The Sarah Everard Disappearance; An Introduction: The strong sense of something awry

There are reasons to believe that all is not as it seems with the news story of the moment, which is not the ridiculous race-baiting psyop emerging out of appearances on a TV talk show by royal periphery, but the disappearance and possible murder of a woman – a 33-year old, marketing executive – who is reportedly called Sarah Everard.

The primary cause for suspicion is the evidently pre-packed, instant agenda, whereby all men are collectively guilty for violence against women, that began being systematically deployed at the signal, it seems,  of a man being arrested on suspicion of murder, and also the discovery of “remains”† in such a well timed fashion that no grass was able to grow under the feet of those whose jobs would be to demonise Wayne Couzens, the fellow in question.

It’s not that Couzens is a cop that has created cause for the very high profile exposure that corporate-media has given the case, because there has been coverage of finger tip searches on Clapham Common and such like since before any arrest was made. However, Couzens being a serving officer with the Metropolitan Police has certainly given corporate-media an excuse to escalate its own scrum and circus.

In stark contrast is the non-coverage of the plight of Bennylyn Burke, who was reported missing from her home in South Gloucestershire on 1st March, having disappeared, along with her two children, on 17th February. On March 5th, the Scottish police attended a property in Dundee, and evidently made an arrest of a man on suspicion of murder of Bennylyn and one of her children. For her, no photographic opportunities starring a cast of multitudes in fluorescent jackets combing local heath lands. For her, no police in wet suits dragging the bottom of the local wetland or ponds. No one knows about Bennylyn Burke, and the crime against her and her child is potentially (because a body has not been found) and arguably a more heinous one than that against Everard.

Sarah Everard, to notice the obvious comparisons, went missing on 3rd March for the Metropolitan Police to raise the alarm three days later. After that, police activity escalated speedily, with specialist officers having been drafted into a missing persons investigation by 8th March, deployment of sniffer dogs on the next day, and culminating with the arrest of a suspect on the morrow after that.

It is the juxtaposition of the two cases that offers an opportunity to see, all in one scope, the difference between a disappearance and possible murder that looks as if it is purely organic, and one that looks like it is being handled and exploited by the authorities to advance an agenda. As any crisis event sceptic will testify, the problem for people looking to create an Hegelian synthesis via the old problem-reaction-solution model is that a natural crisis might have elements beyond the control of the social engineers that would threaten to embarrass and be detrimental to their purpose.  That control, of course, would extend to levels and places of access for conduits of information most effective for the very precise manipulation of public opinion.

Crucial to the forming of the perception belonging to the public, of course, is the early condemnation of a suspect, and Wayne Couzens has certainly suffered from that, with corporate-media discussing the means by which he could have lured Everard into his vehicle. Couzens, of course, is innocent until proven guilty. On the other hand, the corporate-media never respects presumption of innocence – and is never punished for it either – whenever there is a figure that must be convicted in the court of public opinion ahead of a fair trial. Perhaps the most dreadful implication of Couzens’ unproven guilt, however, came from Cressida Dick, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, who spoke of being appalled at the arrest of a colleague, who she insinuated had betrayed a trust. Couzens, of course, had yet to be charged – and still hasn’t been charged, although he has had a trip to a hospital to treat a head injury sustained while in incarceration‡. Well, Cressida Dick will no doubt have a lot at stake after having cast her particular aspersions.

Of course, there will be more detail and examination of Dick’s comments in articles that are planned to follow up this introduction. Likewise, there will be scrutiny of the official story in respect of Everard’s disappearance, and other matter strictly concerning the case. Any strangeness to be found, naturally, will only work to exacerbate the already strong sense of something awry.

† To be clear, as of 9am, 12th March, when this footnote was appended to this article, what presumably is a body, found in woodland in Ashford, Kent, on 10th March has not been confirmed as having been identified as being Sarah Everard’s.

‡ In fact, at the time of this footnote being appended to the article, at 11pm, 12th March, Couzens (by now charged) had been “rushed to hospital with a head injury for the second time in three days today”.