A
recurrent question asked on this blog is whether or not David Fletcher removed
Yang Dany’s clothing in 2009.
This
is a valid question, given that Yang Dany, whilst insisting she was not raped
by Mr Fletcher, has asserted that he did
remove her clothes.
Mr
Fletcher denies having done so. It’s his word against hers.
Imagine
what might have happened if Mr Fletcher had been charged not with rape but with
removing Yang Dany’s clothes.
- On
27th June 2010 Mr Fletcher is arrested in Thailand and held, without
charge, in a Thai prison.
- 17
days later Mr Fletcher is charged by Cambodian authorities with having removed Yang
Dany’s clothing on 15th March 2009, on 22nd March 2009 and on 15th
May 2010.
- The
charges have been laid by Yang Dany’s mother, Sekun, in July 2010.
- Through
the Thai courts, Cambodian authorities seek Mr Fletcher’s extradition to face charges
arising from the removal of a 17 year old’s clothing.
Imagine
now that there was a court case open to the media and the public, held in
accordance with the Cambodian Court of Criminal Procedure. Yang Dany is, after all, 18 years old now!
APLE’s
lawyers, representing Yang Dany’s mother, Sekun, must now convince the judges and
all present in court that Mr Fletcher’s removal of 17 year old Yang Dany’s
clothing was a crime serious enough to warrant extradition.
This
is not an easy task given that there are no witnesses to this crime having
occurred and no evidence that it occurred. There is only Yang Dany’s statement
to the police, made 17 days after Mr Fletcher’s arrest in Thailand.
Yang
Dany, now an adult takes the stand and tells her story:
- 15th March 2009. Mr Fletcher removed her clothes
in his ‘shop’. She did not mention the incident to her mother.
22nd March 2009. Yang Dany returned to the place
where her clothes had been removed a week earlier by Mr Fletcher. He removed
her clothes again. She did not tell her mother about this second instance of
clothing removal.
May 2010. 14 months later Mr Fletcher
again attempted to remove her clothes. His attempt was interrupted by the
arrival of her brother.
Yang
Dany did not mention this 3rd incident of clothing removal to her
mother. Nor did she mention it, or the two previous incidents, to the APLE
investigators who kept asking her if she had had sex with David Fletcher.
APLE,
CEOP and SISHA had spent 2 years trying to find evidence of sexual misconduct
on the part of MrFletcher.
Mr
Fletcher’s lawyer, in his cross-examination of Yang Dany, reads out to her a segment
from a document entitled:
“Prosecution to Phnom Penh Municipal Trial Court”
Criminal case No. 1551, dated 15th July 2010:
“Up until on unremembered day during June 2010 the police and Aple
organization enquired her (Sekun), as well as her daughter YANG DANY about the
relationship with her daughter and David John Fletcher, but then, her daughter
said nothing, and for about 1 week later, the police and Aple organization
enquired again, so that her daughter told that David John Fletcher had (removed
her clothes) twice at the shop of David John Fletcher…”
David
Fletcher’s lawyer asks Yang Dany how many times APLE had asked her if she had
had sex with David Fletcher.
Many
times, she replies.
“And
what did you tell APLE each time?” asks Mr Fletcher’s lawyer.
“That
he was a good man,” replies Yang Dany, “and that I had not had sex with him.”
“And
what made you change your mind and tell APLE that Mr Fletcher had three times
removed your clothes?” asks Mr Fletcher’s lawyer.
Yang
Dany looks nervously to her mother and cannot answer the question.
Mr
Fletcher’s lawyer puts it to Yang Dany that the ‘unremembered day’ in June 2010 was,
in fact, an ‘unremembered day’ in July – after
Mr Fletcher had already been arrested in Thailand. Yang Dany is confused. She
cannot remember.
Mr
Fletcher’s lawyer jogs Yang Dany’s memory by reading again from the ‘Absolute
Request’ court document – in which there are three references to the dates upon
which Yang Dany alleged that Mr Fletcher removed her clothing.
The
first date reference:
“The prosecution to Phnom Penh Municipal Trial Court received the case
from the Department of Anti-Human Trafficking and Minor Protection of the
Ministry of Interior, with entry number on 14th July 2010 for legal
proceeding.”
The
second date reference:
“The answer of the civil plaintiff named KHEANG SOKUN, sex female, age
59, dated 20 July 2010…”
The
third date reference:
“The documents in connection with the victim named YANG DANY. The answer
of the victim, sex female, age 18, dated 20 July 2010…”
Mr
Fletcher’s lawyer points out to the court that Yang Dany clearly did not tell
APLE that Mr Fletcher had removed her clothes on an ‘unremembered date’ in June
but on an ‘unremembered date’ in July, prior to 14th July.
Mr
Fletcher’s lawyer also points out to the court that as of 14th July
2010 Mr Fletcher had already been held in a Thai prison at the request of the
Cambodian authorities for 17 days. During those 17 days (or the bulk of them)
Yang Dany had stuck to her story that Mr Fletcher had not committed any sexual
crimes at all; that he had not removed her clothes once; let alone 3 times.
Mr
Fletcher was never charged with an offence in Thailand. He was being held only
because Cambodian authorities has asked Thai authorities to do so. For the 17
days of his incarceration in Thailand to far there had been no suggestion that
he had removed Yang Dany’s clothes.
Mr
Fletcher’s lawyer returns to his questioning of Yang Dany.
“If
you did not want Mr Fletcher, whom you described to journalist Andrew Drummond,
as your ‘fiance’, to remove your clothes on 15th March 2009, why did
you return to his ‘shop’ a second time, a week later, on 22nd March,
and allow him to remove your clothes again? Why did you return to his ‘shop’ a
third time?”
I am
not sure how Yang Dany would respond to such a question but it should be clear,
by now, the difficulty APLE would have running a case such as this with so many
inconsistencies, so many illogicalities, in a public setting, with the media
present.
Given
that APLE, with the assistance of the Cambodian authorities, SISHA, CEOP and
the British embassies in Cambodia and Thailand had put so much effort into
convincing Thai authorities to arrest Mr Fletcher, something more solid than
the removal of clothing was required if all those involved were going to retain
any credibility at all. The solution was to charge Mr Fletcher with rape –
three weeks after his arrest in Thailand. This solution was rendered easy by
the offer of $30,000 to Sekun and Yang Dany if they were prepared to say that
David Fletcher had not simply removed Yang Dany’s clothes but had raped her.
Given
Mr Fletcher’s previous 1998 conviction, all concerned in this affair figured
that no-one would come to the aid of a man who could, so easily, be portrayed
as a pedophile, as a sexual predator. For agencies dependent on a constant
stream of convictions. Mr Fletcher was a Godsend.
This
‘rape’ solution to the credibility problem of all involved was perfect – except
for two small problems:
(1) It
became apparent in September 2010 to all involved (CEOP, SISHA, APLE, the Anti
Human Trafficking Unit and the British Embassies in Cambodia and Thailand,)
that Ynag Dany was still a virgin.
Ooops!
Fortunately
for all concerned, this little problem would never become public knowledge if
the trial was held in secret. And it helped that in this secret trial the
judges declared, in their wisdom, that Yang Dany’s hymen must have grown back.
Phew!
(2)
The second problem was that Mr Fletcher’s passport, held by the British embassy
in Thailand, indicated that he was not in Cambodia in March 2009. The solution
to this little problem was relatively easy, however. Mr Fletcher’s passport
simply had to be made to disappear. And disappear it did – ‘accidentally’
cancelled and destroyed by the Foreign & Commonwealth office.
In
anticipation of Team Neeson and others launching their usual attack, let me ask
you a question:
“How do you account for the 17
days that Mr Fletcher spent in a Thai jail, at the request of the Cambodian
authorities, when court documents make it clear that Yang Dany had not yet come
up with her clothing removal/rape story?”
Let’s
be a little more bold and specific:
“Do you think that during these 17 days, Yang Dany and her mother’s story
might have changed as a result of their being told that they stood to get
$30,000 in compensation if they did?”
Hurl
as much abuse as you like at me and Mr Fletcher but whilst you are at it,
please provide us with your own logical explanation for Yang Dany’s change of
story during this 17 days – after two years of round the clock surveillance by
CEOP, SISHA and APLE!
Fifteen
months later, two weeks after Mr Fletcher had been arrested in Thailand, with
no charges laid, Yang Dany announces that on two occasions, in a location she
cannot remember, Mr Fletcher removed her clothes.
I wish that APLE would undergo the same scrutiny that David Fletcher does on this blog. The fact that there is absolutely no scrutiny about APLE's modus operandi and it's founder Thierry Darnaudet at all is more than worrysome.
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to understand why Thierry Darnaudet wants to expand his PROTECT Business to Haiti and other equally corrupt countries around the world. He's got the cash and nobody will stand in the way or even ask questions.
I cannot understand why some bloggers here are going to such lengths to justify the denial of David Fletcher to a fair trial. Is it perhaps that they cannot accept the fact that they made a mistake in setting him up in the first place ?
What I learned about the entire NGO Sector in Cambodia (which is the same around the world according to some insiders of the NGO Sector) is that the individuals running such schemes often start with good intentions but are quickly corrupted by the money making system (which makes some leave quickly).
I also understand that many Volunteers and Staff of NGO's are not really honest about their motives as to why they want to DO GOOD. Many simply want to service their bad conscious because they're usually so much better off than the children at the dumpsite for example. But mostly it's because doing good feels like an orgasm to their own ego.
Yes, all you keyboard warriors, when are you going to scrutinise APLE and Scott Neeson in the way you attack David Fletcher. If it is fair enough to question Fletcher's credibility why not question the credibility of APLE and Scott Neeson in the same way?
DeleteI agree, Anonymous 2.59 and 3.05. Attack me as much as you like. Attack David Fletcher’s story. Find the holes. Use facts, evidence and logic to demolish his credibility and my own. But please do apply the same principles to APLE and Scott Neeson.
DeleteFor those that use childish playground less than original names for James and myself. James has kindly given me a platform to state my case, which no one has done before. I am under the same rules as everyone else as it should be, I would have it no other way.
DeletePossibly the only difference as far as I am concerned and you the decerning puplic is, I am sharing first hand experiences of my life, the same in my book, but as in anyone's explanations of their life, one cannot prove a negative and many other experiences. In good faith I feel when challenged I must explain myself to you. Not justify!
I do not name names and use terminology when I cannot provide strong evidence to state my case. If a person acts as a Judas I call them a Judas, I do not speculate. In Neeson’s case, Hogan and APLE the evidence is there for all to see, they have published their guilt themselves! The evidence is there for a blind man to see. I think I am justified in using terminology accordingly.
For those who sink to profanity to express to the world, just exposes their limitations.
I feel as James, challenge me on any issue if you have evidence, not supposition or my friend said, or I saw it on khmer440, sleaze press or media. In my book I do not use he said, she said terminology, just my first hand experiences. Whilst on the subject, all net profits from my book will be used to help my poor children on the dump. So good will be forth coming from all the evil maliciousness.
Please do challenge me on anything that is pertinent, for I shall challenge all the scuttlebutt remarks, the backstabber so called friends with dark agendas themselves, my alcoholic loose tongue ex business partner, the geriatric Gunna in the silver Mercedes with matching Zimmer frame, the man of straw Brit at a PP university, the Nordic, the ex CIA gangsters who set up businesses and still in Cambodia. The two back stabbing Kiwis one is in the hotter climes as Hogan, the computer nerd, bring it on and state your name rank and number, or collect your white feathers. This includes Team Neeson, Neeson if ever he has the guts, which I doubt and all the other creative accounting NGOs, selective LICADHO and ADHOC, stand up instead of keeping your agenda in the shadows.
