Robert Green imprisoned for 1 year

[the baron]

Originally Posted by uprising

It says they did background checks on all of them. Wow
I asked how many were questioned?.. Is it none then?

What background checks did they do anyway?

Why don't you read the report for yourself and if you have any questions ask someone who might be able to answer them.

I encourage everyone with an interest in this case to look at the source documents. Far too many have simply sat back and been spoon fed the official line from the Cult.

I can sense you are shocked as it begins to dawn on you that the facts are materially different from what has been portrayed by Anne Greig, Robert Green and Belinda McKenzie.

[positive_forward]

Interesting that it's claimed Hollie was sexually active as in had a boy friend.
I find it difficult to believe a sex ring would choose to target a mongoloid child.

The more I read about this case the less I believe it. Or there was any pedophile ring in action.

[uprising]

Originally Posted by the baron

Why don't you read the report for yourself and if you have any questions ask someone who might be able to answer them.

I encourage everyone with an interest in this case to look at the source documents. Far too many have simply sat back and been spoon fed the official line from the Cult.

I can sense you are shocked as it begins to dawn on you that the facts are materially different from what has been portrayed by Anne Greig, Robert Green and Belinda McKenzie.

I'm shocked at nothing, I've learned nothing new really and see the need for a proper investigation is just as important as ever.

[uprising]

Originally Posted by positive_forward

Interesting that it's claimed Hollie was sexually active as in had a boy friend.
I find it difficult to believe a sex ring would choose to target a mongoloid child.

The more I read about this case the less I believe it. Or there was any pedophile ring in action.

Where is it claimed she was sexually active with her boyfriend?

[positive_forward]

Originally Posted by uprising

Where is it claimed she was sexually active with her boyfriend?

That's how it read to me, pages back. Something about Hollie being given contraceptives..

[uprising]

Originally Posted by positive_forward

That's how it read to me, pages back. Something about Hollie being given contraceptives..

That was mentioned on here the other day as I explained then, I work at a residential home for autistic adults most of the females are on various kinds of "birth control" for reasons other than birth control, and usually at the request of parents.

http://holliedemandsjustice.org/faq/
A. After years of Hollie’s medical notes being withheld from her, when finally Anne laid hands on them in October 2009 she found amongst them two important items of evidence, both dating back to the early ‘90s, when Hollie was a pupil at Beechwood Special School in Aberdeen: 

Memo from Dr Paul Carter, Beechwood School Doctor, to Dr S J Wilson, Grampian Health Board Community Services, 5 July 1990, indicating that Hollie then aged 10 had contracted perianal warts, a sexually-transmitted condition, and referring to her as an ‘at risk’ child;
Letter from Dr Paul Carter, then Senior Clinical Medical Officer at Grampian Health Board Priority Services Unit, Community/Acute Services Division, to Dr James Maitland, Hollie’s GP, 3 February 1992, “giving a little background on Hollie”, eg., Hollie had been suffering from pain on passing water and lower abdominal discomfort for 2 or 3 years and had been exhibiting signs of having had sexual experience. However she had never disclosed to him, Dr Carter, any details of this. [This was because she had been terrorised into silence about the abuse she was suffering]. "
"

[dolores1]

Jeez, when you're getting flack you're over the target!


We have been demanding a full PUBLIC enquiry - none has been provided - police and other involved groups internal enquiries don't count.


Words won't change the facts!


It appears some posters just lurk for years until they are instructed to ACT!

[filfar]

who would you suggest for this PUBLIC enquiry delores1?
Lord Christopher Monckton?
Who is going to investigate Alex Salmond who has been accused of covering it up?
Ian McFerran?
Who is going to investigate the entire Scottish Judicial System and who is going to pay for that?
Belinda McKenzie and her paypal?

Really, for real, WHO? and what if they come up with answers that Anne doesn't agree with?

