Ms
Naly Pilorge
Director
LICADHO
Naly,
do you believe that all men and women accused of a crime are entitled to a fair
trail?
If men
and women accused of the crime of genocide are entitled to a fair trial, do you
believe the same legal and human rights should be extended to a man accused of
rape?
On 21st. Dec 2014 in
an email about David Fletcher, you wrote:
Dear XXX
Thanks for
your email. We are following the case, our findings differ from James Ricketson but we cannot reveal the details
of the case to protect the
parties involved, thanks.
Naly
Naly Pilorge
Director
I have
arrived at no ‘findings’ at all. It is not my job to do so. Nor is it yours. It
is the function of a properly constituted court to find an accused person
guilty or innocent.
Your
‘findings’ and my own are irrelevant, unless they can be introduced as evidence
in a trial; unless our ‘findings’ (evidence) that can be tested by both the
prosecutor and the accused person’s defense lawyer.
Your
‘findings’ can be tested by no-one because you keep them secret!
What I
have done, in my role as journalist/blogger, is point to serious deficiencies
in the prosecution case; point to the many ways in which Mr Fletcher’s
‘in-camera’ (secret) trial, with the accused absent from the proceedings and
unable to present a defense, breached pretty well every part of the Cambodian
Code of Criminal Procedure.
How
did you arrive at your ‘findings’ in relation to Mr Fletcher, Naly? And what
are your ‘findings’? Guilty of rape?
Did
LICADHO conduct its own investigation into the rape allegations made against Mr
Fletcher? If so, why is there no mention of LICADHO’S ‘findings’ in any court
document from the ‘in camera’ trial?
Or did
you arrive at your ‘findings’ on the basis of what you were told by someone
involved in the investigation? CEOP. SISHA, APLE? Or were you relying on
scuttlebutt you had read on Khmer440?
Given
that you were one of the founders of APLE, your friendship with Thierry
Darnaudet and LICADHO’s frequent ‘partnering’ with APLE, I think it fair to ask
if your ‘findings’ emanate from either Thierry Darnaudet or Samleang Siela? If
so, are you content to unquestioningly accept their word that Mr Fletcher is
guilty as charged? Regardless
of Yang Dany and her mother’s insistence that Dany was not raped? Regardless of
the medical evidence that found Dany, post rape, to be a virgin? Despite the fact that it took APLE, SISHA and
CEOP 17 days AFTER Mr Fletcher’s arrest in Thailand (no charges laid) before
they managed to come up with ‘evidence’ that could, in retrospect, justify his
arrest?
And what was the evidence that APLE,
SISHA and CEOP uncovered so late in the day? It was that Yang Dany, having been
told that there was $30,000 up for grabs in compensation if she charged Mr
Fletcher with rape, suddenly remembered that he had raped her 15 months
previously. Twice. And on each occasion the rape lasted for an hour!
Do
none of these facts bother you, Naly? Do none of them make you think that
perhaps your ‘findings’, along with those of CEOP, SISHA and APLE, need to be
tested in court, in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure?
Are you committed to human rights for all? Or only for those whom your
‘findings’ deem to be deserving?
If
LICADHO does not respect Cambodian law when it comes to the legal and human
rights of men accused of a crime, and is prepared to rely on second hand
‘findings’, how can you complain, with any credibility, when the Cambodian
government breaches Cambodian law in arriving at its own ‘findings’ in matter
of law?
Let me
make this really simple:
“Do
you believe that Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial?”
As Director
of LICADHO this should be a very easy question to answer.
If the
answer is ‘yes’, do you believe that the trial held in 2011 was fair?
If the
answer is ’no’ it goes without saying that you must, as Director of LICADHO, be
prepared to advocate Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial.
But
will you do so, that is the question?
They will not advocate for a fair trial anymore than they advocate for a child's right to a family! Where do you think this organization has been while Neeson was taking children from families? They have one goal and that is to fill their coffers! To call them human rights organization is misguided!
ReplyDeleteHands up anyone who wasn't involved in a a conspracy to send kiddie fiddler Fletch to the Letch to jail. You need to see a shrink Ricketson you are fucked in the head.
ReplyDeleteTotally fucked. Hes become a joke. Accusing everyone in sight. Loser.
DeleteShoot the messenger. How original.
ReplyDeleteAt least James hasn't been accused of being jealous of Naly Pilorge :-)
DeletePilorge will answer no questions. Omerta rules. Like Neeson, Morrish, Darnaudet and Seila she doesn’t think she has to be accountable to anyone.
DeleteWhy FFS would Naly Pilorge want to be part of a conspiracy to put a lowlife like Fletcher in jail? Your conspiracy theories are pathetic Ricketson. You are pathetic.
ReplyDeleteHow would you feel if you were not only denied a fair trial but had Scott Neeson accusing you of grooming young girls and Naly Pilorge implying in communications, with friends and associates, that you were guilty of rape? And refusing to provide any evidence to back up her assertions?
DeleteNeeson and Pilorge have not only defamed Mr Fletcher; they have used their names, their high public profiles in Cambodia, to create an atmosphere in which very few (if any) people will care one way or another what happens to Mr Fletcher.
Answer the fucking question, Ricketson. Why would Naly Pilorge want to take part in a conspiracy to jail David Fletcher?
DeleteI have no reason to believe that Naly Pilorge was part of any conspiracy to jail Mr Fletcher. She is guilty, however, of remaining silent about what she knows (or thinks she knows) about Mr Fletcher’s alleged rape of Yang Dany. She is guilty of remaining silent about Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial.
DeleteI suspect that Pilorge is relying for her ‘findings’ on lies she has been told by Samelang Seila and Thierry Darnaudet. I wonder if she has ever asked them if they told her the truth about Mr Fletcher’s rape of Yang Dany? I wonder if she cares what the truth is?
I hope Darnaudet and Seila sue you for calling them liars. You wont be such a smart arse when you are sharing a cell with Fletcher. And no one is going to give a fuck what happens to you Ricketson. Everyone knows you are sucm.
DeleteMmmm, so I am sucm? I googled ‘sucm’ and found out what it stands for - Syracuse University College of Medicine. This is the first time in my life I have been accused of being Syracuse University College of Medicine! I guess this is an insult, but I am finding it difficult to figure out in what way I should be offended? Or did you, in your cups, misspell ‘scum’?
DeleteYes, I am saying that both Samleang Seila and Thierry Darnaudet are corrupt; that they are both liars; that they paid a lot of money to guarantee not only that Mr Fletcher was convicted of the crime of rape in the absence of any evidence, but that they ‘arranged’ for the key witness to disappear from Cambodia and so not be available to either give evidence in a properly constituted court or be in a position to speak to the media.
I sincerely hope that one or both of them sues me for defamation. I wouldn’t even mind too much if they sued me in Cambodia – a country in which they could both (as they have before) secure the verdict they want with whatever the going dollar rate is these days for such verdicts.
My suspicion, however, is that neither of them will sue me – not even in Cambodia. Why? Because the last thing they want is for APLE’s dirty laundry to be washed in public. They both know just how they set up Mr Fletcher. They both know that they have left a paper trail which, if revealed in a proper court, would show them both to criminals who have sought to, and succeeded in, pervert the court of justice.
They are not sure if I have access to the paper trail or not. If I do, and if they sue me for defamation, they would be opening up a hornet’s nest that would, in a country in which the rule of law applied, see them in jail for perverting the course of justice. Would they want to take this risk? I think not. I hope they do, however.
Samleang Seila and Thierry Darnaudet do not have the balls to sue you Mr Ricketson. You are right. They are criminals. Right now they have the Phnom Penh Post and Khmer Times giving Aple the cover it needs but they will turn on Aple and Neeson when they see an advantage in doing so.
DeleteNeeson's people and influence continue to deprive the children of the help that was being provided by David Fletcher;
ReplyDeleteDavid deserved a fair trial; His friends believe him to be innocent, his enemies believe that it does not matter. I wonder if they do not believe that everyone accused of a crime in Cambodia should have a fair trial? Wes
Below is my response to a comment posted a few hours ago which has mysteriously disappeared from my blog. This happens frequently and has me mystified!
