NORMAN SCARTH WRITES 29 JULY 2014

To Sir Jeremy Sullivan

Office of the Senior President of Tribunals

Sir,

Having been told that complaints against N J Warren should be sent to you, I do so now, though not expecting much when a complaint about what is really quite serious crime is to be dealt with by someone who is a colleague.

Consider: This relates to a cover-up which has been on-going since 8th August 1999, when I was the victim of what it is no exaggeration to call an attempted assassination, to stop my exposure of widespread corruption in the courts, of which I had newly become aware. Had it succeeded, it would have been the perfect murder – ‘Death from Natural Causes’.

Well, it failed, & my exposure of corruption has continued. So also have the attempts to silence me! During the 15 years since that first attack there have been more terror attacks, physical assaults, malicious prosecutions, Kangaroo Courts, incarceration.in many different prisons & so-called ‘Mental Hospitals’.

Old age hasn’t saved me, & I was imprisoned again at the age of 86. Following which, I belatedly realised it was time to leave the land of my birth (the land for which I fought in WW2!) & seek safety in the Republic of Ireland. England is NOT a safe place for those who dares to expose corruption.

It hardly needs saying that the cover-up of crime such as described above, is itself serious crime. N J Warren is party to that cover-up, along with many others. To say nothing of his petty, spiteful ‘Order’, as punishment (effectively a fine), that I must use expensive snail-mail, denying me modern methods of communication..

My release from prison in 2011 only came about because of outrage from abroad (it was even on Russian TV!) but the persecution didn’t end then.

From July 2012, the then Attorney General, Dominic Greave contemptuously ignored the Civil Procedure Rules, trying to silence me by having me incarcerated again, for which he enlisted the aid of HM Solicitor General, HM Treasury Solicitor & their staffs, Lord Chief Justice Lord Igor Judge (NO LESS)), several Lord Justices, several Puisne Judges, Circuit Judges, District Judges, Court Service staff, police, bailiffs, Old Uncle Tom Cobley an’ All an’ All!

To waste such vast sums of taxpayers’ money was itself a crime, especially when all concerned knew the whole exercise was futile from the word go. With me safe in Ireland I was able to watch with amusement the antics in the Royal Courts of Justice. Why on earth was it started, & why was it allowed to continue? When LCJ Lord Judge did impose two prison sentences on me, I was able to cock a snook at him from afar.

Well, Sir Jeremy, what now? Do you ignore this, as the brave Admiral Brigstocke? (see below). Do you come out with the usual stock phrases of gobble-de-gook? Do you send me on a wild goose chase somewhere else?

Or, do you show that there is at least one honest lawyer in Britain?

The ‘Culture of Cover-Up’ is disintegrating in other aspects of British life, e.g. Savile & the BBC, phone hacking, Hillsboro’, abuse in Childrens’ Homes, etc. etc.

Perhaps the ‘Wind of Change’ is about to blow through the Legal Establishment? Are you are the man who is going wield the bellows?

We shall see.

Norman Scarth.

From: grc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
To: againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:38:16 +0100
Subject: RE: Complaint against N J Warren?

Dear Mr Scarth,

A complaint about the Chamber President must be submitted in writing to the Senior President of Tribunals, as follows:

Sir Jeremy Sullivan, Office of the Senior President of Tribunals

Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2A 2LL

Yours faithfully,

Tribunal Clerk, HM Courts & Tribunals
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)
P.O. Box 9300
Leicester, LE1 8DJ
Tel: 0300 123 4504
http://www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/general-regulatory-chamber

From: Norman Scarth [mailto:againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk]
Sent: 28 July 2014 12:04
To: GRC@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: Complaint against N J Warren?

PS: It is a poor reflection on the Royal Navy of today, that Admiral Brigstocke ignored an S O S message from a man who served on the Arctic Convoys of WW2. Those who know nothing of them should see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21845753 NS.