[uprising]

Originally Posted by filfar

who would you suggest for this PUBLIC enquiry delores1?
Lord Christopher Monckton?
Who is going to investigate Alex Salmond who has been accused of covering it up?
Ian McFerran?
Who is going to investigate the entire Scottish Judicial System and who is going to pay for that?
Belinda McKenzie and her paypal?

Really, for real, WHO? and what if they come up with answers that Anne doesn't agree with?

Who? Is quite a good question though I don't see why dolores should be the one to answer that.

[freemefast]

Originally Posted by dolores1

Jeez, when you're getting flack you're over the target!


We have been demanding a full PUBLIC enquiry - none has been provided - police and other involved groups internal enquiries don't count.


Words won't change the facts!


It appears some posters just lurk for years until they are instructed to ACT!

One of the main reasons for not letting this hoax blow up was to protect Hollie and the people that Robert and Anne went around naming - including the alleged victims. Why should they have to suffer the witch hunters like yourselves?

The sad, bad and mad have surfaced from all corners of the internet who just want retribution for their past experiences. This case was handled as quietly as possible and the investigations were sufficient.

It appears some posters just lurk for years until they are instructed to ACT!

And there you have it. You are paranoid and slinging mud because you disagree with us.

[uprising]

Information Request – 2012030079
April 30th, 2012 by Admin
http://www.holliedemandsjustice.org/...079/?wpmp_tp=2
Dear Shropshire Council,

 

Regretfully, I find that I have to contact you again in response to your reply in order to APPEAL against TWO of the answers you have provided and ask that you reconsider them and get back to me with accurate answers within the next 10 consecutive days.

 

I will explain my reasons for this appeal per question.

 

Question ONE:

The figure of £40 for 4 hours of attendance at the home of Anne & Hollie Greig by two Council employees, does not sound correct to me, as this would place both Council employees on a salary of just £5 an hour each – which is beneath the National Minimum wage for the year 2010.  If that figure is correct, then Shropshire Council is illegally under-paying its staff.  Please double check your figures and reply with the correct ones within the next 10 consecutive days.  You also state in your reply to Question ONE that the Council did not instigate the forced entry into Anne & Hollie’s home.  Documentary evidence exists to PROVE that it was Shropshire Council who approached West-Mercia Police Force and lied to them about Hollie being under the care of the Council and that both Anne & Hollie were ‘missing’.  This evidence can be produced in Open Court if you wish to contest this point further, which I openly challenge you on public here and now.  Therefore, by misleading the Police, the forced entry occurred illegally and, as such, was instigated by the Council.  You will recall that I asked in my initial FoIto you that you stop lying to me.  I ask you again,PLEASE STOP LYING TO ME!

 

Question TWO:

Response Accepted

 

Question THREE:

I am doubtful as to the accuracy of the figures you have provided as it is known that the Official Solicitor currently being employed by Shropshire Council to persecute Anne & Hollie is THE TENTH HIGHEST PAID BARRISTER IN THE LAND. Therefore, I request a full and complete breakdown of the figures quoted by the Council if the Council wishes to stand by the figures it has publicly presented.  Failing that, I request that the Council re-visit the figures and provide an accurate statement that clearly reflects those involved.  Given that Shropshire Council is known to have used THREE BARRISTERS in Court against Anne & Hollie, plus the matter of one being the tenth highest paid in the land, I simply cannot accept the figures presented by the Council and strongly suspect the true expenditure of the public’s money by the Council in persecution of Anne & Hollie to be much, much higher.  I must, therefore, ask the Council to provide evidence to support the Council’s claims within the next 10 consecutive days.  Again, as with Question ONE, I must ask the Council to PLEASE STOP LYING TO ME!  Shropshire Council’s credibility is already shot to pieces, constantly lying to the public in responses to Freedom of Information Requests only makes things appear an awful lot worse for the Council.  The intentions of Shropshire Council are perfectly clear to anyone following this case, so please do not try to insult my intelligence any further by suggesting that the Council has not taken action to try to remove Hollie from her mother, when both you (the Council) and I know different.

