I have seen no bona fide proof that I have lied or coached my daughter, nor do I believe any exists.

“I have seen no bona fide proof that I have lied or coached my daughter, nor do I believe any exists, I would be very happy to be shown any.

I am assisting Lord Wall by taking up the remedy that he offered me by dealing with him privately.

I am totally to blame for this travesty by not managing my private family affairs without approaching the State for help.

If I realised that the State and councils were a corporation like any other business and profit and loss were their priority, I would never have gone into a contract with them in the first place.

Obviously a lot of damage needs untangling and to have the opportunity to assist the President in untangling this mess is one I am going to grab with both hands.

I am very lucky in that I have a very clear conscience and am happy and very settled in my own skin. I feel empowered and know that things happen for a reason. Man plans and God laughs.

All the bona fide proof states that I am an excellent mother, not only to my eldest daughter, but also to my 3 month old baby.

My daughter has lived through trauma, of which there is bona fide proof, and as her mother, it is my duty to protect my young. The State are not fit for the purpose of protecting children and I am the only person that can give my daughter the love and protection that she needs, which they have even agreed.

Hopefully when justice is done in my case, which I feel will continue in the criminal courts, it will hopefully open the door for the thousands of other cases that have gone drastically wrong.”

Kind regards to all

Vicky Haigh


About Sabine Kurjo McNeill

I'm a mathematician and system analyst formerly at CERN in Geneva and became an event organiser, software designer, independent web publisher and online promoter of Open Justice. My most significant scientific contribution is www.smartknowledge.space
This entry was posted in Doncaster, Family Courts, Mum & Daughter, News, Paedophiles, Secrecy, Sexual abuse, Social Services and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

120 Responses to I have seen no bona fide proof that I have lied or coached my daughter, nor do I believe any exists.

  1. Sandy says:

    “I have seen no bona fide proof that I have lied or coached my daughter, nor do I believe any exists, I would be very happy to be shown any.

    You don’t sound very sure

  2. Anonymous says:

    “You don’t sound very sure” What do you mean by this sentence Sand?

  3. R.D. says:

    “You don’t sound very sure” What exactly do you mean by Sandy?

  4. Sandy says:

    It isn’t exactly convincing; ‘bona fide proof’ ‘nor do I believe any exists’

  5. Sandy says:

    Three High Court judges probably imagined it

  6. ANON says:

    We still to know why Liz Watson was imprisoned when it was Sabine who posted information on her website ?

    Did she or John Hemming have any evidence that would have changed the outcome for her and did they bother to turn up at her hearing or forward any evidence they may have to the courts ?

    These questions need answering !

  7. Jimmy says:

    Do you have a solicitor?

    Have you considered counselling?

  8. Jimmy says:

    Actually that sounds like a really bad idea.

  9. R.D. says:

    It’s Bona Fida Sandy, and you are not making sense of a very serious matter. @nd Jimmy are you for or against, or just playing at being silly?

    • Jimmy says:

      I’m sure it’s bona fide but it’s still a bad idea to ventilate this on the internet. This is a distressing and acrimonious family dispute, not a public entertainment. I assure you I am entirely serious. I think this unfortunate woman needs competent legal advice rather than mad bloggers and politicians with axes to grind. She probably needs to talk to someone trustworthy, rather than internet warriors offering to hold her coat while she gets beaten up again for their amusement.

      • Betty says:

        Well said, Im sorry but authorities would not place any child in danger placing her with her father, especially with Baby P and Victoria Climbie, the idea that there is corruption is just crazy. This woman needs urgent medical help.

  10. R.D. says:

    bona fide is as bona fida :0

  11. annie says:

    Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy VH refuses to publicly answer for herself rather than via any third party why she keeps chosing EW over and above top draw legal advice. Before I read your post, I had posted on another part of this site, the very same point you make.

    I dislike any anonymous person denouncing your comments, and without a name, their comments hold no value.

    I am elated someone else is sharing the good news Vicky Haigh needs a solicitor or….top drawer barrister for sure.

    My reservation remains this about this entire sad story. Any person intent on seeing having their child back in their custody does not behave in the manner VH has in deploying non legals to write disrespectful rants to President of Family Courts demanding compensation, but commands respect and the law via appropriate representation via Legal Aid or privately.
    VH chose neither and she loses a great deal of respect from many via her choice and behaviour and has served no favours, to date.

    Please continue to talk sense VH needs to listen to if only from a man, cause she clearly will not listen to me.

    • Jimmy says:

      I think it was Einstein who said insanity was repeating he same behaviour and expecting a different result. She’s done a truly dreadful thing and she needs to find a way to walk it back. That means ignoring the nutters on the internet encouraging her to double down or telling her that the courts don’t really exist. It means taking proper advice even when they tell her things she doesn’t want to hear. Honest people will do that. Carrying on like this will guarantee she never sees her daughter again.

    • Anonymous says:

      Annie, I came late to this but organised a top solicitor to phone her privately 3 weeks ago before the August 15 hearing. I don’t know what was said but I gather she did not use his services.

  12. I do not care what anybody thinks of my comment here. In my opinion there is a DEMONIC STRUCTURE that is using its POWER to break down the structure of FAMILY LIFE. CURRENTLY LIVING under this OBSCENITY I state that there can no other explanation for this CORRUPTION and ABUSE of so many DECENT FAMILIES by a CORRUPT social service system and its other EVIL supporter profiteering GUARDIANS from CAFCASS. I CHALLENGE ANY of the DUO that I have mentioned to take me to court. IN MY CASE I will destroy you LIARS that you are.

    • Anon says:

      Watch this Phil looks like there is far more going on than meets the eye.

      Brian Gerrish – Child Stealing by the State ( 1 hour Talk )

      • Dear ANON, thank you so much for letting me see this video. Please know that what I wrote was spontaneous but it seems that there other people who are MORE aware of and are better expressing what I think. I have been ill and did not see your post to me earlier. Thanks again.

  13. annie says:

    Either VH is exceptionally niaive, exceptionally arrogant or the 3 independent Judges’ findings are indeed correct. Because anyone who was fighting for justice based on the truth, would have sought to have thrown the “legal” book at the Judges via an expert legal defense team and would not have adopted the high risk strategy of deploying EW.

    The only explanation I can fathom why a professional legal defense was not used would be because no-one would throw “good money after bad” eg if the person knew they had faked the allegations, they were never going to “throw thousands of pounds of their own money defending a game of malicious pursuit”.

    If as 3 Judges have stated, there is no substantive evidence to support VH’s position, and that she had lied, then one could see the endless Court processes were used by a vexatious litigant using the system to prolong the agony of a sustained highly damaging slur on one’s reputation.

    It is true to say systems are abused by many a deeply disturbed vindictive ex partner….and if one looks up the meaning of psychopath, these are people capable of using their hypnotic charm and carry out evil acts without any ability to empathise.

    Court, police and social services systems are a vindictive ex’s dream to exact punishment through the evil repetition of lies against their ex partner. And it’s time these authorities stopped wasting millions of pounds investigating malicious liars,

    It’s time our Courts put those who have been found to have lied under oath….in jail. Then people would think twice before invoking system abuse.

    If the abuse did take place, no doubt when the child reaches 16, she can instruct her own legal team.

    But one thing is clear, someone has lied, and one of those parent’s are culpable for causing this disgraceful and horrendous mess in their young daughters life and that is inexcusable.

    Perhaps one day, when the child is an adult, she may publicly vindicate the parent who has put her best interests first and who never did her any harm and end all doubt.

    • Lisa says:

      Believe me when i say that the little girl involved will probably have nothing to do with Vicky when she is older. You have read the situation perfectly and In my opinion the girl has had a lucky escape and unfortunately not so for the Father, Vicky leaves a trail of destruction and would do ANYTHING to get what she wants, there’s no doubt in my mind that the Judges got this one spot on.