David Fletcher.
Its good to see you finally admitting that kiddie fiddler Fletch the Letch removed the clothes of a vulnerable teenage girl. Even if he didnt rape her he's a scumbag and deserves to be in jail.
ReplyDelete
DeleteI do find it odd that she would have gone back a 2nd and 3rd time to have her clothes taken off again if she did not want this to occur. Even if, worst case scenario, Mr Fletcher had induced a 17 year old young woman to remove her clothes, is this crime worthy of a 10 year jail sentence without a trial?
If you werent such a fucking moron Ricketsoin you would of figured out that the girl hugging Neeson in shtat photo youve used is Yang Dany. Thinak bout that.
ReplyDeleteSeveral people have told me that the young woman hugging Scott Neeson is Yang Dany. Whilst the young woman in the photo and Yang Dany share in common a very prominent chin, that’s where the similarity ends for me. On the other hand, the young woman in the photo is wearing make-up and I have never seen Yang Dany in make-up so, who knows, it could be her!
DeleteIf anyone can shed any light on whether or not the young woman in the photo hugging Scott is Yang Dany I would appreciate it. If she is not Yang Dany, the question still remains: “Who is she?” A resident in a CCF care facility? A university student? Scott Neesonps neice? Without knowing who she is it is not possible to pass any kind of judgment on the photo.
five years is a long time for an innocent man to sit in prison; its amazing to me that David's enemies come on this blog are not satisfied that David has been in prison long enough; that the corrupt system and people that put him there want yet more blood from an innocent man.............fact is they want him to die in prison...........ten years was a death sentence for an innocent man..........so what does this make the people who framed David? murderers! all the people who come on this blog to suggest that David is guilty are part of the corrupt system that will be responsible for David's death if he is not released soon...........they will have to live with the blood of an innocent man;
ReplyDelete"David Fletcher’s lawyer asks Yang Dany how many times APLE had asked her if she had had sex with David Fletcher.
ReplyDeleteMany times, she replies.
“And what did you tell APLE each time?” asks Mr Fletcher’s lawyer.
“That he was a good man,” replies Yang Dany, “and that I had not had sex with him.”
“And what made you change your mind and tell APLE that Mr Fletcher had three times removed your clothes?” asks Mr Fletcher’s lawyer.
Yang Dany looks nervously to her mother and cannot answer the question."
'Explaining Counterintuitive Victim Behavior in Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Cases'
http://www.ncdsv.org/images/Explaining%20Counterintuitive%20victim%20behavior.pdf
'Why Do Victims "Lie"?'
http://www.ncjfcj.org/victim-series-07
And the point you are making here, Anonymous 10.22 is?
DeleteAre you suggesting, implying, that women never lie about being sexually assaulted?
Yes, it is readily understandable that a woman, a child, might lie to protect their father, their mother, a relative or friend of the family. It is also true that a young woman may lie when told she can claim $30,000 in compensation if she does.
The reason why we have courts, judges, a judicial system, is to determine where the truth lies. This necessitates a trial in which both the prosecution and defence present their cases.
Mr Fletcher has been denied such a trial for more than 5 years now.
Do you believe Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial? Ol
“Are you suggesting, implying, that women never lie about being sexually assaulted?”
DeleteOf course not. That would be silly.
But unempathetically cornering a possible victim of child sexual assault on the stand with ‘why didn’t you report it right away?’ type questions is not going to gain the favor of the judge (or jury, if there were one,) even if the defence manage to trap the child with her own words. It would make the defence attorney look like a bully with a neanderthalish understanding of the sexual assault victimology. It would also be a great set up for the prosecution to call in far more sympathetic sounding expert testimony on the behavior of child rape victims.
From the POV of a trial, the defence seems quite confused at this point. The victim and victim’s mother initially claim rape, the victim later recants, saying there was no rape, that the alleged perp only undressed the girl. The defence seems to want to accept the recantation, but deny the part about the victim being stripped, i.e. have their cake and eat it too. That’s like painting a target on your forehead. And in support of this, the defence is beating up on a little girl who may be a sexual assault victim for getting her dates wrong and failing to behave the way a 60 year old man imagines the female child victim of sexual assault should behave.
With this kind of defence Fletch would be lucky not to get another 10 years.
Rachel, (this is you, Rachel, isn't it?) let's go through this point by point.
Delete(1) Do you consider an 18 year old woman (the age that Yang Dany was if there has been a trial open to public and media) to be a child?
(2) Do you believe that it was inappropriate to ask an 18 year old why, over a course of 15 or so months, she had never mentioned to her mother that Mr Fletcher had removed her clothes?
(3) The the words used were incorrect, which words do you believe would have been appropriate to use to ask this question? You will concede, I hope that this is a valid question?
(4) Your reference to 'sympathetic sounding expert testimony' goes to the point I have been making, and that Mr Fletcher has been making - namely, that in a properly constituted court of law there would have been:
(a) an expert witness for the prosecution arguing that it was possible for a woman's hymen to remain intact after two 'brutal rapes' and
(b) an expert witness for the defence arguing that in an intact hymen was incompatible with the proposition that Yang Dany had been raped.
Likewise, in a properly constituted court an expert witness for the prosecution could argue that Yang Dany's inability to give clear and unambiguous answers to questions was consistent with her being a victim; whilst an expert witness for the defence could argue that Yang Dany was dissembling; that her answers were consistent with her having been coached etc.
This is the way courts of law work. Or, should I say, the way they should work. Mr Fletcher has been denied any opportunity, for fie years now, to present his own case. He has not even been interviewed by the police or a Prosecuting Judge. For five years!
(4) Let me quote what you write: "The victim and victim’s mother initially claim rape, the victim later recants, saying there was no rape, that the alleged perp only undressed the girl."
You have segued from 'possible victim of child sexual assault' to 'victim' without giving Mr Fletcher any benefit of doubt at all. How can you justify this?
Let's just say, for argument's sake, that Mr Fletcher did get Yang Dany to remove her cloths three times but did not rape her, OK. Are you suggesting that this alone renders him worthy of a ten year jail sentence? No, you are suggesting, and I quote you, "With this kind of defence Fletch would be lucky not to get another 10 years."
So, in your view, thew removal of a 17 year old woman's clothes, three times, (yes, she kept coming back to have her clothes removed!) should render a man liable to a 20 year jail sentence?
Really, Rachel! Or whoever it is espousing a Rachel Matter's style argument in favour of allowing a man to die in jail without the benefit of ever had a trial?
Sorry James, while the argument of Anonymous 2:28 is deeply flawed, I believe it shows much more intelligence than Rachael Matters has ever had!
DeleteSorry to disappoint you anon 8.01pm - the above comments weren't me. I haven't had the time to visit this blog site for sometime as I have been holidaying in France. Thanks for thinking of me though. You really are intimidated by women aren't you. What a sad life you must live. If I was a gambler I would say that you are mr. Robert Jamieson - the loser expat who couldn't even keep a blog site running. How pitiful!
DeleteThanks for your very colourful labels, it must have taken you hours to come up with such clever original names.
ReplyDeleteI am afraid I am not clever enough, as the Troglodyte ( sorry James, you did allow the scumbag to say scumbag ) to be able to prove a negative. I cannot prove I did not bed Marilyn Monroe, or Lauren Bacall, I cannot prove I did not go to the moon.
I have covered this subject and unlike the nodding dogs and fat Fred, Humphrey Collins scumbag, i will do or say anything to bed your wife because I am not man enough to get one of my own.
The reason I do not make a habit of repeating myself, I assume that any intelligent person has the retention to remember what I have stated before. Not the retention of a goldfish said to be three seconds.
For the goldfish fraternity;
I did not strip Dany ever!
Am I so dim? I did not see where James agreed I stripped Dany .
It must be a full moon!
For what it is worth and after all, many Troglodytes confirm in their sleaze that I know Dany so well, it is Dany in that leary picture of Neeson fondling her.
David Fletcher
Yeah its Yang Dany in the photo. It was taken in 2010 when Dany was chasing after Neeson. He wasn’t interested so she chased after Feltcher. A gold digger out Dany. Mum’s worse. Sekun would sell her daughter if there was a buck in it. Hey, she probably has. Dany’s got a husband in China now! Yeah and pigs can fly.
DeleteNeeson didn't fuck her. Fact. Not did Fletcher. I don't know about Fletcher but she threw herself at Neeson. Neeson knew what her game was and didnpt want to have any part of it. It was Aple told Sekun and Dany that there was 30 grand in it if they went after Fletcher. So they did. Never got their 30 grand or 5 grand tho Sekun might of got a bit for arranging Dany's 'marriage' in China....nudge nudge wink wink
DeleteFor some people on this planet it takes 300 years to get justice in court. The Victim of the european wide Witchhunt now is getting her retrial in a real court, finally after 300 years.
ReplyDeleteOne can only hope that the Witchhunt against David Fletcher will not take that long and that he will walk out from jail as a free and innocent to the charges of APLE.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/16/woman-convicted-witchcraft-retrial-300-years-on-italy
I concur with you regarding the nature of Dany and mother with hindsight of course ( isn't hindsight a wonderful thing!)
ReplyDeleteBelow is a small part from chapter 17, Dany, from my book and please remember this was written in 2011.
"When I first met Dany's family around the beginning of 2010, an older looking lady ( Dany's mother ) would join the ladies line for food, I would give the mothers extra for their families, she very soon became very friendly towards me. As most did, laughing and joking, she rapidly became ' one of the family of regulars' I helped a little more, she had four children and no husband, as others life to survive was hard. She had no English but kept saying to me 'daughter' I would always acknowledge her, give her a hug and extra food. She rapidly fell into regularly helping me every time I was at this location on the dump, as I did not always go to the same place. She was always friendly and smiling, nothing unusual as I tried to have jokes and fun with all of them. One day when she said 'daughter' to me, she grabbed my hand and led me to the side and introduced me to a pretty seventeen year old girl, her name was Dany, she was taller than most Khmers of her age and had a much more positive jaw line. She had a nice friendly smile and her eyes seemed to smile also, she was giving out the 'girlie' message that all Khmer girls seem to do, on purpose or not, I could not say! She quickly started to help with the food and each time I glanced over her way she was smiling back with her eyes.
.....to be continued...
...continuing...
ReplyDeleteWhen we had finished that day she took me by the hand with mother and led me to their family hut, which was close by in a cluster of similar huts. She showed me a one room hut about 4x4 meters square, one room for the whole five of them lived in this area. She introduced me to the family, two younger sisters and an older brother. She very proudly showed me several school diplomas hanging up with her name on. I was impressed, although I had no idea what they were for, it proved to me she was trying! And trying hard! I asked via a lady neighbor who's English was very limited how old Dany was? She spoke to mother in Khmer , turned to me and said Dany was 18. Although translation was very poor, I said if Dany was 18 I might be able to get her a free place in Mekong university via a friend of mine, at the time, but no longer, Dr Philip Dews who was a principle there and had previously informed me the university gave some free and assisted places each year to deserving cases. He encouraged any children from the dump as at the time he was a strong supporter of my project. He had interviewed other children with their mothers at the dump for this purpose before. He, like me, did not have a great deal of money, but we both felt free education was the way to benefit some of the more focused families. When Dany's mother understood what the conversation was about and I was going to try to get Dany a free place she hugged me and was overjoyed. I could see Dany was going to be a bright young lady and a university education would not only change her future, but the whole family's.
