Sometimes I find jewish child molester cases which are rather bizarre such as that of Maria Marks and her son from the town of Poole in Britain. Since on 13th July 2001 the ‘Jewish Chronicle’ announced how:
‘The case of a man who believes he is entitled to a share of his late mother's £240,000 estate, claiming she sexually abused him, was being heard behind closed doors at the High Court this week.
(Name Removed) Marks, from Poole, in Dorset, says his mother, Marla, left him nothing when she died two years ago.
Mr Marks, an only child, wanted the case heard in open court, but Mr Justice Etherton ruled that it should be conducted in private. However, the court agreed that material in the public domain before the decision could be published.
Mr Marks, now 48, alleges that his mother began interfering with him when he was five years old and that she had full sexual intercourse with him when he was 13. He further claims that his father, Harold, who died in 1995, knew what was going on but did nothing to prevent it.
Mr Marks developed bulimia, the binge eating disorder, his weight soaring to more than 23 stone.
Having left home at 15, he got back in touch with his parents after he married and became a father.
His mother — who, he says, had spells in psychiatric hospital suffering from severe anxiety neurosis, phobias and depression — asked Mr Marks to help sort out his father's affairs after he died, paying him £1,000.
But he claims that in 1996, she made sexually suggestive remarks to him which exacerbated his bulimia.
It is alleged that his mother had already made a will leaving everything to her grandson.
However, Mr Marks claims that after he rebuffed her, she made another will dividing her estate bet-ween her two sisters, Lilian Halton and Helen Shafier.
On Monday, Roger Bartlett, acting for the sisters, asked for the case to be heard in private, telling Mr Justice Etherton that it involved intimate personal and financial details. Mr Bartlett also contended that Mrs Marks was not there to defend her reputation against "allegations of the most serious kind."
Describing the case as "perhaps unique," Daniel Lightman, for Mr Marks, said his client would be "very upset" if the hearing were conducted in private. But the judge disagreed.’ (1)
Now in essence then Maria Marks’ son stated that she had sex with him when he was 13 and this continued until he was 15 when he left home and cut off all contact which his father Harold Marks knew about but was ‘sexually impotent’ due to unspecified physical disfigurement caused by disease. (2) However, the context of the court case was that the son was seeking a share of Maria Marks inheritance – he was also bankrupt at the time – (3) which was clearly his actual motivation in bringing forward the charges.
The court – presided over by the jewish sodomite Terence Etherton – (4) however didn’t dismiss the son’s sexual assault claims and merely stated that he had presented insufficient evidence to prove the sexual assault – which is not surprising giving the elapsed time period of some thirty years – but that the point of the case was not the sexual assault but rather the matter of Maria Marks’ will.
Put another way: the court believed the son of Maria Marks’ may well have been sexually assaulted by her when was aged 13-15 but that because he couldn’t prove it due to the lapse of time: the court re-focused on the issue of the inheritance which is ruled that the son was not entitled to because he’d written a letter disinheriting himself when he was 15 that was produced at court. (5)
Put another way Maria Marks was likely yet another female jewish child molester.
References
(1) https://theawarenesscenter.blogspot.com/2008/06/case-of-marla-marks.html
(2) Ibid.
(3) Ibid.
(4) https://www.thepinknews.com/2014/12/12/west-london-synagogue-celebrates-religious-same-sex-weddings/
(5) https://theawarenesscenter.blogspot.com/2008/06/case-of-marla-marks.html