WARNING - These woods are haunted.
Witnesses had reported seeing a white van in the area bothering children the day before the disappearance, and earlier in the week, the police had conducted a search of a local wood 400 yards away from the house known as Birchwood.
They had sealed off the entrances with tape and used sniffer dogs and long sticks to probe the undergrowth.
If the body were to be found there, it would explain why she had disappeared so quickly, and the police would have been stuck with a body in an incident that resembled the Soham murders that the 10th anniversary commemorated.
This case consists of an abduction and murder of a schoolchild on the 10th anniversary of the Soham murders, the first since then, and a decomposing body in the loft which had escaped the nostrils of the residents and sniffer dogs, and which was discovered by the police only after they had astonished everyone by turning their search to the house itself.
The only apparent justification that they could have had for this switch was that the girl had disappeared soon after leaving the house and had not yet shown up in CCTV surveillance records.
There was NO CCTV coverage between the Hazell House and the Bus Stop 200 yards away
(half way to Birchwood) or between the Hazell House and either one of three Addington Tram stops (in the other direction).
As of today, there are EIGHT CCTV cameras mounted on the former Hazell House, alone.
Birchwood is a patch of ancient Woodland owned by the Corporation of London, Guildhall.
It is understood to formerly have been part of a hunting park serving the nearby Addington Palace.
Local Historian discovered in 1910 ruins of what appeared to be a the entrance to secret passageways, tunnels linking Birchwood with Addington Palace and the former stately home across the hill.
Birchwood is understood to lie on the Prime Meridian.
And remains of a Masonic altar were also found in the wood in 1910, close to the abandoned tunnel ruins.
Tia Sharp disappeared on Michaelmas Eve, a night of great magical and Pagan significance, the start of Harvest; she disappeared during the Olympics, which were occurring on the site of the ancient Michaelmas Fayre in Lee, built over to create the Olympic Park.
And it was the tenth anniversary of the Double Event at Soham - where screams were her around midnight in the woods bordering the fence of USAF / RAF Lakenheath, right at the spot where Holly Wells' mobile phone was logged as having been finally switched off...
Tia Sharp Appeal - 8 August from Paul Coker on Vimeo.
August 8th is also the anniversary of the Hiroshima Bomb and the Sharon Tate Murders at 10050 Cielo Drive.
As well as being (approximately) Michaelmas Eve (depending on the Moon)
Tia's birth Father Steven Carter arrives at the Old Bailey to attend the trial of Stuart Hazell.
90% of all murders occur within the family, between blood relatives.
90% of all murders occur within the family, between blood relatives.
More than Two Thirds of all child abuse that occurs is incest.
Steven was an absentee father and estranged from Tia's mother, who had remarried.
The most likely, prime suspects in any instance of child sexual murder are the immediate family and blood relatives.
Stuart Hazell was essentailly confined to house arrest at 20, The Lindens for the duration of the week-long Police search of the area.
Steven Carter was only questioned once by Police during this time, for around 20 mins with his lawyer present.
Steven Carter was only questioned once by Police during this time, for around 20 mins with his lawyer present.
Croydon is well-known and on record as having one of the highest density of Masonic Lodges anywhere within the UK - the guilty parties in the infamous Brinks Matt Roberry Case were all stationed at Croydon Police Station, including the Grand Master of Manor of Bensham Lodge, South Norwood.
Brother Speaks to Brother.
Steven Carter emerges from Court Number 1 of the Old Bailey, having heard the dramatic news of Stuart Hazell's inexplicable change of plea to Guilty "to spare the family any further pain", namely hearing the forensic evidence about to be presented that (police, prosecutors and Hazell's "defence" Q.C., Lord Carlile claim) would have linked him to Tia's body.
Steven Carter does not appear to be suffering any unnecessary pain.
He seems rather ecstatically relieved.
Be careful what you wish for, Steven....
Once more with feeling there, Steven....
On the 10th anniversary of the Soham murders (actually the day before, on Friday, August 3rd, 2012), and during the national excitement of the London Olympics, 12 year-old schoolgirl Tia Sharp vanished after leaving her grandmother’s house in New Addington in south London to go shopping in nearby Croydon.
The significance of this particular day is that a TV programme was scheduled to be broadcast that evening marking the 10th anniversary of the Soham murders, which was to feature victim Holly Wells’s father. The timing looked ominously significant and it soon became apparent that another such case was unfolding.
Three witnesses saw Tia Sharp leave her grandmother’s house at midday, including her grandmother’s boyfriend Stuart Hazell, who lived there. He had told the girl to be back by 6 o’clock, to which she had replied, “Yeah, yeah, yeah,” as she left. The grandmother was not present.
The following Thursday, while the search was still on for Tia Sharp and her abductor, Hazell appeared in a TV interview himself saying that he had not had anything to do with the girl's disappearance, public suspicion having fallen on him because he was the last person known to have had contact with the missing girl.
Then a very strange set of events occurred.
The police suddenly changed their investigation from that of an abduction and sealed off the house in which he and Tia's grandmother lived, including that of the neighbour, Paul Meehan, who was one of the witnesses that had seen the girl leave her grandmother's house that day.
The police now concentrated their investigation among the bins and surroundings of the house itself, and inside it, despite it having been searched several times before, including with sniffer dogs, and despite the witnesses who had seen her leaving the house.
Then a very strange development happened.
Having switched their search to the house, the police announced the next day, a week after the disappearance, that a body had been found inside the loft, which supposedly had been lying there decomposing in the August heat for a week.
Among the various odd circumstances of this was that none of the residents of these two houses had smelt anything, including the sniffer dogs earlier in the investigation, and that the body was miraculously discovered after what seemed like a most unlikely and inappropriate change in the investigation.