DeleteAnonymous has left a new comment on your post "# 163 Do Naly Pilorge and LICADHO believe that men...":
Here are some interesting links regarding Aple, you, Mr Ricketson and NGOs in general. Darnaudet was directly engaged at both ACTT and BSSK.
Interestingly VICE has published a story which includes you and your blog. Keep going, the waves are finally getting bigger.
LINKS:
https://www.vice.com/read/the-cambodian-organization-that-stalks-western-child-molesters-511
http://www.nationalradio.com/CAM_PP_JUNE_15.shtml
http://www.acttindia.org/upload/reportfile/1411710244ACTT%20ANNUAL%20REPORT%20%282011-2012%29.pdf
https://www.changemakers.com/morehealth/entries/bssk
Organization Address
BSSK
A/68,Lake gardens,Kolkata-700045
Share the story of the founder and what inspired the founder to start this project
The Organization has along with foreign Currency Regulation Act (FCRA) registered of the home ministry under the foreign contribution Act and department of Income tax under Acts 12A and 80G. Thus 11 years old organization has very rich experience of handling projects related to Shelter home Projects, education Programme, Health ,Women Empowerment ,livelihood and nourishment Project specially for the Orphan, neglected and below poverty Line children and women and other deprived sections of the society with financial support of GLOBAL HUMANITARIA ,an NGO of Spain .
The organization has an able governing board with 7 members Consisted of President and Presently Secretary Mr. Chandan Das , The Organization has also a consultant Mr. Darnaudet Thierry who is deeply committed for both fund and resource mobilization, The Organization has three Project Locations i.e Kolkata ,Baruipur and Sundarban along with central Office in Lake Gardens, Kolkata . We have Professional team of each Projects along with different Departmental units like Human resources ,Finance ,Research and Development ,Technical of Projects ,Education, Purchasing and Inventory etc .We have more than 300 Resources dealing with different Projects in different locations and has been successfully transforming more than Rs. 2.76 crores per year into meaningful purposes
http://portal.mec.gov.br/arquivos/pdf/programacao_baixa.pdf
https://www.worldvision.org/resources.nsf/main/sun_sex_heritage.pdf/$file/sun_sex_heritage.pdf
The VICE article mentioned above is well worth reading in full. It is a fair and balanced look at both the good work that APLE does and the dangers inherent in the NGO’s modus operandi.
ReplyDelete“(APLE) has also been dogged by online critics, some actively defending convicted or accused sex offenders they see as wrongfully jailed. And in recent months, criminal charges against a former APLE director suggest that cases like Sporich's—as disturbing as they are—are just one part of a complex and deep-seated problem….
The group, founded in 2003 by the French activist Thierry Darnaudet, has become immensely powerful. Though it operates relatively modestly (according to its financial statement for 2014, the organization had an annual income of $519,213 with outgoings of $491,834), the group works alongside American law enforcement, with the official blessing of Cambodia's Ministry of the Interior (MoI). According to Samleang Seila, APLE's president, a government-issued Memorandum of Understanding empowers the group to do its own preliminary investigative work to assist official authorities....
APLE has maintained a growing influence. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this has led to accusations that the group has become too powerful. One of their most outspoken critics is James Ricketson, an Australian filmmaker and blogger who has become an advocate for a convicted rapist named David Fletcher. On his blog, Ricketson attacks the group and its founder, and highlights what he believes to be flagrant examples of shaky evidence collected by APLE that has been used to implicate suspects. In short, Ricketson thinks Cambodian authorities have given too much leeway to the organization.
"Evidence collected by APLE should be challenged by a lawyer representing the accused, but the veracity of APLE's evidence is rarely challenged in Cambodian courts," Ricketson said in an email to VICE. "This is a reflection on the incompetence of the country's judicial system, not on APLE's superior investigative abilities. It is time for the Cambodian government to stop outsourcing the policing of Cambodian law, with no oversight, to NGOs such as Action Pour les Enfants."
Seila dismissed the criticism, saying it comes from a misperception about how APLE operates.
"People seem to believe we are investigating cases by ourselves. What we do under the proviso of our MoI is to identify suspects, to pass information, and to carry out preliminary investigations," he said. "We don't make evidence—we assist the Cambodian police force in their investigations and our role is to support child victims from testimony throughout the process."
Seila is lying about the role the APLE plays in investigations. I will have more to say about this in the near future.
I have one small quibble with this article. Very small.
It claims that I am “an advocate for a convicted rapist named David Fletcher.” I am an advocate for his right to a fair trial. If he were to be found guilty by a properly constituted court, operating in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure, I would have no problem with that. And if he were found to be guilty on the basis of verifiable facts, of evidence I would not feel that I had wasted my time advocating Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial this past year.
You are a fucking hypocrite Ricketson. You spend a year putting shit on Aple and now you admit that it does good work catching kiddie fiddlers like Fletcher. Make up your fucking mind where you stand you useless cunt.
DeleteDear Anonymous 1.04
DeleteThe fact that APLE plays a significant (and useful) role in catching pedophiles who are guilty does not mean that the NGO does not also set up men who are not guilty if it serves their purposes. The same applies with the police. To accuse particular police of being corrupt under certain circumstances cannot be read to mean that ALL police are accused of being corrupt ALL the time. Some police can be corrupt some of the time (James McCabe, for instance) without casting aspersions on all police. The same applies for Scott Neeson. Some of what Neeson and CCF does is beneficial to poor Cambodians. And some of what it does is self-serving and amounts to money making scams. Neeson is both a con artist who plays fast and loose with the truth and a man who has undoubtedly played a positive role in providing a roof over the heads of kids who did not have one; an education to kids who would otherwise not have got one. Mind you, this ‘good work’ needs to be seen in the context of Neeson’s breaking up of families and his refusal to help the extremely poor families whose kids he has in residential care.
The problem with NGOs such as APLE and CCF is that they act as though they are beyond criticism. They respond to any criticism either with total silence or by refusing to answer questions and shooting the messenger instead. They are not alone. Cambodia is awash with NGOs that feel they need not be accountable to anyone. And in Cambodia there is no-one, realistically, with an interest in holding them accountable. As a result, for corrupt NGOs (of which there are many, as we all know) Cambodia is like the Wild West. If you have money you can bend the rules as much as you like, make up your own rules or break Cambodian law with complete impunity.
I would like to think that LICADHO would operate in accordance with one set of rules – namely that human and legal rights are available to everyone. This is clearly not so. Men accused of sex crimes do not make it onto LICADHO’s list of people whose human and legal rights should be respected. Nor do families whose children have been stolen from them and put into fake orphanages.
Dear Mr. Ricketson!
ReplyDeleteYou are on the right track. Please keep going.
Yes he is - on the right track - the right track to sharing a jail cell with the kiddie fiddlers he tries to make out are angels.
DeleteDear Anonymous 5.09
ReplyDeleteI have never said Mr Fletcher was an angel. He is not. And he is the first to admit it. And has done so. However, there is a world of difference between not being an angel and being a rapist. All I have done from the outset is advocate Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. If he he found guilty on the basis of solid evidence he deserves to be in jail. However, having searched high and low for solid evidence (including masses of court documents) I have found none. I have, however, uncovered a mass of evidence that numerous people involved in this matter would not want to be aired in a trial open to the public or the media.
OK . . put that evidence on this blog and let people make up their own mind. Otherwise, how about shutting the fuck up with all your posturing.
DeleteYou must be blind or stupid Anonymous 5:30 if you have read this blog and haven't seen the proof.
DeleteDear Anonymous 5.30
DeleteIf you have not read enough on this blog to convince you that Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial, I fear that no evidence will.
As for putting hundreds of pages of court documents up on this blog, this is impractical. However, in a properly constituted court many of these documents could be introduced as evidence and key people called as witnesses to be cross-examined in relation to them.
Why does batshitcrazyweirdo Ricketson think so many people have spent so much time and money targeting a loathsome nobody like Fletcher? It's strange.
ReplyDeleteAnd why does Ricketson continue to say Fletcher wasn't a paedophile. He has a criminal conviction for statutory rape of a 15 year old girl. He keeps saying 'oh but it was consensual sex'. No Ricketson, it wasn't consensual sex. A 15 year old cannot provide consent; that's the whole fucking point.
