SAFARI Newsletter,

A “RENOWNED CHILD PSYCHOLOGIST,’
referring to children over the age of 10, says: “It would be extremely unlikely for young people who had been coached by a third party to be able to provide the quantity and quality of details given by these children in their various interviews.” This statement is typical of the views taken by the “renowned child psychologists” who are used by the prosecution and by the Social Services in Court proceedings. He maintains that the children (and this could be any ‘renowned” expert here, and any children) must have experienced what they describe.
The picture above is of the alleged “attacker” of a girl between the ages of 5 and 10, raped in her own bed. Police issued the artist’s impression to every force in England and Wales, and considered carrying out mass DNA testing to capture the man. The girl gave a striking description of a young man with scruffy hair, dirty teeth, wearing loose striped trousers with a metal loop or chain hanging from the belt, and a distinctive gold ring with the word “Boys” or “Boyz” written on it, a detail which led police to wonder whether the attacker was a gang member. Police called the rape, which a primary schoolgirl had described in vivid detail, as “every parent’s worst nightmare” and launched a huge manhunt. Newspapers called the crime a “brutal attack,” and detectives were given dozens of names of suspects by members of the public and several men living locally were questioned. If there had been an ID parade, and the child had “picked out” any one of those men, he would not have stood a chance. Even with a cast-iron alibi!! (See later.)
But police now admit that the whole story was a lie, made up in its entirety by a young child.
This child didn’t even have the ‘coaching of a third party’ to assist her. (The girl had witnessed sexual acts — this would certainly explain how she was able to provide ‘details’ of what had ‘been done to her.’) No doubt there will already be “experts” out there murmuring that the child, the police, and everyone else who accepts that she was lying, are all “in denial.”
It’s time that expert “child psychologists” accept that children can “provide the quantity and quality of details given,” and lie about sex attacks.
The child is now “receiving support from social services, health and education officers.” We wouldn’t be at all surprised to hear that they’ve decided “she must have been raped by somebody — and will in time pin the blame on some unfortunate (and innocent) male relative or friend.
A WOMAN HAS ADMITTED perverting the course of justice by using her husband’s SIM card to frame him for sending threatening texts. Judge Philip Richards said: “I do regard the offence which you committed as a very serious one. Normally it results in imprisonment, because it is quite plain that a wholly innocent man, on this occasion, was made the subject of allegations which resulted in action being taken against him.”
MARTIN YOUNG’S 20-year fight for justice has finally ended - the Court of Appeal has quashed his convictions for possessing petrol bombs & causing criminal damage. Referring to several grounds of appeal before the court, Lord Justice Wailer said that cumulatively they “give serious cause for anxiety about the safety of these convictions.”
LANDMARK SCOTTISH RULING: The
appeals of some of Scotland’s wrongly convicted ‘murderers” may be boosted following a landmark judgment by the Privy Council yesterday, which said the Crown’s refusal to disclose documents to the defence breaches the European Convention on Human Rights.
SAMANTHA QUIGLEY (see article in SAFARI issue 16) has been sentenced to three months imprisonment. She made up an allegation of rape “to stop her boyfriend leaving her.”
JUDICIAL INSANITY: “My accuser could not have been baby-sitting my son [aged 3-4 years) in 1992 as he was not born until 1993. The judge, and an appeal judge, claimed that dates don’t matter and my conviction for the rape of a person baby-sitting a child who wasn’t even born is safe! My accusers’ word seems to be better than documentary evidence such as a birth certificate.” This is just one of many cases of a similar nature that SAFARI knows about. We can’t think of ANY other kind of offence when, being presented with cast-iron alibi evidence, any judge could get away with telling a jury that “dates don’t matter.” This “details I dates don’t matter” irresponsibility by judges has got to be stopped! It virtually amounts to a direction to convict. We have another member whose passport clearly puts him around 8,000 miles away from the alleged offence. That, too wasn’t good enough — “details don’t matter.” 8,000 miles A DETAIL? Come off it, yer Onner!
There’s no defence available better than a cast-iron alibi — what can people do if even that is not sufficient?
MR NOBODY,
Thanks to Terry McCarthy at the Parole Board for supplying us with the latest figures for those who achieved release on Parole whilst maintaining innocence.
April 2005 Non-lifers:
29 of 80 All offences 36.3%
13 of 37 Rape 35.1%
1 of 7 Indecent Assault 14.3%
1 of 3 Other Sex 33.3%
2 of 4 Violence 50.0%
1 of 9 Property 11.1%
9 of 14 Drugs 64.3%
2 of 6 Others 33.3%

Total Sex 15 of 47 31.9%
Total Non Sex 14 of 33 42.4%

Lifers only
1 of 3 33.3%