From: againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk
To: informationtribunal@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
CC: richard.bailey@ico.org.uk; mark.thorogood@ico.gsi.gov.uk; simon@simonhughes.org.uk; ben.bradshaw.mp@parliament.uk; aacpresidentpa@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk; alanmdransfield@gmail.com
Subject: Complaint against N J Warren?
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 11:50:24 +0100

I too ask to be advised the correct procedure for lodging formal complaint against Judge N J Warren.
I did make complaint about him to Admiral Sir John Brigstocke, KCB, the Judicial Appointments & Conduct Ombudsman, but there has not even been acknowledgment from the Admiral (which brings to mind the SS Californian and her Captain Stanley Lord, who became notorious for their failure to respond to distress signals sent up by Titanic).
Norman Scarth.
Email: againstcorruption@Hotmail.co.uk

Subject: EA/2014/0149 Dransfield v ICO
From: alanmdransfield@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:22:34 +0100
CC: Richard.Bailey@ico.org.uk; Mark.Thorogood@ico.gsi.gov.uk; simon@simonhughes.org.uk; ben.bradshaw.mp@parliament.uk; aacpresidentpa@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
To: informationtribunal@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Sirs
Please resend me another PDF copy of the recent decision by Judge NJ Warren which I received on Sat 26th July.

Please also advise the correct procedure for lodging formal complaint against Judge NJ Warren.

Name redacted

...a scarth3.xxx jpg

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

AT NOTTINGHAM COURT 25 JULY – Melanie Shaw, Beechwood Child Abuse Witness, Held in Peterborough Prison

 photo mel_zps537493a9.jpg

The Beechwood Children’s Home abuse witness is being held in Peterborough prison after unknown police action on Thursday, 10th July, and a secret court hearing on Friday, 11th July 2014. For the personal safety of the individual and in the wider public interest we are naming the witness as Melanie Shaw. 

     On Friday, 11th July, the UK Column reported that a “key whistleblowing witness and victim of child abuse at Nottingham Beechwood Children’s Home is effectively missing after sending a text to the UKColumn starting ‘pls ring urgent, something has happened n I don’t trust the police and I may be locked up tomorrow.’ Sent at 21:22 on Wednesday, 9th July 2014 the UK Column has been trying to locate the witness ever since.”

Despite telephone calls by UK Column and members of the public to Nottinghamshire police over the weekend, we were unable to establish the precise whereabouts of Melanie. We remained concerned for her safety in light of civilian police staff claims that she was safe, without any supporting facts as to what had happened, or where she was being held. Late on Friday afternoon Melanie Shaw’s solicitor was also unaware of the police action or his clients location.

At 1127 on Monday, 14th July we received a call from a friend of Melanie who informed us that she was being held in Peterborough prison after being picked up by Nottinghamshire police on Friday and held in cells overnight. After a Court hearing the following day, for which it is still not known if Melanie had proper legal representation or the benefit of public and press attendance, she was remanded to Peterborough prison. This category B prison run by Sodexo had a reputation in 2011 for drugs, bullying and violence. As the country’s only male and female prison, it has a maximum capacity of 840 and boasts a Mother and Baby Unit for 12 mums. 

Melanie’s incarceration appears to be based on allegations that she set fire to a neighbours shed – a charge which Melanie denies. Melanie has reported to the UK Column that individuals linked to her bail conditions had been harassing her in recent weeks.

This latest punitive action on a child abuse victim by Nottingham Police and the Courts, follows the removal of her child by Social Services and disruptive action by the Local Council in respect of her home. Melanie claims she had been warned she could have her child taken when she first blew the whistle on Beechwood in 2011. 

Melanie originally approached the UK Column because she wanted to expose the truth of the vicious rapes, sexual and physical abuse, and psychological intimidation that she and some 100 other young children suffered at Nottingham Beechwood childrens home.  Clearly frightened of the police after irregularities in their investigations, Melanie strongly suspected that the police, Local Authorities and Members of Parliament, were already attempting to cover-up the Beechwood abuse.

Following Elm House child abuse London, BBC’s Jimmy Savile, and particularly in light of the ongoing exposure of the cover-up of paedophile rings within Westminster and the wider establishment, the UK Column believes that many of Melanie’s concerns are fully justified. Our opinion is reinforced by the fact that five other women known to the UK Column, who, having reported paedophile activity, have been harassed by the police and Local Authorities and later sectioned in psychiatric units. In two other UK Column cases where Social Services have been attempting to steal children, parents have also been falsely accused of arson attempts.

