Bill Maloney – Pie ‘n’ Mash

Updated 18/03/2010.

British award winning film maker and lower working classes champion Bill Maloney asks British Bullshit Corporation lackeys “what the fuck do you do for us?” …

G20 BBC Newsnight Exclusive with Bill Maloney UN-AIRED:


Some of Bills films that need more exposure …


Government’s Secret Family Courts – Bill Maloney Reports:

February 2010 – Award winning film director Bill Maloney is refused entrance to the Inner London Family Proceedings Court to support a young couple who were having their 10 month old baby girl taken away from them.

This is another tragic example of authorities taking children from young parents at birth.

Reported recently in The Times: Reforms to open up the family courts to the media are at risk of being scuppered by mounting opposition from senior judges, lawyers, childrens groups and MPs, The Times has learnt.

Jack Straw wants to build on ground-breaking moves last year to open the family courts so that media reporting is not thwarted by the current wideranging restrictions. But a second set of measures, designed to allow media reports on evidence and naming of witnesses, has run into heavy opposition.


Adam Rickwood & The Medomsley Heroes TRAILER :


TV documentary on Burnley ‘suicide’ teen Adam Rickwood
Published Date: 12 February 2010

A HARD-HITTING documentary detailing the death in custody of Burnley teenager Adam Rickwood hopes to shed new light on his alleged suicide.

News of the yet-to-be released social drama entitled “Adam Rickwood and The Medomsley Heroes” comes as Adam’s mum, Carol Pounder, visited the High Court to demand a new coroner for a second inquest into her son’s death.

Adam became the youngest person to die in British penal custody at the age of 14 when he was found hanged at the Hassockfield Secure Training Centre in County Durham, in 2004.

In May, 2007, a month-long inquest found Adam had deliberately taken his own life. But Mrs Pounder took the matter to the High Court and Lord Justice Blake ruled Adam had been unlawfully restrained, which has led to a second inquest.

Now Mrs Pounder believes Durham Coroner Andrew Tweddle, who conducted the first inquest, should not preside over the second inquest as he refused to rule on the legality of physical restraint methods used on Adam first time around. The family is now awaiting the judge’s decision.

It will only be after this second inquest, for which a date has yet to be set, that award-winning Cockney film-maker Bill Maloney will release his documentary and he is promising an emotional warts-and-all view on how youths are cared for in this type of facility.

“The idea for it came when I was approached by somebody who has been a victim of abuse at Medomsley, which is what Hassockfield Secure Training Centre used to be called,” said Mr Maloney, who has seen his maverick approach to filming receive awards in London, Ireland and New York.

“He was with a group called and wanted me to make a film about the abuse he and 11 others suffered. After listening to their story I just couldn’t refuse.

“I didn’t even know about Adam until one of the victim’s told me about his story. I then approached Carol as I feel Adam’s story brings the documentary up to date.”

By the time Mr Maloney was 20, he had spent 14 years in different institutions brought about by the brutality of his mother and his father’s alcoholism, an insight which as a director has helped him put the audience directly into this film.

He prides himself on “telling it like it is” and even rejected a £1.4m. budget for his film “Lunatic” as the company would not give him full artistic freedom. After making “Lunatic” for just £40,000, it went on to win Best International Feature at the New York International Independent Film and Video Festival.

Mr Maloney said: “‘Adam Rickwood and The Medomsley Heroes’ is currently two hours and 50 minutes long, but I don’t want to edit it or sanitise it in any way. It really is heartbreaking to watch and that is the way it should remain.

“The time I spent with Carol and her family I saw a very loving, tight, loyal and passionate unit of people. I speak to Carol often and would without doubt say she always has an ally in me.” – Burnley Express


Sun Sea & Satan:


Billy & Lilly Go To New York:


Web Links:
Pie ‘n’ Mash Films Home Page
YouTube Channel



8 thoughts on “Bill Maloney – Pie ‘n’ Mash

  1. Jack Straw CAUGHT lying about children in care:

    Maverick award winning filmmakers Bill Maloney and Lilly Starr expose Jack Straw clearly lying about children in care – Hear Straws lies on tape!
    In the lead up to the general election 2010 the Sun newspaper has introduced a regular slot for a London Black Cabbie to ask major politicians questions from ‘the man on the street’. The Cabbie happens to be a personal friend of Bill Maloney who trained him to act almost five years ago. Last week Jack Straw took the back seat in the London cab and answered a number of questions. The Cabbie had recently seen a video report by Maloney and was keen to hear Jack Straws answer to this question:



    Watch the full report to believe it. BILL MALONEY POINTS THE FINGER DIRECTLY AT JACK STRAW.

    • Thanks for that Maria. More selective amnesia from our so called “representatives” eh!

