Ian Huntley Framed: USAF servicemen paedo's

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by golddragnet


Numpty,


Guess you are American as this isn`t in the English language.



A single american commits a crime, stop making a fool of yourself. A USAF servicemen is NOT a simple american, it is alot more significant that it is a memeber of the military, a bigger news story and you know it. And it wasn't just any crime, he wasn't convicted of shoplifting or parking on a yellow line, he was a paedophile and of course it is dsignificant that a knwon paedophile was only a few hundred yards away from where the young girls bodies were found, don't reply to this thread and stop playing the ignorant fool, you should be ashamed for trying to trviliase that "simple americans" crime


This in the political conspiricies thread which this doesn`t fit as no politics involved.Any servicemen of such a low rank is a simple american unless he prefers to waste his intellect and qualifications on a low paid job.
Just the point a peodofile is a big deal even bigger a murder of two children.Has anybody involved in the investigation come forward or do you still believe a huge expensive cover up of UK justice system would be used just to cover some bad press at a time of Iraq.Excuse me but the US is under more criticism that this story could ever produce.
Can you produce evidance of this servicemens where abouts at the time of this crime other than he was there.L trust the guy can drive because every crime involving sexual acts and murder has resulted in the bodys hidden well away from the persons home in this case the airbase.

I will reply to any thread l feel l won`t to thanxs.

You obviously cannot prove jack on this subject as you cannot proved any evidence.




posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by golddragnet

“What we have is Ian Huntley was there because, found in the tucks of his trousers were seeds from plants that were in this forest. He could have got them from anywhere, they could have been planted. Then he supposedly takes these bodies to the USAF perimeter fence, he strips them of their clothes and pours petrol on them to burn them. Everybody knows that you would leave the clothes on to soak up the petrol and make the fire burn more. He then supposedly takes the clothes back to the school, he gets out a bin from underneath the stage, puts the clothes in the bin and sprinkles petrol on them and sets them alight waits until they're burned so far and puts the fire out with a hose. This is nonsense, obviosuly he was framed! We have the case of the lady who has tried to get a newspaper or to get any form of media to print her story. She walked her dog in that forest everyday for 2 weeks before Jessica and Holly were discovered. She said military police were blocking the road”
www.justjustice.org...


Ian was an aircraft freak people off the same came forward stating he was at the perimeter fence looking at aircraft occasionally.

If you had just murdered two young girls but hadn`t intended too you two would do thing`s a little strange.

You need to research these types of crimes to understand whether Ian acted within the norm so to speak.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   
(...) there is alot of evidence which I have posted earlier but it is beyond your intellect to read it. It is of course a political conpsiracy as it was orchestrated by the Home Office. If it had to come light that it was USAF servicemen responsible it would have done enormous hamr to Blair's already unpopular support of Bush. You are deliberatly underestimating the backlash from the public.
I am not american. This is the final time I will direct a reply to you Zuri as your efforts at debating the facts are worse than pathetic, you should finish reading the Sunday Sport before tuning into your daily dose of SKY tv

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
edited outname-calling instance

[edit on 083131p://upSunday by masqua]



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
www.belowtopsecret.com...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You have a U2U or two.



[edit on 103131p://upSunday by masqua]



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by golddragnet

numpty,


My user name is Zuri



there is alot of evidence which I have posted earlier but it is beyond your intellect to read it.


You`ve posted views expressed on an internet site for American`s who believe there govt is corrupt.




It is of course a political conpsiracy


Nope you believe it is a govt conspiracy.A political conspiracy would include the use of political involvement.I.E voting riging, politicians using dirty tricks,bribes,scandals to gain political power not the govt of the day hidding a crime to cover another govts actions in a foreign country.


as it was orchestrated by the Home Office.


You haven`t provided any documents to suggest any dept within the govt was responsible.


If it had to come light that it was USAF servicemen responsible it would have done enormous hamr to Blair's already unpopular support of Bush.


No both Bush and Blair have no control over the actions of a person from there respective countries.


You are deliberatly underestimating the backlash from the public.


So since the actions of American Servicemen against Iraq prisonners during the time that American need to be the good guys has since resulted in Bush or Blair being ousted from power.


I am not american.


Then l suggest you stop acting like one



This is the final time I will direct a reply to you Zuri as your efforts at debating the facts are worse than pathetic, you should finish reading the Sunday Sport before tuning into your daily dose of SKY tv


I`m not in the UK.I read EL PAIS,EL Mundo,Sur somtimes The Mail and Independent.I don`t have sky or British T.V, l like Gran Hermano e Operacion Truinfo (very sad).I don`t care you respond this a disscussion site and l am having a disscussion.If you cannot take a disscusion that is opposite to your view then better you don`t respond.