    • Anon says:

      It would appear that those of you who are so happy to rely on the “word” of three judges who have decided in their “wisdom” that Vicky has lied, have probably never been in a Family Court.

      If you had you would know that Family Court Judges accept “hearsay” evidence, and frequently make decisions which fly in the face of all common sense. Their decisions are not based on the principle of “beyond reasonable doubt”, but merely their view of the balance of probabilities. They can be and frequently are, plain wrong.

      Try therefore to retain an open mind unless and until you have enough facts to make up your own minds and in the meantime, do some research and find out for yourselves how the Family Courts really work. I did and it’s a shock!

  14. Lisa says:

    Vicky, tell them about the affair with Married Trainer Willy McKay and tell everyone how you thought you had it all sewn up so you thought it would be a good idea to ring his wife and tell her, tell them how (not for the first time) you and your belongings were unceremoniously dumped on the street. Tell them how you asked your daughters’ riding instructor to tell the authorities your daughter was ‘sore’ and how you asked her to say that your Daughter had told her it was because of Daddy, she refused to collude in your pack of lies didn’t she? Tell everyone who the titled (married) gentlemen is who paid for your 40th birthday party at the Crown Hotel in Bawtry and what his connection is with Parliament !!!! Surely none of these good people taken in by you will know the real Vicky Haigh.
    Think very carefully people before you go into bat on this one, I know Vicky from when we were teenagers and she’s never wronged me in any way but I know exactly who she is and what she is, probably the most socially ambitious gold digger I ever knew (of course – in my opinion) and it comes as no surprise to me that Vicky’s 15 minutes of fame didn’t work out the way she planned. I feel so sorry for the poor guy accused of being a paedophile, I just wish that he’d asked around the racing crowd before he got involved, Vicky is a standing joke with them, they all know who she is and steer well clear!
    PS what about the tabloid slur you did on a Channel 4 racing presenter and the affair you had with him ‘a ride for a ride’ remember that line Vicky?

    • Lisa says:

      @Anonymous, Vicky did a huge kiss and tell a few years ago, I can’t remember the tabloid that ran it but there must be archive somewhere. Vicky had been friendly with the Channel 4 presenters and team (I wont go into too much detail here on the exact details of that) and she did a huge ‘expose’ on the so called corrupt nature of Racing, it was rubbished and dismissed by all who knew her but obviously the general public didn’t know it was nonsense. She posed quite provocatively in racing gear and the general theme was that as a female Jockey (look at her height, seriously how many trainers could use her anyway she was too heavy!) you were expected to give ‘a ride for a ride’ , it’s her phrase and her words and one which has haunted her with the Racing fraternity, It is my belief she was paid for the story and she loved the attention, she had been conducting a ‘relationship’ with a Channel 4 racing presenter and there was an axe to grind, one of many axes Vicky has had to grind! The sad thing is that she only has herself to blame for the scandals and the grief that’s befallen her over the years.

    • mary0017 says:

      Lisa, You sound as though you know her well…good for you for just being honest !!

  15. David says:

    This filthy cunt should be doing Ten years minimum!! Look how quick the MP’s and assholes run to a lying woman’s defense. For every one man like her ex there are a thousand we don;t know about. It is time a mandatory 10 year minimum is handed out for any woman lying about rape or abuse. May you rot in hell you foul bitch.

  16. David says:

    This story proves one thing, those who shout “Pedophile” at every opportunity usually ARE one or are false accusers.

  17. annie says:

    Thankyou Lisa. But you know how I am able to make such an accurate appraisal. Because my vindictive ex husband did exactly the same to me as has happened to David Tune. The allegations against me were that my son wasn’t autistic, but that I made him act “that way”.

    My ex used the police, the courts and social services to punish me for leaving him. I left him because of his intolerable control (not for another man, and I am still on my own today after the abuse I suffered from him I can never trust another man again).

    My ex had the children taken from my care based on nothing but the most sickening lies and I can tell you I knew if I didn’t put up a strong legal case and fight to get them back, I would curl up and die with the grief and pain my evil vindictive ex caused me.

    I have suffered enormous financial loss by securing a top legal team to expertly challenge the “lies” and needless to say, he was found out to have lied and hoodwinked the courts, police, social services using his hypnotic cunning charm.

    I have my children back and my son, who remembers the trauma my ex put him through eg taking him away for 3 years not letting him see me, NEVER wants to see his father again and hates him.
    My daughter was too young to remember so does see her dad.

    But you are right to say, VH’s daughter will likely never want to see her again, because my son hasn’t seen his father again because father had tried to destroy our loving relationship.

    I had great doubt VH when she refused buy in legal representation. I would have lived in mudhut and paid every last penny to get my children back, if they were taken away based on lies. And this is were I became suspicious. My case cost over £100k in total and I will be paying for it until the day I fall into my (early) grave.

    I was made to pay, just like David Tune and trust when I say, I do understand what it’s like to live with the most evil horrific lies spread about you all over paperwork everywhere. At least his name is cleared but I think the Judge should have set an example of someone like VH and jailed them for lying on oath. If we are to believe the Judge’s findings, then he really should have sent her to jailfor perverting the course of justice.

    You clearly know VH personally and it’s interesting to read your account of her.

    • Lisa says:

      Annie, I am very very sad to hear what you have been through, it’s clear that you have a deep love for your Son and I am extremely sympathetic to your plight, I cannot begin to imagine the hurt and pain you have been through. Vicky did have the financial means to take a top legal team in but as always she relies on charm and guile to get what she wants, she gambled and lost and you’re right to say that you should be prepared to go to the ends of the earth for your child, I would do the same. I too am left wondering how she managed to walk away from this one, our nickname for her used to be ‘sticky Vicky’ but I guess Teflon would be more appropriate. I hope you prosper in life , you deserve some peace, I can’t think of anything more frightening than over zealous petty officials wielding power and reading these blogs tells me there are many cases to answer, it just sickens me to see people taken in by Vicky thinking that she is a genuine cause. Have a happy life Annie you deserve it.

  18. steve says:

    Mens groups MUST push for a public inquiry as to how and why this woman is not being criminally prosecuted and doing Prison time. She should be doing TEN YEARS! It makes me sick when I see so many women making false allegations and getting away with it.

    • annie says:

      Both men and women should push for a public enquiry to ask why a 3rd Judge found VH to have lied but not held her accountable for lying on oath.

      This is a very serious matter not just for the family involved, but has wider public interest for abuse of the public purse to fund a vendetta which a full costing should be done on this entire case eg social services costs, police costs, judges costs, legal costs by other party etc.

      I would like to see a full costing for this case and the Judge, if as he believes VH lied and spread scandalous allegations, he should bac up his words by way of action, and take action against VH for the scandalous abuse of public funds.

      There is something wrong with the Judge’s findings. He is clear he believes she has lied, but appears let her “off the hook”. THIS JUDGE TELLS THE WORLD IT’S OK TO LIE AND GET AWAY WITH IT!!! Now that is scandalous.

      On that note the public should write to Sir Nicholas Wall and ask if VH is guilty of lying and spreading scandalous allegations to the detriment of both her daughter and the father, why isn’t she facing a jail sentence?

      Put it into ridiculous perspective. A looter who took a t-shirt was jailed for 20 months. The cost of that T-shirt could be no more than say £30. If the Judge is right about his assessment of VH, then it appears hundreds of thousands of pounds has been looted from the taxpayer at the behest this vindictive woman, and for that, an example should be made of her and she should be put behind bars.

      And just as the rioters received strong sentences, so should strong sentencing commence with those who deceive the public purse with false malicious allegations sending a strong message to all men and woman considering making up false vindictive allegations against an ex partner.

  19. Anon says:

    It would appear that those of you who are so happy to rely on the “word” of three judges who have decided in their “wisdom” that Vicky has lied, have probably never been in a Family Court.