      Here’s the article in the Independent:
      “Justice Ministry to bar parents from telling their own stories

      The Websters made headlines, but, says Matthew Bell, such exposure will soon be impossible

      Sunday, 15 February 2009

      Last Wednesday, Mark and Nicky Webster were told they will never see three of their children again, even though a judge accepted that allegations of abuse could be false. Their story was the lead item on the following day’s BBC news, and appeared in several newspapers with pictures of the couple and quotes of them saying they felt they had been the victims of a miscarriage of justice.

      But as of April, because of a change in legislation being introduced by Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, the media will no longer be able to identify those involved in cases such as the Websters. It will also be illegal for any children currently in care to speak out, even if they feel they are being maltreated.

      The change, unremarked by the press, comes within an overhaul of the law on the reporting of family courts that has otherwise been widely welcomed by the media. Currently there is a blanket ban on journalists entering family courts, but in December Straw announced a change to the law that will allow journalists to attend family court hearings. “A really important veil is being lifted on what happens in these courts” he said. The change was greeted warmly, particularly by The Times, whose columnist Camilla Cavendish had led the campaign to open up the family courts, for which she won the Paul Foot Award. But what The Times omitted to mention was a line, slipped in at the end of Straw’s statement, stating his intention to reverse the decision in a case known as Clayton v Clayton.

      Simon Clayton is an intense 47-year-old book-seller from Hay-on-Wye. In 2003, he astonished locals in the Welsh border town by abducting his seven-year-old daughter, days ahead of a divorce hearing, fearing he would lose custody to his wife. He was tracked down to Portugal and brought home under arrest, after which he fought a lengthy custody battle.

      When his case was concluded, Clayton found he was legally barred from offering a public explanation for what he had done. He fought the existing legislation, and in 2006 the Court of Appeal reached a landmark ruling that a parent should be allowed to identify himself and his child and tell his story. It was decided that a parent’s right to freedom of expression was greater than a child’s right to privacy.

      It is because of that Clayton v Clayton ruling that the Websters were able to speak of their distress on Thursday. “Reversing it will mean that any child or adult who has been in a family court case cannot identify themselves in public,” says Clayton. “The implication of this for papers is bad – editors are only interested in a story if it has a human dimension, if you can see the people or read about them by name.”

      Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming agrees: “There are two issues here. One is that the press will be prevented from reporting cases like the Websters with their names and faces. The other is that, at the moment, children who are in care are entitled to speak out if they are unhappy, although it doesn’t happen very often because nobody knows how to do it. The effect of this change will be to gag them.”

      Since Clayton v Clayton there have been no complaints of invasion of privacy. “Fran Lyon, Angela Canning, Bob Geldof, Jack Frost – there are more than a dozen people who have benefited from being able to go public with their stories,” says Clayton. “There are thousands of people like the Websters out there who, once their cases are over, will want to log on to a forum and discuss what happened to them and get support. As of April, it will be illegal to identify yourself in any way that could lead to the identification of the child.” Similarly, there are occasions when the children may wish to make a public statement.

      Clayton is incensed that Straw is claiming to be opening up the family courts while reversing the Court of Appeal’s ruling, and says he has yet to receive an explanation, or any reply, from Straw’s office. A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “The Secretary of State has made it clear that any move towards openness in the family courts must be balanced with the welfare, privacy and well-being of children.” She added that the decision to reverse Clayton had been made following a consultation with a variety of bodies. For better or worse, the balance has been tipped against openness.

      Some say the child must come first, end of discussion. Others see a sinister attempt to gag those who say the system doesn’t work. Cavendish takes a less conspiratorial view, but is nonetheless perplexed about the reversal of Clayton. “It won’t cancel out the new legislation but it will make it increasingly difficult to report these cases,” she said. “I’m afraid I don’t know why it is happening.”

  2. Irish citizens outside of Ireland who are first and second generation born abroad (like me and my Children), and are persecuted and preyed upon by the RCC because we are of Irish descent all our lives, should be included in the unity of Irish abroad movement too.



    Why are we tracked by the RCC all our lives?


    Please contact me. I am on Facebook. I have also made a number of videos about the RCC and MK ULTRA that are on You Tube.

  3. Pingback: Historic Abuse | 1061073821

  4. Would you stop feeding the minds of the mediocrity Bill. You use polemic issues such as child poverty, sexual abuse & government corruption to allude to the fact that you credible. It’s called misinformation…

    Those things exist Bill – we know.

