Robert Green in court today

Robert Green in court today

Postby holy vehm » Mon Jan 16, 2012 9:35 am

Robert green is to stand trial for breach of the peace today in Stonehaven Scotland.

Robert Green, for those unaware, is the main campaigner on behalf of hollie greig.

http://holliedemandsjustice.org/content/who-really-issued-the-interdict-on-robert-green/

Our thoughts are with those in attendance today.

:love:
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby holy vehm » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:35 pm

http://www.policeinvestigationgroup.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=328

Trial Day 1 – Angiolini still on the hook
Posted on January 16, 2012 by Belinda


At Stonehaven Sheriff Court, Aberdeenshire, Day 1 of the resumption of Robert’s Trial on Breach-of-the-Peace charges, joining the previous line-up of Sheriff Principle Bowen, Procurator Fiscal for Edinburgh and Prosecutor for the Crown, Stephen McGowan aided by Anne Currie, Procurator Fiscal for Aberdeen, was a new Counsel for the Defence, Andy Lamb assisted by Lili Prais, instructed by Solicitor Patrick Campbell. Some 5 out of the 61 witnesses for the prosecution (and their driver) were also spotted going into the building. All had to run the gauntlet of the crowd of Green’s supporters who had braved the sub-zero temperatures to stand outside the courthouse and welcome participants with clicking cameras, placards and a ‘Scotland’s Shame’ banner. Spotting the battery of cameras, Sheriff Bowen tried to hide his face behind his briefcase as he entered the courthouse.

Robert got things off to a flying start by asking first McGowan, then the Sheriff if they were Freemasons? He cannily popped this question before responding to the Clerk’s opening question, are you George Robert Green? confirmation of which would have doubtless resulted in the Freemason issue being dismissed out of hand, so it was now or never, as Robert explained afterwards. Besides, he wanted to put the Freemasons in the frame right at the outset, this being not just a case about the rape

and torture of children, but as he told the court, ever since April 2010 when during the course of an Interim Diet he had spotted a document with the Masonic insignia passing between McGowan and Sheriff Patrick Davies he had been disturbed by this possible element in the case. Up till then he had been of the opinion that the case was not connected with Freemasonry. So why were the Prosecution using this to influence the Sheriff? A question that remains unanswered to this moment.

Again, as Robert explained afterwards, his raising this issue was by no means to discredit Freemasons in general, which would be unfair, but merely to question if there was some undue Masonic influence in the proceedings being brought against him and the manner in which they were being conducted. There was now the new question of a mysterious tie-up between his previous Counsel Frances McMenamin and the reporter from the Scottish Sun, who seemed to be ‘in the know’, to use a Freemasonic metaphor, about what was to transpire in Stonehaven Court on 15th November 2011. If it became clear from the evidence coming out of this case that Freemasonry was harbouring within its ranks rogue elements who are protecting paedophiles and abusing their public position in the process, then that would obviously be a matter of concern to all who are members of this organisation which, at a certain level anyway, prides itself on its moral standards. Quite apart from the fact it would indicate that there could be a collusion between the Bench and the Prosecution which would constitute a conflict of interests.

This was then the reason why Robert asked the question, in the interests of justice being seen to be done, and had the Sheriff answered in the affirmative he would have asked him to recuse himself.

McGowan, whom we have never seen looking anything but discomforted in his thankless role of Prosecutor for the Crown, after the briefest of pauses for reflection and looking down at the floor, answered “no I am not”. The Sheriff himself tetchily told Robert he did not intend to answer the question. Whereupon Robert confirmed to the Clerk, “yes, I am George Robert Green” and the hearing began.

Whether or not they had been prepared for this opening salvo, Anne Currie for the Prosecution was certainly ready to deal with the issue of the citation of Elish Angiolini. She attempted to dismiss that first-off, indicating that as the former Lord Advocate was not amongst those who have been offended by Robert’s allegations/named as Hollie’s abusers, she had nothing to do with the case. At which there were gasps of incredulity from the public gallery and one loud chortle, the perpetrator of which was summarily removed from the chamber.

It will be remembered that Currie has come unstuck over the witnesses and is currently under investigation over an attempt to mislead the court. Robert has by now seen the statements of the 61 who include members of the justice service, including Peter Watson of Levy & McCrea, as well as friends and neighbours of those named by Hollie as her former abusers. Many of these people were previously described by Currie on 13th April 2011 as ‘traumatised’. This would have placed them in the vulnerable witness category, requiring accompanying medical reports, yet these are conspicuously absent. In fact not even Peter Watson would seem to have been traumatised by the course of events, despite the additional pressures on him of the Stephen Purcell case.

