SMALL CRIME BEFORE CHILD SAFETY - Now do you understand?
This is my response to Paul Greaves from Devon Live, who recently published an inaccurate article on my case at Magistrates court, Exeter on Wednesday 27th March 2019 omitting crucial details of the case. Since, I have received death threats plus online stalking/abuse!
Predator attacks hunting team with a weapon - a fact omitted by Paul Greaves!
Above: Paul Greaves - Devon Live Journalist
Devon Magistrates and local reporter (Paul Greaves, Devon Live) lose sight of their priorities and promise to serve, protect and inform their citizens for their safety!
Once again, small crime is the priority whilst sexually abusing our children can take a back seat under the heading of ‘Released Under Investigation.’ (R.U.I) In the meantime, known, re-offending and pending cases of paedophilia in the UK, get to relax, put their feet up in our council homes, paid for by the tax payer, near children and schools, whilst continuing to sexually abuse children online with their unmonitored technical devices!
It is the case that sexual offenders on the SHPO list, get called before MAPPA even turn up to check their devices admitted by a recently caught predator! Prior warning meaning time to delete evidence only confirming why stings are necessary as well as case files being ignored by the police! Until the Police act on our evidence immediately for child safety, STINGS WILL CONTINUE! This is the battle we fight every day as concerned, hard-working, tax-paying citizens, parents to children ourselves and we are the ones that the police monitor, follow, harass, arrest and abuse over a long period of time until you have no choice but to quit or plead guilty just to end the nightmare and protect your own mental health and family safety!
Firstly, I did not plead guilty to ‘attacking’ a man as Greaves suggests. The definition of attack is an aggressive and violent act against a person or place. This word was used several times by Greaves as well as ‘roughly handled,’ leading to a ‘fight.’ Again incorrect. Greaves does however accurately describe the incident as restraint later on in his article. Greaves contradicts himself with the use of violent terminology against the truth of the matter which I personally feel is slander against my character. It does not accurately define my charge and plea. I plead guilty to common assault, namely ‘Assault by beating,’ which by definition of the Common Assault s39 – Criminal Justice Act 1988 is when a ‘person intentionally OR recklessly applies unlawful force to another.’ In my case, I was asked to assist the leader of United for the Kids who led this sting (another fact omitted from Greaves article) in RESTRAINING the predator after the predator used his own keys against another member of the group in an attempt to flee the scene! This under the Citizens Arrest Act, intention to flee the scene before the police arrive, is a crime itself of which the predator was not charged with. This was not an intentional act or pre-planned, but a choice at the time considering the escalating circumstances and violence against the group. This was also not led by myself or my team and I have never encountered a violent outburst in any other of the 60+ stings that I have lead. This predator was fairly questioned and caught with evidence of his own material sent to a 'United 4 The Kids' decoy, confirming sexual online grooming abuse against what he thought was a 14 year old child. All facts of evidence which were excluded from Greaves’ article. Certainly, escalation occurred but from the predator’s own aggression and choices.
Greaves also repeatedly calls the man in this case a ‘victim,’ which in my opinion is not a ‘victim,’ but accurately a ‘suspect.’ His case of child sex abuse is still currently R.U.I
Secondly, another fact omitted from this article is that I was originally charged with ABH, but there was insufficient evidence to prove this in the crown court so instead, the police changed my charge to only a summary offence of common assault, ensuring the case could never reach Crown Court for fair trial, evidence cross-examination and a jury. It is my opinion that this tactical decision was to ensure that I would not be given the chance use the video evidence of the incident to support my litigation. With the close relationship between the Police and the Magistrates, and the Police’s consistent harassment of me over a period of 12 months which started months before this case, including continual road side stops, tracking and following my car and seizing my devices that their aim is to use punishment to try and stop us making headway against Paedophilia. My opinion is supported with the fact that my case of common assault, which was overwhelmingly pending for over 7 months of my life was still completed before both predators in this case today whose cases are still R.U.I! This highlights our concern and message! 7 Months on and both predators are released under investigation regardless to water-tight evidence plus admissions. Small crime over child safety!
I hope every follower of ours, namely the 50K supporters online, plus as many families as possible read this response and SHARE IT! It is my opinion that this case proves how our Justice system is failing our children!
Greaves states that ‘the victim was confronted by ‘an angry Jewell and four others from Justice for the Innocent.’ Again this statement is false. Video footage evidence proves that I was the calmest person making multiple attempts to assure the predator that he was safe. Video footage also confirms the predator attacking the group with his keys in an attempt to flee and therefore restraint being needed for the predator’s safety as well as others on the scene from any further injury. Greaves suggests the ‘fight,’ (when he means restraint) ended when the police arrived, arrival by the call of a ‘member of public’ (actually a member of JFTI who had to call the police twice because their emergency response time was appalling). These calls were made on camera twice and were reported as the predator violently attacking our group with a weapon when exposed and asked to stand still under Citizen’s Arrest until the police arrived, therefore not as Greaves states.