And then, lo and behold, Fletcher turns up in Paedophile Paradise Cambodia. Who would have thought it? And it gets better. He starts working with children. Well, I never. And then he is caught red handed undressing said children.
A lot of people know the real background to this story, and have spoken to a number of victims of Fletcher back in the UK, victims who are scared to tell their story and understandably want to put it behind them. None of those people are in any doubt that this horrible man is where he should be.
And as for Ricketson . . well, of all the causes you could choose to make an utter tit of yourself? Sad, very sad. Your reputation is in tatters, man, and you simply can't see it. There is even a phrase using your name to describe someone losing it: Going Full Ricketson.
5:29 are you working for APLE?
DeleteDear Troll (aka Anonymous 5.29)
DeleteLet's go through this point by point.
(1) Do you know David Fletcher? Have you had first hand experience that has led you to the considered position that he is 'loathsome'?
(2) I have written a great deal about how and why it is that Mr Fletcher was accused of rape a few weeks after his alleged victim had referred to him as her 'fiance' and a 'good man'. There is more than one reason why various people and organisations jumped on the 'get Fletcher bandwagon'. I have written about this at length and will write more about it as more documents come into my possession.
(3) Yes, Mr Fletcher has a conviction of 'statutory rape' from 1998. Do you believe that this is evidence that he raped Yang Dany.
Given that you are part of Team Neeson and/or Team APLE, do you believe that the same should apply to James Mc Cabe? He was convicted of drug-related crimes more than a decade ago and so must be guilty of any drug-related crime he is accused of now and into the future? From a legal point of view what you are suggesting here is just plain nonsense.
(4) When was Mr Fletcher caught red-anded undressing children? Did you catch him red handed? Did a friend? Someone you know? Did you read it on Khmer440? Why have you taken so long to add to the list of crimes Mr Fletcher should be tried for?
(5) 'A lot of people know the real background..." Please enlighten us. What is the real background? Again, how did you come into possession of the information you have? So, Mr Fletcher should be sentenced to 10 years in jail because you know someone who knows someone who knows the real story!
The reason why trials are held is to convict or acquit those accused of a crime on the basis of evidence; not on the basis of scuttlebutt. You are quite happy to convict on the basis of scuttlebutt, aren't you?
As for my 'causes', there have been many over the years and they have varied. They all have one thing in common, however - a concern for the protection of the human rights of those who very often have no-one to advocate on their behalf.
Even if I had come to the conclusion, personally, that Mr Fletcher was a 'loathsome nobody' (which I have not) I would advocate on his behalf. Justice is not reserved for those whom you or I like and should not be denied to those that you or I may dislike. I don't imagine, if I met any of the Khmer Rouge cadres on trial for genocidal crimes that I would like them. I might find them loathsome, but this should not (must not) be used as a reason to deny them a fair trial.
@ anonymous 5.29
DeleteLove this quote:
"No Ricketson, it wasn't consensual sex. A 15 year old cannot provide consent; that's the whole fucking point."
Does this apply to James Mc Cabe also? Did he rape the 15 year old girl who became his wife?
Why don't you put your name to your question anon 5.29 so you can be sued. What connection is there anywhere between sex or rape, James McCabe, a 15 year old and James McCabes wife
DeleteOk 5:09 Let us hear why you don't think that Mr. Fletcher, or anyone else who is accused of a crime, deserves a fair trial. It could be interesting, seriously. I believe that you cant come up with any reason, because you probably belong to some group or fraction which is profiting from this injustice. You are a sad example of a human being.
ReplyDeleteDer Anonymous 5.48
DeleteI am more than a little astounded at the number of people who comment on this blog who seem to think that there is a class of people who do not deserve a fair trial. I imagine that they'd probably feel quite differently if it was they who received a jail sentence without the benefit of a fair trial.
Don't forget James that you are dealing with Cambodian Expats. They don't leave a very good impression do they?
DeleteIt is amazing that all the foul mouthed village idiots deny the existence of a conspiracy when they are spewing out all the elements of a fishwife gossip conspiracy themselves!
ReplyDeleteThey obviously cannot see, do not want to see, that they are being used in a typical herdal behavior. A conspiracy of default, but none the less, a conspiracy.
A few FACTS;
Barry Lucas ( geriatric, 14 year old silver Mercedes with Zimmer frame, helping hand @gmail.com Ha! Ha! Ha!) Starts it all in village idiot bars because I will not be cowed by him.
Hogan Khmer440 picks this up and repeats because I have had a business dispute with him. Coincidence? NO!
Bent NGOS pick up these malicious fabrications, just what they want after two years of looking for anything unsavory in my life and finding nothing.
Coincidence? NO!
No hard evidence to be had, so a bogus victim has to be coerced. Coincidence? NO!
She later denies I raped her. She disappears. Coincidence? NO!
Her mother is moved and hidden. Coincidence? NO!
The FCO and CEOP pick up on this because of my inappropriate relationship 19 years ago. Coincidence? NO!
CEOP investigates, finds nothing, deliberately make no comment. Coincidence? NO!
APLE, Scott Neeson of CCF , SISHA Steve Morrish all looking for something that is not there. Their lies fabricate a bogus victim. Coincidence? NO!
FCO influenced by these lies has me illegally arrested without charge, lawyer or translator in Thailand. Coincidence? NO!
After this facade the FCO and the rest of the Muppets discover the bogus victim is still a virgin after two brutal rapes lasting an hour each Coincidence? NO!
The FCO then discovers, via information on my passport that they were holding for 'safety’, evidence that I was not in Cambodia at the time of alleged rapes. Coincidence? NO!
The FCO then arrange for my passport to be destroyed by ' mistake ' and gives me three different versions of how. Coincidence? NO!
My appeal papers in Cambodia were filed with a high official within the correct time frame, they disappeared on the way to the court. Coincidence? NO!
APLE push their protest in court that my appeal was not filed in time. They do not want a trial as the truth will come out. Coincidence? NO!
Not one accuser has come forward to stand and substantiate their lies. ie, Scott Neeson, APLE and Steve Morrish. Coincidence? NO!
Village idiots keep repeating their idiotic unsubstantiated crap rhetoric and are afraid to confront me. They continue hiding, which in itself tells you all you need to know. Coincidence? NO!
Team Neeson are getting paid maybe? We know how good Neeson ls at paying up, so does Dany and Mother!
The village idiots are so stupid they cannot see they are cannon fodder and being used by APLE/NEESON and the other muppets.
Now you may believe in Coincidence, I do not, I believe in conspiring by default.
If you believe in Coincidence, there is an awful lot! You must believe in wrestling also!
Unlike the malicious trogs, James and I have full facts and evidence of what we state, unlike you trogs of fabricated rhetoric of straw.
Have a nice day at the gossip market.
David Fletcher
The one important FACT you forgot Fletcher is that you are locked up in jail where many people think you deserve to be, for having been found guilty (and not for the first time). That is the only proven FACT that coincidentally you seem to have omitted, it isn't rumor, it isn't gossip and it isn't scuttlebuck. It is the truth my friend.
DeleteDear Anonymous 11.14
DeleteWhat does "many people think you deserve to be" have to do with law; with justice. Mr Fletcher would 'deserve' to be in jail if he had been found guilty in a court in which he was able to present a defence. You clearly fit into a category of commentators who do not believe that due process is required to find a man guilty. All that is required is that "many people" think you deserve to be in jail.
No James, it does not need many people. It only requires 1 and that is the ruling judge, that's all it takes to put guys like Fletcher in jail.
DeleteAs much as Fletcher might like to rabbit on all I did was point out an indisputable FACT. He is banged up and many people think that is where he deserves to be. I only quoted FACT (something a little foreign to your way of thinking I know)
There will always be 'the mob,' the torch & pitchfork, the lyncher's noose, that is a fact. They find their satisfaction in blood, not in justice. That's why civilized people insist on law and process, to stand against the mob, to find justice, because it doesn't matter what "most people think he deserves."
DeleteThere will also always be Karma and "what goes around comes around" thankfully. At this time Fletcher is getting his dues and we all know it irrespective of any chance of him getting a trial. His next big test will no doubt be when he meets up with his mate Peter Hogan again somewhere that I have a feeling is going to be somewhat hotter than Phnom Penh. You are sure right about the fact there will always be the torch and pitchfork mob in Fletchers life but very soon I think Lucifer might be in on the party as well.
