Tuesday, 31 December 2013



Tuesday, December 31, 2013

"Maggie Tittle Tattle Tuttle & ZoopMad - More Questions Than Answers!"

"Just Who Are The Real Gatekeepers?"

ZoopMad....Jesus Saves!!!

Recently I posted a series of CHRIST-mas posts based on the life long work of that rascally scholar, Jordan Maxwell, and Zoopmad didn't like it!!!

In true Zoopmad fashion, she set about trying to belittle me via the VoiceForChildren blog, and which extracts are below.

Ian Evans25 December 2013 04:08

CHRIST-mas is a complete lie, but let us rejoice in The 'SUN' of God!!!

Zoompad30 December 2013 06:37

Christ is not a lie, and I know that because he has helped me get through Pindown and Secret Family Court abuse, I cried out to Him when there wasn't anyone else there to help me and He led me to find out about Richard Gardner and Ralph Underwager, and it was me who found out about David Rose MI5 agent, sorry if it sounds like I am blowing my own trumpet, but I have slogged my guts out researching stuff reading loads of stuff, and feel like I am being brushed under the carpet. Jesus really does exist, and so do I and whats more I am too fat to be poked under any blinking carpets! Just feel so sad that Ian Evans can have another pop at me by rubbishing Christianity, and at Christmas time too, and you all know that I am a Christian, yet everyone is ok about it, WELL I'M NOT!

Just sitting here, reading what he's posted - the second time he's posted nasty things about me in a month - feeling so very very hurt. I thought you were my friends, you all of you know I am a Christian, why can you all not see why it absolutly hurts what he's posted? I have slogged my guts out to expose the Pindown scandal, I have been so brave, and quite frankly I feel so betrayed.

If I were a Muslim what Ian Evans wrote about my God would not be tolerated. I just feel so shocked and appalled that no-one seems to see the horrible insult that is bang on target!

Stuart is an athiest, but he would NEVER have let Ian Evans post that about my Lord Jesus Christ, because he would never let one of the Pindowns be hurt with such a cheap shot. Sorry that such a bigoted remark against Christianity is considered ok on this blog.

Zoompad30 December 2013 07:05

I feel so betrayed. Why is it ok to attack Christianity, when it is absolute taboo to attack any other religion, or catagory of people? Why cant anyone see how I feel? What the hell is wrong with people - is everyone blind? I feel like I have walked into the Day of the Triffids right now!

Barbara is an absolute legend in the "against child abuse movement" especially for pissing off people who make any attempt to help child abuse victims. Just what her motives are I am to dumbfounded to even guess at anymore, let alone contemplate? What, if anything, she has personally endured in relation to the issue of child abuse, I have no idea either as not one scrap of evidence has been published that I have personally seen.

I would sincerely hope that she is a fraudster as I would not wish child abuse on any children, past or present. That said, if she is genuine then I feel deeply for her. That said also, why does she go around destroying the very fabric of the movement? Why would you drive people like Brian Gerrish and John Hemming to the point that they won't even contemplate communication with you anymore?

Even people like Brian Claire, who is so easy going, she has managed to isolate for life. Worse still, and not so long ago, she ripped into Aangirfan for (I believe) not publishing her true story. Aangirfan then set about doing a rather chronological blog of her alleged circumstances and got hammered even more by Barbara to the point where he/she took the blog posting down forever!!!

Barbara's antics now bring me to a character who goes by the name of Maggie Tuttle, just who is Maggie Tuttle? I know little about her other than a couple of video clips that I have watched, one of the most recent being aired tonight on The People's Voice/TV.

Maggie states (if my recollections are exact) that she has the name/s of renowned paedophiles who she knows but cannot speak those names unless she has at least £20,000 and whilst telling the audience that she cannot muster even 20 pence? If you have the name/s of well known and high profile paedophile/s, why would you need at least £20,000 to simply state that/those name/s in public?

Have I got it wrong?

I stand to be corrected.

The Plot Thickens!!!

Posted by Ian Evans at 1:25 AM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook

Labels: Aangirfan, anti child abuse campaigner, Maggie Tuttle, Zoopmad


AnonymousDecember 31, 2013 12:22 PM

It is rather clear that there wasn't a direct pop aimed at Zoompad and the article should not be inferred as such. However, as freedom of speech (ha) current allows, we can question information that is presented to us as 'the facts'. And that posting was no different.

