Predatory Creepy Liar Carla Jenkins (Evening Times) Victimises Addy AGame (Not Guilty!) In Fake News Article
Seedy Creep Reporter Carla Jenkins Writes Article Quoting Female Who Changed Her Story 4 Times Making False Allegations Against Innocent Man Adnan Ahmed aka Addy AGame
Predatory creep reporter Carla Jenkins is a fake news spreading liar. Seedy pest is known for stalking victims online and harassing them to give her stories, as well as pressuring them to follow her on Twitter and intimidating them to DM her intimate details of their private lives. Seedy sleazebag Carla Jenkins gets her philosophy on life and warped perspective for soap opera Coronation Street; this explains her lack of intelligence, lack of integrity and blatant dishonesty.
Slimy loser Carla Jenkins depressingly admits on social media that she has been rejected from numerous jobs – most likely because of her hateful, twisted, dishonest demeanour. Reject reporter Carla Jenkins tweets about leeching off friends and being in debt because of her overdraft and spending her money on alcohol (her lack of funds made her state; “pints are expensive”).
This low class amateur journalist sinks to even lower depths by quoting a “fake victim” who has previously changed her false allegation stories (about Addy AGame) 3 times – first in the media, then in a police statement, then in court – and now a 4th time in treacherous glory hunter Carla Jenkins – Evening Times article!
Speaking of the Evening Times aka Evening Slimes, it’s no wonder the flagging news rag employees bums like Carla Jenkins. Seventeen MPs signed a motion in regards to editors being sacked at Glasgow based Evening Times because of terrible journalism. Parent company News Quest offered scummy Evening Times staff demotions (the opposite of promotion) and less pay. Recently a lack of sales and their falling popularity of the fake news, toilet paper rag, The Evening Times aka The Evening Swine’s led to the dishonest publication making bum journalists redundant and demoting editors to lower positions. If the charlatans at the Evening Times reported the truth instead of exaggerated lies from unreliable sources maybe they would cease their well deserved decline.
Jenkins starts her hate speech by stating; “victim bravely speaks of ordeal ahead of sentencing.” This is a disgusting weak attempt by the creepy journo to influence court proceedings. There were no “victims” or “ordeal” – just false allegations, and there is nothing “brave” about lying. Her source told 4 different stories about an incident Addy AGame denied via his one consist account of what actually happened. Look at her choice of words “victims,” there were no victims, there were no actual crimes recognised under UK Law, there has to be a crime to be a “victim.” Fake “victims” who are glory-hungry idiots, jump on a fake #metoo bandwagon (saying they were simply chatted up) actually takes away from real victims who actually have to face the reality of real crimes. The only “victims” in connection to the Evening Times are the people they victimise through their vile trash hate articles.
Rancid Carla Jenkins spewed on; “saying she feels let down by the verdict, I’m appalled, I feel let down by the justice system.” The real reason this liar is appalled is because the creature didn’t receive any compensation money for her false allegations, she should be appalled at herself for lying under oath, the cretin! Sleaze Carla continues quoting the 4 time liar; “he was found guilty of threatening and abusive behaviour, that was it.” In reality he should not have been wrongfully convicted of anything because you lied – 4 times! It should have been thrown out of court, the judge reduced the charge because even he saw the continuous obvious lies told by the unreliable accuser – but it was left up to a bias jury programmed via 9 months of a media hate campaign against Adnan Ahmed aka Addy AGame (via TV, radio, social media) – the only person the justice system actually let down is Adnan Ahmed!
We are not going to quote idiot Carla Jenkins fake news account of a lying source telling a 4 time altered version of false allegations, instead we are going to quote what was actually said in court to show how the contradictory inconsistencies the accuser spoke about took place! The woman was asked in court why it took her 3 years to report this (in 2019) she told the court she didn’t feel there was a crime. The woman also told the court she had anxiety and mental health issues. She also said “I looked a lot better 3 years ago, I was thinner, I didn’t have tattoos on my face,” the court heard. It was reported; “she said the pair met in Buchanan Galleries and he told her she looked gorgeous and Italian.” This has not been proven in court and is not a recognised crime in Scotland!
