You mean, her own father? The article says her fiancee also had been accused of saying he feels attracted to children but they claim his account was hacked, which may be true as no one in their right mind would tweet something like that.
You mean, her own father? The article says her fiancee also had been accused of saying he feels attracted to children but they claim his account was hacked, which may be true as no one in their right mind would tweet something like that.
Her father raped and tortured (a car battery was involved) a ten year old. This happened over multiple days whilst the child was tied to the rafters in the attic of the family home. This is the same house Aimee Chancellor was living in at the time. But she claims she didn't know and she was not on trial. Regardless, during the trial photos of Aimee with the victim were discovered on Amiee's phone.
After her father was arrested and charged with 22 counts of sexual violence, she forged documents in order to hire him as her election agent. This is a position where he would have had contact with children. She was kicked out the Green party when this came to light.
She then joined another political party, and was kicked out of that after her fiance was found to have tweeted:
"I fantasise about children having sex, sometimes with adults, sometimes with other children, sometimes kidnapped and forced into bad situations."
They were both contacted by the media about this, she claimed he had been hacked, he claimed that these were only fantasies, and would never act on these urges... She later married him.
Amiee Chancellor is a despicable human being who can only be viewed positively if she is compared to the people she chooses to surround herself with.
"Amiee Chancellor is a despicable human being" is pretty heavy, but the only thing related to her in your comment is that "she forged documents in order to hire him as her election agent." Not cool, but is there more here?
Regardless, during the trial photos of Aimee with the victim were discovered on Amiee's phone.
Thanks for pointing that out. Yes of course, that's completely different.
Does anyone know where to find more info about this? It's such a strange situation.
EDIT: There are some details here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/coventry-captive...
though nothing about Aimee being in the photos. I'm curious how she wasn't implicated in that case. How weird...
[1]https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/12/green-party...
Though I have no idea, I suppose her father couldn't get a job (I suppose he has paid his 22 years in jail now) so she might have felt like she had to step in to help?? I don't find that a huge problem, though if she did indeed forge documents , then of course she should be held accountable.
EDIT: I am sorry, I hadn't read the details of the case, so I assumed the crime had happened 22 years ago (as the father was free to work, I assumed he had paid his time)... but it seems he was on bail (!!!) from the crime, which happened in 2016!!! How does one get bail after such a crime?! I withdraw my comment above, this story is far too horrible and I don't want to be on the wrong side.
I think bail before conviction is fine if the person is not a flight-risk. (Innocence before being proven guilty, etc.) Far too many stories of people who are denied or unable to post bail (usually people without power or means) and get stuck in jail for months before ever seeing trial.
EDIT: I would link sources but the only sites which have properly covered this story are highly transphobic so I will refrain.
Yes I'm being cynical but why else hire someone with such a history for a social media company?
It's exactly as I thought. They thought they had a good employee and failed to vet with due diligence.
But, in their response, they absolutely failed to convince anybody: by banning a bunch of people for posting things that are in mainstream external media. Even if it doxxes your employee, once it's in the mainstream, you can't control it.
> he claimed that these were only fantasies
This are some pretty serious accusations, and the situation is much more fucked up if true (i.e. she shouldn't just be fired, more likely jailed).
Do you have any sources to back them up?
A five year setup followed by a Twitter hack seems incredibly unlikely.
Edit: The unique name used for her partners keybase account is associated with similar content posted in 2004. The evidence appears concrete that her partner is a self-confessed paedophile.
You must be blissfully unaware of the child-oriented fetishes that exist online. I know kink-shaming is a no-no, but I find it hard to believe that adults who participate in these activities don't have any desire to include real children. Just like I find it hard to believe that someone who uses an "islamic terrorist" target at a gun range doesn't have any desire to shoot a real one.
EDIT: replace "islamic terrorist" with "gangster thug" (I don't like altering comments in this way so just pretend I did)
it's kinda like people who are really into home defense. there's nothing wrong with people who train a lot to defend against a home invasion. but with some of them, you get the impression they actually hope it happens. not a great look.
To be clear, the connection is not just that he is her father. He raped and tortured a 10 year old girl in his own house while living there with Aimee. Then after he had been charged but not yet convicted, she hired him as her campaign manager.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190602191056/https://cphpost.d... > Cartoons and drawings depicting paedophilia do not encourage people to commit child sex offences in real life, a report by experts who treat sexual problems concludes.
The report, carried out by Sexologisk Klinik, which is a part of Rigshospitalet, was ordered by the former justice minister, Lars Barfod (Konservative), after the Socialdemokraterne, then in opposition, demanded a ban on drawings and animations of children being sexually abused.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.h... > The findings support the theory that potential sexual offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex crimes against children. While the authors do not approve of the use of real children in the production or distribution of child pornography, they say that artificially produced materials might serve a purpose.