As someone was has strong empathatic (is that really a word?) skills I can understand how something that one were to believe in to be holy (pun not intended, I'm not that clever..) and has helped someone to get through difficult times to be questioned must resonate rather deeply. However the church is made up of humans with all their\our faults. I know of a person who was beaten by the father and went to the church for help. And was turned away as they did not want to know. Oh, and the school just called the parents in and and told them to ensure that the bruises are not on show .... {fume}

However, any open minded Christian should look into the facts as to why the 25th of December was chosen as the day Jesus was purported to have been born. History is written invariably by the winners.

Isn't there a quote out there about it is easy to accept a lie but harder to accept that you have been lied too?

The Beano is not The Rag

AnonymousDecember 31, 2013 1:16 PM

Barbara has published a book called Tip about her experiences of Pindown. Yes, she alienates people left and right but like HG (the woman booted out over the Dean affair) she is autistic. That may explain a few things - I have no idea whether all her claims are true. As for Maggie, I would love to know if she's informed the police of her claims.


Ian EvansDecember 31, 2013 2:22 PM

Indeed anon, autism may explain much about Barbara but it's really not a good idea to push people away who are on her side. I met Barbara at the 2010 rally against child abuse in London and she was a really zany character who I liked so I befriended her on Face Book. It wasn't to long before she was having a pop at me and began demanding to know how Brian Claire, who wasn't at that particular rally, knew I was talking to her?

It never occurred to Barbara that there were pictures and videos posted all over the net from that days event. Neither did it occur to Barbara that I had told Brian that I had met her and a number of other people such as David Icke, Bill & Maria Malloney, Brian Gerrish, Maureen Spalek and many others. She just got it into her head that there was a conspiracy by myself and Brian against her!

She is a very troubled soul who I hope very much finds some peace in her life. Happy new year Barbara xxx


HGDecember 31, 2013 2:45 PM

pardon me but why are we dragging me into this when I am being ever so good? just minding my own business and staring at the fish. Happy New Year everyone. HG


Ian EvansDecember 31, 2013 2:53 PM

Happy new year HG xxx


HGDecember 31, 2013 3:02 PM

:) Happy new Year Ian, why is there a random mention of me? :) fame at last!
I think it is important that people know that people with autism are unlikely to lie but often have a perspective that others do not understand, and can misunderstand neurotypical intentions quite badly.
However this should not be used against someone with autism to say that they were not abused or they did not experience what they did. That can really cause trauma to someone with autism, as I know, being told that the truth is not, can actually be harmful to someone like me, and has been.
People with autism and/or other conditions that affect perception can be more vulnerable to abuse than those who are neurotypical. and abuse should never be denied because of disability, abuse can affect a person for life.
But under stress, we can get a bit volatile and out of control, under peaceful conditions we are nice and quiet as I am now, watching the fish tank.
I was under horrendous unbearable stress in Jersey.
Excuse the speech. all are welcome to read my blogs, even the trolls, cos I fancy a nice troll for dinner. HG


Ian EvansDecember 31, 2013 2:22 PM

Indeed anon, autism may explain much about Barbara but it's really not a good idea to push people away who are on her side. I met Barbara at the 2010 rally against child abuse in London and she was a really zany character who I liked so I befriended her on Face Book. It wasn't to long before she was having a pop at me and began demanding to know how Brian Claire, who wasn't at that particular rally, knew I was talking to her?

It never occurred to Barbara that there were pictures and videos posted all over the net from that days event. Neither did it occur to Barbara that I had told Brian that I had met her and a number of other people such as David Icke, Bill & Maria Malloney, Brian Gerrish, Maureen Spalek and many others. She just got it into her head that there was a conspiracy by myself and Brian against her!

She is a very troubled soul who I hope very much finds some peace in her life. Happy new year Barbara xxx


Ian Evans, yes, I have been diagnosed on the Autistic Spectrum, so what? Does that make me a nutter?

And yes, I am a troubled soul, and so I should be, after all the abuse and persecution I have had to deal with. That would trouble anyone, autism or otherwise. In fact, its a miracle I am still sane, because certain individuals have done their level best to drive me round the twist!