Media attention having switched to himself, Stuart Hazell was soon recognized by a member of the public buying vodka in a shop in Merton, and he was arrested and charged with murder, while Paul Meehan, the witness who lived next door and had supported Hazell's account of Tia Sharp's exit from the house, was bailed on suspicion of having assisted an offender.
How can he be charged with having Assisted an Offender before Hazell had even been remanded on suspicion?
What if he's NOT an offender?
I'm fairly confident this is not legal - for one thing, this is not "assisting an offender" (plenty of other people also saw Tia leave on her own and said so, he wasn't the only one), this is "confirming an alibi" or "exculpatory evidence", which resulted in Meehan's arrest and detention on charges.
I'm fairly confident this is not legal - for one thing, this is not "assisting an offender" (plenty of other people also saw Tia leave on her own and said so, he wasn't the only one), this is "confirming an alibi" or "exculpatory evidence", which resulted in Meehan's arrest and detention on charges.
Welcome to Britain.
THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF OLIGARCHICAL COLLECTIVISM
by Emmanuel Goldstein
:
Chapter I Ignorance is Strength
The aims of these groups are entirely irreconcilable...
Meehan's statement and (subsequently blocked) trial testimony would have definitively put Hazell in the clear.
It was physically impossible for him to have done this.
It was physically impossible for him to have done this.
A point I raised myself to the representatives of the Mainstream Media outside The Old Bailey, but the cognitive dissonance was already kicking in - the appeared not to understand that that kind of thing kind of means that the Police are lying through their teeth...
The best response I got was "Why would the Police want to make it up...?"
Kind of not the point...
Why it Matters from Paul Coker on Vimeo.
He's telling the truth.
Huntley from Paul Coker on Vimeo.
The night before Ian Huntley was arrested, the police broke into his car on the pretence that the two girls were in danger in there (this was two weeks after the girls had disappeared and when the official police view had switched to a belief that the girls were now dead).
This break-in was a civil rights abuse against Huntley and his property, and it should be illegal. A second such abuse occurred the following morning, when the police arrested him at his father's house at the unseemly hour of four in the morning on suspicion of murder.
Huntley and Carr were taken to separate police stations for questioning, and Huntley was later taken to a psychiatric hospital where he was charged with the murders.
The police gave as their explanation for this strategy that he didn't seem to understand why he was being charged with the murders, so his "treatment" in that hospital was for symptoms of innocence. He was deemed by the doctors to be unfit to be seen by the magistrates yet.
Huntley was held for questioning until the early hours of Tuesday the 20th, when he was snaffled away to Rampton high security hospital at five-thirty in the morning, and he was charged with the murders at ten o'clock that night.
The timings of the arrests and the murder charge shows that the police and doctors found his condition to be robust
Ian Huntley's sleep had been ruined at both ends of the day that he was charged, and he was charged at the very point at which the police were legally obliged either to charge him or else to release him.
The magistrates were not allowed to see him until he had been conditioned by the doctors at Rampton, when apparently he was no longer able to defend himself.
If Huntley was fit to be charged with murder he should have been fit to be seen by the magistrates.
There was no inquest into the deaths of Jessica and Holly before the trial.
This responsibility was left to the prosecution of Ian Huntley.
The purpose of an inquest is to provide an unbiased overview of the circumstances and witnesses relating to a death, and it is essential for a fair trial.
An inquest would have called up many witnesses who did not appear at the trial.
The taxi driver, Ian Webster, whose evidence is mentioned above, was not called as a witness.
The evidence of a witness who was reported seeing the two girls in the High Street after they are supposed to have died in Huntley's house (the witness was with her husband and knew the girls), was not used in the trial.
The four witnesses who were reported seeing the two girls at the War Memorial at around the time that they are supposed to have died in Huntley's house did not appear in the trial. Their testimony confirms Huntley's original witness statement.
The witness who was reported seeing a man and a woman in a green car (metallic green?) staring at two girls in the High Street did not appear at the trial. This evidence is important because two kidnappers might well be needed to control two children.
The several witnesses who saw a green car acting suspiciously around Soham at the time were not called to the trial.
Ian Huntley's legal defence was incompetent, and on this ground alone the trial judgment should be scrapped.
No defence witnesses were used.
The only defence witnesses that appeared were Maxine Carr, who didn't know anything, and Ian Huntley, who only had the prosecution case to defend himself with.
The legal defence acted throughout as though Huntley was guilty even while he was protesting his innocence.
His defence even caused him to accept the charge of perverting the course of justice when he was pleading innocence, and this undermined his Not Guilty plea to the murder charge.
He did not change this defence until a year later and two weeks before his trial.
The series of murders involving Jessica and Holly began with the victim's body (Sarah Payne) being dumped out in the open in the holiday area that she was taken from (this presumably to throw the police and public off the scent regarding the Cheshire sighting), and it ended with the bodies of Jessica and Holly being dumped out in the open, minus the forensic evidence (the clothes) for the prosecution of Ian Huntley.
In between, the cases of Milly Dowler and Danielle Jones indicate that the series killer would tend to bury or conceal his victims, which corresponds with the two areas of disturbed ground on Warren Hill outside Newmarket that the jogger reported to the police in the Jessica and Holly case.
The series began with defendant Roy Whiting pleading Not Guilty against a perfect stitch-up in forensic evidence (with hairs and fibres from the victim on the defendant's white van etc, and vice versa), and ends with Ian Huntley pleading Not Guilty (and changing his plea two weeks before his trial) against forensic evidence with which he is supposed to have fitted himself up.
The Fool from Paul Coker on Vimeo.
A man who would come here of his own free will...
A man who has come here with the power of a king. By representing the law...
A man who would come here as a virgin...
A man who has come here as a fool!
A Lecture by Ian Crane on the world in which you live as it is.
Rather than how it should be.