    If you had you would know that Family Court Judges accept “hearsay” evidence,and all manner of testimony which would not be accepted in other civil or criminal courts.

    They frequently make decisions which fly in the face of all common sense. Their decisions are not based on the principle of “beyond reasonable doubt”, but merely their view of the balance of probabilities. They can be and frequently are, plain wrong.

    Try therefore to retain an open mind unless and until you have enough facts to make up your own minds and in the meantime, do some research and find out for yourselves how the Family Courts really work. I did and it’s a shock!

    • annie says:

      What a high-handed attitude you have assuming those us posting on this particular matter have not been in a family court.

      If you had taken the trouble to read the above posts properly, you would see people like myself have written in given EXACTLY our personal experience in the family courts.

      I suggest you start at the top of this thread, and read them all before you post in such a scornful tone. It is actually because of my experience with the family courts I able to comment.

      Have you been in a family court and if you have how much did you spend? Were you successful? and how many years were you battling?

  20. annie says:

    here here @ genuinely loving mum.

    Has anyone noted Sabine writes her blog has been suspended? Good. It should be removed never mind suspended.

  21. annie says:

    Why don’t you VH provide bone fide proof you are not a liar and pay to fly in private lie detector operator with his equipment from the States and take lie detector in the presence of your solicitors, and use it’s findings in the Courts?

    This arguably one of the best pieces of evidence you could produce in a Court where findings are based on probability. Put your money where your mouth is VH.

    • Jimmy says:

      Actually it’s a terrible piece of evidence. About as reliable as the ducking stool in witch trials. No English Court will take any notice of it. Despite the impression you may get on tv, even American Courts generally don’t.

  22. annie says:

    @Jimmy this has been used in UK courts with success by another woman, who also allegeded her ex abused their child. The evidence prevented her a lengthly prison sentence. I know because I have spoken to her about her experience.

  23. annie says:

    @Jimmy as I said it’s on the balance of probabilites, not beyond all reasonable doubt, so any witness can use any evidence availabe to support their case. Any evidence. Including making false allegations apparently!

  24. Jimmy says:

    I’m afraid you were misinformed. Polygraph evidence is not and has never been admitted in UK Courts.

    • annie says:

      This was admitted within the Isle of Man Courts, who conform within UK juridistion. It is therefore to the best of my knowledge compliant with UK jurisdiction. It has been used, and it saved a female from a lengthy prison sentence. Manx courts. So use of lie detector could be effective tool to dismantle a UK legal argument and therefore could be used in UK Courts, and it’s down to the opposition to disprove.

      You miss the point. In family courts, it’s the balance of probablity.

      Criminal Courts is altogether different, and beyond all reasonable doubt.

      So whatever an individual chooses to use within an a private court, if their evidence and if they cites, such as a lie detector, that is conceivable reasonable evidence and has been successfully used in the UK and outside.

      The Bush Adminstration defines waterboarding as a successful use of “torture” to obtain the truth. Everytime they are forced to inhale water droplets they know they might die. These abuses are set out in CIA reports. Waterboarding is torture.

      Therefore how do we really get the truth? Difficult decisions.

      Some CIA go beyond their remit resorting to mock executions.]

      How do we define the truth and how do we accept it? What is palatable? Dogs? Slapping? The Pandora’s Box.

      It is perfectly acceptable to use a Lie Detector evidence, within UK Courts. End of.

      Will they argue that? That’s a legal argument for the opposition to disprove and I would say Clint Eastwood style “make my day punk” if I were telling the truth.

      Some however choose to remain complicit in the torture of lies. Complicit in torture is a criminal offence.

  25. Phil Grayson says:

    I cannot believe this foul, hatefull, lie spreading woman has the nerve to continue her ridiculous and peverse campaign here or anywhere else for that matter.
    Its time to smell the coffee VH you have been found out and no amount of twisted half truths of supposed private meetings with ANY judge are going to save your already severely damaged reputation
    You have consistently lied and failed as a mother and as a decent human being

  26. Anonymous says:

    LISA of the LYNCH MOB this website is about a child in trouble and NOT about the past life of VICTORIA HAIGH, you seem to be on a PERSONAL CRUSADE of HATRED against VH, WHY??? What is YOUR PROBLEM??? People in Glass Houses, would you like some of YOUR PAST DEEDS POSTED HERE???

    The baby is bouncing with health and vitality, safe in the mothers arms and surounded by many good people in IRELAND. I have read all the words from the lynch mob up above, and it is clear that THEY are all missing the point…

    LISA is like a vicious SIREN in her PRIVATE ATTACK on Victoria Haigh, LISA may well be telling the truth, or she could just a failed racehorse trainer (WHO KNOWS?) bent on trying to destroy Victoria Haigh in public for her own reasons, that are NOT CONNECTED to the CHILD MOLLESTING CASE, as for VH friends, she has had many visits from PRIORITY racing people whilst over here, and many phonecalls of support from the same.

    When the Child is returned to her mother and Doncaster SS is proved to be a corrupt bed of paedophiles what will LISA and her followers say then?

    To all the people who have read the so called Private disclosures by LISA “THINK” and “THINK AGAIN”, this is NOT about VH and her past life, it is about VH now!

    AND to ALL who have posted negative or hate comments about VH, check your own past FIRST please, and “let him who is without sin cast the first stone”. People in glass houses etc..@nd Lisa why don’t you tell your Lynch mob who you are, and the reasons for your hatred toward VH, why did you sell Night Trade? so sad woman, so sad:)

  27. Anonymous says:

    LISA of the LYNCH MOB this website is about a child in trouble and NOT about the past life of VICTORIA HAIGH, you seem to be on a PERSONAL CRUSADE of HATRED against VH, WHY??? What is YOUR PROBLEM??? People in Glass Houses, would you like some of YOUR PAST DEEDS POSTED HERE???

    The baby is bouncing with health and vitality, safe in the mothers arms and surounded by many good people in IRELAND. I have read all the words from the lynch mob up above, and it is clear that THEY are all missing the point…

    LISA is like a vicious SIREN in her PRIVATE ATTACK on Victoria Haigh, LISA may well be telling the truth, or she could just a failed racehorse trainer (WHO KNOWS?) bent on trying to destroy Victoria Haigh in public for her own reasons, that are NOT CONNECTED to the CHILD MOLLESTING CASE, as for VH friends, she has had many visits from PRIORITY racing people whilst over here, and many phonecalls of support from the same.

    When the Child is returned to her mother and Doncaster SS is proved to be a corrupt bed of paedophiles what will LISA and her followers say then?

    To all the people who have read the so called Private disclosures by LISA “THINK” and “THINK AGAIN”, this is NOT about VH and her past life, it is about VH now!

    AND to ALL who have posted negative or hate comments about VH, check your own past FIRST please, and “let him who is without sin cast the first stone”. People in glass houses etc..@nd Lisa why don’t you tell your Lynch mob who you are, and the reasons for your hatred toward VH, why did you sell Night Trade? so sad woman, so sad:)

    @nd Phil Grayson, you are another victim of the newpaper reports, you and many others haven’t a clue what is going on, and you rely on bad reports and the judgement of WALL who never looked into the case proper and relied on the corrupt lower courts findings, which consited of cover ups by Doncaster SS & Doncaster Police, David Tune has a brother within the force, the first SS worker was SHIFTED because she believed VH and saw the evidence of abuse on child X, there are 2 Police videos and statements that have been dummed down… David Tune and the rest will be exposed for what they really are, and you lot will have to eat your own words…as I stated before Phil, Jimmy, Annie and LISA who is a failed racehorse trainer read these words “LET HIM WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE” you LOT remind me of the RABBLE who convicted JESUS of Wrong (and HE was innocent) and let the THEIF GO!