...continuing...
DeleteMother beamed at the news and the direction the meeting was going, she spoke and made gestures to the neighbor, who then turned to me and said 'would I like to marry Dany?' I laughed in my usual way and banter, how many times had I heard this, at the markets, on the dump, in the shops and bars, I would always go along with it all as merry bantar! I said oh yes in my usual way, thought no more of it as always, this happened hundreds of times and just about every day, and just got to be part of Khmer girls socializing with westerners, nothing other than fun, not this time though, it was coming back to bite me! Mother took it very seriously. The free uni places were for 18 year olds upwards, as I was informed by Philip, they must also have a little English to get by with. I asked Mother for the family book, this is a record of the family births, as Khmers are notorious of not knowing their correct age , or even what time it was! Mother had borrowed money from a loan shark and had to leave the book as security, so it was some weeks before she could get a copy and establish the facts. In the meantime every time I went to that location on the dump Dany was sitting there waiting, and I might add always nicely dressed for he dump, I suspected nothing in my trusting naivety! But did think it odd she was always sitting and waiting. When the copy family book arrived it showed Dany to be 17 years of age, her birthday was 8th September If I remember correctly. I then checked it with the local police station which was only one block from the bar, the policemen knew me there and often came and helped at he dump or more likely dropping into my bar for a free drink! I was going to give Dany a job at the bar as waitress so she could earn some money , improve her English and help her through uni, the police said it was ok to employ her as she had Mothers permission and this was now April, so not that long till she was 18. I did not employ her in the end, perhaps I had some gut feeling something was not quite right here, so I erred on the side of caution, I was beginning to feel some negative issues arising with this arrangement.
How is it that you are able to post lengthy excerpts from your book from there in Prey Sar? You mentioned before that you don't have access to a phone, computer, etc, and are passing notes out to James. Yet you seem to be able to respond posting thousands of words in a matter of a few hours or less.
Delete@ Anonymous October 16, 2015 at 3:47 PM
DeleteDavid Fletcher posts extracts from his book. Is this a reason for you to worry ?
Everyone in this country, including the press, knows that it is possible sometimes to "rent a phone" etc. in Prey Sar. That way people like David Fletcher have a REAL chance to have their voices heard. How otherwise would you get such detailed information about the Kangaroo Courts and absence of REAL Justice here ?
You seem to be concerned and perhaps you can enlighten us for what reason ?
I would not be surprised if you took this opportunity to alert Human Rights Org. Licadho about such an abuse in order to cut the communication with a person who has been denied a fair trial for the last 5 Years.
Anonymous 3:47, is your name Alan Lemon?
DeleteAnon 9:40 - Renting a phone? Ok, fair enough. And is he tapping out 1500 word extracts from his book from notes/by memory? Or does he have his whole book stored in this rental phone in Prey Sar or what?
DeleteDear Anonymous 1.08
DeleteMr Fletcher is not in Prey Sar but in PJ.
Does it really matter how he is getting his messages out? Surely the message (whether you like it or not) is more important than the mode of transmission!
If you live and/or work in Cambodia you will understand how the system works and not be too much surprised that Mr Fletcher finds less difficulty communicating than the powers-that be would be happy with.
Mind you, this can change overnight, as it has a few times this past year. If you have questions you want answers to, now is the time t ask them. My experience of Mr Fletcher is that he is brutally honest - even when 'brutal honesty' does not present him in a politically correct light and gives his adversaries (of which there are plenty) ammunition to shoot him down.
"Does it really matter how he is getting his messages out?"
DeleteNo, not really. But it does leave me wondering if he really is getting his message out or if somebody else is speaking in his name. While I can believe that rental phones and such would allow him to make occasional brief responses, I don't understand the prison logistics of his ability to give regular, timely responses that include extensive quotes from other material. That would seem to indicate access to a stable posting platform such as his own computer/lattop/iPad that has things like his book on disk.
If anybody were to be speaking in Mr Fletcher's name, Anonymous 4.57, it would be me. And I am not.
DeleteYou will notice that Mr Fletcher's 'regular timely responses' have only been possible very recently. And this option may may disappear for him any day. Such is life in a Cambodian prison!
As for length quotes, there is no mystery here. Mr Fletcher has his book, along with much else 'parked' in cyberspace. So do I. Asa safety measure, and so that I can refer to them at any time I like, anywhere in the world, I have many precious documents (precious to me) parked in cyberspace. If need be, I could access a document I write 10 years ago in less than 60 seconds with a $20 mobile phone that had access to the internet. There is no need for a computer, an iPad or disc.
Amen Anonymous 9:40! FU Anonymous 3:47 ( aka team Neeson)!
ReplyDeleteKeeping with recent issues brought up not only by bloggers, but the latest B.A. report. Which of course is no surprise to those that wallow in this cesspit, or intelligent people.
ReplyDeleteI reaffirm my position, my good friends and supporters have been aware of my agenda since day one, they have kindly begged me to take the easy way out, as ever I refuse.
When I first arrived in Cambodia, within a couple of weeks I was offered release for a sum of money, I refused.
Then I was taken to a lady prosecutors office, she asked me if I wanted a retrial or appea, l as I did not have a lawyer present or an official translator I said could I come back in 7 days after consulting a lawyer and give her my reply. She agreed. I did however state that there would be no corruption or bribe money whatsoever paid to anyone.
I never heard from her again.
Seven days later I posted my own request for a retrial all within the correct time frames.
Surprise, it never arrived at the court and it disappeared, I paid $100 delivery fee and entrusted it to a high official.
I have also made it clear that I will not pay Dany or the court 1cent.
You are by now well aware who the corrupt NGOs are, the fruit company and our saint N. What you do not know is the British FCO have bee a major part of this corrupt agenda. I am in the process of taking legal action against them.
I stress to all, I am not fighting for freedom, I am fighting for justice. All know I am not going to get it, so be it, but I have proved to most via James I am innocent. And for the goldfish fraternity, I say again, I am no saint, never wanted to be, but I have had a more exciting life than you will ever have wet dreams of.
It has been suggested to me that if, I keep quiet, do not speak the truth, I will be released because of a pardon, old age or sick.
I have told them to go forth and multiple themselves.
I leave prison an innocent free man or in a box, which will please the corrupt, nodding dogs and the goldfish fraternity.
If and when I do leave in a box, it will be of my choice , when and where.
I will die with my code and honour, which cannot be said for most in Phnom Penh.
To the Sherlock Holmes who is convinced I have an iPhone, you have no idea what you are talking about, grow up, James has a full copy on digital of my book for safe keeping.
You must lead a very dull life!
David Fletcher
When APLE decided to make David Fletcher a sacrificial victim to its fund raising model, Thierry Darnaudet and Samleang Seila gave no thought to the possibility that he might challenge them. Nor did it occur to them that a filmmaker/blogger might stumble upon the case and ask then questions that they had not been asked before by the media and which they preferred not to answer.
DeleteAPLE's case against Mr Fletcher has now been comprehensively exposed, for all those interested in 'facts' as fraudulent. APLE needs Mr Fletcher to be guilty to maintain the illusion that it is effective in its goals. Fortunately, APLE has certain media outlets that will publish whatever APLE declares in its press releases. Fortunately also, APLE has Cambodia's pre-eminent human rights organisation (LICADHO)s partner. Fortunately also, the Cambodian media generally choose not to ask Naly Pilorge (Director of LICADHO) any questions at all about her being a founding member of APLE or what her relationship with this organisation in in the latter months of 2015
An observation unrelated to this thread. It's kind of ironic that when I google 'cambodia440' to locate this blog, that on the results page a paid advertisement for CCF appears first on the list above Cambodia440.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous October 17, 2015 at 5:09 AM
DeleteDon't be fooled by google. Your browser obviously has no Adblocker in place.
This is the first page of the search results searching for cambodia440 :
quote
cambodia440.blogspot.com/
3 days ago - Cambodia440. There are credible allegations that cases are often decided in favor of the party offering the larger bribe; Cambodian lawyers ...
ASIA REAL ESTATE CAMBODIA (440) - Save
realestate.com.kh/asia-real-estate-cambodia-440/
ASIA REAL ESTATE CAMBODIA (440). Loading... Show properties as : List · Map · » For Sale · » For Rent · » New Developments · » Commercial · » Land ...
Cambodia440
cambodia440.blogspot.ca/?m=1
Cambodia440. There are credible allegations that cases are often decided in favor of the party offering the larger bribe; Cambodian lawyers interviewed by the ...
Cambodia Forums • View topic - Cambodia440 - WTF? - Khmer440.com
www.khmer440.com/chat_forum/viewtopic.php?t=50544
I just had the miraculous fortune to stumble across the Cambodia440 blogspot written by James Ricketson Holy crap. I'd never heard of him ...
200901 Cambodia 440-2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/deseng/3471481114
Explore · Recent Photos · The Commons · 20under20 · Galleries · World Map · App Garden · Camera Finder · The Weekly Flickr · Flickr Blog · Create.
cambodia 440 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
unquote
Have you ever tried to search for APLE, unscrupolous NGO Cambodia, CCF ?
https://childsexconspiracy.wordpress.com/tag/aple-cambodia-corruption/
https://en.wordpress.com/tag/aple-ngo/
http://www.pedofili.net/Arkiv/tpf-cambodia.com.htm
The list is endless.
This is what I get:
ReplyDeletehttp://s28.postimg.org/js1543wml/ccfcam440.gif
this is google's profiled ad targeting individuals based on their prior search history. It's possible ccf paid for the no.1 position.
DeleteYes, I think that is a paid ad. But I have not googled CCF before. If it is a targeted ad it probably probably appears because I have googled Cambodia440 now and before, which contains many references to CCF.
DeleteAPLE now running new office in Cambodia's NGO Capital Battambang
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newdayasia.org/category/current-projects/action-pour-les-enfants-aple/
APLE's 2015 proposal: (it will cost donors 538 066.70USD )
http://www.newdayasia.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/APLE-Proposal-2015.pdf
Risks for APLE:
quote
"A new risk that was identified is that partner NGOs do not agree with APLE legal procedure, which can lead to APLE lawyers having limited access to victims, their families and witnesses. The risk was identified during stakeholder meetings with partner NGOs in 2014. This risk can lead to the victim or their families not receiving full support from APLE lawyers and therefore being unprepared for the legal process, in particular the court hearings. It can also lead to a breakdown in the relationship between partner NGOs and APLE, which could be detrimental to the long term support for victims.
To mitigate this risk, APLE lawyers will have regular meetings with stakeholders to ensure that APLE and all partners agree and follow common standards and requirements duringthe legal procedure."
It's interesting to note that aple's staff has shrunk by about 10%. since 2013.
Another point of interest is that APLE choose Battambang , Cambodia's ground zero for NGO and not Kampot, Kratie or any other tourist town.
How could any self-respecting law-abiding organisation have anything to to with Action Pour les Enfants?
ReplyDeleteAPLE
ReplyDeleteOne Question that I would like to ask APLE's current Country Director and, according to his own accord "OWNER", of APLE (Action Pour les Enfants) is:
"Is Thierry Darnaudet still working as a "Technical Advisor" for APLE Cambodia and if yes for what amount of money is he compensated per annum?"
New Arrest without any charges:
http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/16895/pedophile-teacher-arrested/
http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/16844/police-arrest-british-man-over-alleged-pedophile-activities/
The Headline says it all but there was no proof or even charge of any crime or illegal activity in Cambodia according to the above report in the Khmer Times. The Khmer Times simply says he was arrested because he was alledged to have sex with a minor on sept. 17.