Three Nottingham MPs, Vernon Coaker, Lilian Greenwood and Chris Leslie

Three Nottingham MPs, Vernon Coaker, Lilian Greenwood and Chris Leslie have so far failed to respond to UK Column enquires as to their action to help Beechwood victims and protect other children from abuse. Their silence says much.

source:   http://www.ukcolumn.org/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , ,

KELLIE COTTAM [FORCED ADOPTION EXPOSED] WITH CAROL WOODS – CHILD PROTECTION WHISTLEBLOWER DOWN AT S.C.O.T. UK

Kellie Cottam (Forced Adoption Exposed) with Carol Woods CP whistle blower down at S.C.O.T UK .
Kellie Cottam

 video:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96NI_YBclck

published on 23 Jul 2014

Carol Woods is an ex child protection officer a level 3 social worker. Who after being asked to edit paper work, take children from loving Mothers, targeting families and many other things. SHE BLEW THE Whistle. I only had 10% battery on my ipad so this is a brief interview with Carol down at S.C.O.T UK outside Downing Street. To learn more about Carol Google Carol Woods, Lancashire
more:

video:     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PukfRbz5vuI

Kellie Cottam (Forced Adoption Exposed) reporting from S.C.O.T UK outside 10 Downing Street
Kellie Cottam

Kellie Cottam – the blog:
http://www.forcedadoptionexposed.blogspot.co.uk/

scroll down for more posts on Kellie Cottam

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

UPDATE MAURICE KIRK 21 JULY 2014

As of late 2013 MK had also been stopped 35 times whilst driving his car, allegedly for drink/driving reasons. No charges were ever brought after any “stop”, and on occasions after being taken to a police station for an alcoholic breath test he was released without the test even being given!! Could it not be said that being stopped 35 times without any “positive result” since 2009 by the very people his civil case is against is clearly and undeniably “harassment” by them?

Latest update on 21 July ’14.

Maurice had been moved to another hellhole on Thursday 17th but HMP Swansea prison regime decided not to tell anybody, so when a friend and supporter went for a visit on the following Sunday a warder only then told him, after the supporter had waited in the actual visiting room for MK for some time, that MK had been moved 4 days previously to another prison. Another gross irregularity enacted by these charletans running these hellhole prisons.

A family member writes 21 July 2914:

“X went to Swansea to visit Maurice as arranged. He checked in went through the searches and even went into the hall. After 10 mins a screw came up and told him. ‘Are you waiting to see Kirk? Well he was moved to HMP Parc last Thursday’ (the day he was due his internal examination at a Cardiff Hospital.)
 
I cannot get info that he really is there…data protection! He may be in the morgue at a Welsh Hospital for all I know!
 
Anyway stop sending him post to Swansea for the moment until the Probation Service confirm to me tomorrow where he is.
 
I am trying ‘e mail a prisoner’ to Parc, Bridgend.
 
Frustrated but not so frustrated as my brother!”

Words fail me as to the deliberate misbehaviour of these so-called prison warders who have agreed to a code of ethics when doing their job – they simply aren’t worth a quarter of the salaries they are paid by the taxpayer as it seems many of them are not competent enough to act responsibly, which the job demands . They are an absolute burden who follow  their own rules and not those set out by government – some of them nothing more than violent thugs as has already been shown by MK’s beatings whilst in HMP Cardiff in October 2013 and September 2011 – both assaults carried out by the same criminal senior officer at HMP Cardiff whose name is well known!!

More:

” I hear this being said in a police station in South Wales as a long running Civil Action Case against South Wales Police halts as the victim of many years of police harassment is again stopped in his tracks by a fictitious charge.
 
This has happened over 17 times since the opening of the case. Each time there are complaints by the victim; each time these are ignored and more often than not the victim is held in prison for weeks away from his legal papers unable to progress the case only to be released at the end of it with no apology from the police nor from the justice system.
 
Now this victim is being branded as having ‘a paranoid personality’ and likely to be locked away in a secure hospital wing so that the civil case will be finally abandoned. This is the catch-all phrase used by government and its officials to remove people who challenge an abuse of power.
 
In the meantime the South Wales Police, using nefarious means, has seen to it that this ‘irritant’ has lost his licence to practise his vocation; is banned from contacting his daughter (there have been no sexual charges laid against him nor has he laid a finger against his family); almost made bankrupt, hence the need to defend himself in court, and has been held in prison erroneously for over three years in the last five mainly based on a medical report written by a corrupt psychiatrist who has now been de-licenced and removed from the South Wales Health Service.
 
The judge in the case has tried hard to keep the appellant in contact with his legal papers but each time he has the means to extract the necessary details from the pile of paper and he is able to contact the court with typewritten letters and documents he is moved from within the Prison Service and his papers moved and thus jumbled up again needing hours of re-sorting. Do remember that a prisoner is not allowed paper clips, sticky tape, easy access to photocopying, hole-puncher and the usual accessories of an office.
 
