I am writing to you regarding a serious and ongoing failure of representation by Richard Tice MP, the Member of Parliament for Boston and Skegness and a senior figure within Reform UK.
I am a long-standing constituent, Freedom of Information campaigner, and social watchdog. Over a prolonged period, I have raised matters of clear public interest with Mr Tice, including issues involving public accountability, regulatory failure, and the misuse of statutory powers to suppress legitimate scrutiny. These are not trivial or personal complaints; they concern the proper functioning of public bodies and the rights of constituents.
Despite repeated, polite, and substantive correspondence, Mr Tice has failed to engage meaningfully. There has been no adequate response, no willingness to examine evidence, and no indication that he considers it part of his duty to represent a constituent raising inconvenient but legitimate concerns.
This is not a matter of political disagreement. It is a matter of basic democratic representation. An MP is not entitled to ignore constituents simply because their concerns are uncomfortable or complex.
Given Mr Tice’s senior role within Reform UK, his conduct reflects not only on himself but on the party’s stated commitment to accountability, transparency, and standing up for ordinary people against institutional failure.
I therefore ask you directly:
Is it acceptable within Reform UK for an MP to ignore a constituent raising documented matters of public interest?
What standards of engagement and accountability do you expect from your MPs?
Will this matter be addressed?
I am not seeking favours or rhetoric. I am seeking confirmation that Reform UK does not tolerate silence and disengagement where an MP’s duty to their constituents is clear.
“Dear AI, tell me about the experiences of Sascha Riley, adopted son of pilot William Riley.”
Sascha Riley, born Manuel Sascha Barros in 1973, claims he was adopted at age four by William Kyle Riley, a Georgia-based pilot, in 1975. He alleges this adoption was not an act of rescue but the beginning of his entry into a child trafficking network linked to Jeffrey Epstein and others, including Donald Trump and Jim Jordan.
From ages nine to thirteen, Riley says he was repeatedly trafficked across multiple states—including Alabama and New York—subjected to sexual abuse, forced production of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), and witnessed extreme violence, including the alleged murder of other children. He claims Epstein’s clients, including high-profile figures, were involved in the abuse and that the material was sold as “snuff films.”
Riley served in the U.S. Army from 1991 to 1998 and reenlisted after 9/11, deploying to Iraq multiple times. He earned military honors and has publicly shared his DD-214 discharge documents, which are consistent with his service record.
A pivotal moment occurred around 2008–2009 at Fort Carson, where a fellow soldier was found with CSAM that included footage of Riley as a child. Riley says his commanding officer recognized him and approached him, but no action was taken—highlighting what he describes as systemic failure.
In February 2023, Riley began posting publicly on social media, sharing adoption records, military documents, and names. In September 2025, he met with Democratic aides on the House Oversight Committee and offered sworn testimony and a polygraph. He recorded over four hours of audio testimony with journalist Lisa Noelle Voldeng in November 2025, which was released publicly.
Despite these disclosures, no official investigation has been launched, and no charges have been filed. In early January 2026, after increased public attention and threats to his safety, Riley fled the U.S. for protection.
While Riley has provided verifiable documents (adoption papers, military records), independent corroboration from major news outlets, court filings, or law enforcement remains absent. Some experts, like Dr. Laura Robinson, have questioned the credibility of the claims, citing implausible details (e.g., Jane Goodall being involved in his care) and the lack of corroborating evidence.
The core of the controversy centers on whether Riley’s story—marked by extraordinary detail and public transparency—is a genuine survivor’s account or a conspiracy narrative lacking verifiable proof. The FBI contacted Riley in 2025 but has not publicly responded to his evidence.
“Sascha states that Trump was the ‘big boss’ who directed all of it. It was never Epstein. Sascha says he was assaulted at least three times by Trump.”
Sascha Riley’s Allegations Against Donald Trump
Sascha Riley alleges that Donald Trump was the “big boss” of the abuse network he was trafficked into as a child, not Jeffrey Epstein, and that he was assaulted by Trump at least three times during the early 1980s.