DeleteI love it anonymous 5.27am - dead right - Karma is a beautiful thing and it has come around for that insipid low life Hogan from Khmer440 who copped what he deserved after trying to destroy the reputations of so many people and now it has knocked on Fletchers door.
DeleteMuch karma going around this past couple of years - David Fletcher in prison, Peter Hogan dead, SISHA collapsed and Morrish out of the game, more scrutinizing eyes turning at APLE funding failing, Somaly Mum's organisation crushed, James Ricketson's blog winning attention...
DeleteDear Anonymous 3.41
ReplyDeleteIn Mr Fletcher's case it was not one judge, but three judges, who decided that it was not important that Mr Fletcher be present for the trial; that he did not even need to be told that a trial was in progress. I am sure that I do not need to point out, even to you, that this decision alone was a breach of Cambodian law.
These three judges then determined, despite Yang Dany being 18 years old, that the trial would be held 'in camera'. There would be no members of the public present; no members of the media. There would be no opportunity for anyone to observe what took place in court.
There was one part of the legal proceeding that was in accordance with the law. It was that a medical report had been conducted, commissioned by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court, which determined that Yang Dany was still a virgin. After two hour long brutal rapes. In a court document signed by Sok Roeun, Vice Prosecutor, on 12th Oct 2010, the rape is described in these terms: Mr Fletcher undressed her and he also undressed his trousers and lay upon her and put his penis into her vagina, doing so about 1 hour until he discharged his semen in her vagina."
In this same document the rape is described again thus: "He put his penis into her vagina and made her hurt."
This document was written a month after the results of the medical report (Yang Dany a virgin) were known not only to the Phnom Penh Municipal Court but to Thierry Darnaudet, Samleang Selia, Scott Neeson, Steve Morrish, CEOP and the British Embassy in Cambodia.
The following year the Phnom Penh MunicipalCourt, in its secret trial, explained away the inconvenient truth about Yang Dany's virginity by stating that her hymen must have grown back. After 2 brutal rapes, each one lasting an hour!
What I have written here is FACT based on court documents. It is these court documents that were not available to Mr Fletcher. He has never had an opportunity to challenge this 'evidence' in court. This, like much else in this case, is contrary to the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure.
The fact that you and your friends think Mr Fletcher guilty, regardless of the evidence is, from a legal point of view, of no consequence. From a moral point of view you reveal yourself to be a particularly unpleasant member of the human race.
One more FACT for you to deal with;
On 23rd June 2010, Thierry Darnaudet wrote a report that also appears in the court files. This report was written before Mr Fletcher left Cambodia. It was written after two years of investigation on the part of APLE, SISHA and CEOP. In this report there is no mention at all of rape. NONE. Scott Neeson, Steve Morrish, Thierry Darnaudet, Samleang Seila, CEOP and the British Embassy had not managed to find any evidence at all that Mr Fletcher had raped anyone, including Yang Dany.
A couple of weeks later Yang Dany, whom David Fletcher had not met until 2010 (and this is acknowledged by Darnaudet), accused him of raping her twice 15 months before they met, in a location that did not exist.
Please add these 'FACTS' to the fact that you and your friends are so certain Mr Fletcher is guilty of rape that no semblance of a fair trial is required.
Sorry James, yes you are right, it was 3 judges and not one (still is not "many people" as you suggest). I guess we must have another conspiracy on our hands, maybe you and your capable band of clown followers can investigate and present your findings in your normal unbiased (not) fashion.
DeletePS how was your visit to the Ministry of Justice this week that you claimed in last weeks blog you were going to carry out
Dear Anonymous 5.27
ReplyDeleteIf the rule of karma applies, as you seem to think it does, you will be on a long list of people who do not believe that Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial Scott Neeson, Steve Morrish, Thierry Darnaudet, Samleang Seila, CEOP and the British Embassy in Cambodia, senior officilans with the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, UK Foreign Secretary Mr Phillip Hammond, Naly Pilorge and all those who, on Khmer440 and here on this blog, who have bayed for Mr Fletcher's blood this past five years. The karma you describe suggests that all on this list have some rather unpleasant experiences in store for them.
Is it OK to start using the 'c' word now? Conspiracy?
ReplyDeleteConspiracies come in various shapes and sizes. The one conspiracy shared by all of the following is the conspiracy of silence. Not one is prepared to say, out loud, in public:
Delete“I/we believe that Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial.”
Scott Neeson
Steve Morrish
Thierry Darnaudet
Samleang Seila,
CEOP
The British Embassy in Cambodia
Senior officials within the Foreign & Commonwealth Office
UK Foreign Secretary Mr Phillip Hammond
Naly Pilorge
The Phnom Penh Post and the Khmer Times.
There are a few possible explanations for this silence:
(a) They believe that Mr Fletcher’s 2011 trial (held in secret) was ‘fair’.
(b) They don’t care one way or another whether Mr Fletcher received a fair trial.
(c) They had their own personal reasons for wanting to get rid of Fletcher.
(d) They would be embarrassed to acknowledge, in 2015, a right that they should have acknowledged in 2011 - Mr Fletcher’s legal entitlement, in accordance with Cambodian law, to a fair trial
Some on this list have engaged in a conspiracy much more damaging than silence. This conspiracy would, in a country in which the rule of law applied, see them in court for having perverted the course of justice. They will fight tooth and nail (as they have already demonstrated) to deny Mr Fletcher any form of trial in which their conspiracy becomes public knowledge.
Two observations about evil are appropriate here:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
― Edmund Burke
“The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.”
― Albert Einstein
You are a fool Ricketson - it was the judge of the Cambodian Courts that put Fletcher in jail, not the NGO's, the Embassy;'s or anyone else you have nominated outside of the courts. Why dont you attack the judge? Why dont you come out on your public forum and say that the Judge was corrupt? Why dont you name the judge and say he was corrupt? Why dont you add a photo of the judge on your blog and say he was corrupt? Wy dont you get the newspapers to quote you as saying the judge was corrupt? I tell you why you won't do it - because you know that you have no argument and by doing the above would land you straight in jail for defamation. But its easy to attack everyone else because they won't waste their time replying to you so you can just continue writing bullshit about them. It beggars belief that you honestly think that anyone besides the courts can have enough input to put people in jail. Moron!
Deletewell said anon 5.45 pm - Ricketson knows what he can get away with. he would dare nam a judge or go as far as calling the courts in Cambodia corrupt. There is a term for a person who picks and chooses their targets like Ricketson does - its called a bullying coward.
DeleteYou need to read the corruption article. He is no coward as village idiots claim!
DeleteThe village idols are the wankers who are in jail in Cambodia with a sex offence conviction. As for the people who try to say that all child sex offenders in Cambodia are somehow better people than good hard working expats like ourselves - well no comment on what we need to call you!
DeleteDear Anonymous 5.45
DeleteYou write:
“It beggars belief that you honestly think that anyone besides the courts can have enough input to put people in jail.”
Type “Cambodia's corrupt judiciary” into Google and see what you come up with.
It beggars belief that anyone with experience in Cambodia serious believes that no-one “besides the courts can have enough input to put people in jail.”
It is up to the Cambodian government, when it sees fit, to deal with corruption within the judiciary. And it is up to the international donor and NGO community to deal with, or at least adopt a moral stance, on corruption within its own ranks and not turn a blind eye.
As for the naming of judges, I will deal with that in due course. As for newspapers I have no influence at all in what they quote. And even if I were to make statements of the kind that you so dearly wish I would make, I doubt that any newspaper would print a comment by me that would result in the newspaper being sued for defamation.
Your assertion that I “have no argument” is nonsense. I have presented many arguments here and what you and others of your ilk do not do is engage with my arguments. You think that in shooting the messenger you are destroying my credibility. I would suggest that in never answering questions, in ignoring evidence and facts (to be found in court documents) you make Team Neeson and Team APLE look morally and intellectually bankrupt. If you have not been sent by APLE and Neeson into cyberspace to attack me I can assure you that you are not doing either organization any favours when you write silly comments such as this one.
You write: “they (Neeson et al) won't waste their time replying to you so you can just continue writing bullshit about them.”