Too come to your level and sound like a child you started with the insults and OTT responses.

I`ve looked at your many long paragraphs that you have re typed from other web pages.May l suggest you use your computor properly and insert links.It saves time.Ask your grand kids they will be able to explain how.

And as for that web site that you`ve copied from there is no evidance at all but the writers views,theres no links to sources investigations or interviews by the author.they don`t state they have spoken to the people who had evidence left out of the case, or anything that backs up the statements in it. To simple state witness x was bribed, witness z evidence wasn`t given etc etc etc isn`t frankly evidance at all.The writer need s to get of his bum and interview these people,then enter there comments allong with dates and affidavit`s (so that person is stating the truth whole and nothing but the truth) then post it on the site.That my simple friend is evidence anything less it circumstantial hersay.

P.S l`d rather read the Sun than that site at least they have humour and page THREE


[edit on 29-10-2006 by zuri]



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by golddragnet
www.belowtopsecret.com...


You could have at least included a line or two so that readers can know what they are linking to. This is not even a 1-liner.






posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Huntley was placed in Rampton High Security Hospital (a psychiatric hospital) for two months and this prior to being convicted for the related crimes! If anyone can't smell a rat once they are aware of this I question what's going on in their brains especially if they've made it as far as a conspiracy site such as this.

20 August 2002, government psychiatrists ordered that Ian Huntley be transferred to the Rampton high-security psychiatric hospital for “assessment.” The official reason given by Detective Chief Inspector Andy Hebb, may someday gain a place of notoriety at the police black museum in London, “He [Huntley] gave an impression of not understanding what was going on, and refused to answer questions.”
This is not surprising. An innocent man would not have understood “what was going on” at all, and every prisoner arrested in Great Britain has the absolute right not to answer any questions. There was no valid reason in or outside the law to incarcerate Huntley, who as we already know from video footage filmed only days before, was a completely coherent and reasonably cheerful man.
www.vialls.com...

This is what is known as a show trial. Bears no connection whatever to legitimate procedure in a normal case in what is supposed to be a democratic society.
And if it was a US military involvement in the murders, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to realise the huge repercussions in terms of public backlash regarding an already deeply unpopular alliance with the US in hte war making in Iraq and Afghanistan and who knows where next. Remember this was an absolutely huge story at the time. And to remind everyone he was charged with murder BEFORE the bodies were found. How did they know the children were dead? He had made no confession at this stage. No bodies.... Wakey, wakey.

[edit on 29-10-2006 by riddley]

[edit on 29-10-2006 by riddley]



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
I remember reading about this incident .

One thing struck me strange was the fact that it looks impossible to dump the bodies without being caught by security cameras yet there were no films of huntley dumping the bodies .

We are talking about an american base in UK and to my knowledge ; there are cameras on all of the base walls .

I use to work at Rampton as an interpreter for a while . It is true that the drugs which one is forced to consume may make one suggestible and gullible ; eventually dumber .

May the souls of those two girls be at peace and may the bastard who killed them rot in hell .



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by riddley
Huntley was placed in Rampton High Security Hospital (a psychiatric hospital) for two months and this prior to being convicted for the related crimes! If anyone can't smell a rat once they are aware of this I question what's going on in their brains especially if they've made it as far as a conspiracy site such as this.


He was sent for assesment the cps needed to know what line of defence could have been used.This type of killing isn`t normal.therefore a syc test was needed to understand at what level Huntley was thinking.That is normal under UK investigations.



20 August 2002, government psychiatrists ordered that Ian Huntley be transferred to the Rampton high-security psychiatric hospital for “assessment.” The official reason given by Detective Chief Inspector Andy Hebb, may someday gain a place of notoriety at the police black museum in London, “He [Huntley] gave an impression of not understanding what was going on, and refused to answer questions.”


This states it all, you are saying that govt psyc`s ordered Huntley to be transfered but you blaming DCI Hebb.



This is not surprising. An innocent man would not have understood “what was going on” at all, and every prisoner arrested in Great Britain has the absolute right not to answer any questions.


You`ve forgot to mention that his Lawers agreed to the assesment.If he was inoccent at somepoint Ian and Carr would have stated it.




There was no valid reason in or outside the law to incarcerate Huntley, who as we already know from video footage filmed only days before, was a completely coherent and reasonably cheerful man.


