Ian Huntley and the Soham girls

Right. I am donning hard hat here as this topic created absolute havoc over on another forum to the extent that posts were being deleted in minutes and whole threads being locked, or so it seemed.

As we know, in the terrible Holly and Jessica case, school caretaker Ian Huntley was convicted of their murder and is serving time. His former girlfriend who was a teaching assistant has been protected with a new identity.

In the case of Madeleine McCann Robert Murat was at one time made arguido but later cleared and claimed a large sum in libel damages.

Holly and Jessica were tragically found dead whereas Madeleine has - allegedly - never been found and therefore, theoretically, could still be alive. Although the sniffer dog alerts provide pretty damning evidence that Madeleine died. But not enough to secure any conviction.

As we know, there was a huge hunt for Holly and Jessica. And we know that Ian Huntley offered to help and was generally around on the scene. Even appearing on TV.

It was a Murdoch reporter (who had reported on Soham or at least remembered coverage of the case I believe) who first pointed the finger at Robert Murat and suggested that his hanging around and interest in the case had shades of Ian Huntley's behaviour in the aftermath of the Soham girls disappearance.

This turned the finger of suspicion in his direction and on top of this several of the Tapas also pointed a finger of suspicion. And some other OC guests also reported seeing him at a crucial time outside apartment 5a.  He was made arguido but eventually was cleared and successfully sued papers for libel.

There are those that think Murat has involvement in what happened on some level. I think he was called in to sort out the TM 'disaster' at the last minute. But he may not have been fully aware of what had gone on or even partially aware. He certainly would have become privy to some vital eye-witness information. Plus was privy to police information as he acted as interpreter. Others think he was a convenient patsy - albeit he was well rewarded for having been libelled and media interviews do not show a broken man, imo.  

(A conveniently leaked recorded telephone conversation between Sky News reporter Martin Brunt and Robert and Jennifer Murat shows quite a close relationship between the three which I think is most irregular and in fact highly suspicious given that he has been made arguido. I have my own theories about this but it hardly points towards impartiality.)

Where am I going with this? It's all so complicated but I urge forum-members who want to search for the truth and who are concerned about potential miscarriages of justice to explore the Ian Huntley conviction. Before I looked into it I would never have believed it might be flawed. Following research I am of a different opinion.

If this conviction if flawed as I believe it to be (and many others too if you research this case) then who was responsible for this heinous crime? I urge members to consider where these two girls bodies were found, what this might possibly mean, and what was going on politically at around that time.

Think B-LIAR, Iraq and all the dark forces surrounding all this.

Ian Huntley was whisked off to Rampton mental institution at speed and subjected to all sorts of psychological tests. If, as I believe, there is even a possibility that he was wrongly convicted this raises quite frankly terrifying questions surrounding his treatment following his arrest and prior to his trial. The medical treatment/s he may have received and the experts who assessed, diagnosed and presumably treated him. Photos of him taken post arrest and trial look as though he is heavily drugged and quite 'out of it'.

If you explore his background I suspect his supposed paedophile past was exaggerated in that there was one completely consensual relationship with a girl who was 15 I think it was when he was a few years older. I looked into his other alleged offences against young girls and they didn't really stand up to much scrutiny.

And we know that police forces are not always entirely professional - look at 'call me Stu' Prior and Leics police on first name terms with the McCanns with calls from the public being put through to the very people who would be the prime suspects in a case like this.

I think the media really went to town with all this and whipped up public opinion very effectively so that the crime was solved speedily without too many awkward questions being asked.  

It may simply be a morbid coincidence but I found that some of the media coverage of missing Madeleine McCann lent on some of the media coverage of Holly and Jessica. Which would not be entirely unsurprising as these are both high profile cases of missing children.

Team McCann's choice of releasing a photograph of Madeleine (allegedly!) wearing an Everton football shirt advertising a brand of Thai beer is not only deeply inappropriate, imo, promoting branding off the back of a missing child, but also has an uncanny similarity with the final photo of Holly and Jessica taken when they just happened to be wearing football shirts. So obviously this photo of Holly and Jessica was specifically chosen as these were the tops they were wearing when they went missing. Later the parents asked the press to stop releasing this photo. Whereas TM gave no indication of why they selected a photo of their daughter wearing a football shirt with branding as opposed to wearing clothes that were more similar to those she was wearing when she was allegedly taken. In the photo of Madeleine wearing the football top she looks quite different to other photos.

