Prominent, controversial, feminist activist Caroline Farrow has announced on Twitter (archive) that she has been arrested, her electronic devices seized and she has been questioned over posts on Kiwifarms. She denies guilt and so far has not been charged. This follows on from my article a couple of weeks ago in which MHN drew an inference that the British National Crime Agency was behind the hack of Kiwifarms and multiple suspects would be interviewed from a list based on the database. Given police have not denied it and multiple people are complaining on Twitter about being arrested and / or questioned, I am pretty confident in the story. Now might be a good time for MHN to remind readers about the UK British concept of joint enterprise.
Caroline Farrow credibly claims to have been arrested over alleged Kiwifarms posts. Whilst denying posting is a defence, responding to police questions about malicious online communicationa with, “women don’t have a penis” may not be the wisest response.
Your author is not going to belabour the, “MHN told you so”, point. Instead, it is worth directing readers to British law on joint enterprise. Joint enterprise is a UK law where people engaging in a common enterprise are liable in criminal law for all actions of the entire group. The doctrine originated from the English case of R v Swindall and Osborne (1846) in which two cart drivers had a race. A bystander was killed and both blamed the other. The court held it did not matter who killed the bystander, they were both criminally liable for deciding on the joint enterprise of a cart race.
In the case of Gnango, R. v [2011] UKSC 59 a young gang member named Armel Gnango became involved in a shootout. His opponent accidentally shot and killed a woman called, Magda Pniewska. Gnango was convicted of the murder even though he did not fire the shot. When the appeals over this reached the UK Supreme Court, the court asked the following question –
“1. Permission to appeal was granted in this case in order to enable this Court to consider the following point of law, certified by the Court of Appeal as being of general public importance: “If (1) D1 and D2 voluntarily engage in fighting each other, each intending to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to the other and each foreseeing that the other has the reciprocal intention, and if (2) D1 mistakenly kills V in the course of the fight, in what circumstances, if any, is D2 guilty of the offence of murdering V?”
The court had an answer:
“65. For these reasons we would answer the certified question in the affirmative, allow this appeal and restore the respondent’s conviction for murder.”
In Britain, you can commit murder by being shot at by someone intending to kill you. Some people argue that the law is harsh and a number of NGOs and charities have sought reform. For example, Justice Gap Magazine said this in an article, “Half of women convicted under joint enterprise not even present a scene” (archive).
It is important to remember that Caroline Farrow has not been convicted and denies the posts she is accused of. She is innocent until proven guilty and has not yet been convicted with any crime.
Even so, the reason this should terrify any contributor to Kiwifarms is that, well, Kiwifarms does a lot of crimes and despite their denials, it is obvious from the posts on Kiwifarms itself and from the extensive media coverage that they do so. It seems to me arguable that anyone joining is participating in a joint enterprise of gang-stalking and terrorism, putting people in fear of violence as well as sexual assault.
It is therefore arguable that such individuals would be guilty of every crime foreseeably committed by Kiwifarms members from the moment they joined, even if they did not know about the specific act until afterwards. That could include Brenton Tarrant’s 51 terrorist murders and certainly the glorification of same – child pornography, revenge porn or encouraging vulnerable people to sex crimes (leading to life on the sex offenders register) – murder threats to public institutions. It will be interesting to see who is charged and what they are charged with.
Remember – someone hacked Kiwifarms. British police do not deny hacking Kiwifarms and it would be permissible for them to do so under UK law by giving themselves a Criminal Conduct Authorisation under s29B Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The whole thing feels like when a Darknet market is seized. Police start quietly questioning and arresting people whilst gossip slowly spreads online. Kiwis have been in denial – your author wonders if this will change their mind.
A suspicion here at MHN is that police will interview over minor offences, because once they have an admission or proof of participation the suspect may well be in the frame for everything Kiwifarms has ever done since the suspect joined. This means that any proven member of Kiwifarms could, depending on their posts, theoretically be extradited to Britain or New Zealand and charged with paedophilia, sex crimes and conspiracy to glorifying terrorism and mass murder.
“You know how we interviewed you for malicious communications and you admitted to a couple of posts? We’re charging you with conspiracy to 51 murders, glorification of terrorism, distribution of child pornography, stalking with fear of violence and grooming. Oh yeah, and malicious communications.”
Mind how you go Kiwis.
Samuel Collingwood Smith: “It seems to me arguable that anyone joining is participating in a joint enterprise of gang-stalking and terrorism, putting people in fear of violence as well as sexual assault.”
Samuel Collingwood Smith: “Mind how you go Kiwis.”
Indeed. That ‘McVicar’ moment. The tinkling of milk bottles on the door step at dawn. Front and back doors smashed in. Quick hello to Mr Glock or a semi before being forced into a van.
Same goes for ‘Team Outlaw’. Evidence of their joint enterprises in hand.
Btw, should anyone not be aware of how seriously the courts are dealing with the crimes of stalking and malicious communications, Alex Belfield is now serving 5 years and six months at the big house for stalking and terrorising people.
Wayne Couzens’ colleagues are to be sentenced on 2nd November with regard to their communications and discussions about rape, domestic abuse and violence.
Unlike other London Met police known to be hiding their own and colleagues’ similar vile thoughts and predictions in an unrelated case, none of Wayne Couzens’ colleagues went so far as to discuss the death or killing of the individuals or groups whom they preyed on. Therefore the sentencing of Couzens’ colleagues is of some considerable interest.