Two observations:
Why are you wasting your time replying on Neeson’s behalf? On Naly Pilorge’s behalf? Have you nothing better to do with your time?
Neeson, Morrish and Pilorge, in their own different ways, accuse Mr Fletcher in public of sex crimes without providing any evidence of his guilt. I ask them to produce evidence. I ask them if they believe that Mr Fletcher (guilty or innocent) is entitled to a fair trial. Their silence makes it clear that they do not believe he is. You can use whatever work you like to describe this silence. I choose ‘corrupt’.
Dear Anonymous 7.59
DeleteYou write, “There is a term for a person who picks and chooses their targets like Ricketson does - its called a bullying coward.”
What is the term you would use to describe someone who, as Scott Neeson did, accuses a man of ‘grooming’ young girls, refuses to provide any evidence of his allegation?
Do the words ‘bully’ or ‘coward’ spring to mind? If they do, these would be the kindest descriptions of what Neeson did when he defamed Mr Fletcher in June 2010.
As for myself being a bully and a coward, why do you write anonymously if you are not a coward yourself? You are a keyboard warrior without the balls to confront me personally. If I am wrong in this, let me know when and where you would like to meet to discuss the issues that you feel so passionately about and which you write about here. How about coffee one morning at ‘Browns’? There are several in Phnom Penh. You name the one that suits you and I’ll meet you there one morning. Let’s see who the coward is!
Dear Anonymous 2.03
DeleteYour comment is so silly that no response is either required or necessary.
Naly Pilorge has no credibility. I wonder if she is still getting money from Aple as an advisor
ReplyDeleteI love Fletcher's posts on this blog. They remind what a total tit he was, and how wonderful it is to see him reduced to this pile of shit as a way to express himself. He lords it up and dismisses people as 'village idiots', and yet he is the one who raped a 15 year old in the UK, and he is the one who after puffing his billy big bollocks chest up on here for a few minutes each day, has to go back to eating gruel, sleeping in shit, and lying awake at night thinking he is likely to die in a Cambodian prison.
ReplyDeleteI thought he was on hunger strike anyway? What happened to that? Did he chicken out?
What a wanker you are Anonymous 10:55. You must live a very pitiful life.
DeleteDear Anonymous 10.55
DeleteDid James Mc Cabe rape his 15 year old bride to be?
If you are going to use the word 'rape' as freely as you do, and omit the word 'statutory' be aware that you are raising questions about James Mc Cabe's suitability to be running a Child Protection Unit whose job is (one at least) is to jail men who have sex with 15 year old girls.
"People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones."
On the contrary, I have a great life. Tonight I will have a few beers with some friends in town, and then I'll have dinner with a few glasses of wine. I don't bother working anymore; why bother if you don't need to? Then I'll go home with my beautiful wife and we'll talk about planning a trip to the UK soon. That's the sort of life you can have if you don't go around raping 15 year old girls. That's the sort of life Fletcher will never have again because, if you recall, he rapes 15 year old girls.
ReplyDeletehahaha I love it - good call anon 1.05am - I might do the same.
DeleteWhat fools you make of yourselves! Trapped in your own prison of ignorance and hate.
DeleteDear Anonymous 1.05
DeleteI try to be polite in my responses to comments but it is not always easy. In this case it is not possible. You are a buffoon. Your wife must be a very tolerant person to be able to put up with your stupidity.
Smart arse cunt. That’s what you are Ricketson. Someone should take you out the back and beat the shit out of you. I hope they do. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
DeleteI think Team Neeson needs to upgrade the advocates its employs to make comments like this. Come on Scott you can do better than this.
DeleteMcCabe would only be looking at a sentence of 5 - 10 years for having sex with thr woman he loves and who became his wife. Take a look at yesterday's Daily:
ReplyDelete"Under the criminal code, the rape of a minor carries a prison sentence of seven to 15 years. Sex with a minor under the age of 15, a separate crime under the Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation Law, carries a prison sentence of five to 10 years.
Khat Hun, chief of the provincial police’s minor crimes bureau, said the police officer received the lesser charge because he said that he loved the girl.
“The suspect admitted to having sex with the girl, but he said he did not force her because he loves the girl,” Mr. Hun said.
“I think this case is not a rape case because they love each other and it happened one or two months ago,” he said, “but he is still at fault because he had sex with a minor.”
Mr. Hun said Mr. Sokin was handed to Investigating Judge Veng Muoyky, who charged him with having sexual intercourse with a minor under 15 years old, and placed him in provisional detention at the provincial prison. The judge could not be reached for comment."
If it is so obvious that Fletcher is guilty of rape why are all these trolls advocating a fair trial so that he can be found guilty and prove that Ricketson is a lying cunt after all
ReplyDeleteCome on guys, if the Cambodian judicial system is not corrupt and if Fletcher is guilty why not bring on a trail ASAP and prove Ricketson wrong? You guys should be advocating a trial if only to skewer Ricketson. If you are so sure of yourselves, what aren't you? Or did a friend of a friend tell you that he has a mate whose mate told him Fletcher was guilty?
ReplyDeleteI somehow think the Cambodian judicial system has better things to do than hold court cases in order to prove Ricketson wrong don't you anon 7.46 ? Grow up
DeleteIf Fletcher is guilty as you obviously think he is why can't you bring yourself to say the words, even anonymously, "Give the man the fair trial he has been asking for and when you find him guilty throw away the key." You are scared shitless of a proper trial aren't you?
DeleteWhy waste the time and money anon 8.16 aka James Ricketson. Like several others that make comments on this blog I know a lot more about the past of Fletcher than most people do. I for one sleep a bit easier at night knowing he is locked away where he should be- with or without what you personally might describe as a fair trial.
DeleteWhy not get him to agree to a lie detector test (if he is ever released) where he can be questioned about his past sexual experiences with underage girls. I think the answers might just give even you a hint as to why his family will have nothing to do with him. It is because they know his character and they know his history. Let him rot I say
Dear Anonymous 8.34
DeleteYou write:"Like several others that make comments on this blog I know a lot more about the past of Fletcher than most people do."
You know that he raped Yang Dany? How do you know this? And you are so sure in your knowledge that you do not believe Yang Dany when she says she was not raped? You do not believe the medical evidence that she remained a virgin after two hour long rapes?
If you are so sure of your evidence, why not produce it to a court or here on this blog? You will not, you cannot, because you, like so many others, have no interest at all in Mr Fletcher receiving a fair trial.
As far as a 'lie detector test' goes, given Yang Dany's denial of the rape and given the medical evidence that she was not raped I suspect he'd pass with flying colours. If you can organise a lie detector and get the prison authorities to agree for him to be tested, please go for it. I hope that you will apply the same principle to Scott Neeson. Does he have evidence that Mr Fletcher was grooming young girls?
I would like to point out the clear and factual injustice that an organization like APLE represents.
ReplyDeleteAple is a group of private people, whose entire existence depends on getting people convicted of some kind of child sex abuse. They call themselves an NGO which is rather misleading because they have their tentacles injected deep into government officials, the police force and the judiciary. For the "work" they do they receive a lot of money and big powers. I think that anyone can anticipate that they want to keep it that way. Furthermore they are not volunteers. They manage to receive big paychecks every month.
What does those facts mean? It means that they are not maybe or perhaps biased. It means that APLE per definition is biased.
Let me tell you what APLE always does, in every case they dig up. They are always present and active during the first police interview of a child victim who they themselves have identified. APLE does not only hand over evidence to the police, they are constantly present in the police station directing and suggesting. In all districts of Cambodia they are working with their cultivated police officers, who are always the same ones who deals with their cases.
APLE is per definition biased and here is, from my own experiences from several cases, how they misuse their position to try to get convictions:
In all cases they of course try to let the children themselves explain any abuse. If that doesn't lead to anything sexually abusive, they have 3 options to anyway get an incriminating testimony. 1. APLE has already groomed the poor families with a bag of rice and some money. In the interview they will try to bribe the child by promising further help like free education and additional financial help. The potential financial compensation from the suspect is always mentioned, at least to the parents. 2. If nothing of the above has succeeded they will start to threaten the child ( and the family ) In 2 cases I have knowledge of APLE agents threatening the children with the use of a gun by either displaying the gun on the table or telling the child that the policeman has a gun. This they do besides shouting and screaming at the child. 3. The most favorable victims of APLE are poor AND illiterate families. If the families are not bribe-able the are so easy to trick by being told to just put their thump prints on a document which they cannot read or a blank page.
