Good evening. Welcome to Dispatches. I'm joined this evening by Alex Thompson. Alex, welcome to the program. Thank you, Brian. I wish I was speaking to your happier circumstances. This is a very grave case that we have to cover well we do, but it's up to us and many other good people to speak out and tell the truth about what's really happening. The most important thing, I think is to get the information out there. And this, of course is one of those cases that touches on very
strange things going on in the establishment. Somebody reporting wrongdoing, the system then turns on them. We have strange things going on with the police, with courts, with government officials. Ultimately, this particular gentleman ends up a prisoner of the psychiatric system. And this, of course is an event which we know about from other cases. It's very it's very frightening for many people to think that the psychiatric system, which should be there to help, can be used to try and
silence people. But you've spent a lot of time investigating this particular case. The gentleman's Peter Hoffscher and can you give us a start at the beginning and tell people a little bit about the case.
Peter Hoffscherer, the name is spelled hof sc hr Er and his mother is known as Grandma b. You'll find the blog easily that way. Her real name is Barbara. This pair of people have been through a very great deal. They're both disabled, elderly people. We don't know whether Barbara is still alive at this point. She would be approaching
ninety if she is. What is as a case You could call it an asset stripping case of the kind we've seen in various parts at Britain, where an apparent criminal cabal within all of the public authorities in a county or city conspire to corner vulnerable old people with valuable property and steal their assets. That's one where you could look at it. You can also describe it as a case of what the Soviets called Sihushka, the abuse of psychiatry, well known in the West from the works
of Alexander Soljernitsyn. Now I shouldn't let it affect me, I suppose, but it has been poignant. In calling up Peter can find apparently for life to the ward that he's been sectioned on. The forensic psychiatry department in Gratz
Graz in Austria. It's been very poignant to me to be talking for once to really someone of the same bent as me, a kind of cogitative intellectual man, a historian who speaks several languages and noted his or in a the Napoleonic period, with a library of five thousand books, And to speak to someone who seems less damaged at this point than any of the others we've spoken to in prominent UK column case work who've got this far
into the black hole. He is still able to reflect ironically and dryly and with understatements and relativization really on everything that's happened to him. But that's really something about Peter. Perhaps what I'll do, Brian is I'll spend about four minutes, probably reading the succinct summary of the case first, which has been written by Andy Peacher, a well known campaigner on many of these cases, and you will find his
material in many places online. We're going to put the links in the associated details for this podcast, but here is what Andy Peacher has had to say about the hofsher occasion outline quote British born missus Barbara Hoffschreer was born on the thirteenth of December nineteen twenty eight, and she is in fact a disabled Second World War veteran. Just to comment by me Alex there Andy continues she was kidnapped by her abuses in May twenty fourteen. Her
current whereabouts and status are unknown. She has disappeared in inverted commerce. Her son, Peter Hoffscher, was born on the twenty eighth of May nineteen fifty six and has both British and German citizenship. He has been confined to the Sigmund Freud Klimkum in Gratz gr Z, Austria for life. Although mentally sound, Barbara and Peter have exposed serious organized crime and corruption at high levels in Britain, Austria and Germany. They maintain that they have been detained to prevent further
exposure of cross border criminality undertaken by senior officials. It is thought that Barbara might be confined to a local authority care home in York, England, although nothing has been heard from or about her for many months, it is not known whether or not she is still alive. Peter was detained in Britain on the first of December twenty fourteen, just minutes before commencing a private prosecution case that would have exposed fraud and criminality committed against Barbara and himself,
which also involved police and local authorities. He was held on remand for two years until June twenty sixteen, when he was convicted of possession of indecent images. Just to comment by me, many of the charges were dropped and fiddled with during the process. I'll get to that later. He continues to dispute the allegations and maintains that the images were planted by police or another party. Evidence supporting
this was withheld from the court. Peter and his supporters also maintained that he has not had a fair trial, with Article six of the Urouropean Convention on Human Rights being seriously violated, as Peter had already served longer in jail than the sentence received by the time it came to trial, that is, he was due for immediate release. However, he continued to be held in custody pending extradition to Austria to face various charges which he maintains are false.
These relates a supposed defamation of a judge by sending an email that he said he never sent. Extradition took place in July twenty seventeen, and Peter was first held in jail pending trial, and he says, by the way that while he was there, nearly ten percent of the
prisoners in the jail with him were journalists and political prisoners. However, most of the charges were dropped and in November twenty seventeen he was transferred to a psychiatric institute for life, without ever having been examined by a psychiatrist in Austria. An a psychiatrist who's ever examined Peter, by the way, has been a British psychiatrist, doctor Gethins, who told the British court that there was no mental health problem with
him at all. Andy continues. The psychiatrist who wrote this report was a certain university professor, doctor Manfred Waltzel wa l z L Manfred Waltzel. It has been said that he is known to fake reports to facilitate the imprisonment of opponents of the regime. His report determined that Peter suffers from such a severe paranoid personality disorder that he is a danger to the public and that he needs to be confined for life. This, however, conflicts with all
the evidence. A psychiatrist in England examined Peter in person and discermined that he is of sound mind. That's doctor Geffins I just mentioned. Furthermore, suitably qualified friends and professionals confirmed that he has no mental health issues, and Brian and I just spoken to him on the phone. There's no mental health issues there, that's for sure. He's a
top flight intellectual or very sound mind. Peter maintains that all these allegations of crime and mental incapacity have been fabricated in order to a prevent his exposure of official corruption in Britain, Austria and Germany. B discredit him and the evidence of this corruption he and others have already published in the public domain, that's mainly on the Grandma b blog and see to allow corrupt officials, working in cooperation with certain Hoffshurer family members to defraud Barbara and
Peter of all their assets in Britain and Austria. And that is a point about this case, Brian. There's asset stripping and house stealing going on simultaneously in two EU
member states. Lord Kenneth McGinnis, many people will remember him as the Ulster Unionist prominent politician, Lord McGinnis, member of the British House of Lords, working with a professional investigator, produced sufficient evidence for what should have been a successful prosecution of offenses committed by police and social works involved in the actions to defraud Barbara of her house in England.