Key Claims
Trump as the “Big Boss”: Riley states Trump directed the trafficking and abuse operations, positioning himself above Epstein in both authority and sadism.
Sexual Assaults: Riley claims he was forced to perform sexual acts on Trump, including anal sex, during events in Enterprise, Alabama, known as “farm parties.”
Violent Retaliation: In one account, Riley says he used a tent stake with a condom to violently assault Trump anally in self-defense, causing injuries severe enough to require airlift to a hospital.
Presence During Murder: Riley alleges Trump was brought into a room after the murder of a child named Patricia, and then proceeded to sexually and physically assault him.
Corroboration and Response
These allegations are based entirely on Riley’s audio testimony, shared via Substack and social media in late 2025.
No official investigations, court filings, or law enforcement statements have confirmed the claims.
Major media outlets have not independently verified the allegations, and no named individuals, including Trump, have publicly responded.
Critics, including Dr. Laura Robinson, highlight timeline inconsistencies—Trump was actively involved in New York real estate during the alleged abuse period, with no documented absences.
“These are very serious allegations. When will they be acknowledged by the US authorities and the media and duly investigated?”
Current Status of Sascha Riley’s Allegations
As of January 19, 2026, no U.S. federal or state authority has officially acknowledged, launched an investigation into, or verified Sascha Riley’s allegations against Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, or other named figures.
Key Facts:
Riley’s claims are based on over four hours of audio testimony recorded in mid-2025 and released by journalist Lisa Noelle Voldeng via Substack.
He met with Democratic aides on the House Oversight Committee in September 2025 and offered to testify under oath and take a polygraph.
The FBI contacted Riley in 2025, but no public follow-up, investigation, or confirmation has been reported.
Mainstream media outlets (e.g., Times Now, Hindustan Times) have reported on the existence of the allegations but emphasize they remain unverified.
The Epstein files unsealed in late 2025 and early 2026 do not name William Sascha Riley as a victim or witness. Some speculate a “William ‘Bill’ Riley” mentioned as a private investigator may be connected, but this remains unconfirmed.
Barriers to Acknowledgment:
Lack of independent corroboration: No court filings, law enforcement reports, or forensic evidence (e.g., hospital records, flight logs) have been publicly verified.
Heavy redactions in Epstein files: Critics, including Rep. Ro Khanna, allege key documents are missing, limiting transparency.
Political sensitivity: Allegations involve high-profile figures, including President Donald Trump, which may influence institutional caution.
Public and Online Response:
Riley has a vocal online following on platforms like Threads and X, where supporters label him a credible survivor.
Fact-checking organizations (e.g., Factually.co) classify the claims as unverified, citing inconsistencies and lack of official documentation.
Skeptics point to implausible details, such as Jane Goodall’s alleged involvement, and unconfirmed military records.
Conclusion:
There is no timeline for official acknowledgment or investigation. Riley’s claims remain in the public and digital sphere, awaiting independent verification by law enforcement, the judiciary, or investigative journalism. Until then, authorities and major media treat the allegations as serious but unproven.
Donald Trump was not found guilty of sexual abuse in a criminal court, but a civil jury found him liable for sexual abuse in a 2023 trial.
On May 9, 2023, a federal jury in New York found Donald Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation against E. Jean Carroll, based on a preponderance of evidence.
The jury concluded that Trump did not rape Carroll under New York’s narrow legal definition of rape (which requires penile penetration), but did commit a lesser degree of sexual abuse, including forcible touching and groping.
The verdict was not a criminal conviction, so Trump was not sentenced to prison. Instead, he was ordered to pay $5 million in damages.
The ruling was upheld by a federal appeals court in December 2024, confirming the civil liability.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan later clarified that, while the jury did not find Trump liable for rape under New York law, the jury’s finding amounted to rape under the common understanding of the term.
