Originally posted by Master_007
reply to post by justyc
Much respect for looking into this case more than myself.
I can except your word for it that the family side of the story has some contradictions but i still feel from what i have seen that this case should
still go to court even if the result is the guilty/inocent people get to clear their names and its fair to think the state knows the people it is
trying to protect are guilty.
Why did she get a £13,500 payout if no crime has been commited and did they realy need to send men in white coats to try and silence Ann.
Regards and i will look in to what you have said if you can provide links please.
Thanks for your reply.
Having spent much more time than you over this, I have to disagree that this case should go to court - it would be laughed out of there in seconds.
If myself and others can pick Ann's story apart then what will a trained lawyer do to it and her?
Do you really believe that anyone can make wild allegations about 30-odd people with not a shred of evidence and that it should go as far as the
courts? Don't you think some of it should at least be provable first?
Like the Sheriff's named abuser sister (he doesn't have a sister)
Like the dead non whisky-drinking brother/uncle who had no reason to kill himself (he was suspended from his job as a pub landlord for embezzlement
and was also shown in a photograph with a glass of whisky in his hand)
Like the autopsy report that they never let anyone see when they claimed he had his skull bashed in and his ribs were broken (this was shown to be a
head contusion... (aka a bruise) when it is actually seen by others and the broken ribs turned out to be fractures which are common when CPR is
administered by an unskilled person - which is what happened)
Like how Ann never mentions in any interview that she claims she and Hollie were being poisoned by a nurse/relative who was giving her husband the
poison as they were having an affair - even when they were in the shelter. They were also following her all the time.
How her finally leaving the house for the shelter has 2 different versions.
How her son claims she abandoned them several times and went missing from the house.
How her house was bugged.
How the hospital has no record of her ever being admitted.
How in all this time, she never saw any signs of abuse in Hollie and Hollie (who we are told can't lie) never told anyone she was being abused.
Nobody else saw any signs either and she was examined regularly.
Why they won't talk about Hollie's boyfriend
Why robert green won't allow the taped conversation between him and mark daly to be made public.
How the police complaints commission has twice (as i understand) failed to find any evidence or truth in Ann's claims whatsoever (you can view the
entire findings of one time here -
) That's one document that I discovered myself - it's not one that they want you to know about for obvious reasons. Most of the
documents they provide are very poor, illegible photocopies (like they can't access a scanner anywhere to make decent scans of all the originals that
they claim they have).
They also seem to be very unfortunate and unlucky people in the amount of documents they claim are conveniently missing, edited or stolen etc etc
There is so much more i could go on about but i'll leave you to ponder that lot for now.
As for the money she was paid - it was most likely decided that as there is no way they can prove what happened and felt sorry for her so gave her the
benefit of the doubt. Paying her in no way implies there was any proof of abuse.
Robert also had the opportunity to take this all to court last year and he lied to his team when he said that he had filled in the paperwork to do so
- he never did and that was the one chance they had that it could have gone to court. The last thing they want is for a court case to happen because
all of this information and more will then become known and picked apart. Much better to travel the country telling tales to anyone that will listen
and getting away with it.
I will say this though and add one piece of evidence from their collection, but i suggest you read it VERY carefully several times and don't jump to
any immediate conclusions, but think it over very carefully with an open mind ...
It is 'possible' that Hollie was abused by her father (though this is never ever going to be provable in any court and any hope they had to take it
there is now spoiled by the lies) but i don't believe that there was ever a pedo ring involved. i think Ann is mentally unstable and concocted the
whole story after she started investigating the money she thought she would get from her brother's estate. It seems everyone who she came across in
connection with it (lawyer, bank manager, police etc) suddenly became part of this ring which grew larger as her story did. Indeed anyone that
opposes the story gets accused of being part of the coverup. like i mentioned before, robert green is her folie a deux partner.
The only interview they have ever given where the story was questioned publicly (mark daly), robert green refused to talk to him! You can listen to
the whole thing here - please listen to all 6 parts
All the other interviews have gone along with it hook, line and sinker without questioning anything, investigating any of it or reading any of the
Hope this is helpful to you.