One would think that all the above are useless when it goes to court, but it isn't. Countless foreigners have been convicted in spite of children having stated, that they never has said, what is claimed in the initial interview with the police.
Mr. Ricketson! You are up against the dominant narrative which doesn't allow to be questioned. It is an uphill battle, but your fight for justice is admirable. By the way no one of those commenters on this block, who is attacking you, have come up with a reasonable argument because they are not intelligent enough.
I forgot to mention that there are no valid arguments for denying people the right to a fair trial.
DeleteCorrect. Even if the accused is found, knife in hand, knelt over the body of a person who has been stabbed to death, he or she is entitled to the presumption of innocence. There are good reasons why this presumption is fundamental to the justice system. No matter how overwhelming the evidence might be of a person's guilt, there will always be instances when this evidence is quite simply wrong. This is why it is so important that evidence be tested in a proper court. This applies to all evidence.
DeleteIn this instance, there are two pieces of evidence that point to Mr Fletcher being innocent of the crime of rape.
(1) Yang Dany remained a virgin after the rape
and
(2) Yang Dany denies that any rape took place.
In a proper court of law the prosecution should have the right to present the court with an argument, backed up by expert witnesses if need be, that a woman can be raped twice, brutally, and for an hour each time, and for her hymen to remain intact. Or, that a woman's hymen can grow back.
(2) The prosecution could argue (and should be allowed to argue) that I or Mr Fletcher or some other person had offered Yang Dany inducements of some kind to change her mind about having been raped.
The testing of evidence must apply al ALL evidence if the verdict arrived at is to be a safe one.
The sad thing here is that no one being accused in any of APLEs cases are getting a fair trial, not even those that are guilty because additional false evidence will be fabricated to make it more horrible and sensational. You can cheat some people for some time, but not all the people all the time and I hope that the end is near for APLE.
DeleteYou can think what you like, Ricketson. I'm comfortable with my life. You are asking lots of people lots of questions. How about you answering this question?
ReplyDeleteCan a 15 year old girl give consent to sex? If so, why do you keep qualifying his UK conviction by saying they had consensual sex?
If she can't give consent, then she was raped. As a 15 year old, she was a child.
Ipso facto, David Fletcher is a child rapist. Can't you bring yourself to say that?
It's an easy question. Is David Fletcher a child rapist or not?
Would the same question hold for James McCabe?
DeleteWas Mc Cabe's 15 year old girlfriend able to give her consent when they began their relationship? The fact that she went on to become his wife and mother to hid children tells me that she was not raped and that James Mc Cabe is not a child rapist.
DeleteDear Anonymous 12.56
DeleteYou can call Mr Fletcher a 'child rapist; if you like, for having had consensual sex with a 15 year old girl. In the interests of consistency you can also call James Mc Cabe 'child rapist' if you like.
Even if the 'child rapist' epithet were appropriate for what took place in 1998, what does this have to do with whether or not Mr Fletcher raped Yang Dany in 2009? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't! This is for a properly constituted court to decide. it is not a decision to be made by NGOs who have all been exposed to the same scuttlebutt.
Here is a definition of rape 12:56 "the crime, typically committed by a man, of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will" Did Mr. Fletcher commit this crime? The answer is no, ergo he is not a rapist. Did Mr. Fletcher break age of consent laws in England? The answer is yes, ergo he is a law breaker. The fact that he broke the law 19 years ago is enough for you to want to deprive him of a fair trial now. The bicycle you stole 20 years ago, with your own logic, justifies that you yourself should not get a fair trial today, when you get accused of robbing a bank. Lets just through you in jail, no trial needed.
Delete"...why do you keep qualifying his UK conviction by saying they had consensual sex?
DeleteBecause it was. If it had been forced, it would have been rape. But because it was consensual and underage, it was 'salutatory rape,' which is a different crime. If she had been a prepubescent child, it would have been child rape. But it wasn't. It was statutory rape - consensual sex with a sexually mature girl not yet of legal age,
As much as you want your hysterics and word games to rule the day, the UK court has already ruled against you. Too bad the Cambodian court is not as committed to the law.
Wow . .you guys are talking about 'word games'? Seriously? Here is the plain truth. Whatever way you look at it and however you try to wriggle out of it with semantic, a child of 15 CANNOT GIVE CONSENT. Therefore the sex was not consensual. Therefore it was the rape of a child.
DeleteCome on James. You can say it if you want. You are defending a child rapist.
what ever people may think, the issue is, did David rape the 17 year old girl he was convicted of raping.............the answer is he was not given a fair trial to determine if he is guilty or not.............
ReplyDeleteRegardless of the terminology that anyone chooses to use to describe Mr Fletcher's 1998 offence (illegal sex with a 15 year old girl) he was denied natural justice in 2011 when a trial took place without his knowledge or presence. This is the real issue here.
ReplyDeleteThat most of those on the list I have written above should wish to deny Mr Fletcher a fair trial is unsurprising. The one person who definitely should not be on that list is the Director of LICADHO - Naly Pilorge. It is not just her silence that is the problem. It is the fact that she does not believe that Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial because she has arrived at other 'findings'. She knows Fletcher is guilty. That the head of one of Cambodia's pre-eminent human rights organisations should adopt the position Ms Pilorge has renders her unfit for the position she occupies.
Dear Anonymous 6.48
ReplyDeleteI am defending Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. This right extends to all accused of a crime. This includes those charged with genocide.
Let's bring this a little closer to home, since you seem to be having a little trouble wrapping your head around a very simple and basic proposition.
James McCabe was found guilty of crimes related to drugs. He went to jail. He paid his dues and, if he were ever again to be accused of drug related crimes he would be entitled to the presumption of innocence and should receive a fair trial. If he were denied a fair trial on the grounds of his previous conviction, and I were to defend his right to a fair trial, as I would, would you accuse me of defending a criminal?
Your position on this question is, from a legal point of view, nonsense. It implies that once a person has been found guilty of a crime he or she is automatically guilty of any similar crime they are accused of for the rest of their lives.
I see James is now deleting difficult questions that he doesn't want to answer. So let's try again:
ReplyDeleteGiven it is established in law that Fletcher had sex with a 15 year old child in the UK, and given that it is impossible for that to be called 'consensual sex' because a child cannot give consent, is Fletcher a convicted child rapist or not?
Why can't you bring yourself to say it, James?
Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of his 2011 conviction, have you been spending the last couple of years lobbying on behalf of a man who raped a child?
Yes or No?
Dear Anonymous
ReplyDeleteIt is not easy to continue to respond politely to someone who continues to manipulate language in order to push the barrow you wish to push. Let me try again:
(1) In 1998 Mr Fletcher was charged with and found guilty of 'statutory rape'
(2) 'Statutory rape' and 'rape are two different things - in both law and in accordance with the dictated of common sense that most of us apply in our discourses with each other.
(3) Mr Fletcher was not charged with the 'statutory rape' of Yang Dany. He was charged with 'rape' - a more serious crime because, in law (regardless of what you may think) the question of consent is relevant.
(4) Is James Mc Cabe a 'child rapist' because he had sex with a girl who was not old enough, in low, to give her consent? No, at the very worst he could be charged with 'statutory rape'.
You are free to call Mr Fletcher by whatever name you choose - 'child rapist', pedophile, pervert, sex offender, deviant...the list is a long one... but your attempt to get me, or anyone else, to sign on to your definition is getting tiresome.
You have decided on your own definition and clearly neither a dictionary, the law or common sense is going to induce you to change your mind. Fair enough.
If you have some other point to make, please make it,but please don't waste my time and the time of readers by insisting that others refer to Mr Fletcher as a 'child rapist'.
Mr Ricketson
DeleteI do not understand why you continue to attempt rational dialogue with someone who clearly has no interest in such dialogue but who simply wants to trick you (in a most ham-fisted way) into calling Mr Fletcher a 'child rapist.' Clearly he hates Fletcher and, like a dog with a bone, he is going to keep repeating his 'child rapist' mantra ad nauseum in the hope that he can deflect attention from the key fact that Mr Fletcher has been denied a fair trial.