Apparently this accusation didn't last or was an imagination of the reporter because no evidence was found. He entered the country with his legal passport although the British Embassy was looking for him. So there we are in the time of total surveillance, tel. and email tracking etc. Welcome to Britain's GHCQ . It has prooven to be totally useless many times before. They better get James Bond back on board.
The guy was is a convicted pedo from the UK, who violated the stipulations of his release from prison and fled to Cambodia where he chose once again to take up working with children. He is a fugitive from the law on pedo charges found worming his way into the company of children again in a place like Cambodia, and you are whinging over his being caught and extradited. This sort of knee jerk defence of known pedophiles on this blog (unchallenged by the James, the blog admin) calls into serious question the intent of this blog and those on it who show sympathy for the likes of Fletcher, supposedly on the grounds that his rights were violated. It looks more like you are attacking anti-pedo NGOs and defending pedophiles because they are pedophiles, not because of some high minded legal rights issue. And what, I must wonder, would motivate somebody to do that.
DeleteDear Anonymous 3.05
DeleteAs I have made clear from the outset, and as I have repeated several times, I am not in the business of censoring this blog other than in instances where statements are made that are clearly defamatory.
That I do not censor is not evidence that I agree with sentiments expressed. Nor do I think I have an obligation to challenge any and or all comments made here.
You refer to the 'intent of this blog'. What do you think its 'intent' is? This is not a rhetorical question but I will be very surprised if you answer it as you, like so many others do not answer questions of this (or indeed any) kind.
At the risk of belabouring the point, this blog began as a means whereby I could advocate for Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. It remains that. His rights have been violated in that he has never had any trial at all conducted in accordance with Cambodian law.
I certainly would not suggest censorship. Better the dirt exposed and challenged than hidden and festering. And, as you say, you have no obligation to challenge or even respond to any comments. Nevertheless, what you choose to challenge vs what you choose not to challenge may say something in itself. When I suggest that some of the attacks on NGOs are not properly documented or that your legal logic defending Fletch may not be up to snuff, you challenge me and make excuses for it and try to change the subject. When some guy posts here decrying the arrest of a known and wanted fugitive pedo or makes up unsubstantiated tales about an anti-trafficking NGO, you remain silent and provide them a forum. So what does this say about you and this intent blog? Nothing definitive, but it is suggestive. As a good man once said "Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.'"
DeleteWhat I choose to challenge and what I don't choose to challenge? A few points/questions:
Delete(1) I do not have the time or energy to challenge every stupid comment that is made on this blog, or every comment I disagree with.
(2) You are free to do so and have done so, so what is the problem?
(3) Which attacks on NGOs are not properly documented? This is not a rhetorical question. ANswer it. You should be able to back up this assertion with a few examples. You wont. of course, because you are not interested in details such as facts and evidence.
(4) In what way is my "legal logic defending Fletch" not up to snuff? Please do enlighten me as to which parts of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure have not been breached in his case?
(5) Which unsubstantiated claims about which NGO are you referring to? When you write in such vague terms it is not possible to response except in similarly vague terms. Be specific and I will be able to respond with appropriate specificity.
(6) You write. "It looks more like you are attacking anti-pedo NGOs and defending pedophiles because they are pedophiles, not because of some high minded legal rights issue. And what, I must wonder, would motivate somebody to do that."
Well, here is the forum to do your wondering aloud. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what you are implying here.
You are entitled to arrive at whatever conclusion you like as to what my motivations might be in defending Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. ANd I do not try to prevent you from expressing your opinions, as I so easily could, so stop complaining about which blog entries/comments I do not engage with and feel free to engage with them yourself - as you have today.
"Which unsubstantiated claims about which NGO are you referring to? When you write in such vague terms it is not possible to response except in similarly vague terms. Be specific and I will be able to respond with appropriate specificity."
DeleteThe entire Marc Swensen article which you provided a forum for here.
@ Anonymous 4.17
ReplyDeleteAdvocating on behalf of a man who has been accused of a sex crime to be provided with a fair trial is not the same as advocating the right of men to commit sex crimes. Your suggestion that Mr Ricketson is a pedophile advocate is just plain stupid.
Anonymous October 19, 2015 at 4:17 AM
ReplyDeleteYou have the mentality of a lynch mob.
Simply mentioning that there is a new case of arrest and posting the relevant press clip means ADVOCATING a pedophile to you!
I cannot see where i have been advocating on this new arrest.
You seem to know a lot about people being arrested on pedophile charges. I wonder what your objectives are other than shutting this blog down.
As Ricketson says in his blog, he is simply advocating Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. But of course this is of no relevance to you.
You remind me of these religious creeps preying on the Khmer.
Transparency on the matter seems like your biggest enemy.
But it's also clear to a lot of people in Cambodia that there are several other very questionable cases (like the Matt Harland case where even the British embassy raised it's concern or the Dr. Gavin Scott case which was totally fabricated by APLE simply because he is gay. Dr. Scott got his rights but is monitored by APLE since more than 8 (eight) years by APLE.)
Now this is the world of witch hunt that you are advocating ! Let's only hope your record is as lily white as you suggest.
Like Paul Prestidge mentioned above, Matt Harland jumped bail on pedo charges in the UK and fled to Cambodia, where he was busted on more pedo charges. Dr. Scott was arrested and jailed 7 years before APLE was even in existence. These are your poster boys for APLE injustice?
DeleteWho/where is the paedophile Anonymous 3:05? I think you are using words that don't understand. Do you know what a paedophile is?
ReplyDeleteGreat pic of Neeson, looks like he is the one who should be locked up!
This is such a pathetic blog! Is this Ricketson character anyone with any credibility or experience in dealing with children, law or business?
ReplyDeleteIs Neeson making you read it?
DeleteDear Anonymous 9.01
DeleteReading this blog is not compulsory. If you have better things to do with your time, do them.
Actually, I have had a lot of experience 'dealing with children' and 'law' but my experience is of no relevance to what I am doing here with this blog.
As for my 'credibility' in the world of 'business', I plead guilty.Am hopeless in this department.
@ Anonymous October 19, 2015 at 9:01 PM
Deletequote:
"This is such a pathetic blog! Is this Ricketson character anyone with any credibility or experience in dealing with children, law or business?"
Don't you ever realize what a fool you make of yourself ? Do Thierry Darnaudet or Scott Neeson have any degree that would qualify them for working , sorry "DEALING", as you wrote, with children?
I am certain that both of these characters actually have a lot of experience in DEALING with children. Both characters don't have any degree in law either but I admit their Business Experience in DEALING with Cambodia's children is outstanding and lacks any comparison.
DEALING with children has become a multi million dollar business for them.
Why do i constantly have to think about the Somaly Mam case ??
Ricketson - why have you asked if the young girl in the image with Neeson is Dany or not. Haven't you interviewed her? If you have then you wold know what she looks like. Something stinks here!
ReplyDeleteYour memory stinks.....previously answered.
DeleteYes, rather suspicious. And if it is Dany, what decent person would publish the photo of a child who may very have been the victim of sexual assault, or even rape? Very questionable journalistic ethics to publish photos of minors, especially without the permission of the subject and/or their guardian, and absolutely a clear violation of journalistic ethics to publish the photo of an alleged victim of child sexual assault. Really quite shameful.
DeleteAnonymous 11.53
DeleteAt the time Andrew Drummond wrote the article in which he quotes Scott Neeson saying that Mr Fletcher was grooming young girls, there was a photo of Yang Dany. She was then 18 and not a child. She had also not, as of 20th June, accused Mr Fletcher of rape. She did not do so until a few weeks later - AFTER Mr Fletcher had been arrested in Thailand and held in prison, with no charges laid, at the request of the Cambodian authorities.
Yang Dany was far from being a child when she laid charges or, should I say, when her mother laid charges after being told there was $30,000 in compensation waiting for her and her daughter if she did so.
In my next blog entry you will find out more about Yang Dany that will raise yet more questions. She is in her mid-20's now and, as an adult, was in a position to both speak with my and my camera and to speak with journalists. And she is old enough to appear in court and tell her story. Unfortunately, she has been spirited off to China so will, in all likelihood, never be in a position to testify
Dear Anonymous 9.25
DeleteWhen I first came into possession of this photo it had been sent to me by someone who claimed it to be of Scott Neeson and Yang Dany.
I had not at this point met Yang Dany. When I did I could see some similarities between her (without make up) and with the young woman in the photo. Both Yang Dany and this girl had quite distinctive chins but other than that I could not really see too many similarities.
Over the past 10 months, however, several people have told me that it is in fact Yang Dany in the photo with Neeson.
With the passage of time (it is now 5 years since the photo was taken) and bearing in mind how make-up can transform the looks of a young woman, I became prepared to accept that this COULD be a photo of Yang Dany. I emphasise COULD.
Recently I acquired some new information/evidence about Scott Neeson's relationship with Yang Dany that makes me very curious now to find out if this is, in fact, Yang Dany. You will need to wait for my next blog entry to find out more.
You don't publish the photos of alleged rape victims. Full stop. And you certainly don't do it to child rape victims, even if they have continued to age in the interim. Even if you don't believe that they are telling the truth. And are you actually using Andrew Drummond as a model for your journalistic ethics? Really? Two wrongs do not make a right.
Delete12:15 - So if it is Dany, you are publishing the photo of an alleged child rape victim (or if we take the court's determination into consideration, there is no "alleged" about it. She is a rape victim.) And if it is not Dany, you are publishing the photo of some child you say may be in some sort of dubious relationship with Neeson. One way or the other, you are publishing photos of children in vulnerable children.
DeleteDear Anonymous 12.25
DeleteEither you have not bothered to read dozens of blog entries about this case or you believe that a verdict arrived at by a Cambodian court should end any and all speculation about the facts of a case?
If this is not Yang Dany it is a photo of a young woman who is no longer a child. And, even if she were, I have not suggested that there is necessarily anything wrong with the relationship between Neeson and this girl. If might be his niece, for all I (or you) know. It may have been his fiance at the time. I have no idea.
Given other pieces of the jig-saw puzzle that are coming together I am merely curious to find out if it is Yang Dany or not.
For the person who wrote a most unpleasant comment about Neeson I have deleted it because it is not relevant and will only feed the various trolls who are forever on the lookout for reasons to pounce on me.
"Either you have not bothered to read dozens of blog entries about this case or you believe that a verdict arrived at by a Cambodian court should end any and all speculation about the facts of a case?"
DeleteI have read your blog. Some interesting points regarding the Fletcher case. It should probably go to retrial. Nevertheless, you are not the court. And until it does go back to court, Fletcher is a convicted rapist and Dany is a rape victim. And if you wish to diminish those labels some, the best you can do is say that those are the photos of a vulnerable child and possibly the photo of an alleged child rape victim. And you should not publish the photos of vulnerable children and definitely not alleged rape victims, regardless of age.
Ricketson - you have been placing images of children on your blog site for a long time and you have never asked permission of these people - I think its about time someone goes and finds all these children and sues you. It is a criminal offence to place victims in media you know or perhaps you have forgotten.
Delete@ Anonymous October 19, 2015 at 11:53 PM
DeletePublishing Photos of minors in the arms of so-called Hope, Outreach and Shelter creeps in Cambodia is actually an obsession of the relevant NGO's here. You can find many of these pics on facebook. fund raising brochures and websites.