In May twenty twelve in Parliament, in fact, it was in a response to the Queen's Speech debate he called for a thorough investigation into the hoffsher case. This, however, not take place, and shortly afterwards North Yorkshire Police entered Barbara's house and claimed to have found incriminating evidence against Peter in the house. This summary is nearly done, but
I will drop in the relevant things here. What's relevant about this is that within five thousand books of a collection, police supposedly found the dirt they were looking for within twenty minutes, and when challenged about it, they went back into the house and found supposedly a pile of forty six videos that they have missed in the first search of five thousand books during twenty minutes, which had netted
them a piece of paper. During this time, Peter and Barbara were in exile in Austria, and the Austrian authorities then claimed that Peter lacked mental capacity that is to continue the case because he was starting a case against the Austrians even though they had never met him, and commenced proceedings to have him confined to a psychiatric institute for the rest of his life. Peter and Barbara were then forced to seek refuge in Germany, where they were
granted persecuted persons status. However, in May twenty fourteen, German police and others violently kidnapped Barbara and allowed her persecutors to take her to England. Will get onto the manner of that kidnap later Brian. Both Barbara and Peter are frail and disabled. Physical violence was used against them. Since then, Barbara has been held against her will. She was known at one time to be held in a Yorkshire care home run by the local authorities. She is said to
have been denied critical medication, her glasses and more. She suffered a life changing injury due to what is believed to be wilful neglect, and has been stripped of all her assets. Barbara was and still is being held in communicado, and it is not certain whether or not she is
still alive. The English courts, in particular the infamous Secret Court, the Court of Protection that's the court set up in recent years to look after the assets supposedly of mentally incapacitated old people, has acted in collusion with her persecutors. Peter's appeal against his confined to a psychiatric prison was denied. The courts refused to consider evidence or hear witnesses supporting
his case. Meanwhile, the Austrian State prosecutor starts Unvaldt has dropped two and a half of the three charges against Peter. These are the charges that brought into Austria in the first place. The outstanding matter is so petty that it does not warrant imprisonment. Peter maintains that he and his mother have been subjected to persecution and imprisonment due to their anti corruption activism and their exposure of serious organized crime committed by officials in several member states of the
European Union. His case appears to be far from unique. In fact, when you call Peter, he'll say that there's tens of thousands of people like his mother, and he asserts that he has knowledge of reports concerning a large number of people being held in Austrian mental institutions like himself due to their opposition to the regime i e. Political prisoners. Final paragraph of Andy's summary says the level of corruption in the Hofschuer case has deterred lawyers from
giving Barbara and Peter proper advice and support. Neither of them has had effective legal representation and their case has not had effective media exposure. Despite the efforts of Lord McGinnis. The case is mentioned several times in Hansard for twenty twelve and others. On the contrary, North Yorkshire Police alone have spent in excess of one million pounds in civil actions to block all publicity concerning this case. So this is as we see in Scotland with the Crown Office.
People who are or were in public duty are given a bottomless pit of public money to pursue libel cases against people they don't like. No action of libel has been commenced against those involved in exposing official corruption, just a trumped up harassment charge and public money is used to silence critic. There is the summary, Bryan, of what has gone on. It is pretty incredible. It's taken me
more than four minutes to read. Sorry for the underestimation there, but I think listeners will be gobsmacked enough just by that summary.
It is thank you very much for that summary, Alex, because with many of these cases people who come forward, it isn't that they don't have evidence. The problem that we have consistently encountered is that they have too much evidence. They have hundreds or thousands of documents which demonstrate the
reality of their case. But it's how you take that information and get it into a form that can be put across to other people simply, and I think you've done a marvelous job of that, So thank you very much. And isn't it interesting that if we come down to the absolute basics of the case, we've got a man who says that he has encountered corruption and organized crime and that has impacted on his family, where further wrongdoing has taken place. So things have happened to his mother,
things have happened to him in self. You gave three points there of how he'd been targeted preventing exposure, he'd been discredited, and then corruption amongst officials was then allowed to continue. So there's a sort of template here, and the bit that you also mentioned, which I pick up on straight away, is that you say, well, the use of the psychiatric system for these criminal purposes is what we used to see in the Soviet Union. This was
the Gulag, and you mentioned soldier knits In. Well, we're not in the Soviet Union. We are in Western Europe, or we're in UK and yet we are seeing a system of psychiatric abuse which is amazingly similar to the Soviet system. Perhaps we could come onto that a bit later. But this man has essentially had property stolen. Would you say that that's the key part. He's been targeted for the property he owns.
That seems to have been why Peter Hofsher was targeted in the first place. He had together with his parents, and particularly after his father died in two thousand and eight, and he and his mother were vulnerable owners of a nice large house in desirable York in the city itself which falls under North Yorkshire Council and Police Area.
What focuses attention is the amount of evidence that's come to light about what has happened around Peter. So can we focus on some of the detail of what's actually taken place and try and join together I'm actually trying to get my own head around this case because there's
so much there to it. So we'll say, for listen, I fully appreciate the position we've had an overview of the case, but we need to I think we need to try and focus in on some of the details of things that happen, where we could say, how can you explain this? In a normal functioning system, if somebody goes to the police and they say a crime has been committed, what should happen is that they should be listened to. What they say should be recorded, They should
be questioned in a reasonable way. But then a decision is made. Has the person put forward evidence which appears to be credible and if so, then there's going to be some investigation to see whether their evidence is actually credible. But none of those things have happened in this case.
I'm afraid that the situation in Britain's constabulary ticularly in North Yorkshire, which is the headquarters that Jimmy Saville used, because the city of Leeds isn't in North Yorkshire, but his coastal hideaway in Scarborough was where we now all know that Saville was working closely together with the then Mayor of Scarborough, the late Peter Jack and Ellie Jaco n l I. Scarborough and North Yorkshire coastal area was the epicenter of where Jimmy Saville's operations involving children were
and there's been so many scandals, particularly involving North Yorkshire that, as Lord mcgannis said in his interventions in the House of Lords including the Queen's Speech debate in twenty twelve, North Yorkshire is a particularly suspect police force. And if you go to the magistrates court or the social services in the City of York or the County of North Yorkshire,
it's the same story. There is no basic investigation and you get quite illiterate threatening emails in his case even sent to him while he was in Austria saying we summon you back to Britain. This is the level of hutzpah that these authorities have literate and they claim to be able to have complete jurisdiction over you, as are they owned you body and soul, that investigations don't happen.
Okay, now, Alex we have jumped so far from houses being stolen and assets being stolen and an assault by police and somebody's mother being taken and literally disappearing. We've jumped from that environment to talking about children, and you're mentioning Jimmy Saville. So for our audience, how do we how do we show how these pieces fit together or appear to fit together, Because this is a very big jump to go from organized crime, which is stealing somebody's house.
That's an understandable crime. You're now talking about children being involved, and you're also mentioning Satanism.
I think that the phrase you have come up with yourself, Brian, is very useful. Child abuse is the glue that keeps the criminal structures in place, which exists among behind, and above and around the official public structures we have of politicians, councilors, members of Parliament, police, social services, judges, magistrates and all the rest of them. If some of each of these professions are involved in child abuse, then there is a
hold over them for life. And I think now it's twenty eighteen, it's beyond reasonable doubt in the British and worldwide public's mind that there is a massive systemic problem with child abuse in every part of Britain, with particular hotspots like the coast of Yorkshire and the City of York itself in this case. I don't know whether you had anything to add on that, because of course you
posed this very valid question to me. But you've been in UK column casework longer than I have, and to my four or five major cases i've been involved, and you've been in perhaps a hundred of them. So what's your perspective on it?
Well, I did indeed say that that child abuse was there the fuel or the engine of wider corruption in criminality, and I certainly believe that's true. And as we are speaking tonight, former Detective Constable Metropolitan Detective Constable John Wedger is on his walk from London to Manchester in order to raise people's awareness for the abuse of children, the massive abuse of children and the cover up of that
abuse by the establishment and political circles. So he is walking that distance in immense cold at the moment in order to try and raise awareness. And I'm delighted to say that he's had for part of the journey so far he's had a Member of Parliament, Mike Penning with him. Mike Penning used to be the Policing Minister and Mike Penning is now on record as saying that when he presented a file to the Home Office on the subject of child abuse, but also including the testimony of John Wedger,
that that file has mysteriously disappeared. And once again we're into the pattern that we've seen many times before. So I bring in John Wedger because as a policeman, he talks in the interview that he did with myself, he talks through the detail of how when he started to expose the abuse of children, the deaths of young children, how he was viciously silenced by bullying an harassment by the Metropolitan Police, and he got no help at all
from the political system. So to me, the evidence is overwhelming that we have a political system and an establishment which is involved in the abuse of children and covers it up. And once we can see that at the heart of that system, which has got to be Westminster, it's reasonable to say that because it is there, it will exist at a lower level.