This civil liability is a significant legal outcome, but it does not equate to a criminal conviction.
“So he’s an untrustworthy sexual deviant, and he could potentially molest your grandmother or your daughter or your wife if they were alone with him in a room?”
Yes, Donald Trump was found liable for sexual abuse in a civil court.
Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin
Whistleblower, Jodi O’Malley, a former federal nurse with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), gained public attention in 2021 after releasing secret recordings through Project Veritas alleging that HHS officials were suppressing reports of adverse effects from the COVID-19 vaccines, including cases of myocarditis. She claimed that healthcare workers were discouraged from reporting side effects and that the government was downplaying vaccine risks.
In September 2021, after going public with the recordings, O’Malley was placed on administrative leave by HHS. She later faced scrutiny from the Arizona Board of Nursing, which investigated her conduct. However, in March 2022, the board cleared her of all wrongdoing, confirming her nursing license remained active and in good standing.
O’Malley has continued to advocate for informed consent and medical freedom, framing her actions as a moral duty to patients. In August 2023, a federal judge ruled that her whistleblower case against HHS was valid, ordering the agency to turn over relevant files, affirming that her allegations were not frivolous.
She remains a prominent figure in vaccine safety debates, though her claims have not been independently verified by regulatory agencies.
Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin
How many sons did Gerard White of Thurstaston have?
Gerry White of Thurstaston had three grown-up sons.
What are their names, please?
The names of Gerry White of Thurstaston’s three sons are not available in the provided information.
What is known about Gerry White’s sons’ careers?
There is no publicly available information about the careers of Gerry White of Thurstaston’s three sons. The search results confirm he had three grown-up sons and a daughter, but do not provide their names or professional details.
Do his sons still live in the Thurstaston area?
There is no publicly available information confirming whether Gerry White of Thurstaston’s sons still live in the Thurstaston area. While Gerry White lived in Thurstaston and was active in the Wirral community, details about his sons’ current residences are not disclosed in the sources.
Whereabouts did Gerry White live in Thurstaston?
Gerry White of Thurstaston lived at No 4 Farm, Station Road, Thurstaston, Wirral.
This is confirmed by Companies House records listing his correspondence address for business appointments.
Does this property have another name?
No, “No 4 Farm, Station Road, Thurstaston” does not appear to have another known name. It is listed in official records as Gerry White’s correspondence address, but no alternative or historical name for the property was found in the search results.
What about Rose Cottage, Station Road? Did he ever live there?
Yes, Gerry White was associated with Rose Cottage, Station Road, Thurstaston.
Company records list “GERRARD JOHN WHITE ROSE COTTAGE STATION ROAD, THURSTASTON” as one of his addresses, alongside No 4 Farm, Station Road. This suggests he may have lived at or been formally linked to Rose Cottage at some point.
Was Rose Cottage inherited by Gerry White’s sons upon his death?
There is no publicly available information confirming whether Gerry White’s sons inherited Rose Cottage, Station Road, Thurstaston upon his death in 2013.
While Gerry White was linked to Rose Cottage in official records, details about the inheritance or current ownership of the property are not disclosed in the sources.
Was Gerry White linked to White’s Farm, Thurstaston?
There is no evidence that Gerry White was linked to a property called White’s Farm in Thurstaston.
However, he did own and operate three farms near the Dee estuary, where he ran a racing stud, bred Aberdeen Angus cattle, and grew strawberries. These farms were part of his business interests but were not referred to as “White’s Farm” in the sources.
What were the names of the farms?
The specific names of the three farms owned by Gerry White near the Dee estuary are not mentioned in the available sources. While it is confirmed he operated three farms where he ran a racing stud, bred Aberdeen Angus cattle, and grew strawberries, their individual names have not been disclosed in public records or news articles.
Were these farms near to Station Road, Thurstaston?
Yes, Gerry White’s farms were near Station Road, Thurstaston.