"Hope, Outreach and Shelter creeps"
DeleteAre you unaware that this is a highly controversial issue within the NGO/aid community? And you are citing the unethical behavior of "creeps" as justification for the unethical behavior here? The fact that you acknowledge that they are "creeps" should be some indication to you that they are not an example to be followed. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Dear Anonymous 1.39
DeleteLook at that hypothetical example I have cited below. Are you suggesting that once a charge of sexual abuse has been made, an image of the child who made the allegation can never be used? Regardless of whether s/he is 18, 28, 38 or 48?
Reputable media outlets, as a matter of journalistic ethics and human decency, will not publish the photo or even the name of an alleged sex abuse/rape victim like Dany. Later, if the charges are dropped or the accused is acquitted by a court of law, outlets may identify the alleged victim by name and/or by photo. In the case of Fletcher, he has not been acquitted, nor was the case dropped. He was convicted of rape, making him a convicted rapist and Dany a victim of rape. Her later recantation, assuming there was one as you have presented it, is not relevant to whether it is ethical to you publishing her photo. (Recantation by sex abuse victims being a highly complex topic in itself, which I suggest you research before putting too much weight into her recantation.) Unless Dany, as an adult, has given you specific and explicit permission to publish her identity and photo, as a 'journalist/filmmaker) you should not be publishing her identity or photo because she is still a rape victim, regardless of whether you personally think she is not.
Delete(I am trying to post this again because I see posts have come up after I originally submitted this post, but it still does not show. Perhaps something went wrong when posting from my phone, so I am trying again. If I have double posted, please feel free to delete one.)
DeleteReputable media outlets, as a matter of journalistic ethics and human decency, will not publish the photo or even the name of an alleged sex abuse/rape victim like Dany. Later, if the charges are dropped or the accused is acquitted by a court of law, outlets may identify the alleged victim by name and/or by photo. In the case of Fletcher, he has not been acquitted, nor was the case dropped. He was convicted of raping Dany, making him a convicted rapist and Dany a victim of rape. Her later recantation, assuming there was one as you have presented it, is not relevant to whether it is ethical for you to publish her photo. (Recantation by sex abuse victims being a highly complex topic in itself, which I suggest you research before putting too much weight into her recantation.) Unless Dany, as an adult, has given you specific and explicit permission to publish her identity and photo, as a 'journalist/filmmaker, you should not be publishing her identity or photo because she is still a rape victim, regardless of whether you personally think she is not.
Dear Anonymous 12.20
ReplyDeleteDo you really believe, given her intact hymen and her declaration that she was not raped, that Yang Dany is a 'rape victim'?
Yes, she can be referred to as an 'alleged rape victim', given that there has been no fair trial in which Mr Fletcher was found guilty.
Given that Yang Dany was 18 when the charge of rape was laid, given that she is now in her mid-20s and given that she says she was not raped, do you believe that her right to privacy (name and photo withheld) trumps Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial?
It does not matter what I believe or you believe. Fletcher was convicted in a court of law. He is a convicted rapist. And Dany is a rape victim, until shown otherwise in a court of law. And even if she is not actually a rape victim, you do not publish the photo of vulnerable children, or alleged rape victims, or especially alleged child rape victims. In the sensitive issue of rape and sexual assault the alleged victim's right to privacy trumps your right to publish her photo on your blog or even in the newspaper. You are not a judge. Cambodia440 is not the court. Your publishing that photo is not to be weighed against Fletcher's right to a fair trial, but your journalistic right to publish. And yes, a vulnerable child's right to privacy in a sexual assault case far exceeds your right to publish, ethically speaking.
DeleteDear Anonymous 12.44
DeleteImagine the following hypothetical scenario:
A 15 year old boy from a very poor family, both his parents in jail without a trial and unable to afford the bribe to get out of jail, is approached by an NGO.
A representative of the NGO tells the boy that if he is prepared to accuse a particular man of having sexually assaulted him, the NGO will give the boy $5,000.
The boy refuses. However, he has four siblings he must help support and he cannot feed them. He eventually gives in, accepts the NGO's offer of $5,000 and accuses the man of sexually abusing him.
The man is arrested, is found guilty and sent to jail.
The boy does not get his $5,000.
A few years later the boy is a young man. He feels guilty about the man he was responsible (in part, at least) for having sent to jail for a crime he did not commit.
Now, according to the logic you have presented here, no journalist or filmmaker can reveal the identity of this boy or have him speaking to camera about how he was induced by the NGO, with an offer of $5,000, to accuse a man of sexual abuse. According to your logic, the court found the man guilty of rape/sexual abuse and that is the end of the matter. It doe snot matter if the boy is 18, 28 or 38 no images of him talking about his role in the conviction of this man may appear in public.
Now, think this through from another perspective:
You are an NGO that makes a living, in part, sending men to jail on the basis of little or no evidence, or on the basis of evidence that has been paid for. Let's use the NGO I have referred to above, for example.
The NGO knows that it need not give the street kid the $5,000 promised to make the false allegations. What is the boy going to do? Go to the police and complain?
And if some filmmaker or journalist stumbled upon this story a few years down the track s/he should not/ cannot run with it because the court found the man guilty and the boy is entitled to privacy for life?
In accordance with the model you are espousing, all that a corrupt NGO has to do is to charge a man with rape and that is the end of the matter - regardless of how much evidence emerges that the man was not guilty?
Do you really think that this constitutes 'justice'?
Team Neeson will do most anything to attempt to destroy your credibility. I think the truth is that they hate it when you use that beautiful picture of Neeson!
DeleteWe all know the victim's identity. Dany. The question is whether it is ethical to publish the photos of vulnerable children and and alleged sex abuse victims. The answer is no, regardless of whether they are not actuall sexual assault victims in the court of Cambodia440 or James Ricketson's mind.
DeleteDear Anonymous 1.56
DeleteIs it 'ethical' to jail a man for 10 years for a crime that the alleged victim ays did not occur and which a medical report says did not occur, without the benefit of a trial that even comes close to adhering to the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure?
Your desire to protect the rights of 'alleged victims' seems to have blinded you to the fact that 'aleged perpetrators' have rights also.
"Is it 'ethical' to jail a man for 10 years for a crime that the alleged victim ays did not occur and which a medical report says did not occur, without the benefit of a trial that even comes close to adhering to the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure?"
DeleteToo loaded to answer directly. But to make it a bit less loaded and more of an honest question, if he did not receive a fair trial then 'no' it is not ethical or legal. Which is again completely beside the point of whether it is ethical for you to publish the photos of vulnerable children and (alleged) sex abuse victims. You keep trying to change the subject in the most transparent ways. You do realize this sort of shallow rhetorical ploy wouldn't fly even in a Year 9 debate club, let alone in a court of law or in real journalism. This sort of silliness is part of the reason why your 'expose' here is not taken seriously outside of your small circle of cheerleaders here. It's a shame too. You've clearly done a lot of work and there are a lot of good relevant questions and facts raised here, but it is watered down to almost nothing by this sort of nonsense.
Dear Anonymous 3.54
DeleteOK, so we agree on one thing: Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial. How can this be achieved five years down the track?
There is no evidence that Mr Fletcher raped Yang Dany other than her own statement – made a few weeks after he was arrested in Thailand on 27th June 2010.
The only other ‘evidence’ is Scott Neeson’s statement about Mr Fletcher ‘grooming’ young girls.
So, what would you do now, if you were trying to secure for Mr Fletcher a fair trial? Not challenge Yang Dany in a public forum because he is (or may have been) a victim – even if she says she was not? Even if the medical evidence suggests that she was not?
Is Yang Dany’s right to privacy, as an adult in her mid 20’s, greater than Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial?
Think through the ramifications of what you are suggesting and how it could be used by unscrupulous NGOs to secure a conviction with little or no chance that it will be challenged in any public forum:
- NGO pays child/family to accuse a man of rape.
- A secret trial is held. The man is found guilty; is sent to jail.
The child grows to adulthood, feels bad about the role s/he has played in having an innocent man jailed. S/he wants to make amends; talks to journalists; tells the truth about what happened.
- The journalist cannot run with the story because the adult was a child when the alleged incident occurred. And anyway, the court found the man guilty. End of story.
The scenario you are suggesting, if I am understanding you correctly, presents corrupt NGOs with an idea way of never being held accountable for any fraudulent evidence it may use to secure a conviction, if it involves a child.
Is this your idea of how justice should operate? A possibly innocent man jailed because his accuser can never be identified? Can never go public with the truth?
If it were you in jail, entering your 6th year of incarceration without the benefit of a trial, would you wish to protect the identity of the woman who first of all accused you of rape an then declared that you were not guilty?
What would you do now if you were in Mr Fletcher’s position? What would you do if you were advocating Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial?
If McCabe's wife was only 15 or 16 when he knocked her up (supposedly to get a lighter sentence for his drug thefts), would that be statutory rape in Cambodia?
ReplyDeleteIf David Fletcher is a pedophile for having sex with a 15 year old girl in the UK in 1998 why is James McCabe not referred to as a pedophile for having sex with a 15 year old Khmer girl? Oh, that's right, its OK for guys who runs child protection units to have sex with children...
ReplyDeleteRed herring. Whether there is some other sex abuser that has not been properly outed is irrelevant to whether Fletcher has been outed as a sex abuser. Your attempt to change the subject to somebody elses failings betrays the weakness you see in Fletcher's defence.
DeleteHas Mr Fletcher been outed as a 'sex abuser' in the Yang Dany case?
DeleteDoes the fact that she was a virgin after the alleged rapes could for nothing in your mind? And what of her own denial that the rapes occurred? And her mother's insistence that they did not? Do you believe these facts to be of no relevance just because Phnom Penh Municipal Court judges declared that a woman's hymen can grow back?
Do you believe, just because David Fletcher has been found guilty of the rape of a 17 year old, that James Mc Cabe in under no obligation to explain his 'rape' of a 15 or 1`6 year old?
Surely, if david Fletcher is to be held accountable for his alleged actions, so too should James Mc Cabe?
"Has Mr Fletcher been outed as a 'sex abuser' in the Yang Dany case?"
DeleteYes, Fletcher has been outed as a sex abuser, of a minor no less. Twice in fact. Once in England and once here. Not withstanding your personal advocacy for Fletcher over his most recent sex abuse conviction, he has been convicted of the sexual abuse of a minor twice. Even if he is eventually cleared of the most recent conviction for rape here in Cambodia, he will still have that statutory rape conviction in England on him.
Again, talk of other sex abusers (if they are sex abusers) says nothing about whether Fletcher is a sex abuser or actually committed the rape he was convicted of here in Cambodia. It's just a weak attempt at changing the subject and making an ad hominem attack on somebody to tarnish an NGO you don't like. If McCabe is the devil incarnate, it doesn't change the fact that Fletcher is a convicted sex abuser, or that he raped Dany (if he did in fact rape Dany.)
Anonymous 3.36
ReplyDeleteYou play word games. No doubt some readers will be impressed. you conflate two quite different incidents and treat them as if they were equivalent.
Yes, in 1998, in a properly constituted court of law, Mr Fletcher was found guilty of having consensual sex with a young woman just shy of 16 years old. He was found to be guilty by this properly constituted court, in which he was able to mount a defence, and received a jail sentence.