That's a good way of putting it, Brian, And you've mentioned one of the good MPs who are doing that job.
Now.
The solution to corrupt MPs is not revolution, it is good MPs. And we have to say every political party and independent MPs such few as we have have shown themselves worthy and committed to this. One thinks of Sariah Champion in Rochdale, John Mann, Jeffrey Dickinson, the late Conservative MP who did so much in the nineteen eighties when there was a brief window of opportunity to lift the lid on this and all the dossiers that he brought to the police attention went missing in the Home Office.
Can't find the archives of them in applied company. In the Welsh Nationalist Party you have Bethanne Jenkins still active as an assembly member in Cardiff on this issue. And the most egregious of all is the probably assassinated William McCray of the Scottish National Party who made it to
his cottage in wester Ross in nineteen eighty five. And this was just after he had started talking as a war hero of some reputation, when the SNP was gaining in popularity about the Scottish and British wide issue of child abuse, including at Westminster. So it's not just a bunch of nutters talking about this. Brian. We don't like to pull rank often, but you're a retired role Navy officer.
I was a GCHQ officer for eight years. We believe and we see the evidence brought forward by mister Hofsherer in his limited circumstances, in his clinic and his supporters, and we have to say we believe the word and documentation of mister Hofsher and others of his ilk against the insistence of all of the institutional weight that police
and social services can bring. Because mister Hofsherer, and this is a key authenticity Hallmark has consistently in blog posts and other public appearances, letters freedom of information request, always given right of reply to those whom he's accusing of wrongdoing, whether involvement in the theft or the fraud, or a child abuse or satanism, and they have always replied with silence and sometimes with publicly funded lawsuits to shut up investigators who are backing him up. And that to me
is a great sign of guilt. And we've reached a tipping point now where the respectable and alert people in the nation are on the side of mister Hofshre and you and I are not on the side of the powers that be in this matter.
That's absolutely correct. While you were talking through there, I was thinking about the Hampstead case. That was what came into my mind. Where we have a mother and a partner who go to the authorities talking about what was happening to their children. We have testimony from those children, both on video and audio. And I will add that not only did I meet the mother and a partner, but I was also able to speak to the young
boy in a telephone conversation. I wasn't able to speak to the little girl because she'd already been taken by social services, but what the parents said to me, and certainly what the child said to me, made great sense. The minimum I would have expected is for a proper investigation by the police, but of course in the Hampstead case it is clear that there was no proper investigation from the police. And then there was a recorded interview
of the two youngsters which was incompetent. Is about the best I could put it, because this was certainly not a carefully recorded interview with two young children talking about horrific things. This was it was almost amateur. It was so casual, it was so it lacked professionalism, and other policemen have said this. But what then trans inspires that the mother and her partners are the one who are then effectively hounded. They are the ones who the courts
focus on. Medical evidence is ignored, the whole case is shut down, and any members of the public who are prepared to speak out on it are hounded. And we're left today with Sabine McNeil, for example, one of the people who's been particularly outspoken on the Hampstead case. She's had to appear at court again. She is at fault for speaking out. So on one hand, you're talking about the silence of the establishment. What we also see go with the silence is very often a vicious attack against
those who make accusations. If there was no crime, why does this need to happen. Why can't there be a proper investigation, Why can't there be a fully documented rebuttal to the accusations in the first.
Well, A point of commonality between the Hofsherer case and the Doherty case in the northeast of Scotland, which went over to Ireland as well, is this failure to investigate,
and it takes a similar form in both cases. A good social worker and police constable is put on the case in both instances and is then taken off again within twenty four hours by a colleague who is a slightly senior officer who seems to put the fear of God into the original not bent social worker or copper who was assigned to the case.
Well, that is very true, and I have to say that again with the Hampstead case, when good police officers took the correct action, we know that quite senior police officers were threatened at some stage overnight between being informed and the next morning they had been threatened. In one case, the man was quote a gibbering wreck when he spoke to a colleague at Hoppol seven in the morning. We don't know what was said to him, We don't know
what was done. What we do know is that one policeman was prepared to say when I spoke to my colleague the next morning, he was a gibbering wreck and it was quite clear that no correct action was going to be taken.
Just a slight sidebar here on how that threatening even extends into the political and military realm. We don't want to get too far off the Offsherer case, but just to confirm what you've said, UK column sources have reported to us that flag officers so very senior rank retired military men of the General Admiral Air COMMANDAW level who've spoken out in some aspect of the European Union's military unification agenda have had similar threats. And the leaders of
political parties within the last few years. And when you're at that level of respectability in stage of life, the threat seems to take the form of something will happen to your granddaughter at college. So there seems to be no end to the threats that will be issue to people, no matter high up.
This is very true, and of course this was exactly although he's not a senior officer, but of course John Wedger has said that this sort of threat was made to him within the police force. And yes, I've also heard from very good people that this is the technique used against very senior individuals. And I'm sorry to say that many of the senior military people I think cave
into this remarkably quickly. Whereas I would expect some guts from them, I see people quickly withdrawing into the safety of their establishment world.
Now it's time to get back into the detail of the Hofshure case. We didn't want to hammer it incessantly through the whole podcast because it's a lot for people to take in. But now we've put it in contact, we need to zoom in again to Pour Peter in the current frame we're speaking at the end of February twenty before I read a chronology that Peter himself gave by phone to Andy Peacher, which people can listen to on the Freedom Talk Radio Network channel on mixcloud dot com.
They can easily find it by searching or by going to Freedom Talk Radio dot co dot UK. Before I read basically a retranscribing of what Peter said about the chronology, and it's just a slightly clearer voice on the better line, I would like to read a written contribution that's come into us, which is Peter Hoffsher's account of incidents in the psychological and psychiatric torture that he's now undergoing. You
mentioned earlier that we should return to this now. I've discussed this with Peter, as he's a historian and a cultural analyst. This point of the network he now finds himself victimized by. I said, do you think that, with Austria's particular status in Central Europe through the years, that this is something that the Soviets implanted after the Second World War in Austria, and he said that he'd thought long and hard about it and reckoned that it dated
communism and the Soviet Union. The abuse of psychiatry in Austria is something, he says, that goes right back to the eponymous founder of psychiatry, after whom the clinic he's incarcerated in his name, Sigmund Freud. From that time onwards there has been this angle, and more recent years have seen members of the Freud family acutd of that very child abuse we were talking about earlier.