    What does not exist is the misinformation that you are spreading. Social services support people everyday to keep their children, by putting huge amounts of care, effort, money & time in place. We never remove children easily and never enjoy doing it. Perhaps you’d know what it’s like to see a child suffering ‘significant harm’ ? (Children Act, 1989) the legislation we work under. The child is ‘Paramouncy Principle’ under the Children Act:

    The Children’s Act 1989 10 principles:
    1. Paramountcy
    2. – the child’s welfare should be the paramount concern for a
    court determining any question with respect to a child
    3. Delay – in any proceedings in respect of a child’s upbringing the court should be aware that any delay is likely to be detrimental to the child’s welfare
    4. No order – no court should make an order in respect of a child unless it considers that to make an order would be better for the child than not doing so
    5. Individuality – All children should be treated as individuals. Their opinions should be listened to and all decisions should take account of the wishes of the child
    6. Placement – central to the act are the linked principles that children are generally best brought up by their families and that a child’s upbringing is primarily the responsibility of its parents
    7. Partnership – the local authority should strive to work in partnership with the child, the parents and carers and other relevant interested parties provided this approach is consistent with the child’s welfare
    8. Participation – Children, parents, carers and other relevant interested parties should all be given the opportunity to participate actively in the decision making process
    9. Consultation – before any decision is made which will affect a child, the child, parents, carers and other relevant interested parties should be consulted
    10.Accountability – successful partnership will only be achieved if parents and children are made aware of powers and duties and any action that local authorities might take.

    Which means that NO, members of the public should not be allowed to enter the family courts. That would never be in the best intetests of the child/ren.

    As for “children in care having no voice”, that’s complete rubbish. Read and refer to the whole of the Children and Adoption Act, 2004, particularly section 118.

    Cycles of deprivation have their roots in structural inequality. Social workers are there to attempt to address that in the best way we can with what we’ve got.

    Abuse has occurred since antiquity. It is not a new phenomena unfortunately. It with the increase of awareness & the rise of media & technology that people are more knowledgable about these issues.

    Use this knowledge to increase people’s intelligence and mobilise people in positive ways could you?

  5. This is to reply to Flower who presumably is a Social Worker but hasn’t the bottle to give his or her name. Social Workers do not follow the law and Flower must be on psychotropic drugs to believe they do. His comments are worthy of the applause of the Nazi propogandists for the absolute lies told. Parliamentarians pass laws because they think in their Westminster Bubble away from reality that Social Workers act reasonably and exercise their powers to protect children. Firstly Social Workers now are poorly qualified because they have obtained degrees after attending Access Course because they are too thick to have acquired A Levels. In our experience at the National Consumer Helpline on 0871 711 2889 they are mostly barely literate and cannot spell or do simple arithmetic. Logic and reasoning are well beyond their capabilities. Giving power to Social Workers like this is like giving guns and grenades to toddlers. Social Workers only pick on soft targets. Druggies and Alcoholics keep their children whilst happy looked after kids are stolen by Social Workers with severe Personality Problems that drive them in their revenge against normal families. Gay Social Workers want to take normal children to get revenge on the bullying they had in childhood from straights. The same with Ethnic Minority Social Workers getting revenge on the whites who made their lives hell as children and institutionalised racism. To fights against Capitalism and injustice and unfairness in Society is too much like hard work it is easier to pick off individual families who are happy with their children after getting oneself in a powerful position like a Social Worker. The wonderful law you quote is not followed by most Social Workers. For example, we know Social Workers in Lancashire who lie cheat and concoct false evidence to remove children. We know in one case, Social Workers removed a 4 years old child without a Court Order from his parents saying that if they did not hand him over, the police would be called. This was a criminal kidnap. The parents reported the Social Worker to the police who said that Social Workers have immunity from prosecution. The same Social Worker the next day took another six children without a Court Order or PPO. So, Flower, how many people do you know who can knock on a door unannounced and remove children without a Court Order? How many paedophiles would love to be able to just snatch children and not get prosecuted for it? Social Workers do it all the time. Not in your world, Flower, in the real world The same Social Worker told the Court after snatching the kids that the mother had Mental Health problems and the father was a paedophile. This was utterly false evidence but it got Interim Care Orders and Final Care Orders and the kids are now in long term Foster Care with no Parental Contact.
    At the Final Hearing before a High Court Judge the Social Workers lied and lied giving more false evidence. The judge told the parents to shut up and refused to allow them witnesses. The Social Workers said the children had no education,. They attended Schools. The Social Workers said they had no doctors. They had the same GPs for 9 years. The Health Visitor and doctors opposed the Care Orders but their evidence was hidden from the Court. Flower you know Jack about the law and Social Work. Get yourself a job you can do such as Road Sweeper. The children complained of sexual and physical abuser from Foster Parents. Ther judge said the children were telling lies. One of the children tried to commit suicide on Fathers Day after being refused contact with her parents aged 13 and another child aged 10 was given a gun by Foster Parents when he said he wanted to die. You just don’t know your are born Flower.

  6. Wow1 I feel ashamed that I have been so inactive and felt sorry for myself for years and seen myself as a victim when what happened to me bad as it was there are kids out there suffering terrible terrible things…I have wasted 10 years of my life being a drug addict and am still on medication,I am now “activated” and I make this promise that until my last breath I will fight for all the victims of abuse in all its forms,thankyou Bill,Lilley,David Icke and many others for waking me up….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s