    • Sandy says:

      Hi Vicky

      • Anonymous says:

        My name is Ray, not Vicky and who is Sandy are you paranoid also like most of the Lisa lynch mob:) I know more about this case than most…and like I stated previous this case is about VH as is now, not living in her past, and I will repeat people in glass houses should not throw stones. the Father of X, Doncaster SS and a nimber of Doncaster Police will be held accountable very soon. Judge Wall is playing clever to catch the rats 🙂 Like David Tune stated in the Daily Mail”there is no smoke without fire”, he also stated he believed child X was being sexually abused, but not by him, if he thought child X was being sexually abused, WHY has he not acted upon this???? You LOT are a RABBLE, a TYPICAL set of EEJIOTS! who don’t know your left hand from your right hand 🙂

        1) Part of Article..But David’s story is the polar opposite. He says that the relationship between him and Vicky was already in difficulty by the time X was born. For legal reasons, he declines to go into detail of why but admits they had grown apart.

        1A) As far as I am aware, there are no legal reasons why TUNE can’t tell you one of the BIG reasons for the split, I have seen the evidence WHY and it is CRIMINAL!!

        Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2030507/Father-falsely-accused-paedophile-little-girl-ex-wife-reveals-deeply-disturbing-story.html#ixzz1WbTHLcBi

        2) ‘I just couldn’t get my head around it. I kept asking “Why would she say that? Why?” I started thinking, my God, she HAS been abused. Not by me, I know that, but by someone.

        2A) He knows that “SOMEONE” is abusing X ??? YES that is waht he said

        Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2030507/Father-falsely-accused-paedophile-little-girl-ex-wife-reveals-deeply-disturbing-story.html#ixzz1WbU0kPCh

        Ray (Anonymous)

    • Jimmy says:

      And in this analogy, Ms. Haigh would be Jesus yes?

      Get help you fruitloop.

      • Jimmy says:

        So you think it’s wrong to cast the first stone unless you want to call someone a kiddyfiddler on the internet, in which case that’s perfectly ok?

        It’s a point of view I suppose.

  28. Sandy says:

    Hello ‘Ray’

    I don’t have an ‘alas’ (sic)

    How many do you have?

    • Sandy says:

      Thank you for confirming my long held belief that the use of smilies is the mark of a simpleton.

      Why do you choose to post anonymously?

      How many aliases do you have?

  29. Jimmy says:

    “Judge Wall is playing clever to catch the rats”

    Jesus wept. Let me get this straight. Wall P has ruled that Ms. Haigh is an obsessive and delusional pathological liar and a child abuser but it’s not what he really thinks, he’s just made a pretend finding so as to lull the father into a false sense of security. Because High Court Judges do that.

    What colour is the sky in your world?

  30. annie says:

    Interesting. If as the “Anonymous” post cites, they have read all the papers on this case and they support VH, then why arnt they willing to “stake their reputation” on the line by providing their true identity and publicly align themselves with a woman “named and shamed” by the President of the Family Courts. That, ….I find odd.

    Much as I find odd “Anonymous” hasn’t said that in reading “all the papers on this case”, they advised VH to be “armed and dangerous” with an expert legal team on board at this latest hearing.

    It’s easy to write things anonymously and have nothing to back up any of what they are saying other than just words….cheap words and as now “proven” to be the case…cheap shots against the father.

    What is not cheap is expert legal advice. I will keep repeating the fact that the most bizarre aspect of VH’s position, is her apparent failure to arm herself with an expert legal team, if she genuinely believed her child was at risk of the father.

    I will repeat. In my “expert” opinion, the only reasons I can see legal representation is not used is

    1. The person is exceptionally niaive
    2. The person is exceptionally arrogant
    3. The person knows it will be throwing good money after bad eg they will not pay to defend their game “of malicious pursuit” of falsehoods.
    4. Or that person values material goods more than their child and are not prepared to lose a “lifestyle” set against a legal debt.
    5. The Legals decline to act/represent the person’s case.

    We know Legal Aid is available to those who can demonstrate a low income and who meet it’s threshold for pursuing cases.

    So the perplexing question, STILL unanswered is why VH attended Court without full legal representation on behalf of herself/child?

    Facts are facts. Inescapable facts and one cannot get away from why, if VH truly believes her child was/is at risk, any mother/guardian would ensure they adopt the single most important, appropriate detail and attend Court with full legal representation privately funded or legal aid.

    It appears VH chose to attend Court with a top Judge without full legal representation eg professionally qualifed solicitor and barrister, despite the seriousness of this case.

    It is folty to have no legal representation with 1st High Court Judge outcome. .

    Its is a serious warrning to have no legal representation with 2nd High Court Judge outcome.

    It was an act of wrecklessness to have attended Court a 3rd time with a top Judge without legal representation, and whilst all the above is in my opinion, it remains my opinion, the child was not at the centre of VH’s representation throughout.

    The truth is, no legal team would represent anyone, who was involved with spreading details of the family/Court case across the internet. And there lies the nub…

    A choice. An Internet “war of words” versus a legal team. Anyone whose genuine intention was child centred, would most defintely have sought the latter. The former is the territory of the black hearted.

    We do have an outcome from the 3rd Judge. VH should be named and shamed. And if “anon” or VH still refuse to accept this outcome, then put “your money where your mouth is” and defend this case in the proper manner this case deserved at the outset and that means to do it in PRIVATE, with appropriate legal representation.

    Put up or shut up..

    • Jimmy says:

      The main problem with getting represented in a situation like this is that, contrary to what many think, a lawyer is simply not allowed to put forward a case if he knows it is false. A lawyer who knowingly helped Ms. Haigh to deliberately smear her ex in this way would be in serious trouble. She hired a nutter instead presumably because the nutter told her what she wanted to hear.

      • annie says:

        @Jimmy. The only other person speaking sense here.

        I wouldn’t go so far as to say she “hired a nutter”. I think that’s harsh. I think the “investigator” did not remain objective and did not use their powers of discernment. Their goodwill was used and abused.

        However, anyone should know, to breach a Court Order imposes consequences.

        The word “nutter” is too frequently used against those under severe stress, which I have no doubt, the Investigator found themselves in too deep, too late.

        Ironically, the real nutters, appear as “an Angel of Light” yet reek destruction in unsuspecting people’s lives.Social psychopaths.

      • Jimmy says:

        If you look at the stuff she posted here and elsewhere, it’s not too strong a term. Wall P said he considered that she may have mental health issues. I’d be interested to see the judgment but it’s a little concerning that he sent someone to prison he thought might be mentally ill without getting professional opinion. If she does have problems like that then Holloway is the last place she should be.

  31. annie says:

    An additional thought……for Anonymous.

    If the Judge is “playing clever to catch rats”, then why would a top Judge “stake his reputation” and open what was a private Court to the Public to name and shame VH, when to do so, if the findings were fabricated to “catch rats” (Anon), exposes the Judge to the real threat of a Judicial Review?

    None of what you are saying makes any legal sense. Are you aware of that? Least of all common sense.

    Common sense dictates a robust legal response and seek a full Judicial Review of the case if one truly believes the outcome unjust/untrue. But as I keep saying, an expert legal team is necessary to conduct a Judicial Review and the bare minimum cost of privately is £10,000 plus.

    And yes Judicial Reviews are possible with family court cases.

    To suggest the most recent findings could be quashed without a Judicial Review is nonsense.

    To say Justice Wall never looked into the case thoroughly, well that’s why you hire a top barrister whose job it is to direct the Judge to the points you state were never addressed. So why was something so important as this left to an amateur and not for the first time?

    Why is it 3 Judges, you claim keep missing the “vital point” but no-one will pay for a top barrister to make “vital pointl” evidence? Just who is it that hasn’t got the point?

    It’s very convenient to keep trashing everyone else, in the absence of any hired legal team to legally/professionally “trash” the perpetrators of alleged crime/s and is that because no legal team will touch this case because of the manner VH has conducted herself in eg publicly trashing the father on the Internet to the detriment of the child’s right to privacy and well being?