This takes us into a fascinating area, Alex because in my mind comes the chart from Christopher's Story's book The EU Collective Enemy of its Member States. In the first few pages of that particular book is a table. It says that Britain is to be dismantled as a country by subversion, effectively by first of all weakening society, undermining state institutions. It then gives details of what would happen
at each level. So education would be made empty wasteland where children didn't learn anything really productive and what would that mean that they were vulnerable and the state could claim them. Marriages would be broken down Eventually it's talking about trouble on the streets and major breakdown in the country, and it ends by saying that when the state then clamps down on this unrest, that the United Kingdom will
have been normalized. And what Christopher's story explains in the book is that normalization means that the country will be under a new and very draconian political system. Now the table, the information in the table was acknowledged to a gentleman called Thomas Schumann, which is a cover name for a Soviet ex Soviet KGB man. And when I read that book, and I paid attention to that table because my mind said to me, what was set forth on the paper
was happening in the country. I then thought, how interesting that a former KGB man should be warning the West of what was going to take place. And in the beginning, I assumed that he was breaking ranks with the Soviet system which had unleashed this particular form of attack. And it was later when I began to realize that we were seeing this subversion drilled into every level of our society that I started to realize that this was something
far deeper than a particular political system. This was not something that had simply come out of the Soviet Union.
It had been used in the Soviet Union, but it was something that was much older, darker, and more danger And the Frankfurt school comes into to my mind, and that would bring us to Germany in the when are we talking about the eighteen nineties or thereabouts, where we had a school of psychiatrists who were openly admitting that psychiatry would give them a powerful tool for overthrowing traditional governments. They were talking about it at.
The time they were and the same group of philosophers and psychologists had an evil twin. As well as getting psychiatry, which is the dirty hands on bit psychology involved, they also had the cultural army Frankfort Schuler, which went off to Columbia in New York in the nineteen thirties. Separately there was Antonio Graham, she talking about cultural Marxism in Italy, not part of the Frankfort Schuler or the German clique, and separately from that, and this is where we get
back to Freud and Austria. There was a group which became the Tavistot Clinic, still part of the NHS to
this day. In London. The Second World War set up by Colonel Reese, the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, which does the mind experimentation on subjects unwilling, witting and unwitting, which has always been an implantation of this very dark Austrian and German based idea psychology and psychiatry in Britain and thence into America and the world, particularly through military intelligence.
This is all relevant to what we're discussing with the Hofsher case, of course, because as you said, we were told that the Soviets were the problem, but the Soviet Union and Nazism, which had a strong support based in Austria, were both funded, as mainstream academics like Anthony Sutton have pointed out in their day, by the same banks and the same Anglo American elite structures. So yes, the abuse of psychology and psychiatry is something that transcends nationality and
political ideologies. It is really what Christopher's story in his later years was calling a global revolutionary Trotskyite model which really glides in and out of totalitarian regimes and seems to have gone east to way, from the Soviet Union to Nazi Germany and now the Anglo American model. But with that said here is a brief cry for help, although written in a very dry tone. I have to
say by Peter Hofscher. This has been transcribed because he can't send emails out, but he's dictated it over the phone. There's two incidents described here, and the doctor Weissensteiner he is describing is a female psychiatrist who is on his ward, who he says, like all the rest of them, he describes as a psychotic individual screaming, yelling and not behaving at all like a psychiatrist calming people, and with a
team of strong male nurses. And I say that because Peter Hofscher has room toward arthritis as you're hearing this, but they strap him down anyway, So he writes here incident of the nineteenth of January twenty eighteen. Around eleven am on Friday, the nineteenth of January twenty eighteen, I was called into a room on hospital Wing PS two to one in the London's Krunken House Zudvest, which is just the district hospital for the area in Ratz, Austria.
This room is known to the inmates as the torture chamber, as this is where staff forcibly inject patients, including peaceful patients with the liquid kosh. In the room were a number of people, including doctor Weisensteiner, three to four male nurses, two men and one woman. Normally male nurses wear a white T shirt with name badges. These well built men were wearing civilian T shirts so could not be identified. Doctor Weisensteiner had her hand in her pocket and seemed
to be holding something. The three other people stated that they were police officers from the er Kenungsteinst, which is the police intelligence unit, who had come to take my fingerprints and a DNA sample. Hmm. Interesting for someone who's been sectioned as a danger to the public. They asked me a number of questions which indicated that they had
little knowledge of the case. As I was not sure that they really were police officers and by the way, Brian, we've seen plenty of masquerading as police, haven't we in British cases. I asked them, Peter Osher continues to produce the relevant court order and their warrant cards. They refused
to do so. I then asked to be allowed to take legal advice before continuing this interview, which, according to my knowledge of the Austrian Constitution, is a right in Austria, as in Britain, this too was refused, so I declined to give my fingerprints or DNA. The female then produced a card with poddied tsai and a number on it. Her ID number was sixty one one six five one three six. You can see that Peter Offsher is no fool.
He memorized the number, but it had neither a name nor a photograph on it, So again I refused to give my fingerprints or DNA. At that point, one of the male nurses screamed at me so loud that his face went red, threatening me if I did not cooperate. I responded by politely requesting that the male nurse stop screaming at me. He continued to do so, so again I asked him to stop, which he did. One of the police officers then for possibly ran a swab over
my neck and forehead. I was then allowed to leave the room. It seems that this was a failed attempt to provoke me into a violent reaction to provide an excuse to give me the liquid cosh, because otherwise they
have to apply for a court order for it. The fact that I did not respond as hoped is a further clear indication that I do not suffer from a paranoid personality disorder, which of course is what he's been sectioned for life for without a psychiatric assessment, and the other one, Peter writes, is the same length and it's an incident during the night of the thirteenth to the fourteenth of February twenty eighteen. On the evening of the thirteenth of February twenty eighteen, I went to bed around
nine thirty pm. Around eleven thirty pm, the lights went on and a number of male nurses came over to me and started shouting at me, being half asleep. I cannot be sure of exactly what was said, but it seems I was being accused of having attacked somebody. I denied this politely and asked to be left alone. Then my bed was moved to the middle of the wor where there were around ten male nurses. They grabbed hold of me and moved me to a bed on which
there were restraining straps. I reminded them that I suffer from chronic rheumatored arthritis and asked them to stop manhandling me. Nevertheless, they strapped me down and applied the straps with such force that the blood flow to my hands was restricted. I was then left like this for several hours. At no stage did I offer any physical resistance to this assault.
Firstly because I am a calm placid, non violent person. Secondly, because I suffer from chronic rheumatoid arthritis, so any attempt to use my fists or feet in a violent fashion would have resulted in me suffering severe pain. And Thirdly, when faced with ten or so opponents, resistance would have been futile. Furthermore, passive resistance to violence places one on the higher moral ground. Once I was strapped down, one of the nurses grabbed my genitalia. I noticed a female doctor,
possibly doctor Weisensteiner, hovering in the background. I assume that she was hoping I would be violent, giving her the excuse to use the liquid cosh, which, for anyone who doesn't know, is brain altering chemicals with irreversible effects to send people gargar. Such behavior by the staff of the Sigmund Freud Klinicum appears to fit a pattern of contrived incidents designed to provoke me into a violent reaction so that the staff here have an excuse to drug me.
It should be noted that the drug doctor Weissensteiner prescribed, which I have refused to take, would lead to permanent brain damage. This incident was the latest in a series of criminal offenses committed against me here, which include one imprisoning a sane person for life in a psychiatric institution, a known violation of Article three of the European Convention on Human Rights and considered it to be tantamount to torture.