As the victim’s  sister I ask ‘Is there a politician, journalist or lawyer able to rescue Maurice Kirk from the State?’ 

=======================================

Following on from the earlier posts [scroll down for posts on MK’s release from HMP Cardiff for 6 days before being recalled to HMP Swansea – this time for the [bogus] breaking of his release licence.

UPDATE 17 July 2014:

More on MK’s present situation:

“M is so sure he has a date with an operating table for colonoscopy today at the Heath that he has followed the hospital’s instructions and has not eaten since Monday morning.
 
He says he is not allowed loose 1st class stamps and only 2nd class ones already stuck to envelopes!
 
Only allowed one phone number
 
Huge difficulties accessing the ability to send in Appeal Papers to the courts.
No access to the library and its law books
 
Has had no reasons as to why he is in Swansea rison”

A letter was received from MK 17th July ’14:
“BS614159

15 July 2014

To Whom It May Concern – please forward.

I have been diagnosed as MAPPA Level 3 Barry police station as PPD [Paranoid Personality Disorder] and therefore revoking my 11 July 2014 licence that allowed me to commence 1 month for closing submissions [for his civil cases against S. Wales police + others...ed.]“

1A

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

UPDATE: THE INHUMAN PERSECUTION OF MAURICE KIRK, 16 JULY 2014

Maurice Kirk, rearrested last Thursday on ridiculous charges of “bad behaviour” whilst released from prison “on licence”, living forcibly in a Swansea bail hostel, and having to “sign on” there EVERY HOUR so as to make his presence known, sends the message below.

It is fair to say they are so desperate to keep MK incarcerated  so he can’t continue his civil case against  the S. Wales police + others regarding 20+ years of outrageous and blatant targeting and harassment towards him they had to let him out on licence – a deliberate act – so as to rearrest him a few days later on ridiculous fictional charges of “bad behaviour”. This bizarre conspiracy designed to  kick into touch his ongoing civil case against the S. Wales police and make  it simply “go away”… Meanwhile numerouse recorded delivery letters and emails sent to  many so-called “government figures” including the Secretary of State Grayling, the M.o.J., the N.O.M.S., the I.M.B., the P.+P. O. and more detailing concisely the brutal and deliberate criminal persecution of Maurice Kirk, 69, are all SYSTEMATICALLY IGNORED by all receiving the messages – with all  the characters making MK’s life a living hell able to continue their unspeakable actions without any hitch of any kind!!

How on earth has it come to this and why isn’t anything done about this cabal conspiring to cover each others backs and in the process make a complete and utter mockery out of the laws in place?, because that is exactly what is happening here – all paid for by the taxpaying general public!!!

From MK 16 July 2014:

“M is not ALLOWED to use 1st class stamps so only 2nd class please! (any 1st class ones go into his possessions (one hopes)

He is not allowed to write direct to courts…’they’ address the envelopes

Habeas Corpus

Only one phone number

Urgent representations delayed

Slow 2nd class mail only allowed            (why?)

Swansea Prison is furious that ‘they have been dumped on by HMP Cardiff

but it is all to do with MAPPA

1.

No bail hostel found under Bidder’s instructions 3rd Jan 14 (blocked by MAPPA)

2.

Not allowed out with tag on 3rd May 2014

3.

Recalled from a licence with end date 7th March 2015 and draconian conditions by MAPPA

4. True release date 25th July 2014  (see Rowe document of 3rd July)

NOW BEING HELD ILLEGALLY.”

“MAPPA3 nonsense to do with keeping me in prison upto Prosecutor Arrest Trial…now delayed to 17 Nov 14 in Bristol where they hope I will have 1 yr sentence .

Everyone protecting their own backs:
a) when held for 1 hr in Barry Police Cell on 14 Oct before interview the sergeant woman feinted illness so she wasn’t involved in interview (only Gunney)

Judge said at end of Newport Trial: ‘if only you had signed for the passport’
(for Judge’s protection)

CPS Smyth deliberately played the 1st CD of 14 Oct interview so that neither the jury nor the defendant  saw the real one…….to protect himself. He knows that the whole thing was a set up.

As M is on B Wing he has no access to the library and its Law Books. They are denying him the ability to send out any appeals.