Would you be seasonable cheerful if you had just been set up for murdering two children.Maybe being happy days after could suggest he was a bit nuttier than your average fruit cake.



This is what is known as a show trial. Bears no connection whatever to legitimate procedure in a normal case in what is supposed to be a democratic society.


There were great problems with the investigation but nothing to suggest a cover up.Quite the opposite.Cover up`s of the magnatued you suggest would`t have so many people involved.



And to remind everyone he was charged with murder BEFORE the bodies were found. How did they know the children were dead? He had made no confession at this stage. No bodies.... Wakey, wakey.


The evidence that was found in the bathroom.

If Huntley was framed he would have comitted suicide.Or rather he would have been murdered to look like suicide.The fact he is still alive and that the many attempts Huntley has made on his life proves there was no cover up.The huge cost both in loss of political power and money wouldn`t have made it likely.HE WAS AFTER ALL ONLY A SIMPLE AIRMEN ON THE BASE.
The Americans have been condemned for the Iraqi war from day one.One simple airmen killing two girls would not have resulting any damage to the US for the War.You think the Americans would have stopped the war because Bush would have lost power just because an Airmen in the UK commets murder.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I was sent this reply from someone when discussing the Soham case and the 2 unfortunate girls who were murdered. He believed there was likely some connection to the masons in that case and so many of the other cases where girls who go missing he believed that it was connected to a strange paedophile ring that was run (and protected) by masons, of course the masons hold many positions of power at all levels in every district in the UK (and other countries). Anyhow he was refering to one particular case which he thought was very strange. A girl Sarah went missing, and the case was in the newspapers but suddenly was hushed up very quickly. Anyhow one newspaper printed a painting which was found that the girl did, it was a bizarre picture, I didn't take alot of notice of the painting at first but something struck a chord with him and he sent me another picture that he thought had very eery similarities, he wasn't saying it was definitely connected but examine the pictures for yourself on these links and see what you think, he definitely has a point. Here's what he said about them:

"without wishing to trivialise such an awful tragic event as the death of a little girl, but did anyone see the painting she left behind? Four days after her disappearance, before it was discovered she'd been murdered, the Sun newspaper (of all things) printed it. The painting shows a man standing on a 13-square checkerboard, between columns bearing her name. The man in the picture is wearing what appears to be an apron of 33 studs, and holding an object in his left hand. Oh, and his right sleeve is missing.

As somebody pointed out, where do we find black and white checkerboard floors, the number 13 and two columns? Who would wear an item of clothing with the right sleeve missing, wear aprons and revere the number 33?


i14.tinypic.com...

i13.tinypic.com...

I don't know. These kinds of "coincidence" fall into that category of "Things that look iffy but I'd prefer not to believe so I won't". I try and dismiss it by telling myself that those dots could add up to 34, and checkerboards are common. And the missing sleeve is just the result of a child's inprecise painting technique, and the columns are, well, just columns - they're everywhere. And the 13x13 square floor is just another coincidence.


i13.tinypic.com...

What do you think of his observation???



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Man, that freaks me out.. I like to think i am a skeptical person but the more i look at that picture the more i think there is something very wrong going on..



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Firstly, may I ask Golddragnet if you have any connection with the case? You have given a detailed and highly heated account of the case?

Second, you mention drugs and brainwashing- does this also include Maxine Carr who knew of the bodies and withheld it from police?



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Knights
Firstly, may I ask Golddragnet if you have any connection with the case? You have given a detailed and highly heated account of the case?

Second, you mention drugs and brainwashing- does this also include Maxine Carr who knew of the bodies and withheld it from police?


I can't say I know all of the details for certain regarding maxine, but the evidence does suggest that she was probably not drugged, but she was treated very badly, imprisoned etc. However Ian Huntley most certainly was drugged in Rampton, and then he confessed to Maxine. Maxine was later recorded by the police talking to Ian's mother on the phone after his confession and she was saying how nothing added up, Maxine realised it couldn't be so and the times didn't add up, the girls were seen later alive AFTER Ian was supposed to have killed them, and one of the girls was said to have a bad nosebleed, even though she was seen very shortly before she met Ian Huntley and her nose wasn't bleeding at all. It is worth studying the facts of the case and coming to your own conclusions. You will see that it doesn't add up and Huntley was definitely framed, drugged and brainwashed and tortured, Of course he was informed that Maxine was imprisoned to further add to his torment. I would urge everybody to study this case. I have posted enough information and links in this thread.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I have studied this case in great depth. I first noticed the inconsistencies before reading the Vialls report. It only went on to spark my interest further and how such an act would be covered up and why.