You have told a big lie in that statement, you didn't only know me from the rally, you knew me via Stuarts blog and your own blog and my blog well before that, and you asked me for my telephone number which I gave you, not realising what a bully and a creep you are, I trusted you because you were posting on Stuarts blog.

You still have not explained how Brian Clare knew I was standing right next to you that day in Trafalger Square, when it was the first day I had ever met you face to face ever, and I have never met (as far as I know) Brian Clare, so how the blinking heck did he know you and I were standing side by side that day?

That is a mystery you have yet to explain Ian. Care to try? I'm all ears!

Sunday, 29 December 2013





Tuesday, 26 November, 2002, 18:01 GMT
Paedophile campaigner walks free

A search of baggage at Heathrow revealed the images

A pro-paedophilia campaigner should not have been jailed for smuggling indecent pictures of naked children into the UK, a court has ruled.
Allowing Thomas O'Carroll to go free, London's Court of Appeal said the judge who sentenced him was influenced excessively by the 57-year-old's campaign to legalise sex between adults and children.

As well as setting aside the prison sentence, O'Carroll will now no longer be required to register his name under the Sex Offender Act.

He was convicted at Southwark Crown Court in August of being knowingly concerned in the importation of indecent material by importing long-lens photographs of children and sentenced to nine months in prison.

Appeal judge Mr Justice Holman said the pictures taken by O'Carroll had the quality of indecency in the context in which they taken, but were of the kind that parents might take of their children entirely innocently.

They were found hidden in O'Carroll's baggage as he travelled through London's Heathrow Airport in October 2001.

Naked children

His original trial heard how the images were found by Customs and Excise officers during a search of nine crates which O'Carroll had sent from Qatar where he had been working.

Nearly 100 photographs were examined, with 54 featuring naked or scantily-clad children.

But Mr Justice Holman, sitting with Lord Justice Buxton, stressed the case was very different from the "modern scourge" of child pornography on the internet.

He said there was no evidence O'Carroll imported the photographs for any purpose other than his own personal sexual gratification and he said they were at a "relatively low level" of indecency.

"It appears he has been interested for many years in the subject of paedophilia, although there is no evidence of his having engaged in illegal activities with any child," said the judge.

Mr Justice Holman said the original sentence was "manifestly excessive" and the trial judge had "lost sight of the actual offences for which he was sentencing him".

Pre-pubescent children

O'Carroll, of Leam Street, Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, defended his images of children as "artistic street photography".

But he also admitted he found them erotic and his sexual preference was for pre-pubescent children.

O'Carroll has only one previous conviction - in 1981 for conspiracy to corrupt public morals, for which he was sentenced to two years in prison.

That offence stemmed from the now defunct Paedophile Information Exchange, which he founded.

He had been arrested after publishing the organisation's worldwide contact list in a bid to encourage sexual contact with children.

Thursday, 26 December 2013



The murder of Hilda Murrell, an abiding mystery?

John Osmond 5 December 2011

Subjects:Democracy and government
Civil society

The grotesque murder of a 78 year old rose-growing spinster continues to grip attention in Britain after 27 years - and this is why....

A Thorn In Their Side by Robert Green, published by Rata Books of New Zealand and is available online (NZ$60, including p@p) through accessing Robert Green’s website www.hildamurrell.org

There are many layers to unravel about the grotesque murder of a 78 year old rose-growing spinster in Shrewsbury 27 years ago. The first lies in the character and campaign of the extraordinary woman at the centre of what became a murderous melodrama, Hilda Murrell. She was among the first women to graduate from Cambridge, obtaining her degree in 1927, after which she returned home to Shrewsbury, eventually to take over the family horticultural business. In her later years she became much exercised by the dangers of the nuclear industry. At the time of her violent death she was about to give detailed evidence to the inquiry into the proposed Sizewell B nuclear reactor in East Anglia.