 I am sure that the Council will appreciate the importance of this case and the relevance of the requested information.  So, there is now a great importance placed on the quality of the Council’s reply to this Appeal, a reply that should conform fully to the points…

 All replies to this Freedom of Information Request APPEAL are on the following conditions:"

Letter was in response to-


Dear Mr McFerran,

Further to your Freedom of Information request received on 24 March, please find our response below. Taking your points in order:

1.        Council officers called by the Police to attend the premises on 3rd June 2010 recorded a total cost of £40. This action was not instigated by the Council.

2.        Staff time is not allocated to individual cases. Therefore information relating to staff costs for this particular case is not held.

3.        The Council has spent £21,287 in relation to costs of legal action. No action has been taken by the Council to remove Hollie from the care of her mother.    

We trust that this answers your request satisfactorily.

Yours sincerely

Information Governance Team

Shropshire Council

Shirehall

Abbey Foregate

SHREWSBURY


Which was a response to-

ORIGINAL FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST:

Dear Shropshire Council,

I am making this Freedom of Information request to you on very specific points, related to public finances and man-hours only.  I understand Robert Green has made a similar request in the past to your Council but failed to get an appropriate reply.  Likewise, I also caught the Council lying to me in a previous, directly related, FoI request.  I trust that these issues are now behind us and that this will not happen again.

My request is laid out below in the form of three questions…

How much public money was spent by Shropshire Council in respect of the illegal raid the Council instigated and assisted in on the home of Anne & Hollie Greig on 3rd June 2010?  This question relates only to the day of the raid itself.

How much public money, since the raid to-date, has been spent via public servant man-hours and other administrative duties & operations, as a result of the raid?  This question requires an ‘up-to-date’ figure, which we know and accept is ongoing.

How much public money has been spent so far in relation to the Council’s legal action through the Courts to take Hollie into care and away from her mother, Anne?  This question relates to the Council’s entire time addressing this specific point, including man-hours and other financially accountable operations.

As always, I am prepared to follow this request through to the bitter end if I do not receive an appropriate answer.  However, again, as always, I do hope that the benefit of the doubt will be enough for the Council to answer these questions accurately and within the 20 consecutive days allowed for such a response.

[filfar]

If I got a FOI like that to my work it would go straight in the bin - pompous A-hole.
He has been told but because he DOESN'T BELIEVE IT he is badgering and threatening them, nice one Ian, why do you just call them pedo-protecters and save us all time?

What evidence has Ian got that Shropshire Council have tried to remove Hollie from her mother?

[the baron]

Re post 572

Uprising is clearly in a very small minority indeed if he thinks that the cretinous posturings of Ian McFerran achieve anything other than to expose himself and the rest of the Hollie Greig Cult as a laughing stock.

Will McFerran explain why he is spreading the pernicous lie that Shropshire Council are trying to separate Hollie from her mother ?

[uprising]

Originally Posted by the baron

Re post 572

Uprising is clearly in a very small minority indeed if he thinks that the cretinous posturings of Ian McFerran achieve anything other than to expose himself and the rest of the Hollie Greig Cult as a laughing stock.

Will McFerran explain why he is spreading the pernicous lie that Shropshire Council are trying to separate Hollie from her mother ?

Just sharing it for the benefit of those that are blocked from viewing the site.

Make of it what you will.

[the baron]

Originally Posted by dolores1

Jeez, when you're getting flack you're over the target!


We have been demanding a full PUBLIC enquiry - none has been provided - police and other involved groups internal enquiries don't count.


Words won't change the facts!


It appears some posters just lurk for years until they are instructed to ACT!

Let me explain how society functions Dolores.

The job of the police is to investigate cases where there is some evidence of a crime. Anne Greig was unable to present any credible evidence to the police hence they did not investigate.

The PCCS is an independent body which investigates complaints against the police. They found that the police acted properly in their dealings with Anne Greig.

The Sheriff Court in Scotland tries cases including those of "Breach of the Peace" where an individual causes "fear and alarm" such as when Robert Green named people as paedophiles and rape victims based solely on the word of Anne Greig without attempting to solicit their opinions.