  32. annie says:

    @ Jimmy. How do you know the “Investigator” is at Holloway? I have only heard of it’s reputation.


    Of what I have seen posted, only on this site, it is in my view completely unacceptable given only for the child’s need for privacy and well being. What I’ve seen, has been truly shocking, and should have been kept private.

    My greatest concerns for the child, who is rapidly approaching teenage years, which all teenagers surf the net, and the child will undoubtedly be faced with questions from her peers, if not isolated. That is inexcusable from the parent causing the freeflow of lurid details, true or not. I simply cannot get my head round a parent disclosing this true or not, were the child’s best interests at the forefront.

    So how do you know about the investigator sent to Holloway? And please know I am in full agreement with you, that no-one apart fro expert witness experienced in diagnosing conditions should make a personal judgement on someone’s mental health. If the Judge “thought” the Investigator unstable, then the matter should have been adjourned pending further assessment in my humble opinion.

    • Jimmy says:

      The system may have changed since I had any dealings with it, but I believe there is only one women’s prison in London so that’s where she would have gone at least to begin with. May experience with the more troubled inmates was they were routinely drugged to the eyeballs to make them docile. I would have hoped it might have improved in recent years but from the article you posted it seems not. I’ve never left a prison without being profoundly grateful I didn’t have to spend the night there. Someone like Ms. Watson is going to find this very hard. It’s also why I don’t join in the chorus calling for Ms.Haigh to be banged up. To me the real culprits are the politicians and columnists with an axe to grind who encourage this behaviour and wash their hands of it when it goes pear shaped. I believe there are people who should have known better who could have prevented this.

  33. annie says:

    Seems this has been a game of odds on or off. Who dares wins. Game on. Game over. Bets on favourite. etc all euphenisms for the competitive Gamer; the competitive freak. Both parents, seemingly working within competitive environments. In win or lose conditions.

    But do you know what? Please forgive me if I have this wrong, however I only needed to read this ONCE, and ONCE only, so bear with me on my memory of David Tune’s only rebuttal we have from the Daily Mail. (I believe).

    These are the words that struck the greatest chord in me because this happened to me in almost identical circumstances.


    My understanding from what I read (from memory so please correct if I have misunderstood) is this.

    Only AFTER the serving of a PENAL NOTICE on VH did the allegations commence. Within 24 hours from my recollection. But I may be wrong.

    The PENAL NOTICE, was served as a result of VH allegedly breaching the Contact Order.

    Unless one has been in this position, one cannot comment. I have. So I feel able to pass comment.

    Only when my ex had a PENAL NOTICE attached amidst a breach of NON molestation Order and subsequent breaches of a Contact Order, did I experience the horrific retribution of lies.

    When I read this in David Tune’s account, I am sorry to say, but this for me, sealed the fate of VH. eg lies that result from PENAL NOTICE’S SERVED.

    This, yes THIS exclusively important point is conveniently omitted from Ray/Anon and omitted from VH’s account or anyone elses. Why?

    Please let me explain why.

    Because until you have personally served a PENAL NOTICE on someone, unless you are a gifted fortune teller, you cannot know how a person will react to that. Some will comply. Some will suddenly conveniently make up lies from the ether, which once SS and Police become involved become almost impossible to disentangle only because the MANIPULATOR of lies has nothing to lose making them appear calm and plausible, yet the PERSON APPLYING FOR PENAL NOTICE is seen as the adversary, and who by definition from loss of contact or abuse, becomes more desperate and seen as the antangonist. A reversal of the truth takes place.

    From what brief transcript I have read from DT, I only needed to read this bit……..

    “Once the PENAL NOTICE WAS SERVED” did the allegations against him commence.

    Anyone forced to serve a PENAL NOTICE on an ex to gain contact to their exposes themselves to serious risk of false allegations, in order to frustrate the Notice and prevent it.

    This, by DT’s final and only disclosure I know (Via Daily Mail) following outcome with Justice Wall and VH, is the real reason that caused such allegations against DT in the first place.

    Be a victim of serving a PENAL NOTICE on someone who reacts by making false allegations before you post. Please.

    Love all , Serve All

    • Anonymous says:

      What a sensible posting!!!!!!!!! At last someone with commonsense !!!!!! I experienced exactly similar treatment from my ex. Messed about with access days, my ex not turning up with my daughter etcetera. Nature being what it is, people believe the party who gets their side of the story in first. Then if subsequently they realise they have been told a lie by the initial manipulator they find it difficult, if not impossible, to then admit they were wrong in believing the manipulators story. That’s what is going on here!! Until some of these posters actually have dealings with a narcissistic individual then they haven’t a clue!! Even trained professionals HATE narcissists because they are such compulsive liars and try to hoodwink even professionals. Narcissistic people just cannot empathise with other humans. They treat everybody the same – merely as objects which are to be used. Once of no further use to them the narcissist quickly discards those persons whom they have used and move to another victim. “Push and Pull” with their victims is exactly the game they play!! Its all a great shame really because narcissists love to be loved but, paradoxically go out of their way via their obnoxious behaviour to push the very people who try to love them away!!! Rejection??? Narcissists cannot take it and will fight hammer and nail to get their victim back – hence the request of VH for her ex top ‘take her back’. If you think you have encountered get away quick. Hangf around with them and, boy, have you got trouble coming !!! Ask the investigator who got sucked in by VH!!!!

      • Anonymous says:

        Think about it. If an INNOCENT person is charged with an offence then, because that person did not commit the offence all they can say is “I did not do it”. However, if a GUILTY person is charged with an offence that GUILTY person CAN deny it and come up with every excuse in the sun for not having done it and tell lie after lie to try to convince everybody they did not do it. Here, the child’s father has simply said the only words he can do – those of ‘I did not do it!’ On the other hand………….I need not finish …need I??

      • annie says:

        Seems the great majority of us are talking from the same page.

        What must change is that those found guilty of lying on oath, within family courts, appear not subject to the same rules outside of the family court forum.eg jail on Lying on oath

        I argue Prison, is the only fit place for a person found guilty of lying on Oath. This would stem the flow of many a vindictive ex who would deliberately resort to using the SS, the Police, and Court system to cause profound mental/emotional psychological trauma against a perfectly innocent person whose sole wish is the best interests of the child and maintaining contact.

        There could be no more a “perfectly invisible crime”. Those who have suffered this know EXACTLY what I am talking about and the hugely health damaging effects of it.

        I deeply wish, Justice Wall see our postings. I now have a serious illness as the result of defending years of malicious allegations all now proven to be profoundly without truth.

        Some will relish in the fact that those they set out to maliciously hurt through false allegations, have received grevious injury. Great psychological trauma, that is not including the children. There is no conscience from those inflicting the trauma to other parent/child. None whatsoever.

        There are very serious miscarriages of Justice going within the Family Courts and that is because they are woefuelly under resourced, and women I would argue, because of women like VH, are suffering extremely serious miscarriages of justice.

        Mine was very serious. Did I publicise it? Absolutely NOT. Would I? Absolutely NOT. The ramifications of such, are far too serious, just for a score of “public” justice against a lying malicious ex husband. My children’s anonynimity, their well being is far too precious to even begin to think publishing against the purported miscarriage of injustice VH cites;

        Did, has, VH EVER had a top barrister from a top London based Chamber, apologise to her for the injustice she has suffered against a mother? No. Not that she has publicly published, nor I doubt will she.

        I have. And I received an apology on from a top barrister on behalf of his profession for the “appalling injustice” I received.

        That barrister sought a Judicial Review. (All privately paid for). The presiding Judge retired apparently once it was known a full Judicial Review was sought.

        That’s what sets the “cat amongst the pigeons”. Where if ever, has VH sought proper justice , via any top barrister willing to present her case?

