All over Benelux, facilities are available for the safe storage of goods and chattels in clean, password pin-numbered/secure units - a 6’x8’ garden shed sized unit for example costing around 700 Euros per annum.
Final advice from settled exiles is that, unlike the British, the Continentals act with commonsense and interact as they see fit even to the extent of ‘getting around the rules in various ways'.
Advice and even local assistance in re-settling are available to genuine potential exiles who must first be cleared through the editor of this web site and then by settled exiles. It need hardly be said that no information will be given to members of the British media, from whom most of them are fleeing anyway.
Two final points may be that those in their still working years not wanting to make the move could think about it as a retirement option and prepare now by studying or brushing up on a language, the second of which could be the trigger to make the move. And perhaps of great relevance is that they will be moving closer to Strasbourg where the court of human rights has now been petitioned about their plight.
See Contact in main menu.
To be accused, even falsely, is to be criminalized also
It is said elsewhere on this web site that to be accused, even falsely and even when cleared by the police or courts, is to be guilty – to be guilty of being accused. A reply to the above story demonstrates how this is also driving good men to seek asylum away from British shores.
Alan writes in response.
An excellent and hope giving article about UK/ Irish exiles living in the safer havens of the Benelux states on the European continent.
I know from my own relatively recent experiences that the need /desire to identify and locate to a safe haven outside of the UK, beyond the reach of the life destroying media, police, probation service and potential vigilantes etc, was foremost on the ‘survival list’ I drew up in the event I was found guilty in a criminal court of law for a crime I had not committed.
Fortunately for me I was found not guilty, with the CPS offering no evidence against me in relation to their charge that I was in possession of two indecent CP images contained on a CD.
Nonetheless, following the acquittal I commissioned a second independent computer forensic expert to examine the images and to provide a report.
Turns out the two images were received as unsolicited incoming emails back in 2001 and the entire email cache in which the two images resided was copied to the CD during a back-up procedure of the entire Internet software application program (some 150Mb in size) in which the email cache was stored.
Furthermore, the forensic expert stated that neither of the images had been viewed and could not have been viewed due to the need for special software to open and view them.
Finally, the forensic expert stated that in his opinion the images contained persons aged 16 years and ‘probably older’. This was important in that the age a person was deemed to be a child in 2001 was under 16 years. As I’m sure you are aware the law changed in 2004 when that age was increased to 18 years of age. In 2001, when the images were received and copied to a CD, they were legal images.
So, in a nutshell, I was charged by the police with possession of two mages that had never been viewed, could not have been viewed due to the absence of the required software to view them and were legal when received.
As you may or may not know, to be charged with possession of such images the police/CPS must be able to prove that I had knowledge that the images existed and that I had control over them.
As the above information clarifies, none of those essential ingredients were present. So, in a sense, I was falsely charged since the legal argument was invalid.
Anyway, to the point of this email. With regards to your article, you state: “Those suffering under the repressive British regime forcing them to seek such a haven include both individuals with criminal convictions for illegal activities such as the possession of certain images and inappropriate sexual activities and those falsely accused, because of identity theft, under Operation Ore and all those who found it impossible to obtain a fair trial because of the absence of objective computer forensics experts prepared to act for the defence.”
I’d just like to point out that even individuals charged but successfully acquitted of such crimes endure many of the same obstacles faced by those found guilty.
Firstly, in my case, despite being acquitted I still carry the stigma of malicious PNC data that is incorrect. Recently stopped by a traffic cop, I could hear on the cop’s radio the person back at the police station stating “There is a record,” and “Is it safe to talk?” At which point the cop turned off his radio loudspeaker and listened through his earpiece. Clearly the PNC record in question related to my previous charge of possession of CP.
Secondly, my enhanced CRB will forever more contain a comment in the ‘additional information’ section that will state I was once arrested and charged with possession of CP. I am a marked man for life despite being cleared and despite being able to provide forensic evidence that no crime had even actually taken place. I’ll never be able to return to my former profession and will never be able to obtain employment again where a clean enhanced CRB certificate is required.
Any future occasion where I am required to provide my name and date of birth to the police, such as a routine traffic stop, I run the risk of the cop being nasty to me (believing I am a paedophile) as a result of the ‘record’ stored on the PNC. The idea of my wife and myself eventually leaving this backward and paranoid country for a sunnier climate remains appealing and is something we have planned for.
The EU havens you have mentioned in your article are not just of interest to those who were convicted of ‘abusing a child all over again’ by simply looking at coloured pixels on a computer monitor, they are also of interest to those who were found not guilty but are required to live with the no smoke without fire on-going stigma of being associated with a CP investigation.
If I can legally be of any assistance with your ‘clearing process’ concerning applicants who contact you for more information on moving to any of the locations you mention in your article please do not hesitate to contact me. I live in the (area removed here).
Despite having no interest in CP and despite having feelings of anger and outrage towards any person who interferes with a child, I believe that those individuals who have simply ‘looked’ at such material do not deserve the ‘punishment’ imposed on them for such an action. The punishments themselves are in my opinion a crime against humanity. Indeed, the very people who passed these absurd laws have themselves previously enjoyed the assets of Samantha Fox, with many an MP and judge ‘jacking off’ to her photos in the Sun newspaper pre 2004 change in legislation. Hypocrites one and all!
My mind still cannot fathom how an image that was legal to look at and possess previously, that was openly and legally sold in newsagents across the land (in newspapers) and which adorned the lockers and garden sheds of many men will now result in a death sentence if possessed.
Perhaps the answer to the question in Alan’s last paragraph is that the society that suddenly wants to criminalize others for activities it too formerly (and perhaps now only secretly) enjoyed is very confused about its own sexuality.
Legal advise on the situation
What follows is from a legal adviser.
I was reading your article 'Safe Haven for British Exiles'. I thought you might welcome a bit of elaboration on the very good points you make. The free movement of persons is one of the four fundamental freedoms instilled in EU Community law. A major step in carrying this forward was the creation of the EU citizen, with rights compatible to such status. So, it is well respected in practice.
There is indeed free movement throughout the EU but limitations can be justified for instance under Article 39 (paragraph 3) especially in relation to residency. This allows restrictions on grounds of: 'public policy, public security or public health.' However, a string of important European Court of Justice (ECJ) cases point firmly to this being criteria only to be applied in genuinely exceptional cases. We are talking terrorists and mad-axe-men here.
Directive 2004/38 relates to workers, and again cases from the ECJ reflect that the definition of 'worker' enjoys a fairly broad meaning, and the residency protections extend to the worker's family. It also includes the self-employed - something that might be of interest to your readers, since that too, has a fairly broad meaning. Also covered are job-seekers, who have certain protections as well.
This is by necessity quite a crude broad brush description, but I hope it's helpful. There are also things of a perfectly lawful nature that could be done on the UK side to help someone's prospects of obtaining a smooth residency in another EU member state. But with a little common sense, this probably wouldn't be necessary in most cases.
What is emerging here is a clear indication that on the Continental side of the Channel there is not only a safe haven for British exiles and an absence of the kind of persecution carried out against certain offenders in the UK, but a positive demonstration of tolerance and justice where they are due.
When all this is considered in the context of a part of Europe where the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg, is a little over 100 miles from the border of Belgium, one may more easily accept that there is a place of justice not far from UK shores. Especially as it is to Strasbourg that those denied the most basic human rights of safe residency and work are appealing. Finally, the growing rift between the British and Continental Europeans can mean that the climate is actually improving for those wishing to flee from the British Isles.
Further information and news
Communications between intending travellers and our in situ contact can be arranged by the Editor and can use secure email.
The legal expert who supplied the information above is available for any further specific advice where he might have the knowledge.
Our main contact on the Continental side is closely involved in a demolition-construction project for a new-build 6-storey block of 6 x 2-bed ultra-modern apartments, located 200 metres from miles of sandy beach, promenade and entertainment complex. Approximate asking price for each apartment is around 180,000 Euros, but one or more may be available soon at a preferential price when they will be offered initially off-plan.
Demolition commences in January 2012 with builder's final completion within 18 months to avoid late-penalties. Earliest realistic move-in would be Spring 2013. Off-plan sales are shortly expected to invite interested buyers with a deposit of around 50,000 Euros per unit, and around130,000 Euros balance on completion.
The location is a town centre with all shopping and amenities, supermarkets, fashion shops, hotels, cafes, restaurants, and so on.