Without going into the vapidity of Currie’s argument, Andy Lamb suggested to the Sheriff that the Prosecution’s evidence needed to be heard before any decision regarding the former Lord Advocate’s attendance or otherwise was taken. And surprisingly, the Sheriff concurred!

Lamb then went on to point out to the Sheriff that as he had only just arrived on the case and had in fact only met Robert in person for the first time that previous evening, he had not had sufficient time to prepare the defence and requested an adjournment for the rest of the day.

Again, Sheriff Bowen was disposed to be amenable, but cautioned Lamb that if he let him off for the rest of the day, he did not expect him to use the time and then walk off the case! as had happened on the previous occasion. He wanted everyone back in court ready to go this at 10 am sharp the following morning.

Thus proceedings on Day 1 terminated shortly before 11 am and everyone could enjoy the by then brilliant sunshine and a breath of sea air.

Best of all, Angiolini cannot yet sleep easy in her bed.


http://holliedemandsjustice.org/
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby stubbadub » Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:13 pm

stubbadub
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:50 am

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby stubbadub » Tue Jan 17, 2012 11:10 pm

Trial Day 2 – The Witnesses for the Prosecution

Today the trial began in earnest, being the day when the Prosecution managed to call and question 15 civilian witnesses, with a few more to follow tomorrow, plus the police witnesses.

First to take the stand at 10.10am was Sheriff Graham Buchanan who claimed he was not related to Evelyn or Jack Buchanan, nor to Sarah Jane Buchanan from Aberdeen Social Services. He was extremely vague and unconvincing about the depth of his association with Elish Angiolini, despite his having served in Aberdeen as a Sheriff during the time when she was Area Procurator Fiscal and, as he later confessed having spoken to her regularly when she was working in Airdrie as Deputy Fiscal in the ‘80s. He denied all Hollie’ allegations of which he had first learned in June 2009, prior to which he claimed to have had no knowledge of Hollie or her case, and was very vague also about his about his involvement in Anne and Denis Mackie’s divorce case, although he had acted as Sheriff. Furthermore, Simpson and Marwick which had organised his interdict against Robert also act for Denis Mackie, a fact initially denied by the law-firm, but which later had to be retracted by senior partner Peter Anderson when Anne was able to produce a document to prove otherwise.

When Buchanan was asked if he had looked at the variety of material about Hollie on the internet, he made a surprising attack on David Icke. He replied that one of the sites that was publishing Hollie’s story was Icke’s website and said he was “comforted” that David Icke was “a
strange fellow”, therefore any material he published “doesn’t have any credibility”.

A large number of the alleged abusers and victims then gave evidence. It would appear even to an outsider, let alone to all those following this case, that their answers to the prosecution had been carefully rehearsed and choreographed, since all were polished performances and no two
adjectival words or terms used to describe their emotion at having being branded child-abusers were the same. Much was made of their being distressed by articles on websites and blogs that were controlled not by Robert but by Greg Lance Watkins and Tom George. An explanation is
required as to why these other 2 individuals have not been charged, as it could be argued that their blogs have caused more ‘alarm and distress’ than anything put out by Robert.

A key witness was Sylvia Major, one of the three people named in the report by Dr Eva Harding confirming Hollie had been abused and identifying her abusers, the other two being Denis and Greg Mackie, Hollie’s father and brother. It should be remembered that this was the report that secured Hollie her award of £13,500 by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. Of all the witnesses it was agreed by those observing in the public gallery that Major made the weakest and least convincing impression, “I can’t/don’t recall” being a frequent response and little emotion, contrived or otherwise being shown.

A considerable number of those called continued in similar vein, having either forgotten information or as expected denying everything of which they are accused by Hollie, yet here and there belying the need for more probing than this hearing, which is focused on indicting Robert rather than them, allowed. One such was Hollie’s aunt, Jillian Mackie who first described herself as a nurse then admitted later she was actually currently involved in child protection work. Although she was at pains to portray herself as just an ordinary woman, she recently testified in
the High Court in Glasgow that she was a friend and colleague of the convicted murderer Malcolm Webster. At that hearing it was alleged that she supplied Webster with the drugs that may have led to Mrs Webster’s death. Also at that hearing, Graeme and Jillian Mackie admitted to having received a mysterious ‘loan’ of £10,000 from the murderer, yet this was left hanging in the air, unexplained.

