Skip to content or view screen version

More Truth about Gladys Hammond

ARchivist | 26.02.2009 08:17 | Animal Liberation

Following a story yesterday revealing some of the truth behind the media hysteria surrounding the alleged theft of Gladys Hammond's remains by animal rights activists ( http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422810.html) more evidence has come to light of the political nature of the Crown Prosecution Service and the part the CPS played in the ongoing campaign to discredit the animal rights movement.

Evidence has come to light of political manoeuvring by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to literally rewrite history to blacken the names of animal rights activists. Unfortunately for them, the internet archive ( http://web.archive.org) allows us to prove the complicity of the CPS in the current climate of hysteria against a movement that was getting just too successful.

Immediately after the conviction of four animal rights activists ( http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/05/340791.html) for blackmail in April 2006 following the successful campaign to close the Newchurch Guineapig farm, the Crown Prosecution service issued a gleeful press release, reproduced in full below at the bottom of this article. If you check the CPS press release archive today ( http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/archive/2006/120_06.html) you will see ALMOST exactly the same words. Almost, because this crucial admission from the CPS is now missing:

"Although the prosecution could not prove they actually physically stole the body of Gladys Hammond, they have admitted using that theft as part of their campaign"

The original CPS press release can be found here  http://web.archive.org/web/20060418044852/www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/120_06.html

Questions should be asked of the supposedly independent prosecuting authority. Who removed this sentence, why and on whose orders? Although most of the press coverage at the time ignored the inconvenient truth that those prosecuted had nothing to do with the alleged body theft, there were a few articles that quoted this sentence directly. Presumably this panicked those directing the AR witch hunt and strings were pulled to get the truth pulled.

Activists should be aware of the potential of the internet archive (link above) as a tool for digging around in areas that those in authority think they have tidied, rewriting history up to suit themselves.

Please support Jonny, Kerry, Jon and all the other AR prisoners: www.vpsg.org.

_____________________________________________________________________

CPS secures guilty pleas in Darley Oaks Farm blackmail case
11 April 2006

The final defendant has pleaded guilty in the Crown Prosecution Service's case against four animal rights protesters accused of conspiracy to blackmail in a campaign to shut down Darley Oaks guinea pig farm in Staffordshire. The campaign culminated in the theft of the body of Gladys Hammond, the mother-in-law of one of the farm's owners.

Chief Crown Prosecutor for Staffordshire, Harry Ireland said: "The strength of this prosecution gave the accused no option but to plead guilty.

"These people orchestrated a long running and unpleasant campaign to cause fear and suffering to anyone connected with Darley Oaks farm.

"Their actions went well beyond lawful protesting and persuading; they threatened death and violence, damaged property and used explosive devices.

"Although the prosecution could not prove they actually physically stole the body of Gladys Hammond, they have admitted using that theft as part of their campaign. The whereabouts of Mrs Hammond's body remains unknown.

"Their forceful and illegal campaign has been met with an appropriately forceful prosecution. These guilty pleas reflect the criminal justice system's determination that communities should be allowed to go about their business free of fear and intimidation."

Josephine Mayo pleaded guilty at Nottingham Crown Court today of conspiracy to blackmail. Three other defendants – John Ablewhite, John Smith and Kerry Whitburn – pleaded guilty to the same offence at Nottingham Crown Court yesterday evening.

The charge related to a campaign of blackmail between September 1999 and September 2005 aimed at closing down the business of David Hall & Partners in Newchurch, Staffordshire. Their business bred guinea pigs at Darley Oaks Farm for use in medical research; however the farm has now closed its breeding operations and reverted to arable farming.

Josephine Mayo was given conditional bail and the other three defendants were remanded in custody. All four will be sentenced at Nottingham Crown Court on 11 and 12 May 2006.

ARchivist

Comments

Hide the following 9 comments

I knew it! I knew it!! At last we get the truth...no AR people did this!!!

26.02.2009 13:52

Right from the beginning I said that no AR people did this! Now perhaps people like Jonny Ablewhite, Kerry, John and Jo should be let out of jail for "conspiracy" on this...seeing as it wasn't done.

I know that there are Daily Mail readers who will say "don't be silly they must have done it"....they DIDN'T and most of AR knew it or sensed it.


Like I've said elsewhere on here, read The Enemy Within by Seamus Milne ... a book about the 1980s miners strike which was infiltrated by MI5 who behave illegally at the time. [Don't get me wrong I believe that the work of the security services is necessary but this service should never ever be abused the way it has been].

The digging up of the grave of Gladys Hammond was never proved and now this new news comes out....but where is the front page news and media frenzy on this one? In fact not even anyone on here has a comment...meanwhile there are people for Save The Newchurch Guinea Pigs serving lengthy sentences.

Perhaps a campaign to free these political prisoners is necessary now? If you have read Heather Nicholson's letter she has said that the judge agreed with her that she hadn't broken the law ...so what the fuck is she doing in prison serving an 11 year sentence?

Mandy in Camden
- Homepage: http://www.myspace.com/stopcamdenanimallab


Urm...

26.02.2009 14:59

Sorry if I'm being a bit thick but what exactly is the significance of the removal of this sentence?

"Although the prosecution could not prove they actually physically stole the body of Gladys Hammond, they have admitted using that theft as part of their campaign"

It doesn't read like it was saying: "the prosecution... admitted using that theft as part of their campaign" does it (although I guess it was the key to their campaign...)?

It reads to me that those being prosecuted "have admitted using that theft as part of their campaign" -- did those who were prosecuted admit to "using that theft as part of their campaign" or did the prosecution make this up?

I could well believe that the Police (or other agents of the state or their contractors) dug up the body in order to sway public opinion against AR activists, but without really good evidence most people will continue to believe the lies from the corporate media...