Hilda had two major concerns with nuclear power. First, the by-product of its generation is plutonium, a highly hazardous material which will create radioactive fallout should there be a breach in safety. Secondly, this nuclear waste needs to be stored for hundreds if not thousands of years in a secure environment – typically below ground – before its radioactivity diminishes to safe levels. The continuing relevance, indeed urgency, of Hilda’s concerns was demonstrated in March this year when catastrophe struck Japan following the earthquake and tsunami that eviscerated the nuclear power plants at Fukushima. Two thousand square kilometres of land were contaminated. Radioactive caesium from the disaster is still circulating in the currents of the Pacific Ocean and will return to the shores of Japan in 20 or 30 years time.

Will Fukushima be allowed to fade in the memory just as have the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor meltdown in Pennsylvania in 1979, and the Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine in 1986? Not if the memory of Hilda Murrell has anything to do with it.

A second layer in the story surrounding Hilda’s death was the military and political events that became closely associated with the event. In December 1984 the Labour MP Tam Dalyell got up during an all-night sitting of the House of Commons and announced that “men of British Intelligence” had been involved in her murder nine months before. How could this be?

The link, or coincidence, was the fact that Hilda’s nephew, Commander Robert Green had been part of the naval intelligence operation at Northwood, London, at the time of the Falklands War in May 1982. He was one of only 20 or so people who knew the detailed circumstances around the sinking of the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano. It was torpedoed by the British nuclear submarine HMS Conqueror on 2 May 1982, with the loss of 321 Argentine lives.

In the months that followed Tam Dalyell pursued the truth behind the sinking with dogged tenacity. He became convinced that Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had authorised the attack in order to precipitate an all-out conflict and secure the victory that propelled her to success in the 1983 general election. Intelligence that was leaked to him revealed that at the time it was attacked the Belgrano was steaming away from the exclusion zone that Britain had placed around the Falklands, and so could not be claimed to be presenting a threat to British forces.

In early 1984 Dalyell’s Parliamentary questions about the episode, fuelled by persistent leaks, threatened to completely undermine the government’s position on the Belgrano. There was growing anxiety within No 10 about the source of the leaks. Then, on 19 March 1984 – two days before Hilda Murrell was abducted from her home in Shrewsbury – Dalyell hand-delivered a letter to Michael Heseltine, then Secretary of State for Defence, in which he asked nine new questions about the Belgrano’s exact position and movements, indicating that it was steaming away from the Falklands.

For those who subsequently investigated Hilda Murrell’s murder one proposition became that her nephew Robert Green would have been subject to investigation as a potential source of the leaks. After all, he was among only a handful who had intimate knowledge of the details around the Belgrano’s sinking. It was later revealed that objectors at the Sizewell nuclear inquiry had been subjected to investigation and surveillance by private investigators. The theory gained ground that this provided further evidence to support the suggestion that Hilda Murrell would have been caught up in the search for who was leaking information about the Belgrano. Would her nephew have left papers with her for safe-keeping?

Put in this compressed way the question sounds so far-fetched as to be absurd. However, a reading of Robert Green’s recently published book A Thorn in Their Side – the Hilda Murrell Murder which traces his 27-year quest for the killer or killers of his aunt, may well persuade you otherwise. For one thing, Green himself was initially extremely reluctant to pursue let alone believe this theory. If true it would mean that, however, indirectly, he was in some way responsible for his aunt’s death. Instead, for many years he was convinced that Hilda had been killed because of the threat she posed to the nuclear industry.

In his book Robert Green constructs a scenario, based on evidence accumulated over many years – much of which, it has to be said, is largely circumstantial – which points to Hilda’s murder being the result of a bungled surveillance exercise aimed at discovering whether he was responsible for leaking evidence about the sinking of the Belgrano. As time passes it becomes ever more difficult to pin down what exactly happened. One potential source of enlightenment would be if Tam Dalyell would finally reveal the identity of the “reliable source” who first told him that British Intelligence were involved in Hilda Murrell’s murder. That source has died, as has his widow. Dalyell has contacted the family who have requested that he keep his commitment of secrecy. In his book Green quotes Dalyell as telling him, “As a man of my word, I will carry this man’s name to my grave.”

A third layer surrounding the murder of Hilda Murrell is the behaviour of the West Mercia police who investigated the affair. Throughout they have clung to the belief that the bizarre sequence of events that accompanied the killing was the responsibility of a lone walk-in burglar. However, Robert Green’s book raises a raft of questions that throw substantial doubt on this theory. In the concluding chapter he summarises fifty outstanding concerns and unanswered questions about Hilda’s case.

