Q and A

Think we deserve a bit of a rest after all that muck raking, it’s a sordid business following the Hate Campaign trail, so we’re passing the baton over to them for a while, with a view to gleaning some information.

Now we know from past experience they haven’t been able to cough up hard evidence to back up their accusations and bold statements, but we’re hoping that, because most of them have disappeared or retreated, the few that are left will be dead eager to show solidarity and try to appear credible, although we can’t be sure obviously. However, we are sure that they read every inch of this blog, so maybe they’ll give our challenge some consideration.

Without further ado HC, bearing in mind your claims and accusations, of which you’re very familiar, and if it’s not too much trouble, could you please show proof (i.e. solid evidence), to back up the following. Do bear in mind that cherry picking and taking comments and screenshots out of context to prove a point is cheating and unacceptable. Play fair now:

  • That huge amounts of money in the way of donations has been received via the Save Lennox campaign (we do recall several of you claiming to have calculated up to £60k? Remember now, absolute proof required);
  • That Caroline Barnes said she took the photograph of the dog warden in the BCC van from inside of her house;
  • That Caroline Barnes has been the only owner of a dog deemed as type who has not had to comply with that decision and admit the same to assist the appellant’s case (clue: procedure);
  • That Lennox was a status and yard dog;
  • You have asked Save Lennox supporters ‘where is the proof Lennox was mistreated or neglected‘ in BCC care. Similarly, where is your own proof that he was not?
  • That only Lennox’s owners and/or their closest supporters were directly responsible for bomb threats received by BCC on certain dates ;
  • That Sarah Fisher lied about visiting Caroline Barnes in hospital;
  • The ‘Family’ have made numerous threats of violence against some of your members (to give you a clue of where to look for that, it was a Heather Jones ‘FACT’)
  • That the family and/or their closest supporters were responsible for a petrol-soaked letter being put through a dog warden’s letter box;
  • That the incident(s) regarding a petrol-soaked letter actually happened in the first place (clue: PSNI)
  • The Family did not use the first assessment of Lennox only because it was negative to him;

As Mel Page has said, just today in fact, she despises Craig Winters, she might possibly want to cover this batch:

  • That Craig Winters couldn’t be bothered to attend court;
  • That Craig Winters is involved in dog fighting (link);
  • That Craig Winters ‘abused’ various kennels
  • That Craig Winters was guilty of domestic abuse (Jules, although not exclusively your statement, on this occasion you might want to cover that one)
  • That Craig Winters was responsible for slashing a dog warden’s car tyres and simultaneously involved in terrorist activities (Kirsten, one for you)
  • That the family have abused and vilified Deed not Breed;
  • That the picture plucked from the Internet of a man standing outside the Louvre in Paris shows Craig Winters having a holiday courtesy of donation money received after Lennox was seized;

Well that’s probably enough to be getting on with for now. A few more where that came from, obviously, especially comments about Brook Barnes, the child they swore would never be brought into their campaign. We’ll save those for another day.

In the meantime, and as a prelude to something else we have in mind, we’d also like to ask members of the HC how many of you attended the full court hearings, particularly this one – link? Thanks.


5 thoughts on “Q and A

  1. Have any of them come up with any answers to your questions yet? Or are they just pretending they weren’t asked any and going off on one of their many tangents in order to try and take the attention away from this?

  2. Funny though, in all the screen shots we have stored we cant seem to find one where this so called innocent victim – in any of her many guises, or her organisation for that matter, openly suggested to her ‘friends’ Heather, Roxanne, and the rest, even once, that their actions were, to say the least, inappropriate. Quite the opposite in fact, as some of the screen shots here have shown. As she now does her utmost to distance herself from the kind of bile we have all witnessed, the obvious question is why could she not do so then? It really is a bit late in the day for all these ‘explanations’ from her and her side kick don’t you think?

  3. oh dear. so much backpedalling going on they better attach a rear view mirror, in case they get a big sprize bumping into something they forgot they put there themselves. now i need to finish that chai somewhere else before i ruin yet another good keyboard 😀

Leave a Reply..

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s