If I might add, I have talked to quite a few people and read quite a bit about the strange case of Chgristoper Hansard. And I have met nobody who now disbelieves he created an imaginary CV, had no real training, is a sexual predator, and is generally unqualified and untrustworthy.

Just because there has been no lawsuit, and no police action, that does not mean people doubt the truth. That means the system has failed.

A further disturbing note. Hansard's former Canadian girlfriend went out of her way to convince his former associates that these allegations were not true, this drama was not all his fault, and that his 'Tibetan' story was true and that his opponents didn't understand.

Apparently she flipped and now accuses his former associates of not seeing clearly.

Most of them that I have talked to see very clearly and are very angry but not in a position to do anything about it. However, they also consider the girlfriend as untrustworthy and as dishonourable as the man himself, for reasons listed above.

In summary then, and I would like to repeat, I know of nobody that denies Hansard is a liar, an abuser, and an unqualified creep
But there were also 'enablers,' whose credibility is doubted by some people.

Legal and police action seems to have failed. Undermining Hansards professional credibility and fitness for practice now seems to be the only course of action that makes sense to me.

Jah, there have been a lot of people, myself included, who have believed in and defended this man at various times throughout his long career of damage. This does not mean they are untrustworthy or dishonourable (or, I might add, stupid and deluded as this seems to be a common self-accusation), merely that he is very, very good at getting people on side - for a while. I don't think that criticism of a former girlfriend's erstwhile faith in him is helpful to this cause.

I don't like this latest development either although as Gita points out once he has a professional affiliation he will be subject to regulation. It sounds a dodgy institution although one shouldn't let oneself be led by this forum's biases. But what are we to expect? ..."I was sitting by the Thames, wondering what my future would bring. I knew it was an important day for me and I had to stay there. Suddenly a rainbow appeared and Henry Whitfield laughed"...

I too feel the need to put in a good word for CH's former fiancee. She has worked tirelessly for many months to open up debate and present evidence against -- as you say Elizabeth -- one of the most oleagenous persuasive liars one would be likely to encounter in the civilsed world. She willingly admits the error of her ways when she initially defended CH, following the revelations made in this thread. She is frustrated because it is so difficult to get anything done at an official level to take CH out of circulation effectively and permanently. BTW -- has anyone read Ch's blog ramblings? I see extracts from them on my Google Alerts. They are SO cheesy one wonders how CH manages to get people to take him seriously.

I am wondering just at what point in time Christopher Hansard will finally be held accountable for what were solely his actions after all, as opposed to blaming all those around him, including his own victims.

This is a man who has proved he has no qualms what so ever of taking a lie so far that it has now been put permanently in print. He has been known to be violent towards his students, abnormally aggressive towards his clients (when not grooming them for sexual favours), intimidating towards his business partners, shockingly remiss of all remorse and completely uncaring of the devastation he has caused those in his peripheral... and yet we now question whether or not he was capable of wreaking havoc, and bestowing threats and violence on those closest to him?

Interesting tactic "jah".

I highly suspect once we stop blaming his victims for his actions, then they may find the courage to finally come forward, and then both legal and police action can and will occur. But we must stop blaming the victims.

It is not a tactic Gita. Just an opinion. And I'm not blaming a victim. What I am saying is that lots of other people were "enablers" and they need to take responsiblility for that. Not everybody was a victim.

Indeed at what point will Hansard be held accountable. And at what time will his enablers - press, local authorities, and yes, former girlfriend - take responsibility and be held accountable.

Good luck with your fight "Gita." It is unfortunate you won't take input from others, since I am not your enemy and I do not wish to see Hansard cotinuing to practice.

"jah" I do not think you heard me.

Quote
Gita
This is a man who has proved he has no qualms what so ever of taking a lie so far that it has now been put permanently in print. He has been known to be violent towards his students, abnormally aggressive towards his clients (when not grooming them for sexual favours), intimidating towards his business partners, shockingly remiss of all remorse and completely uncaring of the devastation he has caused those in his peripheral... and yet we now question whether or not he was capable of wreaking havoc, and bestowing threats and violence on those closest to him?

I am not sure what your personal vendetta is against said fiancee, but I suggest you take it elsewhere.
Under various guises such as gondolf and dr. thomas, you have also blamed Stephanie Wright, you have blamed associates and apprentices, and you have rallied against Bowes.

It is all too clear to me that you have no idea what these people have been through and have no understanding of this situation no matter how many workshops you attended, whether you apprenticed yourself for a time, or you referred your own patients as a practitioner perhaps.. If you have taken any part in any of these activities, then you could also be considered an 'enabler'. None of it however negates what this man has done and continues to do. None of it. No amount of 'enabling' negates the fact that Christopher Hansard is abusive, violent, and delusional. And he has made victims of us all.

You have diverted the focus of this conversation about Christopher Hansard towards discussion about his victims and their supposed collusion in their own abuse as well as that of others for I hope the last time.

Yes, Jeff Bowe did an excellent job of flushing out the imnaginary 'Dr. Hansard.'

I'm wondering if anyone has contacted the EFT group and this new Behavioural Psychology group to determine if they have criteria for determining who they certify to practice, and what they take into consideration when determining whether someone is fit to practice.

Over on another site discussing Hansard it is stated that two women filed complaints against him and escaped scrutiny by going to Vancouver where he was then accused of assaulting a woman there and then he moved back to London where the current abuses took place. This is clearly a pattern of abuse over a long period of time that no, I repeat no professional association would be willing to overlook. I'm wondering if there is any record of these complaints which can be presented to the relevent associations and current supporters of Hansard, indicating that his behaviour was not a single period of madness but a consistant pattern of abusive behaviour and avoidance of responsibility which clearly makes him unfit.

If someone could list all the organisations and individuals from who he has been getting training/support that would be helpful.