I know nothing about James McCabe's case. Just out of interest, are you actually accusing him of having sex with a 15 year old, and if so, could you back that up with proof?
ReplyDeleteJames Mc Cabe's wife was either 15 or 16 when he began his relationship with her.
DeleteBy all accounts he is now happily married to this young woman and they have children.
The only relevant to this debate of James Mc Cabe is that it is just as absurd to refer to him as a 'child rapist' as it is to refer to Mr Fletcher as one.
Poor Ricketson is now reduced to deleting posts he doesn't like. Peter Hogan Redux
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous 9.39
ReplyDeleteI have a pretty good idea of who it is beating the 'child rapist' drum. Not a member of Team Neeson but someone else intimately involved in the two year investigation into Mr Fletcher that came up with no evidence of any wrong-doing on his part. He is absolutely convinced that Mr Fletcher is guilty of....something....he is not sure what...and, in the absence of evidence, must fall back on convolutions of the English language to justify his hatred of Fletvher.
Im not trying to defend the guy above, but he has a point. Why is statutory rape somehow seen as more acceptable than normal rape? Surely it should be the other way round? If someone is convicted of statutory rape then you have to accept that rape occurred, rape being sex without consent, either because it was withheld by the victim or legally can't be given by a child.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you accept that rape happened and that the victim was a child, then it's hard to come to any other conclusion that a child was raped, irrespective of what bizarre legal niceties it is wrapped up in.
Not every killing is murder, not every act of illicit sex is rape, not every theft is robbery.
DeleteIn Cambodia having voluntary sex with an underage girl is not 'statutory rape' but 'debauchery,' thus on your logic, old men that have consensual sex with underage kids in Cambodia are not 'child rapists.'
Your problem is that you want you want to deal in hysterics. Forcing oneself on a prepubescent child is infinitely worse than having consensual sex with a sexually mature but underage girl. That former is a child rapist. There is also a categorical difference between having consensual sex with a sexually mature but underage girl and restraining and forcing yourself into a woman, even if she is an adult. The latter is a rapist, the former is some significantly diminished version, if 'rape' at all. If you can't see the difference you've have lost your moral compass in a sea of tears and hysteria.
The bottom line is that EVERYONE accused of a crime is entitled to a fair trail.
DeleteLet me frame this question in a slightly different way:
Let's say, for argument's sake, that a proper trial had been held in 2011. Both the prosecution and the defence had an opportunity to present their evidence and to cross-examine witnesses. If the judges verdict, based on evidence, had been that Mr Fletcher could not be found guilty, would those of you who wish to stick resolutely to the 'child rapist' epithet feel cheated that he had not been punished, a second time, for his 1998 crime?
If Mr Fletcher were, today, to receive a fair trail and found to be not guilty, would you think it fair that he had spent five years in jail for a crime he did not commit?
If Fletcher had been found not guilty in the same seemingly arbitrary way he's been found guilty, they'd all be crying about the corruption of the Cambodian judicial system and how "child rapists" and "pedophiles" are able to buy their way out of a crime. Corruption, the law and process wouldn't be an issue for them then. But as it has worked in their favor this time, they prefer to ignore it and try to change the subject, name-calling, emotive vocab and claims of inside knowledge. Their principles are selective and thus not really principles at all, just the chant of the mob.
Delete"Corruption, the law and process wouldn't be an issue for them then."
DeleteTypo. That should read 'Corruption, the law and process would be an issue for them then.' My mistake.
Dear Anonymous 10.36
ReplyDeleteWhether you like it, or whether I like it, the law makes a distinction between 'rape' and statutory rape.
Broadly speaking, 'rape' occurs when the other party to the sex (usually, but not always, a woman) does not consent to having sex.
'Statutory rape', broadly speaking, refers to sex in which the other party consents to having sex but is not allowed legally to have sex because s/he is under the age of consent.
The law in all countries makes these kinds of distinctions. If you steal an item from a supermarket you are a thief. If you steal $100,000 from a safe you are a thief. If you steal a yacht worth $1million you are a thief. The law does not treat them all the same, however - despite all three being legitimately referred to as 'thieves'.
So, regardless of what terminology you wish to use, and regardless of your own feelings, the law treats 'statutory rape' differently from 'rape'. And even within the 'rape' category there are many subdivisions. A man who takes advantage of a women who is drunk and has sex with her without the woman being in a position to give her consent, is generally known as a 'date rapist' and treated as such. A man who holds a knife to a woman's throat as he rapes her has, in the eyes of the law, committed a more serious crime.
It is up to a judge to decide, as a rule, just how serious the rape is from a legal point of view and what sentence to impose. The judge takes into account a number of factors in making his or her decision. And one of the factors a judge takes into account is the convicted rapists prior criminal record. If, in the case of Mr Fletcher, he were to be found to be guilty on the basis of the evidence before the court, his prior conviction would become relevant in sentencing. Before the trial is held, however, his previous conviction(s) have no bearing on whether or not he is guilty as charged.
I will say it again. James Mc Cabe was found guilty of a crime and did the time (as they say). If he were to be accused of a similar crime again he would be entitled to the presumption of innocence and entitled to a fair trial. There is a school of thought present on this blog that a person's prior convictions are enough to deny that person a fair trial.
Apologies for delay in my response. But I think you all know why I am behind with communications, that is, bloggers with normal retention!
ReplyDeleteThank you blogger for suggesting a polygraph test for me, I think this an excellent idea. If you would arrange for me I would be grateful. So nice to get a sound idea from the village idiot ilk.
Whilst at it, why not invite the Marx Brothers to indulge in the same? Scott Neeson, Steve Morrish, McCabe and APLE.
I would also invite the FCO, but since legal action is being taken against them in the UK, and a few others involved in this facade, they are beginning to see the light. For the purists there was four Marx Brothers originally.
Thanks again for the great idea! I would recommend you bring along a Cambridge Dictionary for correct definitions for your personal use.
David Fletcher
How did I know that suggestion would get right up your nose (if not for the fact we both know you fiddle with little kids Fletcher) There is no disputing that you might have handed a few apples out to the kids on the tip but I also have a feeling I know what the purpose behind it might have been. Have you ever heard of the word grooming Sir. Not sure if you are aware because of the amount of time you have spent behind bars but the Cambridge Dictionary is seldom used these days, Google has taken over,
Deleteif you don't believe me try searching under "Fletcher child rapist" You will get much more information about child abusers there than you ever will from a dictionary. May you rot in hell
7:21 You are clearly a mean sadist and unbelievably stupid on top of it.
DeleteI think that it is just stupid to claim that a real rape, with violence, force, pain, threats and fear is equal to a consented act of sex no matter the ages of people involved. Stupidity is spreading with an alarming rate so I am not really surprised.
ReplyDeleteSo you think 6.23 that it is OK for a 60 year old to ask a 4 year old if it is OK to play "hide the sausage" with her do you ? just because she is not adult enough to know what is going on it appears you think this is OK. Yes, you are right that stupidity is spreading at an alarming rate and you appear to be leading the charge
DeleteYou have to have a sick mind to consider an old man raping a 4-year-old to be on par with statutory rape, ie having sex with a willing, sexually mature, underage partner. If you can't see the difference between those two immoral acts, you suffer a severe and potentially dangerous moral deficiency, and have no business anywhere near the NGO or law enforcement communities, or even near children.
DeleteDear Anonymous 7.21, 7.27 & 10.48
DeleteI suspect that you are one and the same person. What on earth are you talking about? Are you suggesting that Mr Fletcher raped a 4 year old?
Typical of the cheap slight if hand the NGO crowd likes to play to keep the hysteria high and the funds flowing. A page out of their 'stop thinking & start agreeing' handbook. In one breath they are soliciting funds from naive donors with lurid stories of the rape of prepubescent children..."some as young as 4 years old," they like to tack on to whatever sleazy sex story they just croaked out. Then they take those funds to work with the police in anti-prostitution stings, busting hookers and sending them to rape camps like Prey Speu, but skimming off a 'victims' for their NGO 'rehab program,' where they are trained to be factory workers (and proper Christian women) and to work as props in the next NGO funding campaign.