The media are independent of the government and they regularly expose miscarriages of justice and corruption cases. Many media organisations, including the BBC, have looked at the Hollie Greig case but concluded that it does just not add up.

Individuals, often suffering from problems of their own, are free to post on internet forums no matter how detached from reality their views are.

[uprising]

Originally Posted by the baron

Let me explain how society functions Dolores.

The job of the police is to investigate cases where there is some evidence of a crime. Anne Greig was unable to present any credible evidence to the police hence they did not investigate.

The PCCS is an independent body which investigates complaints against the police. They found that the police acted properly in their dealings with Anne Greig.

The Sheriff Court in Scotland tries cases including those of "Breach of the Peace" where an individual causes "fear and alarm" such as when Robert Green named people as paedophiles and rape victims based solely on the word of Anne Greig without attempting to solicit their opinions.

The media are independent of the government and they regularly expose miscarriages of justice and corruption cases. Many media organisations, including the BBC, have looked at the Hollie Greig case but concluded that it does just not add up.

Individuals, often suffering from problems of their own, are free to post on internet forums no matter how detached from reality their views are.

I've heard it all now.

[the baron]

Originally Posted by uprising

Just sharing it for the benefit of those that are blocked from viewing the site.

Make of it what you will.

Thanks. It is good that the David Icke forum provides the opportunity for the free and open debate which is denied by the websites and Facebook pages ran by the Cult where people asking awkward questions are routinely banned (or worse still demonised as paedophiles or government agents).

[dolores1]

Originally Posted by freemefast

One of the main reasons for not letting this hoax blow up was to protect Hollie and the people that Robert and Anne went around naming - including the alleged victims. Why should they have to suffer the witch hunters like yourselves?

The sad, bad and mad have surfaced from all corners of the internet who just want retribution for their past experiences. This case was handled as quietly as possible and the investigations were sufficient.



And there you have it. You are paranoid and slinging mud because you disagree with us.

We are not the people who fouled the Aegean stables!

Check the Tony Blair and Gordon Blair protection racket with covering up the paedo and porn use through operation goldfinger hiding the credit card details because so many of their groups were involved.


Me thinks you do protest too much. You must have an interest in protecting these criminals?


Questions
1 Why are you not protecting the children hurt in this?
2 Why after so many fallow years on DI have you entered this debate?


And mostly!
3 "quote" Including the alleged victims?


You have just shown clearly you have an agenda!

Protecting the perps! I shall no longer engage in a debate with a paid shill!
Away with you, go report to your masters.
D.
.

[freemefast]

Check the Tony Blair and Gordon Blair protection racket with covering up the paedo and porn use through operation goldfinger hiding the credit card details because so many of their groups were involved.

It was Operation Ore I believe.
Where is the evidence they covered anything up and how does it relate to the HG hoax?

Me thinks you do protest too much. You must have an interest in protecting these criminals?

I have an interest in protecting the innocent.

Questions
1 Why are you not protecting the children hurt in this?
2 Why after so many fallow years on DI have you entered this debate?


And mostly!
3 "quote" Including the alleged victims?

1 There was no children hurt. The only hurt person(s) is the accused, the alleged victims and Hollie.

2 Because Baron was telling the truth and I saw some here attacking him like village idiots with their pitchforks and waded in.
Not that Baron needed my help as he has demolished this witch hunt easily.

3 Yes 'alleged'. Anne made allegations - false allegations. Some of the alleged victims weren't born when the alleged abuse happened.
Some are answering questions as well - and all deny anything ever happened.

You have just shown clearly you have an agenda!

Yes I do - to stop your bullshit.

Protecting the perps! I shall no longer engage in a debate with a paid shill!
Away with you, go report to your masters.
D.

And there it is again- the first refuge of the stupid cult followers. You don't like the truth so spin it in your head to make us be the bad guys.

[dolores1]

"Facts are stubborn things;
and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
- John Adams


Hollie was paid compensation - FACT!