The term restraint is defined by a measure or condition that keeps someone or something under control, a method used by the police daily and under the Citizens Arrest Act, appropriate if necessary and proportionate to the situation. It is my opinion that when the predator brought a weapon onto the scene and attacked one of the members, restraint was a fair, reasonable and proportionate decision. Prosecution does not agree though! The police and the court interpret the common assault law in their own way that suits their agenda, therefore ignoring the context and legitimacy of the encounter, choosing to use the terms unlawful and reckless as their argument. As we all know, if you're deemed guilty within the eyes of the Magistrates, you'll be found guilty regardless of the evidence brought forward by the defence, it was simply easier for me to plead guilty and move on with my life, taking the lessons I’ve learned in the process as career professional development. One may fairly ask why I didn’t plead not guilty and force the case into Crown Court – simple answer: The alledged crimes at the time were not deemed serious enough to warrant a Crown Court appearence. I do not qualify for legal aid being just above the threshold nor can I afford a barrister with two children to support.
This case strengthens my position and cause to ensure we keep on creating an awareness of the system’s failings, creating pressure on the government to make significant changes to the law in how paedophile cases are handled. If that means me paying a fine and doing community service to carry on protecting our innocent children then I am happy with that. This was a ‘group enterprise’ claim by the police, but to this day, I am the only member that evening that has plead guilty and received punishment. Immediately during questioning, it became obvious to me that this was a witch-hunt, being the only member that the police were concerned with. Being the founder of JFTI with a very large online support network of members of the public, is that just a coincidence?
I remind everyone that every member of JFTI and other reputable hunting teams out there, we already work for our communities voluntarily, so a few extra hours will not stop us or hurt our cause. As for the other charge of harassment against a known, convicted, re-offending Paedophile, the key to understanding this issue is the word ‘re-offending!’ I wouldn’t have had to re-visit this predator several times if he wasn’t continually re-offending! My mind truly does boggle with this one. According to the law, more than 2 phone calls is considered harassment. Who knew!? Ironically, I was sentenced with 12 month community for catching a convicted paedophile three times, yet it is the case hundreds of paedophiles with evidence of sexual abuse get released, including the two in this case on R.U.I. FACT! In this case, Greaves again calls this man a ‘victim,’ and I would like to take this opportunity to highlight he is in fact a ‘convicted paedophile by his own admittance’ who has re-offended multiple times, and it is the children in these cases that are the victims.
Finally, Greaves interviewed Jo Hall, Detective Superintendent, head of the Public Protection Unit, who states that ‘the material created and shared by such vigilante groups…undermines police investigations.’ Firstly, the ‘material’ is created by the predator who sends the indecent sexual abuse chat, photos and videos to the decoy/child…we collate this evidence for court provided we've not received anything illegal otherwise all evidence gets taken to the Police station immediately, we do not create it! I suggest Jo Hall revises her words here and I urge her to understand that we are not here to 'undermine' the police. We wish to work with the police to secure convictions, supporting them in catching these criminals (of which there are tens of thousands of online, a fact the Police can't ignore or improve without support) to save our children and will continue doing so across England.
It is crucially important for all members of the public to understand that our work has only been an issue for Devon & Cornwall Police so far. Anybody notice that I wasn't arrested, charged or sentenced for hunting or abusing the citizens arrest act? The wider police force of the UK are beginning to accept that working with our teams may be beneficial in the future. We do call for clear guidance and legislation to ensure that all hunters can work within the law. This would be a great step in the right direction for child safety against online sexual grooming.
All other counties across England and Scotland other than DEVON & CORNWALL POLICE have accepted our stings with gratitude so far and we’re making excellent progress. No charges of harassment, false imprisonment or assault, only welcomed handshakes and cups of coffee! Funny that!
Thanks Devon Live for the exposure! Very much appreciated! Once again YOU the media, and the judicial system in Devon & Cornwall have proven that child safety isn't of the same importance as small crime and the financial gain made from those crimes committed.
Shared with our 50K supporters so expect an increase in online clicks! Next time, check your facts before publishing or I'll just continue to correct your poorly written, fake news for you!
James Jewell, founder of Justice for the Innocent (JFTI) 2017!
Devon Live's Paul Greaves outside Exeter Crown Court pictured below
Follow us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/justice4thekids/ Youtube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCbCMkcFkiMBP-N16FhdhmjQ
JJ Founder of J.F.T.I
Copyright © 2018 JFTI / All rights reserved. National Group for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.