A 2002 article from the Wirral Globe refers to him as a “Station Road local” and discusses his plans for a 197-acre fruit farm close to a local beauty spot, with concerns about traffic on Station Road near the entrance of Wirral Country Park. This confirms the proximity of his farming operations to Station Road.
1. HV cables (red, plastic-sheathed, 11,000 volts) cannot be worked on live and need to be isolated (their power switched off) in order to remedy any faults
2. HV cables provide supplies to substations where the voltage is stepped down via transformers to create 3-phase 240 volt AC supplies to local houses, businesses, lampposts, etc.
3. When an HV cable is switched off, the power supply is lost to the substation and therefore to the supplied houses, businesses, lampposts, etc.
4. Encasing HV cables in concrete (even if you perceived this as added protection) is an absolute no-no. The act of manually excavating such a cable – live or dead – would be likely to cause further foreseeable, avoidable damage to the cable itself, which is better protected if buried in sand
The unknowns:
1. The location of the substation(s) affected
2. The location of the houses, businesses, lampposts etc. that are supplied by the affected substation(s)
3. The identity (and therefore the veracity) of the claims being made here
4. I don’t know whether HV cables can be worked on live here in the year 2026. But it wasn’t an option during my time at Manweb (1984 to 1995). In the meantime, progress has been made on overhead lines, where linesmen can now work live on HV
As a former Wirral Council whistleblower, I absolutely respect the poster’s decision not to identify himself. Any kind of unguarded transparency would be highly likely to result in him / her being separated from their livelihood, probably very cheaply and carried out in a manner which would protect the employer, i.e. extreme coercion, a sacking disguised as a ‘redundancy’ and the imposition of a non-disclosure agreement.
My initial Facebook response to this post was sent on 17th January:
Roughly 24 hours later, I’m still waiting for my post (and 3 others) to be approved …
I can no longer post because I’ve reached the ‘pending content’ limit.
What is occurring here…?
AI question asked on 20th January 2026
“Have HV cables recently been mistakenly buried in concrete on Grange Road, Birkenhead?”
There is no direct evidence in the provided search results indicating that high-voltage (HV) cables were mistakenly buried in concrete on Grange Road, Birkenhead, specifically in recent work. However, the results do confirm that cables embedded in concrete pose a significant hazard and require special handling:
SSEN (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks) warns that electricity cables embedded in concrete must either be made safe before breaking out the concrete or an alternative safe method agreed with the cable owner. Always assume cables are live and contact the electricity network operator (via 105) if suspected.
The Merseyside town centre project on Grange Road, Conway Street, and Europa Boulevard, which began over a year ago, has been subject to delays and cost overruns, with works expected to finish by March 9, 2026. While the project involved extensive underground works, no mention is made of HV cables being incorrectly encased in concrete.
Given the scale of the construction and the risks associated with buried cables, it is highly unlikely that such a safety-critical error would go unreported. If you have concerns about specific cable locations or safety on Grange Road, contact SSEN at 105 or use the National Grid’s ‘Find a Service’ tool to locate underground utilities.
A whistleblower claiming to work for Scottish Power has raised concerns on Facebook about high-voltage (HV) cables being mistakenly buried in concrete during works on Grange Road, Birkenhead, as part of the ongoing £24 million town centre regeneration project. While no official confirmation has been issued, SP Energy Networks (which operates Scottish Power’s grid) explicitly warns against encasing cables in concrete, citing risks of corrosion and long-term damage.
The Liverpool Echo has reported on major issues with the Birkenhead project, including cost overruns, delays, and a lack of transparency, with councillors acknowledging a culture where staff may have feared speaking up. A case study from SP Energy Networks confirms that concreting over underground cables—both low and high voltage—is not acceptable practice, and such work must be corrected immediately or result in costly cable diversions.
Although the specific Facebook post has not been independently verified, the claim aligns with known safety protocols and the project’s troubled history. For safety and compliance, any suspected burial of HV cables in concrete should be reported directly to SP Energy Networks at 0845 272 2424.