Two attempting to get a sane person to take unnecessary life changing medication, which is an attempt to inflict serious bodily harm, and three as well as a breach of the Hipocratic oath of course, and three strapping a disabled person to a bed knowing I suffer from arthritis, which is an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Not to be forgotten. Peter Hofsher concludes in this report is that my house
in Austria can only be sold when I'm dead. The assaults and torment to which I'm being subjected appear to be designed to cause me so much stress that I may be tempted to commit suicide. Before I hand back to you, Brian, I'll just say that Peter Hofsherer has found out from friends who the city councilor in the city of Grutz is who covers issues of oversight of the health system. It's a chap called Robert Krotzer. Krtzer easily found contact details online. I have to say I
have little faith in the man. Not only does he look startlingly young to have such a responsible job, but he belongs to the cape UH, the Communist Party of Austria.
I think, Alex that many people who've listened in to that statement that you've just read out will be utterly horrified, and I can imagine that quite a few of them will be very frightened indeed by what they're listening to, because for the average person to understand that somebody can be taken off the streets, not go through a proper trial process, and then end up in a psychiatric unit where they're trying to forcibly administer psychotropic drugs. This is
the stuff of horror films. But you're talking about Peter in this case. Into my mind comes Melanie Shaw, And for listeners who have not heard this name before, Melanie Shaw was a child abuse survivor from Beechwood Children's Home in Nottingham. She blew the whistle on the abuse of children at that location. She also so says the death
of children at that location. And even though the police supposedly carry out an investigation of Beechwood and another seven or eight other children's homes, Melanie is rapidly silenced, first of all being put in prison, but later put in prison again without any proper charges against her. Certainly she didn't know what the charges against her were, nor did she know the time that she would be in prison. But while she was in prison, she has been kept
in solitary confinement for over eighteen nineteen months. She's been denied medication, She's been denied a basic facility such as education provision or even doing a small job. She has been brutalized. And we ask ourselves why, And the only answer I can come to is because the state is terrified of the information melanieawholds about the abuse of children by members of the public, but also bymps and people
in the establishment. I can also think of Carol Woods, a social worker whose crime was to speak out and say that social workers were lying and falsifying reports in order to take children away from their parents. Babies away from their parents. When Carol brought her evidence forward, was she listened to? Was she supported? Was she protected?
No?
The exact opposite occurred and she was placed in the succession of psychiatric units in UK, where she was appallingly treated and drugged on occasions. I can also think of another lady called Emma from Cornwall. Emma's crime was to say that she believe that inappropriate photographs were being taken of children at the primary school in Cornwall. When Emma went to the authorities with her information, was she listened to?
Know?
Was she supported? Know? What happened to her? She was eventually accused of Well what was she accused of? She was accused of nothing really apart from causing trouble. But she was then sectioned, taken to a psychiatric facility in Cornwall, and we still hold the audio recording of Emma speaking from that facility where she is crying and saying they want to forcibly medicate me.
I've just spoke to someone and the time to say that.
Medications.
I think they have me to take it if I will, well you have any sort.
Of down them. So I am sitting here, I'm recalling these cases from my own memory, but all of them were reinforced by evidence at the time. What we can see is this practice of psychiatric abuse is being used. It is used in UK, it's being used in Europe. But what we are seeing the in Peter Hosherer's case again is that this system can be brought into use across national borders. So this is not something which just resides within the UK. In some ways, there's the availability
to link people in Britain and Austria. And if I remember another case, which was a French lady called Kareem Guget, where Krene was desperately worried that her two daughters were suffering abuse. Karen was also subjected to this psychiatric attack and had the police houndinger in both Britain and France.
And in her case you could see from the documents how there was a fluidity in the court attack on her moving from the English child protection courts across to the French courts, and at the time we began to see that the common theme was always children and child abuse. This seemed to produce the ultimate linkage as to how this type of brutalized, brutalizing behavior was able to move
between national borders. And I think at that point I'll say, Alex, all of the work that I've done on my own, the work other people have brought to me, leads me to believe that we are encountering a very high level, corrupt, organized system of organized crime. But there is something immensely dark about it, in its power and the brutality which is prepared to unleash on on individuals.
If people are worried that we've gone off, perhaps too far with our enthusiasm or horror by talking about the level of corruption involved, I should at this point mention a very brief one paragraph letter, an open letter which veteran child abuse victims campaigner Robert Green has written today the twenty fourth of February twenty eighteen to Baroness Hale of Richmond of the Supreme Court, which says this, Dear baroness Hale, subject line satanism in the judiciary in the
family Division question mark and of course the Family Division is akin in its secrecy to the Court of Protection, which concerns old people. The Family Division concerns child cases. Of course, Dear baroness Hale, writes Robert Green, enclosed as a letter by me dated the fifteenth of January to
Sir James Mumby, President of the Family Division. Disappointingly, Sir James has failed to respond to this important matter of concern, and he was asking, Sir James Mumby, could you confirm that there are members of the judiciary in the Family Division who may hold Satanist beliefs while serving in the court. There was no response, so Robert Green says, disappointing me,
Sir James has failed to respond. So I would like to appeal to you to urge him to provide an answer without undue delay, Which is, can judges rule on the lives of children or indeed old people as in the offshore case, while being Satanists? As Robert Green adds, as the matter presents the possibility of obvious risks the
vulnerable people. Whilst this issue is not being addressed due to the widespread and entirely justified concerns about the operation of the Family Division in Jeni and in the Offshore case, it's the Court of Protection. I have decided to make this an open letter. I await your acknowledgment and trust that as head of a Supreme Court, I can rely on your cooperation in the interests of justice, decency and humanity. So right, Robert Green, I suspect you'll get silent or a farbov Again.
Well, that's a very powerful letter, Alex. And I'm trying to think the things that our audience might be thinking at the moment, and I'm quite sure some people will be saying, well, this is just too incredible. And if there are people out there at the moment who are saying for us to suggest that the seat of this very very criminal power in UK and overseas in Europe in other countries, comes back to the power of Satanist bodies.
We have to remember that it is our own government in the United Kingdom which approves Satanism for use on board British warships. So the British Government, in collusion with the Ministry of Defense, has not only fully recognized Satanism. We don't have to say does it exist. I'm going to say it must exist, because the British Government and the Ministry of Defense not only say it exists, but they think that this is acceptable practice for use on board warships. And I can say more or less the
same breath. It's remarkable that since this has been introduced. We know that the incident of very unpleasant bullying and assaults and threats going on on board warships is increasing, and I have good reason to believe it's also going on now in other areas of the military. So remarkable that we would have a government that would not say, well, we're not too sure about what this practice means, but
a government that would want to promote it. And today I was also informed that there's a job advert for a pagan minister to work in Dartmoor Prison, and I believe that the salary is about twenty nine thousand pounds for an eighteen and a half hour week, which seems to me a particularly lucrative job. But I'd like to
know what this pagan minister is going to do. I'm also going to say, because I can perhaps detect some of the response from the audience, yes, but that's a pagan, and I will then say, well, he might hear or she might be. But of course we know that the key attributes of Satanism or of Satanism is to infiltrate and use other organizations. So if people are fearful of what a secret society like the Masonic society is capable of doing. When we move to the Satanic society, then
anything and everything is possible. It's possible to be a Christian minister on the surface but be a Satanist underneath. It's possible to run a Christian church as a Christian church on the surface, but underneath it's run as a Satanic system. So we are starting to get on some very very dark areas, and of course where people have done excellent research in the past in order to get some of this truth up to the surface, it's invariably the case that they've started to be subjected to harassment
and threats themselves. And I've got just on my bookshelves for the side of me a book called Blasphemous Rumors by a gentleman called Andrew Boyd, and he is saying is Satanic ritual abuse fact or fantasy? And investigation His conclusion is that it's real. But also he was one of the several researchers who encountered very vicious threats and bullying the moment they attempted to touch on this subject. If there's nothing to hide, why would that be.