There is something fishy going on here. And I'm not just talking sea-bass. If there is even a shadow of suspicion over the conviction of Ian Huntley then what is being hidden here? What possible ramifications might that have for the Madeleine McCann case?

I merely raise questions but I ask forum readers to explore.

All theories as always. Frankly, I hope I am wrong.

Hi Poster. Found this on Google.

How many of you really know of the true facts of the Soham murders case . 
How many of you know that the girls bodies were found on a USAF base at Lakenheath. 

How many know that USAF servicemen contaminated the scene where the bodies were found and not even 1 USAF serviceman was questioned about it. 

How many of you know that at the time of the Ian Huntley trial that hard evidence that the monster or monsters who murdered Holly and Jessica might well reside inside the razor wire at USAF Lakenheath, was provided at a Courts Martial held on 23 July 2003. A military judge found against Technical Sergeant Randy Bitter on three charges of child sex abuse. Tech Sgt Bitter pleaded guilty to carnal knowledge with a female child under 12 years of age, and two counts of indecent acts with the same victim. He was sentenced to six years imprisonment with dishonorable discharge from the United States Air Force. 
Despite the fact that Bitter was convicted less than 500 yards away from the exact point at which Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman's bodies were dumped, not one British newspaper or television network anywhere in the land reported these horrifying crimes, details of which were made available in "Immediate Press Release #073103-4" dated 31 July 2003 at USAF Lakenheath. Predictably perhaps, these frightening lookalike offences and their obvious implications have been withheld from the jurors in the trial of Ian Huntley. 

How many of you know that Ian Huntley was drugged and tortured after his arrest and before his trial. Even when he was "confessing" he was clearly stating he didn't know what was real and what was imaginery, even though he was perfectly 100% ok before his arrest he was suddenly brain damaged only a few months later, obviously a result of the neurleptic drugs and the treatment he was subjected to. The Home office wanted to frame someone to totally deflect all attention away from the USAF base at Lakenheath. 

Huntleys lawyer should very easily have succeded in winning the case for his client BUT he was appointed to Huntley by the court and was obviously working for them. There are so many holes in the case against Huntley that he should very easily have cleared his name. 

The trial of Ian Huntley must be unlawful and illegal. It seems to have broken all the rules of criminal trial procedure and it was in breach of the oath of truth on several counts (part two of this being "the whole truth"). 

There was no inquest into the deaths of Jessica and Holly before the trial. This responsibility was left to the prosecution of Ian Huntley. The purpose of an inquest is to provide an unbiased overview of the circumstances and witnesses relating to a death, and it is essential for a fair trial. Crown prosecutions in the UK use the adversarial system to examine the facts of a case and this consists of a counterbalance of potential biases. Since the prosecution produces all the evidence a fair trial needs an adequate inquest. 

The taxi driver, Ian Webster, whose evidence is mentioned above, was not called as a witness in the trial. 

The evidence of the witness Margaret Withers, who saw the two girls in the High Street half an hour after they are supposed to have died in Huntley's house (she was with her husband and knew the girls), was not used in the trial. 

The four witnesses who saw the two girls at the War Memorial at the time that they are supposed to have died in Huntley's house did not appear in the trial. 

The witness who saw a man and a woman in a green car (metallic green?) staring at two girls in the High Street did not appear at the trial. This evidence is particularly important because two kidnappers might well be needed to control two children. 

The witness who contradicted the prosecution case that in changing his car tyres Huntley had paid the mechanic a backhander to falsify the registration of his car did not appear as a witness.

part 2 to follow.

Part 2

The witness who contradicted the prosecution case that in changing his car tyres Huntley had paid the mechanic a backhander to falsify the registration of his car did not appear as a witness at the trial. 

The mobile phone evidence that Jessica's signal had faded at 1:30 AM and that it was traced to countryside north of Soham was not examined at the trial. This contradicted the police case that the phone was switched off at the time that their case alleged they died and that the signal came from a mast outside Huntley's house. 