The Scottish media then selectively stated;” the scared 18 year old walked away but was approached again an hour later outside an Argos door.” This is inaccurate as the woman told the court it was over an hour later, she actually said after the initial approach in Buchanan Galleries she went shopping in various stores, called her grandmother for 45 minutes and headed to Argos in Stockwell street in Glasgow a further 35 minutes later approximately. It was then biasedly stated; “he tried to pull me close to him so he could kiss me, so I pushed him away.” The media left out that it was pointed out to jurors that this recollection of events contradicted her police statement, in which she did not say she was “pulled close to him.” The witness responded by saying the police lied. The witness told the court “the police did not make physical contact with the man.”
The court heard, in her police statement the man “touched her face and tried to kiss her,” when the woman was cross examined about this contradiction in court she said she didn’t say so at first as she didn’t want to interrupt the questioning (despite being asked numerous times) then claimed “the pull and face touch” took place. When the contradictory police statement and court statement was pointed out to the woman in front of the jurors, she sat down from a standing position in the witness box!
The media left out that the woman also thought she was messaged by the man on social media, she told jurors this happened despite her giving a fake name to the man which was not linked to any of her social media accounts as she said she did not tell him any details of mutual friends. She also told the court the man wrote his details on a receipt during the initial meeting, but was still able to contact her despite not having any of her contact details and not even knowing her name! The media continued; “she walked away from him and stood with strangers to be somewhere safe.” The media failed to report that these alleged witnesses were not presented in court and that when the woman was asked if anyone saw this she said no despite people being around her.
That is two different accounts of contradictory statements given. Here are another two given earlier in the year; Reporters included in their articles quoting false accusation that was reported to the media by Nicole Venus Barrett against Adnan Ahmed. These false allegations are disgusting, Red Pill Rights cross-referenced statements regarding this matter from Adnan Ahmed, along with all eye witness statements from David Kasonga, against the accuser’s contradicting police statement and press statement.
In the articles, Venus Barrett states “she was 18 when Ahmed approached her on Glasgow’s Buchanan Street 3 years ago.” She claimed that “he was making me uncomfortable and tried to kiss me.” Ahmed responded “she gave me her number after a quick flirty interaction, we had a moment and nearly kissed, she turned away at the last moment saying I’m seeing someone, she gave her number afterwards”
Eye witness David Kasonga confirmed this saying, “I remember this girl because I saw her on the news after the media scandal concerning Adnan Ahmed. She lied on the news, they appeared to be having a conversation and laughing, he leaned his head slowly towards her as if he was whispering in her ear, she gave him her number afterwards.”
Barrett told the press “he tried to touch my hand…. I was scared.” In her police statement she contradicts this saying “he touched my face when he attempted to kiss me.” We asked Adnan Ahmed, he responded “I did not touch her face.” Eyewitness David Kasonga also confirmed “I know for a fact he didn’t touch her face, the only physical contact was a handshake when they parted ways, she did not seem scared or distressed at all, she was smiling.”
Barrett also told the press “I asked him what he was doing and not to come close to me, I had to phone a taxi and ask a member of the public if I could stand next to them.” Ahmed responded, “upon seeing her, I asked her what she was up to, this was not the first time we’d met, she said she was waiting for a taxi home, this was during the day outside Argos superstore on Stockwell Street with lots of people around, she didn’t go stand with anyone, I left after she gave me her number. If she had asked me not to come close to her I would have left, there was no sign or words of discomfort or fear, she was cracking jokes and smiling.”
Barrett further contradicted herself in the press stating “I took his number,” in her police statement she said “he texted me.” How can this be, how can you take his number and he texts you first? He would have to take her number to text her first! She also said (in her police statement), “I knew about his channel 3 years ago.” In the press Barrett said “she did not contact the police because she was scared.” She then said referring to the viral BBC The Social video defaming Ahmed “I was disgusted. I couldn’t believe that finally something had surfaced on this guy.”