        We find no example. @Jimmy cites it is because no legal representation will take on a case, it knows, is wrong who will smear the other side. There is merit in this.

        All I can say is listen to people on the “other side” of a case like this, and who from top brass legal representation, get their children back following robust legal argument.

        VH shows no robust legal argument despite all the advice ” in the world” this is what she should deploy.

        Ask her and her friends why? Better still ask yourself why were you in a similar situation?

  34. Jimmy says:

    If you stick everyone who lies in family proceedings in prison you’d fill them ten times over. It’s not a practical idea. These proceedings are stressful for all involved and few people get through without behaving in ways they’re not proud of. Ms. Haigh isn’t the first to do this and sadly won’t be the last. What made this worse were the cheerleaders and the enablers, those who encouraged bizarre conspiracy theories, those who pushed crackpot legal theories, those with their own agenda who get some strange kick out of interfering in private family grief and making it worse. Mr. Hemming had the nerve to say recently that the lesson to learn was that family proceedings were too adversarial. Of course they are, that is why the lawyers are constantly reminded of the need to seek compromise and to get agreement between couples wherever possible. Sometimes it means telling a client something they don’t want to hear for their own good. Some people aren’t very good at accepting that. They will then go to someone like Mr. Hemming or Ms. Watson who will tell them they’re right and that the lawyer’s not on their side but on the side of the system. They are advised to sack their lawyers and use some oddball amateur like Ms. Watson or Mr. Josephs who believe they know the law better than the lawyers. Obviously they don’t and they lose. They will then tell their “victim” that they lost because of corruption and they will try to smear everyone in sight using Mr. Hemming in Parliament or Mr. Booker in the press or Ms. McNeill on the internet. The Court will tell them to stop but they don’t take it seriously. after all, breaking injunctions can’t be that bad if MPs are doing it. In a bizarre way Ms. Haigh is as much a victim of these people as anyone. I think Wall P was right to target the enabler here, but there are plenty more where Ms. Watson came from. These are the real villains here.

    • annie says:

      @Jimmy, either you are a tad tired when you wrote this post is woefully unable to comprehend the nature of what you have said.

      I will ask, have you ever served a PENAL NOTICE on a person abusing child contact?

      If not. It is with regret to advise you show no disposition to either advise or display approrpriate compassion to a person seeking contact with their child.

      Do you have children? You appear to have been in prison from you last posting?

      Anyone who has children, has not been in trouble with the Law, but has a vindictive ex their are trying hard to extricate themselves from, with the facilitation of a PENAL NOTICE complicated with the rebuttal of abuse, is in a position to comment.

      Forget the politicians or anyone else in all of this terrible mess. Just focus for ONE moment on the child and the terrible impact on a young girl growing up in this mess.

      You bang on about the politicians. Without a shred of thought for this young person.

      I have two young persons deeply traumatised from an abusive lying ex such as Judge W found in the VH case.

      There is far too much emphasis on the trashing of the parent’s postion, rather than putting that poor child first. VH has been named and shamed. Not the father. And VH had every opportunity throughout to have secured legal representation to have shown the father guilty. No legal representation no case.

      It is what it is. VH is no victim you idiot. The Child is the Victim. Even Lord Justice Wall made this clear, or would you be another fool to stand in front of Justice Wall, and tell him he is wrong? * shrugs shoulders and gasps*

      • Jimmy says:

        I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear. I simply made the point that these proceedings have a bad effect on people’s behaviour. There are exceptions of course but my experience has been that people going through divorces or custody disputes will behave in ways they would never have thought themselves capable. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you how stressful this is. It means that however badly Ms. Haigh behaved (and I am in no way defending what she did) there is at least an explanation for it. It’s the others that mystify me. Deterrents only work on people acting rationally. I’m actually agreeing with Wall P who, let us remember, locked up Ms. Watson, not Ms. Haigh. I don’t think locking her up would help and I don’t think the threat would have stopped her. I do think some of the hangers on would think twice if they were in the firing line. Ms. Haigh is a victim. Of course she brought it upon herself, but she had plenty of help.

  35. Jimmy says:

    “You appear to have been in prison from you last posting?”

    In a sense, but perhaps not in the sense you think. I was there in a professional capacity. I would not of course, for obvious reasons, be eligible to enter Holloway as a resident.

    • annie says:

      Well said…. I too thought this morning of saying we should not post on this site anymore. However, we should continue to post for one reason only.

      To stop other people being sucked into VH’s posts. VH will take no pleasure in reading our posts and we should remain posting to keep feeding back “the reality check” this woman needs.

      Oh…and trust me….all of what you put in the post about the narcissistic signs in VH’s postings…”look at me” syndrome boasting about exotic holidays etc was bang on. VH’s posts are uncomfortable to read because they are the hallmarks of an arrogant show off, not of a greiving woman bereft of her child.

      Just how arrogant is this post “I see no bona fide proof I have lied” against Judge W’s findings, persisting she is right and everyone else is wrong regardless of how many Judges have looked at the case, and find against her.

      “I see no bona fide proof” comment to me is the trademark of liar attempting to twist the case and push onus back on the other party, to provide proof she has lied. If VH can appear to be so dismissive of the Judges findings at this late stage, just how dismissive is she of anyone’s feelings….moreover that of her child. Dismissive, yes we know she is, because she has totally disregarded her child by publishing details of the police videos on this site. This was her property which she has freely distributed to all and sundry.

      The words cunning calculating and callous come my mind when I read VH’s posts against the backdrop of Judge W.

    • Jimmy says:

      Please don’t misunderstand me. Her behaviour has been appalling, I do not believe a word she says and she does display classic symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder. It has probably cost her her child. I don’t think it’s sunk in yet. She now seems to think she’s going to have a private chat with the President and he’ll give her her daughter back. When it hits her that she is likely never to see the girl again I think it will hit her very hard. It’s pretty harsh to say that’s not punishment enough. There are others walking away from this without a scratch who don’t deserve to.

  36. annie says:

    @jimmy. Please let me clarify what I mean about sending those who lie on oath to prison.

    Where it can be demonstrated that those lies have caused psychological trauma to the person lied about, then they should go to prison just like anyone else who hits someone inflicting a physical trauma.

    Just because psychological trauma is invisible does mean to say that person has not suffered in the same way someone who has been hit. I would argue protracted psychological trauma inflicted by a malicious vindictive person, if far worse than thump. And can cause sometimes irreversible metabolic changes in the body.

    I believe DT should be seeking damages against VH for such psychological trauma via a private prosecution given the public findings by Judge W he is not a paedophile.

    It is not acceptable to lie. In particular when those lies are constructed in such a deliberate manner to dismantle and ruin someone’s life and reputation, that is inexcusable and should be punished.

    No sorry to say, lies of the nature Judge W illustrates VH adopted, should have consequences, because I know what consequences lies have had on my health.

    • annie says:

      I see no redeeming attributes in VH whatsoever. What I see is vision of pure ugliness. From the inside out.

      I doubt anyone can look at themselves in the mirror and be happy (“in their own skin” ) with the reflection after being publicly named and shamed. There is nothing but an empty shell devoid of compassion and now devoid of their child to reflect on.

      And as @jimmy picks up on…..the “private chat” with Judge W she speaks of….implying an almost tryst-like twist and all will be changed “VH” style. It is utterly delusional.

  37. annie says:

    I missed one important word out when describing what I observe from VH, her posts and Judge W’s findings.

    cunning, calculating, callous and CRUEL.

  38. Anonymous says:

    Yipee Elizabeth is FREE!! Vicky is next you will all see. Ray

    • Jimmy says:

      Next in Holloway?

      • Sandy says:

        Hi Ray
        You still haven’t answered any of my questions.

        If you are unsure of the answers you could always ask one of your imaginary friends for advice.

        Has John Hemming’s wife returned you to his mistress yet?