In Cambodia, on the other hand, Mr Fletcher was arrested inThailand 3 weeks before any charges were laid and at a time when Yang Dany was telling Andrew Drummond that Mr Fletcher was her 'fiancé' and a 'good man'. Two months after Yang Dany's mother charged Mr Fletcher with rape, a court appointed doctor announced that her hymen was intact; that she was a virgin still. This fact proved to be no obstacle for the Phnom Penh Municipal Court judges who declared that her hymen must have grown back. And This fact, along with both Yang Danys and her mother's insistence that no rape took place is no obstacle to your declaring that Mr Fletcher sexually abused Yang Dany but, by implication, that there is no difference between what happened in the UK in 1998 and what happened inCambodia in 2010 and 2011. you totally ignore the fact that in the UK M Fletcher received a fair trial and that in Cambodia there was no trial. Mr Fletcher has yet to be interviewed by the police or an Investigating Judge!
Just as Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial for the alleged rape of Yang Dany, so too is James Mc Cabe entitled to a fair trial for the alleged rape of a 15 or 16 year old Khmer girl.
Of course, in the real world that is contemporary Cambodia, Mr Fletcher will never get to have a fair trial and there will not even be talk of a trial for James McCabe - heading up a child protection unit dedicated to prosecuting men who have sex with 15 and 16 year old girls
Was McCabe selling drugs that he reportedly stole while working in drug enforcement? Why didn't the courts take up that issue? How was the $200,000 reported to have been suspiciously found in his bank account handled? Was this a gift from his 15 or 16 year old girl friend?
ReplyDeleteSorry, have I missed something here, can we have some details of the alleged rape by James McCabe on a 15 or 16 year old Khmer girl please James, has it been in the press and when did it happen
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 7.23
DeleteDavid Fletcher was found guilty in the UK, in 1998, of the statutory rape of a a 15 year old young woman. When Peter Hogan and Khmer440 got hold of this information the word 'statutory' tended to disappear and Mr Fletcher became a rapist, pure and simple. And, because the young woman was still, technically a child (close to 16) Mr Fletcher was also labelled a pedophile.
It has been alleged, from many different sources, that James Mc Cable wife was 15 or 16 when he met and commenced a relationship with her.
If the same use of language is applied to Mc Cabe, and if the allegation is true, he can also be referred to as a 'rapist' and a 'pedophile'.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander. If Fletcher is to be so labelled, why not apply such labels to Mc Cabe also?
If Mc Cabe did NOT commence his relationship with his wife when she was 15 or 16 he could easily say so. However, he, like all at CCF, will answer no questions at all. About anything. Instead, they write anonymous comments her eon this blog or get members of Team Neeson to do so. And this is an NGO that claims to have a 100% rating for accountability and transparency!
Asking Mc Cabe if his wife was 15 or 16 when he commenced a relationship with her is a valid question given that he heads up a Child Protection Unit whose role, in part, os to pursue and prosecute men when have sex with 15 and 16 year old girls. And boys.
The question is doubly valid in that Mc Cabe is a convicted felon.
So in other words James there was no alleged rape by James McCabe. I hope he sues you. As far as I can see James McCabe has nothing to do with this (apart from your obsession to bring down CCF and the Child Protection Unit). Why do you not just accept that they are doing a great job in catching child rapists and murderers and just go and get a life. Your support of pedophiles and criminals involved with crime against children appears to get stronger by the day James. I wonder if there is possibly a hidden agenda here.
DeleteHow do you conclude that there was no statutory rape Anonymous 4:16? You provide no facts only hostility. How old was his wife when he started 'dating' her, reportedly from hostess bar?
DeleteOn the subject of James McCabe, which you appear anxious to pursue, what did McCabe do with the stolen drugs? Did he sell them? What was the source of the unexplained $200,000 in his bank account?
"If the same use of language is applied to Mc Cabe, and if the allegation is true, he can also be referred to as a 'rapist' and a 'pedophile'."
DeleteWhat does any of this McCabe talk matter to the Fletcher case? Not in some rhetorical 'good for the goose good for the gander/you too!' sense, but in a real world sense. What good does any of this talk about McCabe do for Fletcher? As it stands now it seem to have no direct, substantive relation and only distracts and detracts from the Fletcher case by making it look like his advocates here are simply engaging is vindictive, ad hominem attacks. It would seem that if you were to be successful in this line of anti-McCabe reasoning, the most you could hope to achieve is to show that both McCabe and Fletcher are properly referred to as pedos and rapists. And how would that be helpful to Fletcher? Sure, you get the satisfaction of sullying the name of somebody you dislike, but at Fletcher's expense, and at the expense of the credibility of other more substantive points you have tried to make in this blog. You appear to be trying to cut off your nose to spite your face.
How about we stay with the question, James McCabe has never been accused of rape (statutory or otherwise) by anybody other than the trolls on this site. If anybody with any credibility has accused him then please publish who it is and what happened in any resulting police action. You are relying on nothing but scuttlebutt and once again show that your blog has no credibility.
ReplyDeleteLike Fletch the Letch James committed a crime (not involving sex with underage children when he was almost 50), was caught and paid his debt to society. Unlike Fletcher he stayed out of jail and is doing something decent with his life.
You go off like a girl about supposed innuendo and rumor about a man who is serving time in prison in Phnom Penh and was convicted by a legally convened court. You then think it is fine for you to make personal attacks on the character of somebody that is doing a great job in preventing child sex abusers continuing their work with absolutely ZERO evidence of the facts you publish. What proof do you have that James McCabe has ever had any inappropriate relationship with any underage child ?
@ Anonymous 5.43
DeleteSince you seem to be a buddy of his how about asking Mc Cabe how old his wife was when he met her and started a relationship. I'll save you the trouble. She was 15.Not 16. 15. If Fletcher is a pedophile for fucking a 15 year old in the UK, so is Mc Cabe for doing to same thing. If its ok to call Fletcher a rapist its ok to call Mc Cabe one.
What proof do you have of this anon 5.59.
DeleteI could well publish that anon 5.59 plays with himself whilst making posts on this site but it doesn't mean its true. If I believed it to be true and put my name to the post then it might have some credibility but since I think the chances are good it is not true I will stay as anon, exactly the same as you are doing for exactly the same reasons.
Don't tell me to go and ask so and so from such and such bar because again it is nothing other than gossip of the type you are promoting.
So this is the person that Neeson chose to run his Child Protection Unit? Was he also selling drugs that he stole? Did his 'friendship with Lemon overlap this timeframe? Was it around this time that Lemon suspiciously left his job?
DeleteDear Anonymous 6.14
DeleteYour analogy (anon 5.59 playing with himself) is spurious, to say the least.
James Mc Cabe heads up a child Protection Unit. As you would be aware, in Australia, in Britain, in Canada and the United States (and I suspect in most, if not all of Europe) Mc Cabe would be deemed to be unfit to run such a unit on account of his criminal record.
But let’s just say, for argument’s sake, that one of these countries were prepared to make an exception; to accept that Mc Cabe had paid his debt to society and was rehabilitated. This is a fair enough proposition and it is the position I took many months ago.
However, those interviewing Mc Cabe for the job ask him if he is married. Yes, Mc Cabe replies. How long have you been married, asks one of those taking in the job interview process. Mc Cabe replies. And how old was your wife when you met her, asks another of the interviewing panel.
Do you think, if Mc Cabe were to answer 15, or 16, that he would be given the job of heading up a Child Protection Unit?
Mc Cabe is not just anyone. He has been placed in a position of trust and owes a duty of care not only to children at risk (including 15 and 16 year olds) but to those the CPU pursues for sexually abusing children – including 15 and 16 year olds.
Can you not see that there is a huge conflict of interest here? What does Mc Cabe do if he encounters, in the course of his investigations, a man in his 40s engaged in a sexual relationship with a 15 or 16 year old who says, “But I love her and intend to marry her.”
Asking Mc Cabe the age of his wife when he met her is a valid question in view of the job that has been entrusted to him.
Dear Anonymous 4.16
ReplyDeleteOther commitments necessitate that I be brief here.
Like you, I hope James Mc Cabe sues me. In an Australian court in which rules of evidence apply; not in a court in which the verdict can be bought in advance by the highest bidder.
I do not want to bring CCF down and am not so arrogant as to think I could if I wanted to. The same applies with the Child Protection Unit.
My problems with Scott Neeson pre-date the commencement of this blog by a few years. You can read all about it, if you are interested, at:
http://cambodianchildrensfund.blogspot.com.au/
I challenged Scott Neeson's illegal removal and detention of children years before I met Mr Fletcher. It is by chance that these two threads of my life are connected.
On so many levels, CCF is a scam and long overdue to be exposed as such. Just look at the World Housing scam, for starters: HOUSES 'GIFTED' TO POOR CAMBODIAN FAMILIES THAT NEESON AND CCF RENT TO THESE FAMILIES.
Take a closer look at this and you will see that it is a scam of rather large proportions. And it is only one of many.
No hidden agenda other than a natural desire to see justice done in the case of Mr Fletcher. ANd, I should add, to see justice done generally in Cambodia.
Back to the question James, what proof (other than the nonsense your trolls post here) do you have that James McCabe has ever done anything inappropriate with a 15 year old girl.
ReplyDeleteWhat evidence do you have to produce in an Australian court suggesting that James McCabe is doing anything in Cambodia other than a great job ?
No matter how many times you pronounce his innocence Fletcher is a convicted child sex offender in two countries. His innocence will not be decided by you and your readers but by the legally convened courts in which he has been accused (and convicted) If you remember his appeal was rightfully thrown out.
Dear Anonymous 7.51
DeleteYou have a strange notion of what constitutes ‘rightful’. Mr Fletcher’s appeal last month was ‘thrown out’ for one reason and one reason only - he failed to get some paperwork to the court in time. This was not his fault, as has been acknowledged by the person who forgot to lodge the paperwork on time. Action Pour les Enfants lawyer (and Samleang Siela) have latched onto this administrative error and insisted in court twice that it is sufficient to disallow Mr Fletcher the right to a re-trial.
So, here you have an NGO that refers to itself as a human rights organization advocating that Mr Fletcher has no right to a re-trial because of late paperwork! This is your idea of justice!?
At no point, in this past five years, has Mr Fletcher been able to present a case in his defense. He has never been interviewed by the polie, or by a Prosecuting Judge. He has never been able to call witnesses or even address the court. The secret trial held in 2011 was ILLEGAL according to the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure. The deck has been stacked against Mr Fletcher from the moment it was decided, in late June 2010, to request that the Thai authorities arrest him – three weeks before Yang Dany even accused him of rape.
This is your idea of due process? Of justice!?
As to the validity of asking Mc Cabe how old his wife was when he commenced a sexual relationship with her, see y answer above.
If I were going for a job running a Child Protection Unit I would expect the interviewers to ask me about my criminal record and, if I had a very young wife, to ask me how old she was when I commenced a sexual relationship with her. In any country in which the rule of law (and common sense) applied, such questions would be asked. In Cambodia such questions are not asked. By anyone. Not even human rights groups that are, supposedly, concerned with the human rights of children. Cambodia is not referred to as ‘Scambodia’ for no reason, as well you know.
"Mr Fletcher’s appeal last month was ‘thrown out’ for one reason and one reason only - he failed to get some paperwork to the court in time. This was not his fault, as has been acknowledged by the person who forgot to lodge the paperwork on time. Action Pour les Enfants lawyer (and Samleang Siela) have latched onto this administrative error and insisted in court twice that it is sufficient to disallow Mr Fletcher the right to a re-trial.
DeleteSo, here you have an NGO that refers to itself as a human rights organization advocating that Mr Fletcher has no right to a re-trial because of late paperwork!"