The final witness of significance was Hollie’s former head-teacher at Beechwood School, Andrew Young who began by saying he could hardly remember Hollie Greig, yet as the interview went on, including questions about the 2 medical reports by Dr Paul Carter indicating that Hollie was at serious risk he appeared to have a far more detailed knowledge than he first implied. He didn’t remember Hollie but he knew exactly when she left the school, and under cross-examination he confirmed that Robert had brought up Dr Carter’s issues in late 2009, yet he had
taken no steps to check their veracity. Throughout giving his evidence he appeared nervous and uncomfortable.

Robert stresses that it is not the function of this court to ascertain whether all these people are telling the truth or otherwise, owing to the narrowness of the charge against him. All the prosecution witnesses had to demonstrate was the degree to which he had caused them
‘alarm and distress’. Every single witness confirmed that they had never been questioned about Hollie’s allegations, whether in 2000 or 2009, which is precisely the point Robert has always made about Grampian police’s failure to investigate.

If any of these people were telling the truth, therefore, why hadn’t they directed their anger at Grampian police for not conducting an nvestigation which, if they really had been innocent, would have cleared their names long ago, and obviated the need for the public campaign they have all found so distressing!

And why, in view of the degree of distress and anger these witnesses claimed to have suffered, has not one had embarked on the conventional legal remedy of defamation against Robert Green which was open to all, and taken steps to clear their names, either individually or as a Class?

The evidence of these witnesses may need to be put to the test in future court cases.

Source: http://holliedemandsjustice.org/content/trial-day-2-the-witnesses-for-the-prosecution/
stubbadub
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:50 am

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby footloose » Wed Jan 18, 2012 4:11 pm

good luck to Robert and Belinda, i am on the email list of Belinda and have been watching this case for a while now, i think they are doing a great job on behalf of Holly and deserve a lot of respect, i sent a letter to my local M.P and did not even get a response off him!

:love:
"The media is the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent." ~ Malcolm X
footloose
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:19 pm
Location: lancashire

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby pedawson » Wed Jan 18, 2012 4:58 pm

My LOVE :love: , Thoughts and support is with them :hug: .
May the infinite universal truth be heard and heeded, for if it isn't we have been abandoned by the very one(s) that we trust implicitly.

This case is central to everything that is going on around the word and will truly start the ball rolling to convicting , naming and shaming those involved and it will pass a current of fear to those others, even if they are not directly involved in this case, that the 'GAME' is up.

Do NOT be, convinced that this case is a 'side show' it is going to set a standard that TPTB will have to take notice of. If I am correct and have read into this correctly this goes deeper than the majority of the UK (world) population realises.

The best thing that can be done by those involved is to take what is coming to them now, it will be far worse if they try to continue to hide the truth.

THE TRUTH WILL OUT

Regardless as to what 'ANYONE' thinks I am fully aware that there are more involved in bringing about a brighter future for mankind, the ones I talk of are NOT going to take 'NO' for an answer and believe me when the time comes 'JUSTICE' will be meted out in proportion to the deed.
Those involved in this case have a choice 'NOW' to give it up and take what it is 'WE' have to offer them or take the universal punishment for their deeds.
I know which one I would take.
By the way 'DEATH' is no hiding place either. I am 'seriously' serious on this. Not many are aware of what I speak, but I would recommend to those involved, it NOT be ignored.

Namaste, rev;
Oh! and I am not talking about religion or god, God or Christian faith, Buddha or Allah, heaven and hell, I am talking about 'THE REALITY'.
ALL will to be revealed at the right time.
Don't be surprised to discover that luck favours those who are prepared
User avatar
pedawson
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby stubbadub » Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:31 pm

Trial Day 3 – Grampian Police on the back foot

Crown Office in attempt to block defence questioning of Grampian police “weak link” DC Lisa Evans.

Towards the end of a very interesting day, the Trial came to a dramatic halt after Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan attempted to prevent DC Lisa Evans being cross-examined by Robert’s defence QC, Andy Lamb. Even Sheriff Bowen admitted being “mystified” but agreed to an adjournment, as Robert’s Counsel and the PF could not reach an agreement. It has not yet become clear why the Prosecution seem so desperate to obstruct the cross-examination of a particularly weak witness.

We should point out that Evans was the officer who interviewed Hollie about her allegations on 8th September 2009 at Shrewsbury, witnessed by Robert. From the current cross-examining of alleged abusers and victims, it has been confirmed that none of those named were ever interviewed as a result of Hollie’s detailed and precise evidence and, in line with what appears to be normal police procedure over such allegations these days, no computers were seized or examined.