    • Anonymous says:

      MY poetry not Vicky H’s. You clever and callous people will end up with egg on your face and more!, will you come back and apologise for the attack? I doubt that, you will more than likely look in the mirror, be ashamed, and then find a big stone to hide under…Ray (NOT Vicky)

  39. mary0017 says:

    Free..yes, but now a ‘criminal’….a record, I hear a two year suspended sentence…Not good for her ‘business’. ! Wonder if she and Vicky are still mates !! guess not somehow….

    • Jimmy says:

      Civil contempt – no record. I put a link on another thread. Ten days in Holloway scared the crap out of her. I think she’s scribbled on her last injunction somehow.

      • mary0017 says:

        Hah ! think your right Jimmy, But actually…she has a ‘record’ in the public domain….just where she started it all …. as they say, what goes around comes around….and, not good to ‘scribble’ on court documents ! as you say..

  40. annie says:

    Here here, this site should be closed down. And the person who yields the say so is yours truly VH.

    And echo Anon’s post “good EW is now free and has learned her lesson (presumably).

    EW is by no means “off the hook” but the alleged apology to Judge W purging herself, clearly impacted this most compassionate decision to release this woman, who as I have said earlier, clearly found herself in “too deep too late” in a situation out of her league. That is why we have Judges, barristers and solicitors.

    Only a fool represents themselves or deploys another!

    Remember Legal Aid is available to those who are on a low income but whose case must have a reasonable prospect of success!!

  41. mary0017 says:

    Learnt their lesson ?? you really think so, I am not so convinced….of course any ‘normal’ person would, but we are not dealing with the sane here…..

  42. annie says:

    An additional thought to my post previous post on the subject of Legal Aid being granted.

    It is an interesting point to ponder that if those who are representing themselves who do not meet the Legal Aid threshold of low income/low assets, etc by definition begs the question why these same people are not prepared to “stump up” their own money/assets to fund cases such as this? Perhaps they too are aware of the prospects of the case being unsuccessful?

    Put it this way, if I was deemed not eligible for Legal Aid, but that at some point Legal advice (surely sought at some point) was that I had a reasonable chance of winning the case, I would pay for expert legal representation. eg back a “winner”

    I am no betting woman working in the “field of win/lose environments” as illustrated in VH’s backdrop, but arguably the very nature of the work lends itself to backing winners/gambling.

    To back anything, money has to paid up front. Such a train of thought/mentality one would think, was a “transferable skill” of VH’s and would back her case with money “up front” paid to an expert legal team/case she was professionally advised stood a reasonable prospect of success.

    Does not the failure to “back a case” with an expert legal team speak volumes in this case?

    • Jimmy says:

      I don’t know what her situation is but she paid for Ms Watson and has also managed to move household lock stock and barrel to another country, which suggests she’s not completely skint. I suspect the funding issue here is a red herring although in other cases it may not be.

  43. annie says:

    @Jimmy. “paid for Ms Watson”. It would be impossible for a para legal to command the costs of top brass barrister. Just what does this suggest? It is what it is. Peanuts to pay monkeys is the expression.

    This person works within the betting industry. She of all people would have the “tranferable skills” of backing winners. Yet she couldnt/wouldn’t back her own case financially.

    I set out the simplest of points. If one is “skint”, as you put it, Legal Aid is there as the “catch all”. But even Legal Aid, will not back anything that has no reasonable prospect of success.

    My point, must I keep reiterating is this.

    There was no Legal Aid representation, meaning such an individual did NOT meet it’s criteria, else it would have been deployed.

    So what else is one left with. Assets and/or no reasonable prospects of success to consider pursuing a privately funded case.

    No person with assets, will fund a case where they have been advised (or rejected by Legal Aid) has no reasonable prospect of success.

    We are then left with this dilemma, that will NOT go away. What is the reason for having no formal legal representation stacked against such a serious case as they purport and believe in?

    Nope. This important point is not going to go away, because this person chooses to use the Internet to perpetuate the case rather than use Legal representation pursuing the case privately..

    It is at complete odds. An internet “hate campaign” without formal legal representation against 3 High Court Judges findings. One cannot have one’s cake and eat it.

    If VH won’t put her precious money where her mouth is, and adopt appropriate legal representation and quit this site spreading allegations, then exactly what outcome should one expect other than the findings of Judge W. Quit spreading allegations on this site at which point a legal team may be prepared to act if sought after.

    • Jimmy says:

      My point is I don’t think it was about money. The top family silk in the country could have offered to work for free and she’d still have hired Watson because she told her what she wanted to hear, that she was right and the rest of the world was wrong and conspiring against her. Some people are like that.

  44. annie says:


    Watson told the judge: “I am truly, truly sorry. I feel this is a wake-up call to me. I made a serious error of judgment.”

    Says it all.

  45. annie says:

    She added: “I am terribly sorry for any distress this caused to (the child).”

    If EW can/required to say this, er….why hasn’t VH been held accountable to same given she instigated EW and provided her with full consent to publish the details VH supplied?



    • annie says:

      Ray 3 High Court Judges, One of them the TOP of Family Courts has assessed carefully all the evidence and made no findings in VH’s favour.

      To infer all 3 High Court Judges couldn’t between them find that nugget of “evidence” you keep banging on about exists against DT, suggests we have idiots as Judges, yetI have never met a Judge who is an idiot. Quite the opposite.

      When are you going to explain Ray why VH won’t hire a top legal team, or would even an idiot know the answer to that?

  46. annie says:

    Ray, whats your real name?

    You post cheap shots. There is no substance in any of your comments, just slagging people off which as we know, VH has been named and shamed for.

    My posts ask and highlight thought provoking argument. I also provide a background of my own experience I use to base what I say on.

    Who are you, what are you and what’s your experience in the family courts? If I read you have NO personal experience in the family courts then you really shouldn’t be slagging off anyone who has. Cheap shots remember are “not admissable” here Ray. Nor anywhere in a decent society. Are you decent?

    • Sandy says:

      Hi Annie
      He has posted as Ray Doherty before now and also posts as R.D.
      I feel that this is disingenuous as it gives the impression that there is more than one person with his vile delusional views.

    • annie says:

      In an exceptional move, Judge W took to publishing the truth, which he didn’t have to do & carrying with that move, a great deal of personal responsibility in the naming and shaming VH.

      If there was one shred of truth in any of what VH’s says, she would have kept this off the internet. And in particular the sordid detailed transcripts from the police
      videos. The right to a private life for the child was ignored once this was published.

      I will say this.

      If VH is serious about getting her daughter back and seriously concerned for her safety, she will use her time and money more constructively and

      1. Quit this site and shut this blog down
      2. Focus on securing an expert legal team to
      3. Seek a Judicial Review

      thats if she still considers there is a real (not fiction) miscarriage of justice.

      I am not sure there is any point of return once a top Judge has reviewed two other top Judges assessment of the case and still come up wth the same conclusion.

      I am not sure those who post “the truth is yet to come out” have ever stood before 3 top Judges in the land or been inside a family court process.

      Enough opportunities have been thrown at this case for the truth to come out.

      I think it is time for those facilitating VH’s campaign to seriously consider the possibility they too were duped. And that may be hard to accept if there has been much personal investment in the case.

      I have a good friend of mine, who’s 9 year old daughter was raped by her peodophile boyfriend. The man is still serving a very long prison sentence. The mother all this time on, has never forgiven herself and cries regularly….despite the child is now 19.

      You see to suggest the police, 3 Judges (and the rest), Social Services, etc would leave the child with a peodophile under what is now a publicised case,….there are too many jobs, too many egos, etc at risk besides that of the child. To suggest ALL of these people have got it wrong, and the only person who is right is VH, is by now, almost impossible to believe.