DeleteHere we have it again, this greedy NGO sort, knowing he's cornered on the Fetcher debate, knowing the law correctly distinguishes child rape from statutory rape, his only hope is to get people to 'stop thinking & start agreeing,' so he pulls some sick sexual fantasy of his involving 4-year-olds and tosses it out like that one-trick woman on the Simpsons crying "WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!"
No I am not suggesting at all that Fletcher raped a 4 year old (although it would not surprise me if it had done)
DeleteJust read the comment of anon 6.23 "I think that it is just stupid to claim that a real rape, with violence, force, pain, threats and fear is equal to a consented act of sex NO MATTER THE AGES OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED". I am pointing out that this statement is nonsense and quoting an example of a 60 year old having so called consensual sex with a 4 year old which according to the statement made by anon 6.23 would be quite OK. Of course the ages of the people involved is of importance thus making his statement irrelevant to any argument.
What does any connection between anon 7.21, 7.28 and 10.48 have to do with anything
Anonymous 1.24
DeleteYou have lost me. I am not sure what the point is you are trying to make! Please explain, clearly, with no reference to stupid hypothetical situations - such as consensual sex with a 4 year old.
Anon used the phrase "NO MATTER THE AGES OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED" hence my statement where ANY AGE could be a child of 4 and a man of 60, thus making his comment irrelevant to any logical discussion
DeleteI am 6:23 and my statement" NO MATTER THE AGES OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED" still stands. Where did you read that I said that sex with a 4 year old is ok? I didn't say that and don't mean that. If you cant see that a full blown real rape of a 4 year old, with penetration, horrible pain and internal bleeding that, without hospitalization, would likely kill that child, is completely different from her consenting to play with this 60 year old mans penis, you are irrelevant to any logical discussion of this subject. Your paranoia clearly prevents you to see clearly.
DeleteThere are leaders and followers in life. Followers are those who are not intelligent enough to learn or understand the facts for themselves. They just hear or read the lies, rumors or innuendo spread by others and ignorantly believe what they hear. Mr. Ricketson obtained court documents to learn for himself what transpired in the kangaroo court for Mr. Fletcher. Many of those who post on this blog are easily identified to be in the ignorant follower class. They should spend the time they waste posting on this blog in trying to learn for themselves the truth about Mr. Fletcher's false imprisonment.
ReplyDeleteAs for the comment of anon 10.48, firstly you will be happy to know I have no business with the NGO or law enforcement communities but certainly have an interest in the safety of children and the desire to see that those who sexually abuse them are punished.
ReplyDeleteIn many countries governments have set the age of consent at 16 years of age which seems like quite a reasonable limit to me. It is a published fact that many young girls these days reach sexual maturity well under the age of 16 so where exactly are you going to set the age that you think it is permissible for an almost 50 year old (as Fletcher was) to be able to have sex with a child and think it is OK ? 15, 14, 13, 12. At the end of the day he had sex with a child who was not considered mature enough to be able to responsibly consent to sex. I personally think you must be a very sick man to condone this sort of child abuse and defend a convicted child rapist (statutory or otherwise)
Dear Anonymous 1.41
DeleteI too have an interest int he safety of children and believe that men who use their power, their money, their positions of authority to sexually exploit children should be punished.
The punishment should fit the crime and it is up to the courts in various countries to apply both their laws and common practices to determining what punishment fits the crime.
Mr Fletcher was found guilty of statutory rape of a 15 year old girl.The judge took all the circumstances available to the court into account (including the fact that she was a consenting partner) and gave Mr Fletcher a custodial sentence. This is how the law is supposed to work.
As to what age a girl can give her consent, this is a complex question. 25% of 14 year old girls in the UK have had sexual intercourse. Regardless of the law, this is a fact. If a 14 year old girl has sex with a 15 year old boy I suspect that the law is, for the most part, not too much concerned - as long as it is consensual. The same probably applies if the boy is in fact a young man of 17. If the young man is 18, 19, it becomes problematic - in my view. If the man is 28 and having sex with a 14 year old it is even more problematic, especially if the man is in a position of authority - a teacher, say.
A 50 year old man having sex with a 14 year old (or a 15 year old) is wrong in my view.
As for Mr Fletcher's 15 year old sexual partner (a few days shot of 16) I cannot comment on her ability to make a decision, or on her maturity. It seems that the judge took both of these into account. As you will be aware, there can be very innocent 15 year olds and very experienced 15 year olds. I have done a good deal of taxi driving back into Sydney can can assure you that I have had plenty of 14 and 15 year old girls in the can who were much more mature and much more experienced than many Cambodian women I have met in their mid to late 20s.
That you think I must be a very sick man to "condone this sort of child abuse" is nonsense. I have done nothing else here on this blog but to advocate Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. He has received NO trial. If he is found guilty of rape on the basis of evidence presented to the court he deserves to be in jail.
My "condone" comment was made to anon 10.48, was that also you posting as Anon James ?
DeleteNo! Why on earth would I make a comment along the lines made by Anonymous 10.48?
ReplyDelete"In many countries governments have set the age of consent at 16 years of age which seems like quite a reasonable limit to me. It is a published fact that many young girls these days reach sexual maturity well under the age of 16 so where exactly are you going to set the age that you think it is permissible for an almost 50 year old (as Fletcher was) to be able to have sex with a child and think it is OK ?"
ReplyDeleteThere is no age limit for people who have passed age of consent to have sex with other people who are passed age of consent, whether 16 or 80. So that is a moot point.
As for what should be the lower age limit for age of consent, 16 or 18 seems about right. Still, that does not put sex with a 4 year old in the same category with sex with a sexually mature consent partner, even if that partner is under legal age. Nor does it put debauchery (eg sex with a consenting 15 year old) in the same category as forcible rape, even it it the forcibke rape of an adult. To argue, as you seem to be, that sex with a 4 year old is some kind of statutory rape is just sick.
I have read a number of these blogs and must admit to some confusion. The focus of the blog alleges to be the advocation of a fair hearing for Fletcher. Seems reasonable. What does not seem reasonable is why the constant attacks on Mccabe and others whom clearly have no involvement in the events surrounding Fletcher. As an aside I have met him a while ago and his wife was 18 not 15. Likewise Neeson, according to every thing you have written had no involvement in the Fletcher investigation. A throwaway comment to a journalist does not constitute taking part and you have provided no evidence of any kind that he had any further part. As an outsider looking in I think you need to maintain focus and stop fucking people over because someone clearly has a personal axe to grind. Personally, if I was one of these people I would not sue you but I sure as hell would be knocking on your door for a chat.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous 163
DeleteIt is a pity you have made this comment here, where few will read it. Perhaps you could also make it on the current discussion thread so it is more widely disseminated. In any event I will pass on what you have said re James Mc Cabe's wife.
If you read more than a few blog entries you will see that whilst I started out primarily concerned with Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial, it has grown into something else. This is because there is a qute a cast of characters who have played a role (major or minor) in Mr Fletcher's incarceration.
As for Scott Neeson, I had already crossed swords with Scott a few years ago when I discovered that he refused to return to their parents, when asked, two young girls in CCF care. Scott insisted that the parents had, with a contract, signed away their rights as parents until the girls were 18. How and why I got caught up in this is a long story - all of it documented on the following blog:
http://cambodianchildrensfund.blogspot.com
So, I had an interest in Scott Neeson and CCF long before I ever met Mr Fletcher. Then, when I found out that he had played a pivotal role in the witch hunt for Mr Fletcher, I became curious and wanted to know more. Now I know a lot more - much, but not all, of it documented here in previous blog entries.
A comment that defames a man is not throwaway, incidentally - especially not in a Cambodian context; especially not when what Neeson says to Drummond comes to pass a week later with Mr Fletcher's arrest.
Thanks for the clarification re James Mc Cabe's wife.The information that she was 15 or 16 at the time she started her relationship with Mc Cabe comes from Alan Lemon.
For me, personally, this is a red herring. If he is happily married to her and has kids with her I do not think that the age she was when they met is all that relevant. It only became relevant when Team Neeson made such a song and dance about Mr Fletcher being a 'child rapist'.
I have always been open to have a chat. I am still open to have a chat. I have made this clear many times. No-one wants to take me up on the offer!