Had certain police within London Met been sacked and put before the beak for similar offences some six years ago, Wayne Couzens and his colleagues would perhaps have thought twice before committing their thoughts to WhatsApp, email, or anywhere else which keeps eternal records of their depravity and corruption in writing.
Hat tip to all police who are genuinely committed to tracking down stalkers and fantasists who cause immeasurable harm.
All police who have ignored complaints of gang-stalking on Kiwi Farms or anywhere else on the web should be sacked. They are a major part of the problem. They sit back because they are lazy. Allowing lives and livelihoods to be lost. It being proven in more than one instance police have advised a victim of stalking to ‘meet up’ with their attacker to ‘air their differences’. It being known the victim had received death threats. Ffs.
Lawyers and police believe gang-stalkers who publish and distribute graphic images inferring people will be shot in their beds or burned alive, should expect heavy sentences.
It is noted that whilst Alex Belfield spent ten to twelve years stalking his victims, he does not appear to have been so dangerous as to threaten to set fire to any of them. Nor did he threaten to use firearms and leave them lying in pools of blood.
Yet, Belfield received a five years six months sentence, which is already being used as a marker by victims of single stalkers and gang-stalkers. Whilst nobody can be left in doubt after his court case that he is an extremely dangerous individual who attracted some warped people into his cult to assist him in harassing people, Belfield’s vile behaviour is considered by other victims of single stalkers and gang-stalkers to have been relatively moderate by comparison. This is not to say they do not believe he should have been given a longer sentence. Some of his victims will never fully recover from the harm he and his cult have done to them.
Belfield’s sentence has now made it almost impossible to guess how long the sentences could be for gang-stalkers who distribute graphic images around social media to more fully illustrate their gang’s previous direct threats to put bullets into people, and to set fire to people and their homes.
The above being only a small sample of the evil which the police have allowed to pervade social media.
The person mentioned in the above article is hitherto unknown to me. I had a look at a short video where she gave an interview and it seemed she had been accused by a trans activist. I try to be a live and let live old lass but I am perhaps a little gender critical. I want there to be safe spaces for women (and for men) and for women’s (and men’s)* sports to be gender appropriate. I’m not extreme. I don’t think trans women are trying to take over the world. For all I know a trans woman could have been in some public ladies’ loos at the same time as me. I did think in this case the police had maybe taken a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
That said, there have been things said on social media that warrant inspection.
* I’m not against people with CAIS/AIS taking part in women’s sports.
I wonder does the lady mentioned in the article realise that Kiwi Farms has dodgy connections. She seems to be a very straight-laced Catholic. She’s married to a Catholic priest. I’ve only come across something like that before once and that was the case of a married Anglican vicar and his wife and children who all decided to become Catholics and he became a Catholic priest. A lady I used to know (sadly died at the beginning of quarantine but I don’t know if it was connected with Quarantine) was annoyed that married Anglican vicars were allowed to become Catholic priests whereas her brother who was a Catholic priest but later decided he wanted to marry someone had to give up his ministry. She thought it should be a consistent rule for all. Sorry I’ve got a bit off topic.
I’ve never appreciated Jeremy Vine. I prefer BBC presenters to sit still and pretend to be unbiased. Jeremy wriggles around like a child with worms who won’t eat his worm-cake, and his pained face always seems to be crying out for laxatives.
However, few would not put their dislike of him aside and feel some sympathy towards him. It is very clear that he and his family and colleagues have suffered immensely from being gang-stalked by Alex Belfield and his mob. Victims and witnesses to Sonia Poulton and Team Outlaw’s dangerous behaviour during the past ten years will be familiar with the entire script, and then some.
We would expect that due to the high profiles of Jeremy Vine and Alex Belfield and msm reports, some police may have learned some lessons from Notts police regarding how to deal with stalkers and those who organise gang-stalking. First lesson for police would be to learn to act in accordance with their oath at all times. Acting ‘without favour’ is crucial. They should put aside their own prejudice, and any prejudice derived from reading false notes written by prejudiced, bent police.
It should be noted some bent police may still try to hide evidence of stalking and malicious communications when it looks too much like hard work for them to deal with, or in cases where it is obvious they have previously f*cked up, lied and pcj in collusion with false allegators.
It is also noted that detective teams involved in R v Belfield do not appear at any time to have been bribed with ‘television work’ in the event of successful prosecutions. Not even a hint of this. Whereas in other cases…
The aftermath of R v Belfield is turning into rather a ‘Come on down, and see what you could have won’ moment for the London Met police and provincial police who are proven to have hidden vital evidence from the cps. Had police not hidden witness and victim evidence, and arrested Team Outlaw for witness intimidation; making false allegations about their victims to police; threatening to shoot and set fire to victims; blackmail; malicious communications via social media, msm; direct threats to private email addresses and home addresses; doxxing; gang-stalking; pcj; and lying about being stalked and harassed in order to prevent their own arrests, the London Met police would have won the accolade of bringing the ‘most dangerous and prolific’ stalkers to justice. (In the highly unlikely event of any disbelief of the aforesaid, enquiries should be made to London Met police for ultimate proof. No need to rely on witness and victim statements. The London Met police didn’t either. To their shame. Until they were forced to. The abuse of power being so strong in London Met police they are proven to have continued to victim-blame and make direct threats and threats by proxy to victims after their clearance of all wrongdoing. Which rather puts Wayne Couzens’ colleagues in the shade. It is impossible to guess what types of crimes these savages may go on to commit in the future if they are not taken out of society and given a chance to be ‘rehabilitated’. By prisoners. Who understand how police minds work. The line being so fine…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rC2VJ8oO2Q