      I would love to see the original letter of advice from the solicitor VH alleges advised her to drop the criminal case against the father or she would face care proceedings. Why isnt VH naming and shaming the solicitor’s she blamed responsible for jeopardising her parental responsibility?

  47. annie says:

    whoa!! Has anyone read the latest letter VH has posted to her daughter here on this site?

    VH states “I’m in the middle of the biggest story since the kidnap of poor Madeline McCann”.

    ooooo it is shocking VH compares her plight to that of the McCanns or indeed the press coverage. shockingly delusional. Then she talks of champagne, pink limosines…then likens herself battling the Judge with a blunt spoon but they have lethal weapons???!!!

    Er…she has completely lost it and I just wish she would stop for her own good because if she is not careful, with this sort of public language as a letter to her daughter is the fodder social services would lap up to take her other child off her. Stop it please VH for your sake and your children’s. You don’t need to convince anyone your right if you are right. But you are convincing many you are unhinged.

  48. annie says:

    Sorry Sandy I genuinely dont understand what you mean as my post was specifically for Ray because of vile diatribe. And thank you for highlighting his name as Ray Doherty. hmmmm

    • Sandy says:


      Please expand on ‘hmmmm’.

      I probably should clarify; I find it suspicious that posters; Anonymous/Ray, R.D. and Ray Doherty all post in the same inane rambling style. I do not know him or anybody else involved in the case personally if that is what you were implying.

      • annie says:

        ohhh…now I understand!! Got ya. And nope wasnt implying anything other than I couldn’t get the jist of what you saying.
        Thank you for clarifying.

  49. Jimmy says:

    Can’t see that happening. This is like the end of Carrie when the hand comes up out of the grave.

  50. mary0017 says:

    Hi Anonymous…, would prefer a ‘name’, can get confusing with so many…however, clearly you have had first hand experience and recall in an earlier post..you have. Sounds like a nightmare to live with and from a medical background, completely agree with your view of V ….however, whilst that is her personality, I still find it difficult to align that alongside a mother’s instinct to care for their offspring, protect, nurture, etc.etc..even though their view of ‘self’ is deluded..I think alongside, there is clearly a lack of attachment to the child which has allowed her to place the child outside of the normal peramiters of ‘mother and child’ relationship….hence her lack of care for her child in all of this, and allowed her to use the child to promote her own importance…V also has the capacity to ‘use and abuse’ people around her to further her cause using manipulation etc, There is much complaining about the Courts but actually this is a case where consistently, the courts have made the right decision…..and the child is safe……..despite her best efforts to convince all involved that the father had abused the child. And yes, the current partner is well caught up in it all..poor him…..he should leave, with his child, he might well be next……watch this space……….

  51. To all the people who have commented on the MOTHER called Vicky Haig can any of you tell me what this MOTHER is trying to DO.
    Just a few simple words as the following, fill in the last blank.
    Vicky Haig is doing her best to get her loved one – – – -.

  52. annie says:


    Interesting y’all might want to take a look at. Judge W is not without blemish.

  53. Anonymous says:

    VH and baby have a life in Ireland, and are surrounded by many families, who have children themselves and also know the truth about baby X , These ladies are NOT interested in VH and her past life, they are deeeply CONCERNED about the present situation. IF you are posting on here and are part of U.K. S.S. U.K. legal system aor U.K. police force your time is coming..

    Ray Doherty

  54. Anonymous says:

    If any of the posters on this blog would like to meet up face to face for a disscussion about CHILD ABUSE, I am available in the UK or within Ireland, I want to expose Child Abduction, Traffiking and Sexual Abuse of our innocent children and the suffering families….It would prove very interesting as I can request “certain journalists” to attend the same, and maybe a TV camera or 2, I am open to this…but ARE YOU, and YOU know who YOU ARE, I doubt very much that you would show your faces or indeed reaveal who you REALLY are, KEEP ON BLOGGIN’..it’s good for theb CAUSE. I am Ray Doherty I live in Ireland..WHO ARE YOUZ!? Ray Doherty

    • Jimmy says:

      I don’t doubt it. I suspect anyone who got between a camera and one of these attention seekers would risk getting trampled, and tempted as I am by the invitation to give out personal details on a smear site, I think I’ll pass thanks.

  55. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous | September 3, 2011 at 9:58 pm

    Hi Ray; So you never ask about the past history of a person? How very, very odd!!

    I take people at face value, and never judge a book by a “REVIEW”….or Cover

    My Reply…RAY DOHERTY (NOT of Lisburn)…All I said was that maybe the character assasins on this blog would reveal who they really are, and maybe we could meet up in the UK or Ireland to discuss “child abuse in general”, and with the possiblity of a camera and mike to record the debate, I don’t think ANY of the ASSASINS would DARE show their MUGS or reveal their real names because of who they represent 🙂 (SMILE) Ray Doherty, Ireland

  56. Anonymous says:

    Again, a “childish” remark, showing that you are very weak within your arsenal, is your powder wet?…. now it is MY campaign? This had never been my campaign, have you taken the time to look who the blog belongs to? The forged docs are from Doncaster SS are they not?, did Doncaster SS have a certain lady pose as a “Solicitor”? and yes I do not judge a book by a reviewer, I read, and then read again, and again if required. Who are you?, it is very easy to comment and hide, i don’t hide..Ray Doherty, Ireland.

  57. At this late hour I notice that the MAIN conversation concerning the MOTHER who ORIGINATED all these comments are receding. It would seem that she is now content in her new life. EXCEPT for YOUR VINDICTIVE posts among EACH other. AGAIN, I REPEAT this QUESTION. WHAT would ANY of you have DONE if you were cast into that position. PLEASE UNDERSTAND that I am trying to DIVERT your SIMPLE and WITHOUT FOUNDATION remarks to be focused against me and give VH a rest. PLEASE, all you DENIZENS, I await your VITRIOL. Give the MOTHER who seeks her child a rest.
    I am a more VULNERABLE and able to be hurt person. BEFORE YOU reply. PAUSE, look in a mirror and see what YOU ARE. I EXPECT the usual FACETIOUS replies from the USUAL.( do I need to go further) CLAN. I wish to OPINE here(meaning without proof) that I SUSPECT that some of the persons who post here are people from social services who wish to cause disruption.

    • Ray Doherty says:

      Hello Phil, don’t know who you are, but I like your comment “I SUSPECT that some of the persons who post here are people from social services who wish to cause disruption.” I believe you could be quite correct, as the Assassins (spell check) are concerned only with a character of the past, and not the peson of the here and now, the Assassins hide in the darkness and are afraid of showing themselves…are THEY guilty of something? is this WHY they are VERY angry? Are they themselves involved in the coverup? ALEX G. on The Edge Media channel 200 would be VERY interested in Lisa, annie, mary stating their facts on a programme, Myself, V.H. and Brian Gerrish would have NO PROBLEM in attending. AS you can see WE all have NAMES and are for real.

  58. annie says:

    Goodmorning all. Just caught up with the latest on here.

    Ray what is wrong with you? You seem to me utterly paranoid and someone who cannot be bothered to read people’s individuals posts apart from tarring everyone with the same brush.

    I resent the way you speak to people. I for one would not allow you to speak to me like this face to face, and you do nothing but raise considerable hostility. You are a troublemaker who shoots from the hip.

    Read all of my posts before you have the temerity to post again.

    I post for myself asking pertinent questions none of which you will specifically answer.

    And these spats and name calling between some of you is simply ridiculous. Grow up.

    Again Ray, if you took the trouble to read, I do not work for any authority, but a person who has experienced the family court system, which is collapsing and not fit for purpose.

    VH should remove this site if she is to command any respect from any legal team or other human being. The details of the child’s allegations should have remained private and to publish was and is an absolute disgrace to the mother, and even worse so if they are true. Which the current findings are they are not.

    Please will you answer my previous posts asking you if you have ever been in front of High Court Judges within family law.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s