APLE is not a human rights organization. It's stated mission is "To reduce all forms of child sexual abuse and exploitation through prevention, protection, and promotion of prosecution." And this is exactly what they have done in the case of Fletchers hearing a few weeks ago. APLE says that it 'promotes prosecutions,' and like any prosecutor in the west, they take full advantage of the law in all of its intricacies to further the prosecution. It is not their job, as promoters of the prosecution, to try to argue the case for the defence. That is the defence attorney's job.
Further, APLE has not "latched onto an administrative error." They have, like any prosecutor would, used the fact that Fletcher missed the filing deadline to argue that he should be denied an appeal. You say that he missed the deadline because of an administrative error, and that may be true, but it is not the job of the prosecutor to try to prove that for the defence. The prosecutor's job is to make the best case he can for the prosecution. It is the defence attorney's job to argue the defendant's case, in this case that he was supposedly unable to file his appeal request on time due to an administrative error. And apparently the defence attorney failed in this respect.
"If I were going for a job running a Child Protection Unit I would expect the interviewers to ask me about my criminal record and, if I had a very young wife, to ask me how old she was when I commenced a sexual relationship with her. In any country in which the rule of law (and common sense) applied, such questions would be asked."
Sorry, but calling bullshit on that one. Of course they should and would ask about a criminal record, but in countries with rule of law they would not ask a man about the nature of his relationship with his lawful wife. That would be insulting and perhaps even discriminatory. Unless there has been some prior suggestion of illegal activity or impropriety, that question would not be asked in an interview.
Dear Anonymous 11.57
Delete(1) Google "Action Pour les Enfants" and here is what you will discover:
"Action Pour Les Enfants (APLE), Cambodia is a non-governmental human rights organization established to combat the sexual exploitation of children."
(2) You write, "APLE says that it 'promotes prosecutions,' and like any prosecutor in the west, they take full advantage of the law in all of its intricacies to further the prosecution. It is not their job, as promoters of the prosecution, to try to argue the case for the defence. That is the defence attorney's job."
You have hit the nail on the head. It is good to have someone from Team Neeson (and Team APLE) articulate what has been obvious for years now - namely that APLE will use whatever ploy is necessary to secure a conviction.
In the moral universe you inhabit, APLE was entitled to insist on a secret trial back in 2011 - a trial that Mr Fletcher did not even know was taking place; a trial in which he was not able to present a case in his own defence.
You have revealed here not only your own moral bankrupsy but that of APLE as well.
As fot the question of the age of James Mc Cabe's wife when he commenced a relationship with her, of course such a question would be asked by any responsible interviewer if there was any suggestion (be it rumour or scuttlebutt) that he (or any applicant for the job) had had sex with a 15 year old girl. For such a question NOT to be asked would be a dereliction of the duty of care of those who were considering employing him.
Your argument that it would be discriminatory to even ask such a question is nonsense.
James,
Delete1) You said: "...here you have an NGO that refers to itself as a human rights organization..." I said they are not a human rights organization. You retorted: Google "Action Pour les Enfants" and here is what you will discover: "Action Pour Les Enfants (APLE), Cambodia is a non-governmental human rights organization established to combat the sexual exploitation of children."'
A little lesson in internet for you. You can find all kinds of incorrect information by simply googling something and believing the first thing you read. APLE did not refer to itself as a human rights organization. Some random website did. If you look at APLE's website (http://aplecambodia.org), facebook page or print literature, you will find that they do not refer to themselves as a "human rights organization" as you claimed.
2) "In the moral universe you inhabit..."
I am not arguing morality here. I am not saying it is right or wrong (morality.) I am dealing in the reality of the legal universe as it exists here and in the world in general. Prosecutors make the best case they can for the prosecution. Defence attorneys make the best case for the defence. Both, if they are good at their jobs, use the law the best they can to the advantage of the prosecution or the defence, respectively. Neither, if they know what they are doing, argues morality. That is not the way any court system work.
Herein we see part or your problem and why your efforts to help Fletcher are failing - your imprecision in your arguments and your apparent lack of knowledge of the law. Just because somebody said something on internet that you like doesn't make it true. It just makes for pointless debate. And just because you don't like the way the law works doesn't make it some other universe. It is the reality of the situation. And until you start dealing in reality you are just spinning your wheels.
3) No, that question would be not asked, especially not because of scuttlebutt from a site like this where people seem to be willing to make up pretty much anything to try to try to damage the reputation of their perceived opponents. And it would seem the reason you want to keep talking about it is because you want to change the subject from the reality of Fletcher's situation, and damage the reputation of somebody you perceive as an enemy of you and Fetcher. Both of these are cheap rhetorical tricks unworthy of even high school debate club, let alone something serious like this with lives in the balance. You do your argument and Fletcher a great disservice by persisting in such ugly irrelevancies.
You are right when you write, “Prosecutors make the best case they can for the prosecution. Defense attorneys make the best case for the defense.”
DeleteThis only works, however, if both the prosecution and the defense have an opportunity to present their cases in court. When the prosecution arranges for a trial to be held in secret (as APLE arranged in the case of Mr Fletcher), however, and to deny the defendant an opportunity to present is case, is not only a breach of Cambodian law; it is also abrogates the human rights of the defendant.
It the moral universe you inhabit, arranging a secret trial, is perfectly OK. Winning the case trumps all other considerations – legal and moral.
Would you have felt the same way if Fletcher’s and Neeson’s roles had been reversed? (see blog # 157) If Fletcher’s lawyer had arranged for Neeson’s trial to be held in secret, would you have seen this as a clever and totally acceptable legal tactic or as a breach of Scott Neeson’s legal and human rights?
This is not a rhetorical question.
...to be continued...
....continuing...
DeleteAs for my ‘failure’ to help Mr Fletcher, what do you suggest I do? Given that there is no-one else advocating Mr Fletcher’s legal and human right to a fair trial, should I now withdraw, accept defeat as an advocate and forget about Mr Fletcher’s predicament? Is this what you would do if you were in my position?
Again, this is not a rhetorical question.
Whilst your arguments up to this point in your comment make sense and are worthy of a response, the same cannot be said for this:
“…people seem to be willing to make up pretty much anything to try to try to damage the reputation of their perceived opponents.”
Please be very precise here. What has been made up?
This is not a rhetorical question.
I have asked Neeson if the young woman in the photo is Yang Dany. This is a valid question given that both Neeson and Yang Dany have played very significant roles in Mr Fletcher’s incarceration for 10 years for rape. Or are you referring here to my question of James Mc Cabe regarding the age of his wife when he started a relationship with her? Or to something else?
Let’s look at this from a slightly different perspective. Let’s say that you had heard something about myself that either cast me in a bad light or raised questions about my personal integrity. Given the profile this blog has created for myself, questions about my integrity are valid.
sSo, you ask me if what you have heard is true or not. If it is true, your question may well be damaging to my reputation if I answer truthfully. If what you have heard is not true, I can very easily write, in response, “No, what you have heard is not true. Here is the truth and you can check it out by…”
That is the end of the story. If I have lied, chances are someone will pick it up and I’ll be seen as a liar. And rightfully so.
However, asking me the question is not, in itself, necessarily damaging of my reputation at all. If I can demonstrate that it is based on rumour, scuttlebutt, the matter is put to rest.
In this instance, Scott Neeson can respond with, “That is not Yang Dany in the photo,” or “That is my niece,” or….whatever. And, of course, Neeson can opt not to answer the question at all. His choice. And Neeson has chosen. He will answer no questions – not just from me but from any journalist asking his questions that are not answered in one of his self-praising press releases.
The same applies for James Mc Cabe. “My wife to be was aged xxx when I met her and the scuttlebutt I read here on Mr Ricketson’s blog is just that – scuttlebutt.” Or he can opt for silence. Which he has. Fair enough. Mc Cabe’s choice.
At some point in the future – be it six months or six years – someone will find answers to the questions I have been asking and there are, broadly speaking, two possible outcomes:
(1) James Ricketson was full of shit and his questions were merely veiled attempts to damage Neeson and CCF or
(2) Scott Neeson was/is indeed a scoundrel who skillfully used the media to avoid all scrutiny of the many scams the Cambodian Children’s Fund was involved in.
Regardless of what you or I write here, the truth will eventually emerge. In your case, because you choose to hide your identity, there will be not reputational loss if you have backed the wrong horse. For me, if I am proven to be someone who plays fast and loose with the facts, with truth, I will, quite rightly, be outed as a journalistic fraud.
I am quite prepared to await the verdict of history.
James, please answer the question
ReplyDelete"Back to the question James, what proof (other than the nonsense your trolls post here) do you have that James McCabe has ever done anything inappropriate with a 15 year old girl."
Answer - NONE, it is just bar gossip from the Ricketson trolls.
Fact. Fletcher is correctly locked up because of his inappropriate behavior with children
Ricketson, perhaps it would be worth doing an entire piece about James McCabe, the man Neeson picked to head his CPU. The drug thefts he admitted to, the suspicious $200,000 in his bank account, his admission that he sold drugs, who his drinking buddies were at the time and who he was living with. Would make for quite an interesting expose, not only on McCabe, but on the quality of Neeson's administration.
DeletePS Don't forget his jail time vs that of his partner and how that was most likely accomplished.
DeleteAlready been done. Here's the hatchet job by the Cambodia Daily:
Deletehttps://www.cambodiadaily.com/archives/convicted-police-officer-now-ngo-worker-46728/
And here a much more sympathetic write up in the SMH:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/james-mccabe-is-on-a-mission-to-protect-abused-cambodian-kids-20131130-2yiyq.html
Not already done Anonymous 3:11. Hardly a hack job as you describe. Contains several quotes by your friend Scott Neeson, with many pertinent facts left out. I'm pretty sure Ricketson could present a much clearer picture of McCabe.
DeleteThere is much discussion about the appropriateness of posting this picture of Neeson and young girl that committed purjury to a Cambodian court and apparently filed fraudulent documents with the court. Please tell me who had the photo taken, correct me if I'm wrong, but it was Scott Neeson! Neeson has posted numerous inappropriate photos as he poses holding shirtless Cambodian girls in his arms. Pot calling the kettle black I think!!
ReplyDeleteWe do not know that the girl purjured herself or that she filed fraudulent documents, no matter what Ricketson may think he knows.
DeleteAnd again, if Neeson was wrong to post the photo, then Ricketson was in publishing them too. Two wrongs don't make a right.
And it is not the pot calling the kettle black because it is not Neeson criticizing Ricketson for posting inappropriate photos. It is me saying it, and I would never publish a ohoto of a vulnerable child or sexual assault victim like Ricketson has here.
Dear Anonymous 3.06
DeleteThe reason why trials are held is to determine whether or not, in this instance, Yang Dany filed fraudulent documents.
All Mr Fletcher has ever asked for is a fair trial. All I have ever advocated on his behalf is a fair trial.
Do you believe that he is entitled to one? A simply 'yes' or 'no' answer will suffice.
Why is it wrong to publish the photo of Neeson and a young woman? She is clearly not a child!
"The reason why trials are held is to determine whether or not, in this instance, Yang Dany filed fraudulent documents."
DeleteNo, that is not the reason trials are held. The trial was held (and if he is granted another trial, will be held) to determine Fletcher's guilt or lack thereof. This claim about Dany filing fraudulent documents may or may not be one aspect of that trial.
"Do you believe that he is entitled to one? A simply 'yes' or 'no' answer will suffice."