However, after spending a great deal of time looking at it, and given the facts about the circumstances of the arrest of Huntley, I came to the conclusion that he had killed both of them. It's my opinion based on what I had read and taking into consideration those inconsistencies which have been flagged up here in this thread.

Even today, I find some apects of the case puzzling, but nothing ever like this treads a straight line to a conclusion. I don't think an airman from the base did it, nor do I think that a secret group did it for the simple fact of the state the bodies were left in, the lengths went to by Huntley to burn the bodies was indicative of someone like Huntley acting with Carr, not the actions of a serviceman at the base or a secret group.

I think on this topic, Vialls got it wrong.



posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLR Jester
I have studied this case in great depth. I first noticed the inconsistencies before reading the Vialls report. It only went on to spark my interest further and how such an act would be covered up and why.

However, after spending a great deal of time looking at it, and given the facts about the circumstances of the arrest of Huntley, I came to the conclusion that he had killed both of them. It's my opinion based on what I had read and taking into consideration those inconsistencies which have been flagged up here in this thread.

Even today, I find some apects of the case puzzling, but nothing ever like this treads a straight line to a conclusion. I don't think an airman from the base did it, nor do I think that a secret group did it for the simple fact of the state the bodies were left in, the lengths went to by Huntley to burn the bodies was indicative of someone like Huntley acting with Carr, not the actions of a serviceman at the base or a secret group.

I think on this topic, Vialls got it wrong.


Of course I would disagree with you, and you haven't given any reasons as to why you think Huntley was guilty, or why he was sent to Rampton, he went in sane and came out braindamaged. You say Vialls got it wrong but don't say where he was wrong and you think you know better. You say that Huntley went to great lenghts to burn the bodies means it was him and not a secret group, not that is feeble. It is very like the actions of a satanic secret group. What proof do you have that it was Huntley who burned the bodies, why would Huntley remove the clothes from the bodies and bring them to a location that would implicit himself in the crimes. It seems to me you haven't studied the case very well at all. And if you feel you have answers for the "puzzles" then why not share them with us, and if you don't have the answers then it is still a "puzzle" and in that case how could you convict Huntley of the crimes if there is so much to be resolved.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knights
Firstly, may I ask Golddragnet if you have any connection with the case? You have given a detailed and highly heated account of the case?

Second, you mention drugs and brainwashing- does this also include Maxine Carr who knew of the bodies and withheld it from police?


I hope you study the case and share your own conclusions with us



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:35 AM
link   
Excellent thread golddragnet, you've brought a lot of things to my attention that I had absolutely no knowledge of before.



Can I politely suggest you refrain from calling other members gullable and lacking in common sense though, I think you've got a great thread here, and wouldn't want to see it derailed, or you get banned by the mods because of this.


[edit on 26-11-2006 by VelvetSplash]



posted on Dec, 3 2006 @ 04:53 AM
link   
So where`s all the great evidence?

Why has this debate suddenly stopped?

Posting info/views from other web pages doesn`t prove anything other than more people have noticed inconsistances etc etc etc.

Are there any people either here or on other sites that were actually involved/ related in the case either investigators,social workers,sycs etc etc etc?

Nope.

If somebody involved ever voiced any thing it has only been the incompatence of the investigation, was that a cover up.

Nope

Just bad policing.If there was any cover up it would have been done better due to the risks involved in that cover up coming into the public domain and the resulting matter hitting the fan would have been greater than the original reason that resulted in the need to have a cover up.

Look at all the stuff on here.Theres very very very rarely anybody posting that is actually physically involved in the subject there writing about other than spending time looking into web info.

This isn`t the Britannica, since people with opposing views have stopped posting this debate has stopped.

That says alot for the original poster.Just looking to debate his point and nothing more, just looking to argue once the argument stops BYE BYE.

But l bet he will see this and return.

[edit on 3-12-2006 by zeed85]



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   
you obviously haven't read the articles, there is ALOT more than simply inconsistencies, only a brainwashed government lackey would study the case and still defend the government. Huntley was obviously framed, drugged and tortured by the authorities. There is ALOT of evidence to show this but it was never used in court by his defence lawyer, whom was appointed to Huntley by the court.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   
another webpage covering the story

www.cod.../wells-chapman-huntley.htm

and another detailing that Huntley was framed to cover for the USAF serviceman who commited the crime

www.kasino.co.uk...

[edit on 8-3-2007 by golddragnet]





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join