Ok, so Barrett said she was “scared” to go to the police, but not scared to go to various media outlets and national television news to make false claims. She went to the press before she went to the police, she only spoke to the police months after going to the press because the police contacted her about making a statement to them to build a case. She actually didn’t go to the police even after the media scandal, they had to track her down.
We asked Ahmed about this, he said “she’s lying, she wants the fame from this horrible ordeal, her police statements and media statements contradict each other. I have an eye witness. I remember she looked like Lady Gaga when I first met her briefly in 2016. When I saw the press stuff she looked much less attractive, she didn’t age well, she did say she was into drugs, maybe that’s why.”
Nicole Barrett also claimed to the press that Mr Ahmed contacted her on Snapchat, texted and called her before she blocked his number. However, she told the police “he found me and contacted me on Instagram,” not mentioning Snapchat. In order to contact someone on Snapchat you have to have the person’s phone number or snap code, so either she gave her number to Ahmed or he is psychic.
We asked Mr Ahmed about this and he responded “I never contacted her on Instagram, check my followers/following lists, we did message briefly on Snapchat in 2016, she even told me the guy she was seeing was in prison at the time for something, she didn’t come out for a date, so I stopped contacting her, there was nothing more to discuss if we weren’t meeting up. I have never forced this girl, ever, and I was never blocked. I just stopped messaging. I deleted Snapchat around 2 years ago and used Instagram as it began to gain more popularity and had more features whilst Snapchat became less popular.”
Adnan Ahmed aka Addy AGame was set-up by BBC The Social’s video which caused mass hysteria depicting him as a terrifying figure, where in reality he is a good man and a caring father. He was working in Criminal Justice and studying in his 3rd year at university. He is in a committed relationship with a woman he says he loves dearly. People like Nicole Venus Barrett saw an opportunity for fame and added to the horrible negative publicity with no concern about ruining an innocent man’s life.
The worst part is that the Scottish Justice System is designed in such a way that females who make false accusations face limited punishment for their lies, if any legal repercussions at all. This is not justice, when did the media become more powerful that the law, this is a disgraceful miscarriage of justice.
Moron reporter Carla Jenkins then goes onto list dates of alleged incidents between “2014 and 2018,” this is more amateur reporting, the false allegations were from 2016. Passive-aggressive runt Carla Jenkins continued; “a Scots pick-up artist approached young and vulnerable girls,” Carla, labelling women “vulnerable” because of their gender is chauvinistic, “vulnerable” how? “Vulnerable” to having a conversation in broad day-light with hundreds/ thousands of people and CCTV around. And “young” how, all women were adults above the legal age of consensual sex in the UK! Lying fool Carla Jenkins continued “Ahmed, approached 5 girls in Glasgow.” This may seem like news to Carla.
Childish Carla Jenkins blabbered on; “Ahmed was found guilty at court for acting in a threatening and abusive manner that could cause a reasonable person fear or alarm.” In reality Ahmed was wrongfully convicted by a bias jury who were influenced by an online social media campaign and horrible selective press reporting during every turn of his trial (by Connor Gordon and the Scottish Media scum). Even though it was clearly stated in court; “this is not a crime; being confident is not a crime, having a conversation is not a crime, witness is unreliable, asking someone out is not a crime, if you have any inclination of reasonable doubt – he’s innocent, peoples perspective was skewed by how Ahmed was portrayed in a online/ media hate campaign.” Ahmed was actually wrongfully convicted of section 38 breach of the peace which is equivalent to raising one’s voice too loud outdoors, madness! Here’s how the jury process works in Scotland, there is no screening for racist, feminist, prejudice or psychiatric deficiencies (unlike the USA). 15 members of the public are selected at random and simply told, “don’t go on social media or media” without any enforcement or checks conducted during the trial. Ahmed’s jury was made up of 9 females and 6 males (some of which were programmed by the media to hate his, some pudgy beta males and some angry overweight feminists), the wrongful non-majority “guilty” verdict will be appealed and overturned in the next few months as no crime was actually committed! Ahmed maintains his innocence, 13 charges were dropped before the bias jury got a chance to deliberate on them. Adnan Ahmed did no receive a fair trial and is not guilty of any criminal conduct!
The jury and accusers are asked to take an “oath to God” to ensure an unbiased/testimony, without individuals even being screened to see if they even believe in God (in an age of rampant atheist beliefs). It’s a ridiculous board-game style set-up, this is not justice, it’s a farce!
It is the aim of the clowns in the Scottish press to dehumanise Adnan Ahmed, objectify him, troll him and discredit his reputation to write scandalised, sensationalised lies as news stories. They did not write about his girlfriend and his mother being present to support him during the trial, as well as various male and female well-wishers and supporters dropping in and out during the proceedings. They did not report whole testimonials, only select words to demonise Ahmed further. The press even reported incidents Ahmed was found “not guilty” of after the trial finished. This is further grounds for him to sue for defamation!
Reptilian swine Carla Jenkins then goes on to quote puppet face weirdo Sandy Brindley from rape crises Scotland. Why does this meddling nobody Sandy Brindley have to get involved?! There were no accusations of any incidents involving rape, why doesn’t this stupid publicity starved Muppet go and help actual rape victims?! What does Sandy Brindley actually do?! She isn’t qualified to speak about this case, it is out with her pointless role – she would do anything to back her feminist man hating agenda.
Coward Carla chuntered on; “Sandy Brindley said; this is a significant case, important message, this predatory behaviour isn’t just unacceptable and inappropriate, but illegal to.” It is not illegal for men and women to chat and flirt, you may think it’s immoral or distasteful to you Sandy – you sad old hag (because no one wants to chat you up) but don’t impose your poisonous crap on other normal people, you fake #MeToo robot. This case is not “significant” it’s a farce, no other country in the world brought this to court except from the social justice hicks in Scotland, the “message” this sends is – don’t talk to women with romantic intentions in Scotland because jealous old bats like Sandy Brindley feel left out because they neglect their appearance and mental health and blame men for it rather than take responsibility for themselves. This is detrimental for men and women in Scotland who just want to get along! Both Brindley and Jenkins call Ahmed “predatory” in this article, the only thing predatory here is how imbosiles like Sandy Brindley and Carla Jenkins target innocent people’s reputations to enhance their transparent insecure agendas and catastrophic failed careers! Hungry desperado Jenkins stated Ahmed “has been labelled a predator,” By who Carla – you, your hack buddies and some sad weirdo online trolls. Addy is not a predator. He is an exemplary human being, a good father, he worked in the Criminal Justice field helping others and did daily community work (with NA, CA and AA) for free. He has a fiancee, a mother and all his ex-partners testify there has never ever been any “predatory” behaviour on his part, ever!
Crappy Carla continued to quote monster Sandy Brindley; “treatment of women as play pieces in a game….is truly repulsive, it is right the man responsible faces consequences.” Shut up Sandy, the only thing “truly repulsive” is your appearance, demeanour and existence! Ahmed aka Addy AGame didn’t humiliate, degrade or mistreat any women, he was set up like a play piece in the BBC Social’s game via a one sided prejudicial video by weasel rat Myles Bonnar and you joined in to get some of the tainted fame. Sandy do you actually help anyone or do you just chat nonsense in the press because you have an empty boring life?! There will be “consequences” for you Sandy, you and your organisation will be sued for the minute funding you have (if any at all). How about you change yourself Sandy instead of talking trash about men to mask your insecurities. Here’s more about Sandy Brindly: http://redpillrights.com/psycho-feminazi-sandy-brindley-vs-self-help-glasgow-dating-coach-adnan-ahmed/
Adnan Ahmed aka Addy AGame has always maintained he is not a pick-up artist, he has always said he is a dating/ life coach. It is a sad state of affairs when people are unable to talk to each other face to face, confining society further into dating apps and social media. In this era it is more normal to troll pictures and profiles online, messaging desperately and projecting a false persona to lure others in; whereas starting a random conversation with someone you find attractive face to face during the day is considered not only abnormal, but also criminal. There is more danger involved in meeting someone online than there is in meeting them in person. Plus face to face dating is a much more human and much less time consuming process, that is if police Scotland don’t arrest you first.
Following are the testimonials from women that really know Addy and described their time with him;