DC Evans had been brought in as a prosecution witness because she was one of the officers involved in the raid on Robert’s home on 13th February 2010 whilst he was being held in Aberdeen and his computer, unlike those of the alleged sex abusers, was seized. The computer and papers taken from his living room (with no inventory supplied) were part of today’s court productions.

It would seem that Grampian police have a confusing sense of priorities when computers of alleged sex-abusers are not seized or examined, but the computer of someone who trying to expose the abusers is confiscated! There may well be some rational explanation for this anomaly but so far after two years, no one has been able to provide one.

Although the Evans issue seems to present a problem for the prosecution, it was not the only set-back for the Crown. Today’s witnesses packed less of a punch than yesterday’s, in particular Win Dragon, who seemed to be overwhelmed and incoherent. Dragon repeatedly claimed that Hollie had never been raped. However, she admitted to being a friend of Denis Charles Mackie, which could have affected her judgement. She was also cross-examined by Mr Lamb about her relationship with Dame Anne Begg, MP for Aberdeen South.

There seems to be an increasing mood of dissatisfaction about Grampian police’s repeated failure to investigate Hollie’s allegations, or to try to ascertain the true facts about the death of Robert Greig. As we said yesterday and as we believe is rapidly becoming apparent to even the most sceptical observer in the court, the witnesses who claim to be angry and/or distressed about Robert’s allegations should instead direct their feelings towards Grampian police whose negligence, and possibly worse, has brought things to this pass. Most consicuously absent from today’s court productions are the 2 notebooks seized from Robert’s house in which details of DC Evans’ interview with Hollie were recorded.

Once again, Robert wishes to thank all those who turn up every day to support him and for all the kind messages of encouragement he has been receiving. Please note there is no hearing on Friday, so after Thursday’s session the trial will resume again on Monday.

Following the updates from Stonehaven court for the past three days, on Hollie’s website, the hits have increased expotencially as they have for other supporting sites with a phenomenal amount of interest. On Hollie’s site alone, downloads of the Buchanan V Robert Green pdf file are now heading close to 1,000. The dam is fit to burst. Mainstream media are at long last NOW showing an interest as are councils and police in both England and Scotland. Across the world people are visiting the site. Due to the wonderful support of the many thousands of people who support truth and justice, it finally feels that justice may in the end prevail for all three victims of authoritarian abuse – in many departments.

Please continue to visit, support, comment and spread the word about the documents, which reveal so much.


Source: http://holliedemandsjustice.org/content/trial-day-3-grampian-police-on-the-back-foot/
stubbadub
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:50 am

Re: Robert Green in court today

Postby holy vehm » Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:30 pm

Trial Day 4 – Technical

Posted on January 20, 2012 by Belinda




Day 4 was a largely ‘technical’ day, focusing on evidence extracted from the contents of Robert’s computer which has been in the hands of Grampian police since February 2010, and on material appearing on the internet presumably thought to show that Robert has been in breach of Grampian’s bail conditions.


There will be a fuller report on Day 4 + commentary on this eventful first week of the trial later today. Again, supporters please note THE HEARING IS ADJOURNED TILL MONDAY 23 JANUARY, 10 AM.

.
Posted in Hollie News | Tagged @Holliejustice, family courts, hollie greig, robert green, royal courts of justice, stonehaven | Leave a reply
Interference

Posted on January 20, 2012 by Admin

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This site came under sustained hack attempts overnight in what was clearly an attempt to interfere with its good working.

In particular there were 39 Attacks, by 11 attackers using 21 separate IP addresses. All failed. In the main it was an attempt to corrupt the Share buttons on each post, and in particular the Facebook share.

One can only assume that the reporting of the Trial of Robert Green is causing much consternation amongst the powers that be, and that they have tried to limit the spreading of the reports. That the MSM have been largely silenced is witness to this.

Our response has been to harden our site security, update and make more widely available the share facility on this site, and you will notice that the share options now appear on a floating sidebar as well as within the posts themselves.

We have also made the content available via mobile phone, which we can see a good number of you have already made use of.

The truth will eventually come out, but in the meantime the interest in this story of an attempt to silence the messenger of a heinous crime that still remains to be properly investigated is growing daily. We will continue to report, whether that is liked or disapproved of or not.

Justice is for all.
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142


Return to Children

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron