Our next instance of child molestation/paedophilia engaged in by jews is a historic one from 1991 in the Stamford Hill area of London and focuses on two jews who – to save on almost entirely repeating myself I will cover in one article rather than two – raped two siblings: a one-year-old girl and a seven-year-old boy.
We read in the ‘Independent’ for 22nd May 1991 that:
‘A Mother claimed in court yesterday that her strict Jewish community protected child abusers.
The woman, whose two young children allegedly suffered sexual abuse from two men, said her community knew she was telling the truth but would never admit it. The woman, a member of a religious sect in Stamford Hill, north London, denied at Southwark Crown Court that she had embarked on a ‘’hysterical crusade’‘.
A student, Philip Eli Cohen, 18, of Riverside Road, Stamford Hill, denies one charge of buggery and 13 charges of indecently assaulting a boy and four offences of indecently assaulting a girl.
A community police liaison officer, Jonathan Rosenthal, 40, also of Riverside Road, denies three charges of indecently assaulting the girl and one similar offence against the boy. The alleged assaults began in 1986 when the woman’s son was seven and her daughter one and a half.
Cross-examined by Jonathan Goldberg QC, for Mr Rosenthal, the mother denied members of her community had turned against her because they believed she had ‘’coerced and rehearsed’‘ her children to lie about his client.’ (1)
Incidentally the description of Rosenthal as a ‘community police liaison officer’ is an old way of describing what we’d now call a member of Stamford Hill’s Shomrim (aka jewish community police) organization.
We get further detail from an article in ‘The Guardian’ from the same date:
‘A teenager facing child abuse charges yesterday told a jury how his repressive upbringing in a strict Jewish household led to him indecently touching a young girl.
Student Phillip Eli Cohen, aged 18, said he felt guilty about twice touching the girl, aged 5, but that he had ‘pent-up feelings’ he had not been allowed to express.
Such was his ignorance of sex he thought the touching was not as bad as masturbation, which he had been told was ‘worse than murder’. Mr Cohen, of Stamford Hill, north London, is accused along with Jonathan Rosenthal, aged 41, also of Stamford Hill, of abusing the girl and her brother over four years.
He denies three counts of indecently assaulting her as well as one count of buggery and 13 counts of indecent assault against the boy.
Mr Rosenthal denies three counts of indecently assaulting the girl and one of indecently assaulting the boy.
Mr Cohen told the jury at Southwark crown court that virtually all his knowledge of sexual matters came from an 18th-century theological text which described masturbation as ‘worse than murder’.
In the lead-up to the alleged incidents with the girl, Mr Cohen said he was becoming increasingly confused.
‘I had these building-up feelings, these pent-up feelings. I wasn’t allowed to express them. Or if I did it was the most wicked thing.’
In January last year, he was in the children’s house and the girl was running around in a short nightdress with no underpants. He asked her to play a game and during the course of it indecently assaulted her.
‘I stopped immediately after that and I felt very guilty about it. I read some psalms,’ he said. ‘I didn’t mean to hurt her.’
Some days later, he was in the house again and touched the girl in exactly the same way.
‘I didn’t mean to hurt her and I thought she didn’t find it wrong. I knew it was wrong but I thought it was a lot less bad than masturbation.’
The girl eventually complained to her mother and Mr Cohen wrote a letter to her trying to explain his ‘evil inclinations’.’ (2)
However, the nitty-gritty of what actually occurred was only provided after Cohen had been sentenced and given almost no punishment despite being convicted and Rosenthal had been cleared – but only on a legal technicality not because he wasn’t believed to have actually sexually assaulted/raped the one-year-old girl and her seven-year-old brother – (3) with Melvyn Howe writing for the ‘Press Association’ on 26th July 1991 that:
‘A shy teenage member of a strict Jewish community was sentenced to six months youth custody today for indecently assaulting a five-year-old girl. Student Phillip Eli Cohen, 18, who blamed his behaviour on “evil impulses” and repressive upbringing, looked stunned as Judge Robin Laurie told him he “richly deserved” a custodial sentence. While he accepted that Cohen, of Riverside Road, Stamford Hill, north London, was immature and not street-wise, he was an intelligent young man with an “element of brass if not metal in his character”. “Anyone can see that these assaults have done enormous damage,” said the judge. He told Cohen, a member of the orthodox Yekers community, that one of the most serious aspects of the case was the effect it would have on the girl. “In my judgment, this offence is so grave that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified.” He added: “It is high time in my view that you paid the penalty that any other young man in the same circumstances would be expected to pay, which in my view, you richly deserve.” Cohen was convicted of the offence four weeks ago after a two-month trial at Southwark Crown Court. He was cleared of three other offences of indecently assaulting the girl as well as 13 allegations of indecency and one of buggery against the girl’s older brother. When the trial opened, the prosecution claimed Cohen had subjected the two children to years of sadistic sexual abuse. John Hilton QC, prosecuting, alleged Cohen had “indulged his sexual fantasies” by abusing the children and dressing up in their mother’s clothes during evening sex sessions while the parents were out.’ (4)
This is extremely sick by all accounts since Cohen was basically dressing up as in a woman’s clothing and then proceeding to repeatedly rape that woman’s one-year-old daughter and her seven-year-old brother.
What was Cohen’s defence?
‘Mr Cohen told the jury at Southwark crown court that virtually all his knowledge of sexual matters came from an 18th-century theological text which described masturbation as ‘worse than murder’.
In the lead-up to the alleged incidents with the girl, Mr Cohen said he was becoming increasingly confused.
‘I had these building-up feelings, these pent-up feelings. I wasn’t allowed to express them. Or if I did it was the most wicked thing.’
In January last year, he was in the children’s house and the girl was running around in a short nightdress with no underpants. He asked her to play a game and during the course of it indecently assaulted her.
‘I stopped immediately after that and I felt very guilty about it. I read some psalms,’ he said. ‘I didn’t mean to hurt her.’ (5)
Basically we are supposed to believe that Cohen ‘only knew about sex from a theological text from the 1700s’ but then this somehow excuses him – if I may be blunt – from getting a hard on from a young toddler running around the house in ‘a short nightdress with no underpants’ and then this further somehow ‘forced’ him to repeatedly rape her and her brother while wearing their mother’s clothes.
This is clearly utter bullshit, and Cohen was/is a sexual predator of the worst kind: a paedophile who wants to rape babies and toddlers of both sexes.
What did the British courts do?
Well according to Geoff Frost for the ‘Press Association’ on 2nd August 1991:
‘A student who blamed his repressive upbringing in a strict Jewish community for an indecency offence against a little girl won his freedom from a six-month youth custody sentence today. The sentence passed last Friday on Philip Eli Cohen, 18, from the North London Yekers community, was understandable, said Mr Justice Pill in the Court of Appeal. But the impact of a long trial on other charges, of which he was cleared, and a short period in custody was sufficient punishment, said the judge, sitting with Lord Justice Watkins and Mr Justice Rose. “We feel enough is enough.”’ (6)
Basically, they shoved Cohen in a young offender’s institution for six months – an extremely lenient sentence – because ‘he felt bad’ and ‘was extremely sheltered’ after he repeatedly raped a baby and a child/a toddler and a pre-teen for nearly five years!
We know that the jewish community exerted a lot of political pressure and engaged in a lot of lobbying to get Cohen’s sentence reduced down to an absolute minimum and Rosenthal off entirely because of what happened next?
A large mob of jews then descended on the family home of the victims – no doubt at the behest of the local rabbinate – and promptly drove the victims out of their own home by rioting and violence towards them and their property so that they had to flee in fear of their lives. (7)
Without the newspaper accounts of what happened saying it; what had clearly occurred was that by getting the non-jewish authorities involved and prosecuting Cohen and Rosenthal for repeatedly raping her children. The mother and her family had been judged to be ‘Mosers’ (i.e., ‘Informers’) who had broken the Mesirah principle in Judaism – basically a rabbi has to clear a jew to talk to non-jewish authorities about goings on inside the jewish community – (8) and thus were being extrajudicially punished by the local rabbis in compliance with rabbinical rulings which advocate the extrajudicial execution of ‘Mosers’ but where this is impractical just driving them out. (9)
And yet they have the audacity to claim that the Christian churches are ‘filled with child molesters’ while they actively protect jewish serial child rapists from prosecution and punishment!
References
(1) https://theawarenesscenter.blogspot.com/1991/05/case-of-jonathan-rosenthal.html
(2) Idem.
(3) Idem.
(4) Idem.
(5) Idem.
(6) Idem.
(7) Idem.; https://theawarenesscenter.blogspot.com/2008/06/case-of-nachman-stal.html
(8) On this please see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/rabbis-informers-and-paedophiles
(9) Idem.
Karl’s SubstackRead More
T1