Consider: on the late morning of Wednesday 21 March 1984 Hilda Murrell returns home from a shopping trip to disturb an intruder or intruders in her home. Following a struggle in which there is evidence that she is assaulted, she is bundled into her car parked on the drive alongside her house. She is then driven through the middle of Shrewsbury town centre past the police station. She is slumped in the passenger seat and is wearing a floppy hat that covers her face. The driver is reported to be in his late twenties or early thirties with short light brown hair and a clean-shaven appearance.

There are more the 20 witnesses to the car’s progress as it passes through the town and is then driven erratically into the countryside beyond. After a few miles the car swerves in a narrow lane, crashes and comes to rest on a wide verge off the road. The driver’s door is jammed against a low grassy wall in a way that prevents it being opened. Hilda Murrell manages to grab the car keys and leave the car. Staggering off she places the keys in her pocket where they are later found.

The driver follows her after exiting through the passenger door. He catches her up and drags her through a gateway into a field across the road. Here Hilda is assaulted again, losing her hat and spectacles. Then she is either dragged across a large ploughed field and dumped in a copse about half-a-mile away, or just left against the hedge at the side of the field and later crawls into the copse by herself.

In any event three days later, on the morning of Saturday 24 March 1984 Hilda’s body is discovered by the police in the copse. A post-mortem finds that her torso has been stabbed several times and her hands are cut, revealing signs of a struggle. However, death was the result of hypothermia and she died at some time between the Wednesday and Friday nights.

All these are the police assumptions of what happened. In 2005, after they had re-opened the case they secured a conviction. Their alleged culprit was Andrew George who at the time of the murder had been a 16-year-old truant from a home for looked after children in Shrewsbury. Despite all the improbabilities, including the facts that at the time George was unable to drive and that he did not fit witness descriptions of the driver of the car, he was convicted at the High Court in Stafford on the basis of DNA evidence found in Hilda Murrell’s house. He is currently serving a 13-year sentence

Robert Green’s new book provides evidence that George’s conviction is likely to be unsafe. This is because subsequent to the trial and appeal it emerged that some DNA evidence that was discovered was not put to the jury by the prosecution. This was DNA on the underside of Hilda’s fingernails from a male that did not match that of Andrew George.

So, although the DNA evidence – and also fingerprints – prove that Andrew George entered Hilda Murrell’s house at some point on the Wednesday or Thursday, no doubt with the intention of stealing whatever he could find, it is also possible, if not probable, that as a result he found himself caught up with events and people over which he had no control. Indeed, new evidence revealed in Robert Green’s book suggests this is the case.

In his book Robert Green calls for George’s release and for a Commission of Inquiry into the case, led by an independent figure who has no connection either with the police or the British security system. I would suggest that figure should be Michael Mansfield QC who provides an important Foreword to Robert Green’s book.

I first became aware of the murder of Hilda Murrell in May 1984 when the late Gerard Morgan Grenville, founder of the Centre for Alternative Technology at Machynlleth, suggested that Wales This Week, the HTV Wales programme I was then working for, should look into it. He had known Hilda for some years and was advising her on the paper she was preparing to put to the Sizewell B nuclear reactor inquiry. In February 1984, a few weeks before her death, he had taken a phone call from Hilda at his home near Crickhowell. At the end of an unusually long call, which lasted about half-an-hour, she had uttered what became fateful words, “If they don’t get me first, I want the world to know that one old woman has seen through their lies.”

Gerard put me in touch with Robert Green and I began an investigation that led to us producing three programmes that were broadcast during the first half of 1985, and then a fourth in 1994, on the tenth anniversary of the murder. Our programmes focused mainly on the improbable events that surrounded the first three days of the affair, and especially the lost 24 hours following Hilda’s abduction when the police failed to follow up repeated calls about her abandoned car. The car was reported to the police within hours of it crashing at around 1.30pm on the Wednesday. It was seen by two local people who discussed the car on the phone before agreeing that one of them should report it to the police. It is acknowledged that the first 24 hours following a murder are likely to prove the most productive in any murder investigation, after which the trail becomes increasingly cold.