And who would be less likely Brian to start talking about having been victimized by Satanists and child abusers than an apparently secular, balanced, non religiously committed, non fantasizing historian of some repute, who, until this tragedy befell him ten years ago, had been peacefully writing books about the Napoleonic Wars, with no element of conspiracy theory in his writing at all. It seems to me that he is the least likely
person who have made any of this up. And if you listen to him speaking in his own voice by going to mixcloud dot com and finding Anti Peacher, you will provide the link Anti Peacher talking to Peter. You will hear he's the most down to earth, unspooked out Englishman you could ever hope to hear.
Yes, and this is really what we should be paying attention to. Society should exist on the basis that when somebody comes forward and says that they have suffered a wrong I was walking along the road and a man assaulted me. You may be the only person who was present, but society should take your word initially, and it should then investigate, and it should consider whether your word against
the word of another individual is the truth. But clearly this is no longer happening because when people come forward to say what happened to them, they are shut down without that proper investigation. This is what makes John Wedger's case so powerful that he recounts in great detail every time he tried to warn about what was happening with children, the abuse, the grooming, the drug taking, the prostitution, and ultimately the little girl being found dead in the gutter.
There was no proper response from his police colleagues. In fact, it was worse than they wouldn't listen to him. He was threatened to shut up. And there can only be one reason for this that individuals in the Metropolitan Police and colleagues within Westminster local authorities charities have an interest in covering up anybody who is pointing a finger at what is happening to children.
With that in mind, Brian, I shall read out my chronology, which I've boiled down from Peter's own words in his call to Andi Pecher, and this is basically in telegram style the events and do just interrupt me at any point if anything occurs to you, but I think will more or less leave the listeners. With this chronology, we've done all this build up and now people can get a sense of what's happening at what stage in the case over the last decade.
Before you do that, als, we'll just remind our listeners that these are, of course the allegations that obeye my Peter himself.
So here we are two thousand and eight. Peter, who partly grew up in Germany for years and has dual citizenship, and who at this stage lives in Austria. In two thousand and eight, rushes back to York to find eighty seven year old father ill with a heart condition and both parents being neglected. September two thousand and eight, North Yorkshire Police make their first attempt to arrest Peter. Social Services make the officer investigating the matter disappear from the case.
January two thousand and nine, died of his second bout of bronchitis. Through two thousand and nine, Peter and his mother, Barbara adapt a house to keep Barbara safe in having been chased out of the parental home which was otherwise going to have been Peter's by power of attorney. Autumn two thousand and nine, your social services refuse to safeguard Peter and Barbara. Twenty ten Peter and Barbara realize they're stuck in Austria and find that no British solicitors are
willing to assist them. That's lawyers for our overseas listeners. The Member of Parliament is not interested. Social Services are at this point in twenty ten ordered to reinvestigate by two independent bodies and ignore the matter. Twy eleven, twenty twelve, the Ulster Unionist Lord Ken McGinnis begins raising the case in the House of Lords. Home Office ministers replied that
it's a police matter and that they cannot comment. Lord McGinnis tells the Lords that he has shown Theresa May, who at this point was the Home Secretary the British Interior Minister, hundreds of documents about fraud and corruption in North york Shire. Peter's solicitor, Mister Crawford, says that the documents would convict the Social Work Department and all North Yorkshire Police senior officers. Peter and Barbara lie low in Austria during these years two thousand and eleven twenty twelve,
awaiting ministerial responses. The responses end up being bog off right up to the then Prime Minister David Cameron through this period. Theresa May is the kingpin of this as Home Secretary. July twenty and eleven, when Peter and Barbara regain control of the house.
This is in York.
Two computer hard drives that's loose from any personal computer are found in the house which demonstrably were not there before because there had been a bailiff's inventorization of the property after the last time that Peter had had access. So that's the beginning of the fitting up for the child abuse images. Twenty twelve. North Yorkshire Police becomes embroiled in scandals and above all the scandal breaks of the Jacko Neelly that's the mayor of Scarborough until he died
in nineteen ninety nine, and Jimmy Savile scandal. This was just the time Jimmy Savile died. Barbara begins blogging in her own right under the name Grandma b. The blog is still up at Grandma Barbara dot WordPress dot com. Harris meant charges are cooked up, although at law one cannot harass by stating true information. May twenty twelve. Lord McGinnis's last statement in Parliament on the matter calls for
a criminal investigation into North Yorkshire Police. There is no response. Also, in May twenty and twelve, Peter replies to the Austrian court to reopen the case. June twenty twelve, a woman at North Yorkshire Police writes to Peter, pretending that he is harassing them and that he supposedly must come back to Britain immediately. Peter replies, pointing out that she is acting beyond authority and that if North Yorkshire Police issued a European arrest warrant it would be challenged by the
Austrians for grounds. She never writes to him again. July two thousand and two, well, the same Austrian judge as before issues his pronouncement there will be no reopening of the case because Peter supposedly lacks mental capacity. Twenty twelve to twenty thirteen, Peter fights the mental incapacity allegations in Austria. No Austrian mental health professional has ever examined him and
still hasn't out of twenty eighteen. Austrian courts tell Peter in September twenty thirteen that he is going to be sectioned confined because of his mental supposed condition. Peter wonders what will happen to his mother. Then he says that there is obvious Yorkshire and Austria collusion. So in September twenty thirteen, Peter and Barbara flee to Guterslaw, which is
near Paderborn in Westphalia, northwestern Germany, to lie Low. It so happens that the town of Gutislow is also the site of the one remaining base of the British Army of the Rhine. The German local council at Gutuslow agrees that North Yorkshire Police and the Austrian Judai are persecuting
Peter and Barbara. Underward them official German persecuted persons status criminal helped Commissar Andreas Fogel of the nord Drinvestfahland Police agrees to Peter that he will help him and his mother lie Low and says if an arrest warrant is issued from Britain, we will ignore it or Austria. January twenty fourteen, North Yorkshire Police issue an inter pole request for Barbara, who has supposedly been kidnapped. Westphilia police know
that this is nonsense. February two thousand and fourteen, the second such interpole request is sent out and ignored. May twenty fourteen, the third such Interpol request is sent out and this time Peter and Barbara are raided without warning while still in bed one morning. Fogel and he later admitted that this was under pressure, organizes the raid because it's his patch. Together with his colleague criminal helped Commissar
villefried Vitkemper. Orders for this can only have come from or have been cleared by the Nordry invest Farland State Interior Minister and ultimately from the Chancellor of Germany, Missus mercle This is because it must have been coordinated on the British side from Cameron in Peter to judgment, so it would need peer to peer clearance. Folwell told a friend when this got back to Peter that I know what North Yorkshire police are like, but my hands were tied.
On the morning of the raid in May twenty fourteen, ten men in civilian clothes with no id, led by a German speaking man, beat up Peter and Barbara, smash their video camera, handcuffed Peter and then pepper spray him in his face, emptying the rest of the canister on Barbara. Barbara is taken back to Britain and never heard from again. Neighbours later tell Peter that there were besides the ten who raided in their flat, another ten British men involved.
And they say these were military police, not special forces, they said. And this may have been an assumption, you think, because around that part of Germany they were used to tough British men and they would call them red caps, because that's the kind of guys you would see policing around the basis. But no, that they were British military police. Arresting as a British civilian in Germany is later confirmed in the Tees Side court case, which we'll get to
in a moment, by the Ministry of Defense. So Peter says that because the Ministry of Defense and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office would both have had to provide Secretary of State level clearance for this operation, therefore it must have been done in administerial consultation. So in other words, the then Prime Minister David Cameron, he says, must have done it and missus Maybe's or the Home Secretary at
the time must have agreed it jointly. Neighbours also spotted women in the arresting party, whom these neighbors identified as North Yorkshire Police and Social Services. Peter is held for only four hours this day and released without charge. So it was just a kidnap. Missus Offsherer that this happened. It has no further reason after this to stay in Germany and goes to stay with a friend I believe this was in Austria, while trying to get his mother
returned to his care. At this point, he contacts the Court of Protection, which was set up in the Blair government to look after old people's interests. When he says my name is mister Hofscherer, they slammed the phone down on him. During summer twenty fourteen, he writes a written application to the Court of Protection appealing for Barbara to be returned to him. These are supposed to be dealt with within twenty four hours, but the rejection comes three
months later late twenty fourteen. Peter is advised, probably correctly at this point that a private prosecution is the only or best hope in these circumstances, so he contacts York Magistrates Court and they claim that Peter can only file it in person in York. Peter knows that returning to Britain is most likely going to be a trap, but it is his only chance of rescuing his elderly mother,
so he does it. And then in December twenty fourteen, and this was witnessed by Andy Pecher, Peter walks through the court doorway in York and is arrested minutes before filing his private prosecution on a technicality. Peter is then held on remand mostly down in London at Magister's Britain Wandsworth, far from Yorkshire, for two years. This case should have come to trial within six months in English legal practice, and this two year period is necessary because he's being
stitched up for supposed possession of child pornography. The two computer towers these were additional to his own computers on which the supposed images were found, were not listed by the bailiffs in an inventory made after the last time Peter was in the house, and he does note that the number of images supposedly found was six, nine hundred
and sixty nine. In other words, sixty nine sixty nine a possible reference to the year in which the Church of Satan was founded in America, which has become a general reference to Satanism and or an obscene sexual reference. Peter says at this point, quote police had access to my personal computers in York since twenty ten. That's five years before. I note, by the way, this is Alex talking that the same trick was played on Chris Spivey,
who supported Peter Hofsherer. Chris Spevy had this trick played on him by Essex police an hour and a half's search of his computer and not being allowed in the room and then supposedly an indecent image being found on it.
And this was in the same timeframe. Now, when the trial eventually comes in June twenty seventeen, the judge Tonally Briggs Queen's Council refuses to let Peter out, which he should have done on time served, which is he's already spent longer in prison than the alleged defense was for. He refuses to admit defense evidence for Peter Hofsherer, and
Peter's defense solicitor is uncooperative. Listeners should know that any lawyer is an officer of the court and has a duty to the court that they won't tell you about if you're in a defense situation, but they do. He sentences Peter to thirty months and places him on the Sex Offender's Register for life. He used the word outrageous
when sentencing him. By this time the time of the trial June twenty seventeen, the original charge on which he was arrested in twenty fourteen at the Austrian's request, which was writening a threatening email to a judge, has already been dropped. The remaining charges relates to items supposedly found among his five thousand books within twenty minutes of a search.
When this is challenged as hard to believe, North Yorkshire police go back into his house and then supposedly find a pile of forty six videos that they missed the first time. The photo's charge was also dropped in the interim, and so the only charge on which he was sentenced in twenty seventeen was for these supposed videos. Peter has never been given a list of the contents of the
videos he supposedly had in his possession. The number of videos mentioned, and also the serial numbers of the charge sheets and other police documents seemed to be random and different every time Peter mentions it was a six, then eight, then fifteen, then forty six, then twelve, and the trial itself is moved from York up to Teaside, which is a couple of hours drive further north at the last minute to keep his supporters out of the public gallery.
On the day next month, July seventeen, Austria still has an arrest warrant out for Peter, so's he's out on bail at this point and Austria has an arrest warrant out for him so that he can be sectioned mentally. And finally Peter is extradited. And this happens after disinformation that was put out by some of his supposed supporters.
These false allegations thrown into the mix were that Peter had skipped bail and some insinuated that Peter had been responsible while on bail for a sexual assault on the child nearby. Now the Austrians issued an European arrest warrant and this related to defamation of a judge, because in the Austrian model, that's the equivalent stitch up to in Britain what you get with harassment to deal with people
who you don't like. And he says, when I was transferred to Gratz jail and was held on demand there. This is still July twenty seventeen. He says there were five hundred inmates there, forty of whom were journalists or other political prisoners, nearly ten percent. And then he mentioned at this point that he'd previously, for the only time in his life, had a mental health professional assessment by a doctor Gethins, and this was to answer an English
courts request. And she writes on completion of a screening questionnaire. He quotes from this document that he still has with him. Doctor Gethins writes, on completion of a screening questionnaire, he did not score above three on any item, suggesting that he does not have a personality disorder. At her concluding sentences, on the basis of the evidence before me, I can find no evidence to suggest that mister Hofscherer is suffering
from a mental illness. I am of the opinion that there is no current role for mental health services in the onward management of the case. That is the chronology. Brian, I don't know what you make of that. It's really too bizarre for words.
It seems bizarre. It will certainly seem bizarre to some people. But from me, as you moved through it, and as this gentleman has produced this information, I see that there are certain attributes other with other cases that comes into my mind. I'm sorry, I'm shuffling some papers here while I'm talking to you, So there's a little bit aboutground noise.
The French lady Kareem Gauget, who I've already mentioned, was a child protection case around her, but also she had been doing exceptionally good work exposing a Spatan but she saw the cases moved flexibly between the UK and France, with documents being changed, with very strange things happening. We've got the Interpole request being put out. And the case that came into my head then was for Leanne Smith, the mother who went on the run with her children
and then tragically murdered the two children in Spain. But they were being hunted as a result of actions by social services in Cumbria, principally in Cumbria, and Leanne describes what was happening to them after the Interpol became involved, was being hunted. You've mentioned that Merkele should know, and you've certainly mentioned that Theresa May as Home Secretary, would know what was going on, and possibly even David Cameron. I say it would appear to be the case that
they must know. But we could also say, is it actually the case that the people running the country at the very top, the Prime Minister, are simply puppets and these decisions are made around them and they are totally unaware. I could accept both standpoints. I can accept complicit and I could accept that they don't know anything. They are just ignorant. You said about Barbara being taken back to
Britain and never heard from again. Another case comes into my mind, and this is the Linda Lewis case, the Bonnie Lewis case in South Wales, where a mother takes her daughter to Florida to get a medical opinion and her daughter is taken from the American hospital at gunpoint with nith Port Talbot's Social Services in the American police and the little girl is flown back to Britain on a false passport and is then held in a psychiatric unit and told that her pain was her imagination and
since the mother had proved by going to that American hospital that the little girl had multiple ulceration of her gut Zollinger's disease, she was in intense pain, but the local social services took her to a psychiatric unit where they said she was imagining it. And I'm fascinated that the Red Caps appear to have been involved in this, because, of course the military police do have a role to investigate child protection issues. That's part of their military policing job.
And I can say the military police did attempt to help in the Korean Gouget case. But it's also true to say that some of them were very careful to say there was only so much they could do, and it was said in a way that I believe they were trying to say that they couldn't do some things because pressure was being put on them. And your comment about Lord McGinnis, the Ulster Unionist, trying to do something but being told with the Home of it's a police matter.
Into my head came Mike Penning, the Policing Minister, who of course did try to help John Wedger in blowing the whistle on child abuse. But Mike Penning MP is also saying that the Home Office simply refused to help. So, with the advantage of our experience of many other cases coming forward, we have seen people being taken out of
the country. We've seen them being put in psychiatric units or imprisoned and there is a pattern here, there's a template, and the template to me seems to be a template to make sure that anybody that gets too close to the dark heart of the deep state. And I'm choosing those words. I'm using them because I think they're the right words. Anybody who gets too close to the really dark heart of the deep state has got to be silenced, fitted up, put in prison, held without trial, or ultimately
to disappear in a psychiatric unit. And I believe that in the Melanie show case, and of course, alongside Melanie's whistleblowing on the abuse and death of children in so called care, Melanie was herself a survivor of SRA of Satanic ritual abuse. I think the plan for Melanie was to get her to disappear into a psychiatric institution. But because Melanie had told her story and was at that stage already well known to the public. I believe that
she was too hot to handle. They didn't dare disappear her. What they've done is a lesser crime. They've held her in solitary confinement on some unknown charge for nearly two years. But this is happening in UK. Can we end alex on a positive note.
I have a positive note for you, Brian, which came in just an hour or two ago today, the twenty sixth of February twenty eighteen, from a lady doing sterling work for Peter Hofscherer from the other side of the world in British Columbia, Canada. She's originally from the Scarborough area or nearby, so she saw this happening firsthand growing up and was warned in veiled terms not to get too close to certain people as a child, so that's
why she's motivated to help. Anyway, this fine lady says this to me today and I have a good word to put in here for my former colleagues in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Here, well done, she writes Alex, I heard from someone by email today. They said that they had contacted the British Embassy in Vienna and asked them to do a welfare check on Peter Hofscher. I think that this is the place that Andy Peacher already contacted.
This is after making the phone calls to Peter in the ward and they that's the Foreign Office, are sending Peter a letter for him to sign to authorize their contact with his lawyer. Peter said that first they contacted doctor Meyer maai e Er, who is the treating doctor, the head of the signal defreud Clinicum, there so effectively
the man responsible for the care. And Peter says that the attitude in the ward has changed radically since then, and that Dr Meyer now looks very nervous, and I think that would be true of Dr Weisenstein at the underling as well, because she has already breached medical ethics and the law and constitution of Austria by screaming at Peter, I will not contact your general practitioner or family doctor for you on your request, so that family doctor, by
design does not even know that the perfectly saying Peter Hofscherer, whom he's treated for twenty years for physical ailments, is locked up in a shushka setting treating Dr Meyer. It is at the express request of Peter Hoffscher yesterday as
I'm giving it. Email him. Be polite and lawful at Manfred n fr ed dot Meyer mai e Er at car guess kag e s for Sierra, dot at for Austria, ask politely and professionally why Dr Meyer is treating a man who has been detained under mental regulations for life without any psychiatric assessment, and why Peter's own Austrian family doctor does not know that he has been confined. Dr Meyer may be doing a bit more sweating. If a few more of us address this correctly, there's plenty we
can do in this case as well. There is time pressure on it, because God forbid, the application has already gone into the court. I believe it is to inject Peter forcibly with brain destroying chemicals to stop him from speaking more about what's going on. One idiot has already taunted the doctors by sending them links to the interviews which Peter has given by phone, which are up at
Anti Peacher's site. Secularly bad and childish idea. We need adult professional responses, particularly from people in the medical or other responsible professions, to contact Dr Meyer and also to get on to the consular services the good people of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in Vienna about this. It's possible that Peter could be sent as a dual citizen of Britain or Germany to a medical equivalent treating facility
in Britain or in Germany. Of course they should if they're not meant, take one look at him on arrival and say you're not that. There's nothing wrong with you. You don't have the psychological or personality disorders that you're said to have. As Peter says, I'm only mad in Austria. So this may be difficult to accomplish, but it is what Peter wants to happen, and all his European Convention on Human Rights entitlements totally separate from the EU. This
is the ECCHR rights. The rights to a fair trial and representation have been breached.
Alex, thank you very much for that. I will just add that the more measured, the more polite, the more reasonable people are when they may cause or they send emails, the more powerful they are because the state as it stands is well geared up to deal with people who are rude, aggressive or threatening or vexatious as it likes to call them. But for people who remain quite polite, reasonable in asking questions in particular, that is the powerful
way to do it. And I will also add so that, of course Robert Green, who was also facing accusations that he was mentally ill, at one stage it appeared in Scotland that there was a concerted effort to see whether they could section him. The psychiatrist in that particular occasion deemed him perfectly sane, of course, but nevertheless that tempt was made. But one of the things that Robert says as a means of lifting spirits in these very dark
subjects is to lift the stones. If you lift the stones to expose what is going on, the other side is terrified of what you're doing. And this is absolutely correct. So if you're beginning to get concerned as to what we're talking about, if you're going to take some form of action, it's the simple exposing of what the other side is doing that has enormous effect.
Do not say anything stupid, rude, or aggressive. Peter's life depends on it, but it also depends on numbers to tell doctor Manfred Meyer that the world knows what's going on.
Alex, thank you very much. Well, that was an extremely long dispatches tonight. We must end there. I think, thank you very much for taking us through that great detail of the case. There is of course a lot more that we know about which we can't talk about at the moment, but we hope at least we've given an insight in some very dangerous things which are taking place in UK and Europe. Can it be stopped? Yes? How can it be stopped by enough people simply saying we
see it and we're not having it. So think about that, think with what you can do, Think about what you would wish if you were in the same position, and that's probably the best guidance we can give you to tackle this. Alex, thank you very much. We'll leave it there good night.
I will also give listeners the email address of the man who originally wrote the diagnosis last summer that put Peter in mental sectioning for life without ever having seen him. That is Dr Manfred Waltsel wl z L. His email address for polite professional communication asking him why he did this is wal z l at a O N for November dot a T for Austria. W al z l at ao N dot a T ask Doctor Valsel at Peter's request why he sectioned Peter for life without ever
having seen him. I would also add that since we recorded this podcast, Peter has let us know that pressure is already causing some alleviation of his conditions on the closed ward and he very much hopes that people will continue to ask doctor Meyer and doctor Valsel what is
going on to prevent Peter from being injected with irrevocable drugs. Finally, if anyone has further details about the case or related or corroborating information, whether from Britain, Germany, Austria or elsewhere, they are very welcome, indeed, including on behalf of Peter. To contact the UK Column you can email Brian go Irish at Brian at ukcolumn dot org, uk c O, l U m N dot org, or use the contact form on the UK column dot org website. H