It's worth noting that Gladys Hammond's name was used as part of the Indymedia server seizure operation -- see the info about the anonymous email sent on the same day that the home address of the Judge was posted:

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/420278.html

Confused Reader


Even More Truth.....

26.02.2009 19:05

From the Guardian at the time.....

For months, activists taunted the Halls, telling them the body would be returned if they closed the farm. The body was found only last week in woodland after Smith told the authorities where it was.

Which cover their 'use' of the exhumation - and Smith told Police where the body was ! Totally innocent - yeah right!

Nick Baker


this is dynamite information, good investigation

26.02.2009 23:06

Thanks to ARchivist for uncovering this gem. I think it has become increasing clear that there is a massive propaganda campaign being carried out by the state and animal abuse industries against animal rights activists. You only have to look at the trolls on Indymedia and the grossly misleading stories in the press to see that.

For the people questioning the relevance of this example of historical revisionism:

The press at the time and even now almost without exception write their stories to imply that the people in prison were convicted of stealing the body from the grave. They never explicitly say it but 99% of people reading get that impression.

They were basically just convicted for sending the Halls taunting letters and emails about the exhumation. This was classed as "blackmail".

From what I heard, the skeleton's location was only revealed from an anonymous tip-off. There was still no evidence to suggest they were in any way responsible for it.

Unlike some people, though, I do think it was a genuine animal rights action, and a very inventive, effective, non-violent and successful one at that. But the people in prison weren't the people that did it, a fact that the judge acknowledged at the verdict.

anon


@Confused Reader & Nick Baker

27.02.2009 15:09

CR
You mention the server seizure. The server was seized because of those comments. It is perfectly possible to condemn the seizure without approving or supporting the comments, and to use that as part of a campaign for freedom of the press. After all, the comments were removed. Further it is possible to defend the legality of the comments (except in terms of IM guidelines) while still condemning them.

NB
Taunting opposition, even tastelessly, does not equate to complicity in an act. The seizure-comments taunted a judge for his son having died but no one is suggesting that poster killed the son. I think there is a parallel to be drawn with the grave desecration, at least from an uninformed position. You claim "Smith told Police where the body was" - what evidence do base that on since Anon says it was a tip-off?

post haste


yeah - I see it now

27.02.2009 19:12

My mistake - my post quoted the Guardian regarding Smith providing the location of the remains - most of the other press reported this as well. Smith himself has never contested this.

But if someone here has heard differently then that must be right!

BBC:-
John Smith, 39, of Wolverhampton, one of four being sentenced, told police where the body was, a court heard


I think people who are really against animal cruelty will support us no matter what
SHAC spokeswoman

Nick Baker


tip-off was passed on to Smith

27.02.2009 21:23

> My mistake - my post quoted the Guardian regarding Smith providing the location of the remains - most of the other press reported this as well. Smith himself has never contested this.

> But if someone here has heard differently then that must be right!

> BBC:- John Smith, 39, of Wolverhampton, one of four being sentenced, told police where the body was, a court heard

My understanding is that the tip-off was passed on to Smith whilst he was in prison, and he then passed that information on to the authorities. There was nothing to suggest he dug up the remains, moved them, reburied them, or knew where the skeleton was before he was imprisoned.

anon


Further to Gladys HAMMNOND

02.03.2009 11:00

Detective Inspector Nick BAKER said of Gladys HAMMOND "It becomes quite obvious that I F something of this nature (the exhumation of Mrs HAMMONDS body) had taken place"

It seems, even he doubted it.

Had the government really believed animal rights protesters capable of stealing a dead body to further their cause, with their record bringing in hundreds of new laws, they would have immediately made it a criminal offence to rob a grave.

Janet TOMLINSON
mail e-mail: JanetSara1@talktalk.net
- Homepage: http://N/A


Rev Peter Lister

13.04.2009 11:21

In 2005, the Reverend Peter Lister, Director of Education, Lichfield Diocese (in charge of hundreds of schools and youth clubs) walked away from Newcastle Crown Court, without facing charges of serious child abuse. He was spared trial on a technicality - the wrong dates were somehow put into the final police statements handed into the court; accident or conspiracy, he escaped trial. The serious accusations against him remain.

This is the same vicar who lived in Yoxhall, Derbyshire with his wife Rev Jenny Lister. Soon after the allegations of sexual abuse were made against Rev. Peter Lister, Gladys Hammond was dug up from the graveyard which Rev. Peter Lister and his wife, Rev. Jenny Lister, presided over. Where the Rev Peter Lister goes, strange things happen.

He was forced to take early retirement and has moved to Warwickshire having been given 'special dispensation' by the Bishop of Lichfield to continue ministerial duties.

A so-called independent police probe (launched by Church Victims via the Independent Police Complaints Commision - the IPCC) dragged on for 3 years. Various key police officers were, all of a sudden: missing in action, dragging their heels and/or off duty for very long periods of time on sick leave. The Rev Peter Lister seems to be above the law.

The police team, led by DS Geoff Forsyth, investigating Rev. Peter Lister, put into the final police statements the wrong dates, even though they had the correct information. This enabled the Rev. Lister to escape facing any charges. Create enough doubt and the job's well done - Rev. Peter Lister walked free. DS Forsyth has been promoted. The IPCC declared that Northumbria Police were 'not guilty' of more than 20 charges of negligence made against them regarding their investigation of the Rev. Peter Lister case.

Weblinks:
 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6783/is_2005_July_13/ai_n28284726  http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/burtonmail-news/displayarticle.asp?id=65349

Email contact:  churchvictims@yahoo.co.uk

Yoxhall Church Watch
mail e-mail: churchvictims@yahoo.co.uk