When I was investigating the case I repeatedly contacted the police asking for a background briefing and an interview but was refused. On the evening before the transmission of our first programme, at about 8pm, while we were editing the film, I took a call from the police in Shrewsbury. They were now very anxious to see us, they said. When I told them the prpgramme would be broadcast the following night they said it was vital they should see us first. They would travel down to Cardiff o see us by 9am the following morning.

Two officers duly arrived and spoke with myself, the reporter on the programme David Williams, and HTV’s solicitor for several hours. They were very concerned, they said, that we had filmed inside Hilda Murrell’s home. They were worried that we might reveal details that would interfere with their conduct of the case. They wanted to hold back some information so they could check the veracity of witnesses and suspects. We agreed to most of their requests, as is usually done by journalists when a police investigation is underway. But we also took the opportunity of questioning the police about their handling of the inquiry.

Their demeanour surprised us. Normally, the police are brisk and businesslike when dealing with journalists. They have the information. Usually they are looking for the co-operation of the media to publicise a case, but they call the shots. In this case it was different. The officers who came to see us were on the defensive, even embarrassed. We seemed to know as much about the case as they did. They were unable, or unwilling to give us satisfactory answers to many of our questions. We suspected they had come as much to find out what we knew and what we intended to report as to protect their operational handling of the case.

One of the main new revelations in our initial programme was our account of an interview with the owner of the copse where Hilda’s body was found, Captain Ian Scott. He was a member of the local squirearchy and a witness of some credibility. He was unwilling to be interviewed on camera but told us that on the Thursday afternoon, the day after Hilda was abducted, he was in the wood with his dogs counting his trees for felling. He said he paced over the spot where Hilda’s body was found and she was definitely not there at that time – about 3.30pm on the Thursday afternoon. “There is very little undergrowth in the wood at that time of year,” Scott told us. “If there had been a dead rabbit in that wood I would have seen it.”

In Robert Green’s book he publishes for the first time police photographs which came into his possession in 2006, after the case was closed following the conviction of Andrew George and his failed appeal. Among them are Hilda’s body in the wood at the time it was discovered. One is a long distance shot, another a close up. The ground is bare. Hilda is clearly visible at some distance.

Of course, if Scott was right and Hilda was not in the wood on the Thursday afternoon this would undermine the case against Andrew George that he was the lone walk-in burglar, solely responsible for the murder.

But the police discount Ian Scott’s story. In March 1985 the West Mercia Police brought in two outside senior detectives from the Northumbria force to review the case. This was completed in June that year following a three-month investigation. The police refused to publish it at the time. However, it was leaked to Robert Green in 1996, and it is now posted on a website devoted to the Hilda Murrell case. In their report the Northumbria police give a good deal of credence to Scott as a witness. However, they suggest that since he was counting his trees when he walked through his wood on Thursday afternoon 22 March 1984 he would have been gazing upwards and not looking at the ground.


I would advise anyone who hasn't already seen it watch the film Gravity. It's very loosely based on The Light Princess by George MacDonald.

I like to watch films and read books that lift my spirits and give me inner strength.

Wednesday, 25 December 2013


Thank you for choosing to live and die for me 2000 years ago.

Thank you for hearing our prayers.

Thank you for being patient with me when I made mistakes by going against your will and blessed plan for my life.

Thank you for being a beacon of hope in this dark world.

Thank you for forgiving me my sins.

Thank you for giving me love in my heart for others, and wanting to share your gift with them.

Thank you for The Holy Bible which is a guide book for those who would be wise by following You.

Thank you for Christmas Day.

Sunday, 15 December 2013

Gilbert Keith Chesterton

I haven't been online so much, because I have been reading. I got a book called The Outline Of Sanity by Gilbert Keith Chesterton, actually I bought it because of the beautiful pen and ink sketches in it, but I have found myself hardly unable to put it down.

I am very happy to read that he was also totally against eugenics and slavery.

I have also been rereading Uncle Toms Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe.

Tuesday, 3 December 2013


I am being stalked on Twitter. I have prayed about it, but apart from that there's not a lot I can do about it, if I go to the police I'll just be written off as a "MENTALLY ILL ATTENTION SEEKER" again no doubt.

But prayer is good as the Lord never calls me nasty names and he always answers my prayers.

Because of the stalkers, this is what I have found out:


And this: