Dirty Liars At “The Evening Times” Lie About Glasgow City Centre Sex Attacks; Falsely Accusing Adnan Ahmed Who Is Innocent

The Evening Times Online Are Shameless Liars, They Published Numerous Articles Making False Allegations About Innocent Life Coach Addy AGame, Facing Trial For No Reason!

The Evening Times are well known for their fake news, false allegations and dirty lies in countless articles. Evening Times Online were forced to apologise for a rape story they featured recently because they irresponsibly published intimate aspects of the alleged victims ordeal. They also twisted the story in order to sensationalise it to sell their filthy publication.

The alleged victim claimed that The Evening Times reported it in the twisted manner the fake news vultures did, it was reliving the horrible ordeal. An MSP got involved (for the right reason for once) and the newspaper made a weak apology. The alleged victim attempted to commit suicide 3 times because of this.

This is the fault of the cowards at The Evening Times, who hide their nasty  journalists names by crediting their garbage articles to “The Evening Times Online.” Thus, every reporter at The Evening Times is responsible ad should be liable and held accountable for their lies. The journalist cowards applied the same tactics to falsely accusing Adnan Ahmed of crimes he did not commit. He is innocent! The publication regurgitated lies on 16th May 2019 copying articles (word for word) from The Sun and Clyde 1.

The hypocrites at The Evening Times advocate for “women’s rights” to sell copies of their toilet paper publication. The Evening Times is a total sham. A bigger sham is the dirty and desperate Evening Times journalists. They disgustingly, falsely accused Adnan Ahmed of sexual assault, Ahmed is innocent. They reporter doesn’t explain what the charges are because if they did their article wouldn’t have any impact. The slimy hacks turn up to every court date Ahmed has, like teenage mega fans going to see their favourite boy band. They need a career boost by the looks of it, this behaviour is typical of what is wrong with journalists today.

Let’s explore the reporters lies and inconsistencies. Firstly they falsely wrote that Adnan Ahmed was “pestering women for YouTube channel.” However, from what we seen, all the women Ahmed spoke to were willing participants in all conversations. The Evening Times reporter then said “allegedly firmed himself approaching women in the street,” wrong again – Ahmed had a film and camera crew.

The reporter ups the controversy by writing “a man is to stand trial accused of targeting and pestering young women in the street.” OK, so we’ve already cleared up that willing participants doesn’t mean “pestering.” However, “targeting” is another saucy word in the reporters limited vocabulary that we must define. “Targeting” for what? Conversations on the street in the middle of the day with thousands of people around. If someone was “targeting” people, we imagine they would do so with no witnesses around in a hidden manner. As far as “young women” goes, well every female was over the age of consensual sex in the UK. We don’t know if The Evening Times reporter prefers O.A.P’s, nor is it any of our concern.

The reporter goes onto make false sensationalised claims, “alleged to have sexually assaulted a number of them…in Glasgow city centre between May 2016 and January this year.” Wow, no explanation of what this claim of “sexually assaulted” entails or the actual number of incidents, or of the specific dates they supposedly took place. This information is available in a public document in the form of an indictment against Ahmed, from which the reporter is referencing their article, but chose not to explain in the actual details of each allegation as it would discredit their flimsy reporting. Anything to sell a story, huh!

We have the details; Adnan Ahmed has been charged with 14 counts of “section 38, breach of the peace,” for simply talking to people during the day, most of whom gave him their number. Two of these charges aren’t even people, one is a video of Ahmed chatting to women who are “unknown” to the prosecutor and who did not even report or complain about an incident to the authorities. The other one is also “unknown” to the prosecutor, which is a shadow silhouette of an anonymous woman claiming Ahmed spoke to her – this was reported by the media via an online video, and again this anonymous person did not report this to the authorities.

How can these charges even be considered, or worst still put on an indictment? Furthermore how can the accused defend them? There was no complaint! In reality, they were put on the indictment against Ahmed to run a trial, in order to convict him on legal technicalities by convincing a jury he is of bad character, using his bad-boy image in the media to do so.

The fake sexual assault charges consist of one female saying Ahmed squeezed her leg and another saying Ahmed touched her face. Both of these allegations are said to have happened in broad daylight, on busy city centre streets, fully clothed and the allegations are from over 3 years ago. These individuals didn’t make these accusations until there was a media scandal regarding Adnan Ahmed’s dating business in 2019, before that no accusations were ever made or reported. The accusers even appeared in the news and on social media when the media scandal regarding Ahmed’s dating business initially happened. They did not make these claims in the press or online. In fact their initial online/press statements actually contradict their later police statements. The police had to find these individuals to file a report, they made no police report of there own accord, they only talked online and in the media. The police did so to build a case against Ahmed.

Furthermore, Ahmed was not charged with any of this when he was arrested then remanded in January 2019. The police/procurator fiscal added this to his indictment in April 2019, in order to have a document of charges to justify a trial and prosecution. There is a 3rd charge of sexual assault which is a false accusation by a female Ahmed has never even met before. It is alleged to have took place on 5th November 2018. Ahmed was not there, there is video evidence of this. Ahmed appears in a time stamped video filmed by his girlfriend at the exact date and time of the false accusation. The accuser blatantly lied to the police and contradicted her police statement on Instagram. Ahmed’s girlfriend took screenshots of this and sent the evidence to the police along with the alibi video proving Ahmed wasn’t there. Despite this, police and prosecutors chose to ignore the evidence. Ahmed’s girlfriend is now a defence witness and has to go to court to testify to this, rather than the charge being dropped.

The authorities would have had to release Adnan Ahmed on bail if they had dropped the charge, which they could have done in January 2019. Instead they added it to the indictment despite Ahmed’s girlfriend’s police statement and alibi evidence. If they didn’t include these charges they would not be able to indict Ahmed – as the other charges are too small to do so. Additionally they can still convict Ahmed of this on a technicality through the jury process because of a Scottish Law called Moorov/ Collaboration – even though Ahmed has never ever met the accuser before. Corroboration is when 2 or more independent parties make a similar complaint.

However, in Ahmed’s case no one who has made an accusation is an independent source, as everyone spoke to each other on social media through the Twitter feed of the BBC The Social video defaming Ahmed’s dating business. Evidence of this has been forwarded to Adnan Ahmed’s lawyer, who will attempt to use this in court if permitted to do so. Hence corroboration/Moorov’s Law does not apply as there was clearly collusion between all the accusing parties. All accusers also start all their police statements with “I saw the BBC Social video on Twitter….”

Furthermore, the three alleged sexual assault charges we have just explained are written as “or alternatively, section 38 breach of the peace” on Ahmed’s indictment document. Meaning, the mild nature of the false allegations are not even considered concrete “sexual assaults,” they are “breach of the peace” charges trumped up to the bigger charge as an alternative option in order to justify the uncertain element of the bigger charge. This is not justice, it is ridiculous.

Adnan Ahmed denies all charges. The media know they have acted hastily, yet they still splashed “sexual assault” all over the tabloids (again with no details or explanation of what was involved) in order to pressure prosecutors into convicting him. Adnan Ahmed is innocent, he is a victim of ambush journalism and a corrupt set-up. Never before has a court of law in Scotland dealt with a case like this.

They Evening Times reporter continued to pick and choose certain parts of the indictment against Ahmed in order to make the reporter’s fake news story juicy. The hacks wrote “it is claimed he pressured one women into giving him her phone number and then sent a message referring to sex.” If a person is pressuring another, why would they ask for a phone number or even “pressure” someone for a phone number just to send text messages. It doesn’t make sense, there is no motive.

These women are independent people who welcomed the interactions, willingly gave their numbers and only came foreword because of he media scandal defaming Ahmed’s dating business. Before that they did not even see it as an issue or a crime. The reporter’s claims are false. Every female who gave Ahmed her number did so of their own free will. He did not “pressure” or “force” any of them. There was no text message with the word “sex” in it, that is a fact.

The reporter continued their despicable lies writing, “another is said to be approached in a secluded lane,” the “lane” being referred to here is in the Uddingston area. It is joined onto a housing estate, between 2 main roads, leading to a main train station. This supposed incident is said to have happened between 8am-9am, at this time the “lane” is massively populated with people making their was into the city centre for work and adult education. In no way is it a “secluded lane.” Ahmed also has an eye witness in his favour for this alleged incident.

The Evening Times reporter continues “one woman alleged she went to a hotel to get away.” We researched these claims and found that the accuser said she very briefly spoke to Ahmed for less than a minute and she left, then went to a hotel to call a taxi. This woman was questioned about her claim by the public who asked, “why didn’t you call the police?” and “why did you wait until the BBC Social video came out to talk about it?” and “in what way was it scary, you walked away.” This seems to be another case of no actual offence being committed and the accuser having no inclination in her mind that there was a crime until the BBC Social video defaming Ahmed’s dating business went viral.

In all the incidents on the indictment; either no one thought a crime was being committed until the media scandal (because of how the BBC Social video was designed to portray Ahmed), or people made false accusations to gain some small-time fame, or worst of all no crime was even reported by an actual person – but a charge was added to the indictment anyway (i.e. the “unknowns” to the prosecutor).

The reporter fluffed on “Ahmed is further accused of filming himself approaching a female,” this is a total lie. Ahmed faces no charges of “filming” anyone. “Filming” is not included on the indictment. The Evening Time’s lies are constant and transparent. The reporter finishes their article with one true statement about Adnan Ahmed, that is “he denies a total of 18 charges at Glasgow Sheriff Court,” that is because he is an innocent man.

Check out our next blog post: http://redpillrights.com/the-daily-record-newspaper-falsely-accuse-football-talent-scout-gordon-neely-of-raping-and-abusing-boys/