Huntley's legal defence was incompetent, and on this ground the trial judgment should be scrapped. No defence witnesses were used, and the legal defence acted throughout as though Huntley were guilty even while he was protesting his innocence. His defence even caused him to accept the charge of perverting the course of justice when he was pleading innocence, and this undermined his pleas of innocence. He did not change this defence until a year later and two weeks before his trial. 

www.justjustice.org/ 

The British Home Office asserted that Huntley had already been imprisoned for rape in another jurisdiction back in 1998. This damning information was also leaked to the jurors in court, in an attempt to influence their final judgement on Ian Huntley. 
What the Cambridgeshire Police Service did not know in 2002, and jurors were not told in court is that after being in prison on remand for two months, Huntley was freed because a council video camera was found to have filmed him many miles away from the crime scene, at the exact time of the rape. Ian Huntley was therefore not only an innocent man, he was also a man who had been arrested and unlawfully detained because of significant police incompetence 
www.vialls.com... 
www.vialls.com... 
www.joevialls.co.uk... 

Please study the case carefully before coming to your own conclusions (not the conclusions the British Home Office and the controlled mainstream media want you to have). It seems very clear it was all a coverup for the USAF base at Lakenheath


I hasten to add I have never studied this in any depth. Just supposed Huntley was guilty so not saying I believe this or not.

Huntley really turned suspect, when he said he was the last person to have seen the girls alive. That's a difference.

The idea that Ian Huntley is innocent is not something that I personally can take seriously.

I don't know whether Ian Huntley is guilty or not but just the suggestion that he could be a patsy might have inspired the McCann team to point the finger at Robert Murat. They copied the iconic football shirt photo so the Soham murders were obviously in their minds.

However, the McCanns have the same problem that the Ramseys had/have. In 2008, 12 years after JonBenet's death, the Boulder County District Attorney formally cleared the Ramseys of involvement and apologised to the family. A quick google will show you that the case is still being disected and the Ramseys are still considered responsible.

I can't find the exact quote from someone close to the case but the jist of it is that to lift the public's suspicion it wouldn't be enough for a third party to be found guilty of JonBenet's murder, the Ramseys would have to prove their innocence.

The same is true of the McCanns.

IMO.

I had never thought about this but I have an open mind about everything and don't believe much that I read in the papers or see on the TV, so much of it is designed to make us think in a certain way and that is becoming more and more obvious.
on this webpage and associated TV show which you may remember there is analysis of the 2 cases.

http://www.closeronline.co.uk/2014/01/ian-huntley-stuart-hazell-and-the-mccanns-experts-reveal-how-to-spot-the-liars-from-the-innocent-in-famous-missing-child-cases


while searching for that I also found this page which is unrelated but still interesting. It's 8 years old but would never be published today. However it's still there.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mccanns-evidence-doesnt-add-up-514328

Poe, your comments about the Ramsey parents being cleared but still being thought guilty by many people, reminds me of a bizarre ongoing case in California which was originally thought to be a hoax. If I can find the YouTube video (which I watched yesterday) I'll add a link.

Here's a newspaper report in the meantime.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/14/california-kidnapping-disbarred-lawyer-charged-over-abduction-police-called-a-hoax

I'm going to go and have a read about the Huskins case.

I found http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/deception-kidnappers-of-denise-huskins.html and in the comments section trustmeigetit says "This is as believable as the ransom note written by a "group of indivuals that represent a small foreign faction" That is a direct, if badly typed, reference to the Ramsey ransom note and clearly shows that despite their exoneration, the Ramsays are still not trusted.

This jumped out at me from your post Hellsbells

Prof Barclay visited the crime scene along with ex-Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Stevenson, the man who caught Soham killer Ian Huntley and psychological profiler David Canter.

If you explore his background I suspect his supposed paedophile past was exaggerated in that there was one completely consensual relationship with a girl who was 15 I think it was when he was a few years older. I looked into his other alleged offences against young girls and they didn't really stand up to much scrutiny

So poster you are saying a horrific sex attack on a 11 year old girl Hailey Giblin is not of any consequence. Well I have news for you it was to her, if you could be bothered to do any proper research. Why this post is allowed is beyond me

JJ wrote:If you explore his background I suspect his supposed paedophile past was exaggerated in that there was one completely consensual relationship with a girl who was 15 I think it was when he was a few years older. I looked into his other alleged offences against young girls and they didn't really stand up to much scrutiny

So poster you are saying a horrific sex attack on a 11 year old girl Hailey Giblin is not of any consequence. Well I have news for you it was to her, if you could be bothered to do any proper research. Why this post is allowed is beyond me

This aggressive tone of writing starts all the nastiness on here. Couldn`t you just write :-

"So poster you are saying a horrific sex attack on a 11 year old girl Hailey Giblin is not of any consequence. I believe it was to her, and here is a link to support my belief "

Why the rudeness ?