You ask this again and again in completely irrelevant places, presumably because you feel the weakness of your argument and you want to change the subject. That said, of course anybody charged with a crime is entitled to a fair trial, for whatever that has to do with your dubious contention that Dany filed false documents.
"Why is it wrong to publish the photo of Neeson and a young woman? She is clearly not a child!"
Because, as I said before, if that is a photo of Dany (which, oddly, you claim to be unsure of,) or some other vulnerable child, as a matter of standard journalistic ethics and human decency, you do not publish the photo or even the name of an alleged sex abuse/rape victim like Dany. Later, if the charges are dropped or the accused is acquitted by a court of law, outlets may identify the alleged victim by name and/or by photo. In the case of Fletcher, he has not been acquitted, nor was the case dropped. He was convicted of rape, making him a convicted rapist and Dany a victim of rape. Her later recantation, assuming there was one as you have presented it, is not relevant to whether it is ethical to you publishing her photo. (Recantation by sex abuse victims being a highly complex topic in itself, which I suggest you research before putting too much weight into her recantation.) Unless Dany, as an adult, has given you explicit permission to publish her identity and photo, you should not be publishing it because she is still a rape victim, regardless of whether you personally think she is not. Further, even if that is not Dany, it is unethical to publish the photos of vulnerable children in general, and especially in a case like this where you are exploiting her image to make some dubious, seedy case against Neeson. A decent person should know you don't use children like that, you don't expose them to this sort of distasteful public scrutiny, especially poor vulnerable children who don't have the power to stand up for themselves against you.
You continue to damage your own case with your exploitative, neanderthalish behavior. And just as a legal hint, there is really no better sort of argument for the prosecution than a poorly made argument by the defence.
Dear Anonymous 4.11
DeleteYou clearly believe that Yang Dany’s right to remain anonymous trumps Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial.
If this is Yang Dany, she was not a child when the charges or rape were made( she was 18) and she is now in her mid-20s.
Yang Dany and her mother both agreed to be interviewed and to go public with the fact that Dany was not raped. I did not pay them or offer any inducement. It was their choice.
Nonetheless, you seem to think that Dany had no right to make this choice; that she was bound by ethical standards that do not, incidentally, apply to men accused of sex crimes. If it is OK to splash photos of men accused of sex crimes across newpapers, clad in orange, handcuffed, as they get out of prison vans, why is it not OK to splash a photo of a young women (23 now) who has chosen to reveal that she was involved in a money-making scam when she accused Fletcher of rape?
Fletcher was convicted of rape in a court proceeding held in secret, with no opportunity to present a defense. Such a trial is, in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure, illegal. If the rule of law actually applied in Cambodia, his original ‘trial’ would have been declared illegal and a re-trial ordered.
Do you really believe that when a Cambodian court reaches a verdict that this is the end of the matter? As is the case all over the world, it is often through the media that people found shown to be innocent of crimes that they have allegedly committed, for which they have received long custodial sentences. It is one of the 4th Estate’s many roles to uncover such injustices.
What makes you think the young woman in this photo is a vulnerable child? She does not look all that vulnerable to me and nor does she look like a child. And if the photo is of Neeson and a young woman who is a friend of his family, his niece, a CCF university student etc, why is the problem with publication?
Rickets you are a dog. How dare you allow people to talk about McCabe and his wife and somehow compare that to Fletcher. McCabe and his wife are married and have children for fucks sake. How low will you go? You are a despicable individual. Peter Hogan from Khmer440 was like you and Karam found its way. One can only hope you get the same. Someone needs to put a stop to his disgusting blog
ReplyDeleteIsn't it quite funny that Ricketson has posted 156 blogs and no one has sued and no one can stop it? Team Neeson will go to great lengths to defame Ricketson (I can testify that he is not a dog), but no one can stop it! PLEASE ANSWER THIS Anonymous 11:27, were they married when McCabe started boinking her (was she 15?)? Where is your outrage for Neeson taking over 700 children from their families??
DeleteIsn't McCabe an alleged DRUG DEALER (he allegedly arranged to sell drugs, read the Harold Sun)? How could you allow Fletcher to be compared to the alleged drug dealer, McCabe??
DeleteWouldn't it be appropriate for his children to know who their father is?
What on earth has McCabe being married to her got to do with when he started having sex with his now wife. Has Fred Nile now joined the rest of the loonies on team Ricketson.
DeleteAnonymous 11.27
ReplyDeleteThe age of James Mc Cabe's wife-to-be is relevant to his job as head of the Child Protetion Unit for reasons I have explained already. If she was not 15 years old, as alleged, James Mc Cabe needs only to say, "SHe was not 15, she was xxx".
Simple. End of story.
As for his wife and children, please also spare a thought for Mr Fletcher's children. H is alienated from them because they believe he raped Yang Dany.
Actually, McCabe would be well advised not to answer the question. It is clearly being asked with ill-intent - the purpose to defame him and make some ad hominem rhetorical point. To dignify it with an answer would give it undeserved credibility, to treat it as if it were a genuine question and not just another rhetorical ploy. And given the way this blog runs to date, just repeating the same things again and again, and making up faux controversies out of the air to keep the noise going, he could almost be guaranteed that if he answer it, it would just spark you to make up more disingenuous questions, probably even encourage you to. If I were him I'd just let it stand where it is, maybe let you spin your wheels repeating yourself and coming up with even more outrageous claims to try to get a rise out on Mom and Dad. That question sitting here amongst all this craziness says pretty much all that need to be said about it. No answer is necessary.
DeleteYou can rest assured that James Mc Cabe will not answer any questions. Whether this is well-advised or not only history can tell.
DeleteIf Mc Cabe's wife was over the age of consent when he commenced his sexual relationship with her there is no problem at all. If she was 15 years old then there is a huge credibility problem for a man who heads up a Child Protection Unit dedicated, in part,to putting behind bars men who have sex with 15 year old girls or boys.
In the short term silence is a seemingly clever response to questions but let history be the judge, in the long term, of whether or not an answer from Mc Cabe is necessary.
Here is the Herold Sun story on 'Saint. McCabe':
ReplyDeleteVictorian cop James Anthony McCabe admits to stealing drugs
A FORMER Victorian police officer who worked with the National Crime Authority has pleaded guilty to stealing 1kg of drugs.
James Anthony McCabe, 39, was due to face trial in the Sydney District Court on drug and armed robbery charges relating to a fake drug bust in 2002.
McCabe, who was then a Victorian policeman seconded to the National Crime Authority, allegedly faked the arrest of a drug dealer in Sydney's west, stole 1kg of methamphetamines from him and arranged to sell the drug.
The former police officer pleaded guilty today to one count of robbery, with his lawyer Louise McManus indicating the other matters would be considered as aggravating factors when he was sentenced.
McCabe was one of two officers accused over the phony arrest, in which McCabe was alleged to have held a pistol to the drug dealer's head.
He was committed to stand trial in his absence after refusing to return home to Australia from Cambodia, where he fled after a Police Integrity Commission (PIC) investigation of the matter in 2004.
He was informally extradited to Australia last year and yesterday his attempt to have the trial permanently delayed was refused.
In applying for a permanent stay, Ms McManus asked Judge Michael Finnane to rule that due process had not been followed by Australian and Cambodian authorities and that McCabe should subsequently not face trial.
She also claimed a large number of witnesses had been contaminated by widespread media coverage of the PIC hearing and other legal hearings about McCabe and his co-accused, Samuel Foster.
Foster is serving a jail sentence after also pleading guilty over the drug bust.
He was a NSW police officer who was working as McCabe's partner in the National Crime Authority, now known as the Australian Crime Commission.
Foster had been expected to give evidence against his former colleague.
Judge Finnane adjourned the hearing until later today, to allow preparation of agreed facts.
Thank you blogger Oct 20 at 4.08 for your civil and constructive question. So rare!. You placed it on blog # 154, but I am replying on # 156 as this is the blog that is presently upsettin the Troglodytes.
ReplyDeleteI will not publish another excerpt from my book to prove a point, as it is too much for the goldfish fraternity to retain and they just complain about irrelevant issues.
Look at how many times James has published an issue with concise facts, evidence and details. Yet the three second goldfish are too lazy or incapable of looking up in past blogs for the truth. They seem hell bent on going over the same old chestnuts that have been sensibly debated many times.
To answer your question blogger;
I came back to my bar one afternoon covered in mud and filth from the dump.
There were several gentlemen at the bar and centre of attention was a stocky young Khmer man of about early 30s. The other gentlemen I recognized. They said David, there is someone who would like to talk to you about your children at the dump. On that subject I am always ready to talk with anyone.
To cut a long story short, though much of the conversation is private. The young man said, David my father wants to know more about your project and he thanks you for helping his children, I was a little jealous at that remark as I always consider them my children. He would like to meet you and your Khmer wife. Do you know who my father is? I apologized and said I was not familiar with Khmer society. He said I am Prince !!!!!!!!!! and my father is His Majesty King Sihanouk.
The rest is privileged and private.
I was greatly honoured and this moment remains one of three great honours in my life in Cambodia. The other two was my wonderful Khmer wife and helping those poor children at the dump.
Now I hear you say, that is not proof. You are correct.
The other gentlemen who escorted the Prince and recorded the meeting were from the French Embassy, who often helped me feed the children.
Even today I am happily reminded of this honour as I see the Prince on some of the banknotes.
I am grateful to James for this platform, short lived it may be, but I try to bring issues that have not been discussed before. Not to justify myself, but to give the discerning blogger a bigger picture and understanding of my life in Cambodia. Don't get me wrong, as I have always said I am no saint. I enjoyed openly the nightlife of Phnom Penh and the lovely ladies.
On one of James remarks I believe he is wrong, correct me James if you did not say, that feeding the children is only a band aid! I agree with what you say, but not your analysis. A band aid stops the bleeding! You cannot educate a hungry malnourished child. You cannot motivate a child that goes to bed hungry. A hungry child cannot focus further than the next rice bowl and many other issues.
My band aid was the beginning to stop the bleeding.
To catch up with recent debate.
Do you believe a conviction, fabricated by APLE and Scott Neeson of CCF, reminiscent of ' The Planet of the APES ', trial is safe!
Do not take my word for it ( as your blind hate will no doubt not allow); or James’. Read the official independent report of the I.B.A. on the Cambodian justice system. That is if you are interested at all in facts and evidence, which presently seems too illusive for your comprehension.
I am not in a popularity contest, never will be. If you have met me and dislike me it is your prerogative, it is very probably because I do not suffer fools gladly.
Thank you all for listening.
David John Fletcher
Cant wait for your book to come out Fletcher - i need some new paper for the floor of my chicken pen.
DeleteYour kindness speaks volumes about you Sir!!
Delete"To cut a long story short, though much of the conversation is private. The young man said, David my father wants to know more about your project and he thanks you for helping his children, I was a little jealous at that remark as I always consider them my children. He would like to meet you and your Khmer wife. Do you know who my father is? I apologized and said I was not familiar with Khmer society. He said I am Prince !!!!!!!!!! and my father is His Majesty King Sihanouk."
DeleteThat is an absurd claim. The late King Father has 3 living sons, none of whom are young and none of whom would be caught dead in some cheap barang bar - the reigning King Sihamoni, former Prime Minister Prince Ranariddh and Prince Chakrapong. The only other possibility, Prince Narindrapong, who died at the age of 49 in 2003, had not had contact with his father since 1979.
It is a potentially very dangerous thing to tell lies about the royal family. Tread carefully David.
I heard the same.
ReplyDelete