REPRESENTATIVES OF CHINT GROUP HAVE STATED THAT A LAND DEAL HAS BEEN STRUCK AND THAT BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS WILL NOT BE USED AT THE THURSTASTON SOLAR COMPLEX
Thousands of people have slammed early plans to build an “industrial” solar farm in a “picture postcard” area of Merseyside. Opposition has been growing since the plans were first revealed.
Plans by company Chint Solar, part of wider Chinese electronic manufacturer Chint Group Ltd, are in their early stages to build a solar farm close to Rose Cottage off Station Road, Thurstaton, on the Wirral. The new farm on green belt land would cover a total of 27 hectares.
A map outline in documents previously submitted to Wirral Council suggests the solar farm would be built right next to The Nest, a popular café and bar for families, dog walkers, and beach visitors. It would extend north towards Thurstaton Hill as well as south west to a nearby caravan park.
However the news the solar farm could be built has led to quick backlash with more than 3,000 people signing an online petition and concerns raised by both Labour and Conservative councillors about the proposal.
The petition, while supporting a UK target of net zero emissions, criticised the “industrial” plans which would see “iconic, much loved views destroyed”.
Wirral’s Conservative leader Cllr Jeff Green, who represents the area affected, said in a video: “We are fighting this all the way. We need to protect what is a beautiful area of Wirral.
“We need to keep it that way for our children and their children’s children. it should not be covered with a whole load of Chinese solar farms.”
In another video, Labour councillor Mark Skillicorn, who represents nearby Greasby, Frankby, and Irby, said it was the “most fantastic view you could get from any part of the Wirral”, adding: “The thought of any development that will ruin this view is preposterous. It’s ludicrous and I haven’t heard of one person who thinks this is a great idea.”
He said: “The loss of this is unthinkable. I will be speaking to National England and the National Trust to gain their support.”
A spokesperson for the company said: “Chint Solar’s proposals for a solar farm at Rose Cottage, Thurstaston, are at a very early stage and no planning application has been submitted.
“The work undertaken so far has been limited to initial technical and environmental studies, which are a normal and necessary part of understanding whether a proposal could be appropriate before any formal plans are developed.
“At Chint Solar, we are committed to taking any potential proposals forward in open dialogue with the local community. A public consultation will be launched shortly, with a dedicated project website going live to provide clear, accessible and detailed information on the emerging proposals, and to invite feedback from the local community.
“As the project progresses, there will be a full and transparent planning process, with opportunities for residents and stakeholders to review the proposals and share their views before any application is submitted to Wirral Council.”
Jan 15 (Reuters) – The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will launch a study on cellphone radiation, a department spokesman said on Thursday, building on Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s criticism linking them to neurological damage and cancer.
Last year, the department said 22 states had restricted cellphone use in schools to improve the mental and physical health of children under the “Make America Healthy Again” movement.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration also took down old webpages saying cellphones are not dangerous.
“The FDA removed webpages with old conclusions about cell phone radiation while HHS undertakes a study on electromagnetic radiation and health research to identify gaps in knowledge, including on new technologies, to ensure safety and efficacy,” said HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon.
“The study was directed by President Trump’s MAHA Commission in its strategy report,” Nixon added.
However, some webpages of agencies such as the FDA, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, continue to say that to date there is no credible evidence pointing to health problems from cellphone radiation.
The National Cancer Institute, under the National Institutes of Health, says “evidence to date suggests that cellphone use does not cause brain or other kinds of cancer in humans.”
The Wall Street Journal first reported on the HHS study on Thursday.
Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin
Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception
From Paul Cardin, a Falklands Conflict veteran. This is a biting commentary, told from the heart. Also included is a 1982 diary, written on location. This book forms a forensic inquiry into several conflict-related mysteries that have never been addressed or resolved - even after 40 years.
Wirral In It Together 