I get angry when I read of people supporting convicted paedophile killers and stating horrific sex attacks on 11 year olds do not stand up to scrutiny when Ian Huntley himself has admitted the offence.
This is a matter of public record and poster should have checked their facts before posting.
What manners and respect have been shown to Hailey Giblin?
It is interesting my tone is of more concern to you than sex attacks on children

https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/paedophile-innuendo-the-soham-murders-something-for-the-wannabe-censors-to-think-about/

Don't think we'll ever know the full extent or otherwise of Huntley's past as Humberside police deleted his files. The above link is an interesting and illuminating read.

http://news.sky.com/story/326725/cops-at-dinner-of-man-accused-of-child-sex-abuse

According to this report it is not the only time Humberside police have been criticised for  failing to investigate properly. In this case, claims against the chairman of their own Police Authority.

I've never heard until now of the incident with the 11-year-old girl, JJ. Perhaps Poster wasn't aware of it either. I was certainly under the mistaken impression that the previous incidents involved willing but slightly underage girls.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/my-nightmare-at-hands-of-child-killer-huntley-1-2374010

The 11 year old girl made her claims very vociferously locally once she was grown up. She staged a rooftop protest at Hull college:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-517531/Ian-Huntleys-victim-roof-protest-police-refusal-charge-sex-attack.html


The strange thing is she herself entered into an underage relationship with a man 19 years her senior when she was 15 and he 34. They remain together happily married.

But as already said we'll never know of the full list of allegations against Huntley because of the bizarre actions of Humberside police. Mrs Giblin's own allegations were ignored due to "lack of evidence" although, in April 2007, she eventually won a civil case she brought against him:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/6586743.stm

But a year later Humberside police still refused to reopen the investigation into her claims, despite the civil case victory and Huntley's signed admission in March 2007 that the assault in 1997 did happen.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/im-a-paedophile-huntley-finally-confesses-7299445.html

I seem to recall forensic evidence being found in Huntleys house but I could be wrong.

Also what about his live in girllfriend who I think was convicted for obstructing the police, jailed and now has a new identity somewhere.

From memory, the girls' burnt shirts were found at the school where he was caretaker.

Antonia wrote:I seem to recall forensic evidence being found in Huntleys house but I could be wrong.

Also what about his live in girllfriend who I think was convicted for obstructing the police, jailed and now has a new identity somewhere.

Maxine Carr served 21 months of a 3 year sentence for providing a false alibi to Huntley. She was in a Grimbsby nightclub with another man at the time of the murders according to Huffington Post.
Her new id and protection has cost upwards of 2.5m. She is married and I believe she had a child.
The sentence she received while on the face of it, par for the course for what she did, in no way compensates the parents of those children for the additional 2 weeks of anguish they suffered before the bodies were found. Her moral compass was totally skewed and she deserves to carry what she did on her conscience for life. 
Having read more about this case today I have reverted to my initial feeling that Huntley was as guilty as sin.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/27/maxine-carr-former-girlfriend-soham-murderer-ian-huntley-marries-besotted-boyfriend_n_5396270.html&ved=0CE8QFjANahUKEwiOtY6kntbIAhVFWRQKHZs5B1Q&usg=AFQjCNGMI5PX3ZOwfSUTfcIQAh_twuwPeg

Antonia wrote:I seem to recall forensic evidence being found in Huntleys house but I could be wrong.

Also what about his live in girllfriend who I think was convicted for obstructing the police, jailed and now has a new identity somewhere.

You're right. Plenty of forensic evidence was found:

49 fibres matching Jessica and Holly's shirts were found on Huntley's clothes and around his house.
2 of Huntley's hairs were found with their clothes in the bin in the hangar, as well as his fingerprints on the bin bag that he put on top of the clothes.
Fibres from his curtains and carpet were also found on their shirts.

A clear two-way link.

He also often went to Lakenheath for plane spotting, so was familiar with the area.

Antonia wrote:I seem to recall forensic evidence being found in Huntleys house but I could be wrong.

Also what about his live in girllfriend who I think was convicted for obstructing the police, jailed and now has a new identity somewhere.

From what I remember he admitted to the girls being upstairs in his house and one going into the bathroom and slipping and the other girl getting hysterical.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3236674.stm

Yes, that was the tale he told. One fell into a bath full of water; he and the other one were with her and could have helped her out. What a load of you-know-what.