Sadism is something difficult to understand for any well balanced individual, where a human being actually enjoys inflicting pain or mental suffering on another person. Who would do such a thing? A normal person is the opposite and enjoys helping people.


Some civil servants are taught to think in a manner that encourages them to hurt their fellow man. It may start innocently, but it soon leads to a power complex where some council and police officers and even nurses or doctors begin to enjoy being cruel, indeed, the financial setup of many local authorities is designed to extract as much money as possible from every citizen to fund their corrupt practices.


They use public money to target campaigners and activists, like Nelson Kruschandl who kept on winning planning cases for people who did not know how to defend themselves against a devious council. In Nelson's case they lied about the history of a building he occupied, rained more than 181 terror visits on him and his partners and asked a Judge to take away his toilet and washing facilities.


This was Wealden District Council. They waste an extraordinary £500,000 five hundred thousand pounds trying to buy this adversary, who now provides this website with information that is likely to help other victims understand just how council officers think.



How councils identify a target that does not conform



Sadism involves deriving pleasure through themselves or others undergoing discomfort or pain. The opponent-process theory explains the way in which individuals not only display, but also enjoy committing sadistic acts. Individuals possessing sadistic personalities tend to display recurrent aggression and cruel behavior. Sadism can also include the use of emotional cruelty, purposefully manipulating others through the use of fear, and a preoccupation with violence.

Theodore Millon claimed there were four subtypes of sadism, which he termed Enforcing sadism, Explosive sadism, Spineless sadism, and Tyrannical sadism.




Personality disorders (PD) are a class of mental disorders characterized by enduring maladaptive patterns of behavior, cognition, and inner experience, exhibited across many contexts and deviating markedly from those accepted by the individual's culture. These patterns develop early, are inflexible, and are associated with significant distress or disability. The definitions may vary somewhat, according to source. Official criteria for diagnosing personality disorders are listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the fifth chapter of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD).

Personality, defined psychologically, is the set of enduring behavioral and mental traits that distinguish between individual humans. Hence, personality disorders are defined by experiences and behaviors that differ from social norms and expectations. Those diagnosed with a personality disorder may experience difficulties in cognition, emotiveness, interpersonal functioning, or impulse control. In general, personality disorders are diagnosed in 40–60% of psychiatric patients, making them the most frequent of psychiatric diagnoses.

Personality disorders are characterized by an enduring collection of behavioral patterns often associated with considerable personal, social, and occupational disruption. Personality disorders are also inflexible and pervasive across many situations, largely due to the fact that such behavior may be ego-syntonic (i.e. the patterns are consistent with the ego integrity of the individual) and are therefore perceived to be appropriate by that individual. This behavior can result in maladaptive coping skills and may lead to personal problems that induce extreme anxiety, distress, or depression. These behaviour patterns are typically recognized in adolescence, the beginning of adulthood or sometimes even childhood and often have a pervasive negative impact on the quality of life.

Many issues occur with classifying a personality disorder. Because the theory and diagnosis of personality disorders occur within prevailing cultural expectations, their validity is contested by some experts on the basis of inevitable subjectivity. They argue that the theory and diagnosis of personality disorders are based strictly on social, or even sociopolitical and economic considerations.





A Bunny Boiler is normally a female who wants to extol some kind of sadistic revenge on a male who was formerly a partner or family member, but has decided to leave or reject that situation for what may be a combination of reasons.



The Physical Signs of Sexual Abuse - Royal College of Paediatrics


THE ULTIMATE RAPE - Is being convicted for raping a teenager, when the girl was still a virgin (intact). Dr Liebenberg was the expert witness who aided Sussex Police to obtain the conviction of an activist that Wealden District Council desperately wanted to silence. In effect, she lied to a Jury, by not telling them that guidance just about to be released, confirmed that certain marks are naturally occurring. Our Melanie from Eastbourne said words to the effect that she: could think of no other explanation (meaning rape by penetration) than that the man was accused of. It gets worse, when Liebenberg realized on examination that the girl's hymen was tightly closed (a virgin), she then declined to measure from the hymen to the vaginal wall, because she knew that part of the test would reveal conclusively that the girl was intact - or another words, that she had lied about being penetrated. But if the doctor revealed that, the accused could not be charged - and that was the agenda. Because once charged of a sexual offence in the UK, a man is presumed to be guilty - not innocent. The state does not have to prove guilt, any person can make an unsupported allegation and in the absence of evidence to the contrary (which of course a clever pretender can fabricate)




WHY DO THEY DO IT - I just cannot help myself doctor. Members of the public who I should be caring for just irritate the hell out of me and I want to cause them as much pain and suffering as I can. I'd like to take their houses and cars and bankrupt them, and while I'm at it I'd like to ruin the private lives and have them branded pedophiles. That's what I'm like.


The desire to hurt some members of the public is so strong it has become an obsession with me. I even dream of physically hurting them and all that stops me is that I need the money from my council job to support my flamboyant lifestyle - and then there are the back-handers and preferential treatments - and did I mention how much my enhanced pension will be. Let's face it where else would I get paid to hurt people. I actually get paid to do what I love doing most - and you'll never guess what, I'm using their taxes to do this, so they are paying me to cause them pain. That actually makes it more fun you see. Can you help me doctor or is this normal. My colleagues at work seem to enjoy doing the same thing. We sometimes work in teams as a group to really hurt some people, and we use as many other agencies, like the police to help us. We've found that they like hurting members of the public as much as we do. Is there anything wrong with that?


I also get this feeling that I'm better than them and we'd be better off without these lesser souls who should not be allowed to have children. Why should we allow anyone in our district who does not meet our ideals as to perfection. That cannot be wrong can it, it's the American way and I think that Charles Darwin was giving us a steer. I feel so sorry for poor Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler. I think they were doing such good work cleansing their state. I only wish we had labour camps in England as we did in our colonies.




FRAUD AND IMMUNITY - The claimant's mother was a serial fraudster. She'd had a previous relationship that failed leading to a property struggle. This woman owned a property other than where she was living and failed to declare that fact, or the capital sum that subsequently came from its sale. No problem, but with that sum on money she could not claim housing benefit or work credits. She was of course claiming both. How then did the police not prosecute her, but instead prosecuted the man when he was collecting evidence of these frauds for an appeal? The only answer we can think of was that she was granted immunity from prosecution in return for her false testimony - she may even have been blackmailed into it, or rather, told they'd help her to gain revenge after the calling off of an engagement. She even blurted out something about this when being cross examined. Indicating that she'd been coerced into giving evidence, against her will. It could be then that the police knew about her fraudulent ways and used this knowledge to force her to take the witness stand, even where she was only thinking about ways to get the chap back for leaving her, rather than actually wanting to step out onto the perjury ledge.


The problem with her testimony, was that she claimed in open court that the man had not lived with her, when he had lived with her for over two years, also contributing money to the running of her house in Hailsham. The neighbours (if they had been asked, including a solicitor and a police man) could have confirmed that the target stayed at her house every night for these two years - hence, the definition living together. The woman claimed that there had been no financial input from the man, and that is demonstrably a lie because of payment stubs where he was paying her credit card bills on a monthly basis. But these facts did not sit well with her claiming housing benefit or working tax credits. There were other frauds that reveal a pattern of abusing state grants, and not declaring income - that it would have been nigh on impossible for the investigating officers not to discover.



The name comes from the French word 'sadisme.' Named after the Marquis de Sade, famed for his libertine writings depicting the pleasure of inflicting pain to others. The word for "sadism" (sadisme) was coined or acknowledged in the 1834 posthumous reprint of French lexicographer Boiste's Dictionnaire universel de la langue française; it is reused along with "sadist" (sadique) in 1862 by French critic Sainte-Beuve in his commentary of Flaubert's novel Salammbô; it is reused (possibly independently) in 1886 by Austrian psychiatrist Krafft-Ebing in Psychopathia Sexualis which popularized it; it is directly reused in 1905 by Freud in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality which definitively established the word.



Heirich Himmler and Adolf Hitler living the dream




Also see: sex  sodomy  buggery  rape