He is starving himself in readiness for the op booked for tomorrow although he has been told it has been cancelled.”

kirk rcj musa12

Scroll down for more articles

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

Nottinghamshire Child Abuse Witness Taken By Police, Now Missing

A key whistleblowing witness and victim of child abuse at Nottingham Beechwood Children’s Home is effectively missing after sending a text to the UK Column starting…”pls ring urgent, something has happened n I don’t trust the police and I may be locked up tomorrow…” Sent at 21:22 on Wednesday 9th July 2014 the UK Column has been trying to locate the witness ever since. 

 

 

This witness has reported to us rape, intimidation, beatings, physical and emotional threats as just some of the abuses suffered by vulnerable young children at Beechwood, but some youngsters were also witnesses to ‘suicides’ – children ‘falling’ from upper windows. Other witnesses report that children’s bodies were hidden on the site.

Fearful for the physical safety of this highly vulnerable witness, who already alleges a police cover-up and is fearful of the police, we contacted Nottinghamshire Police via their 101 phone line. 

After speaking to the civilian telephone operator and expressing grave concerns for the safety of the witness, Nottingham police were asked if the witness had been arrested and if they were safe. In a short return call the operator said that a police officer had said that the witness was safe. Unconvinced by the vague reply, we asked the name of the police officer and a shoulder number. The operator said they were unsure. They were also unsure as to whether the witness had been judged ‘safe’ at home, had been arrested and was ‘safe’ in custody, or was in a psychiatric facility.

The UK Column duly asked for clarification from a named police officer with their personal number and was promised a call from such an officer. No such call was received overnight. Our worst fear remains that the witness has been sectioned and held in a psychiatric unit in order to silence them.

Early this morning Friday, 11th July 2014 the UK Column again made contact with Nottingham police via their media team. Again requesting information as to the whereabouts and safety of the witness, Richard from the media team would only confirm that the witness was safe, but would not give their location, state if they had been arrested nor give details of the police officer or their official number. He also appeared unsure as to why the police refusal to give full and proper details about the location and safety of a vulnerable child abuse witness would be in the public interest.

The UK Column has also expressed concerns for the safety of this individual to Bassetlaw Nottingham Labour MP John Mann. Mr Mann has recently spoken out about child abuse in Westminster stating that ”there was a cover-up with regard to child abuse investigations in Nottingham.” He also reported on his Twitter post:

On Monday Nottm court Beechwood children’s home abuse. No prosecutions for 100 victims. County Council denying liability.

Further posts state:

No answer yet on how many files destroyed by Notts County Council involving child abuse..Notts County Council offering [£]9000 to child abuse victims but admitting no liability.

BBC Nottingham news team who have previously reported on the horrific child abuses at Beechwood, were also informed by the UK Column of the witness safety concerns, particularly in light of increasing reports from across UK of police forces failing to investigate paedophiles, and reports by witnesses of police harassment and threats to silence them. 

To date Nottingham City and Nottingham County Council, holding joint responsibility for the now closed Beechwood home, have paid out some £250,000 in compensation to 17 victims. It is believed the payouts included gagging orders. Nottingham police have previously stated to UK Column that over 92 victims of Beechwood abuse have come forward, but there is no murder investigation.

Again, because of the sensitivity of this case we are extremely concerned for the safety of this witness. We would like to ask that members of the public contact Nottingham Police about the Beechwood child abuse witness via their local 101 telephone number and ask for more information.  

Nottinghamshire Chief Constable Chris Eyre

SOURCE: http://www.ukcolumn.org/article/nottinghamshire-child-abuse-witness-taken-police-now-missing

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

UPDATE 10 JULY: M KIRK REARRESTED – MORE SOON – MAURICE KIRK RELEASED – BUT IS HE ANY BETTER OFF? 10 JULY 2014

Maurice Kirk was arrested on the 10 July on dubious charges, designed to put him baxk in HMP Cardiff and far away from the civil case he was pursuing against 20+ years of chronic targeting by S Wales police and others: From the 8 July 14:
Latest News

Maurice Vacates His Cell for Rolf Harris  

14/05/14                Appellant to Criminal Court of Appeal             BS614159 
                                                                                                                T20131144 Etc                                                                                                          

         3rd Breach of ‘Restraining Order’ 17th March14 Cardiff Crown Court Trial

My attempt to submit further ‘Grounds’ already with Criminal Court of Appeal
 
GROUNDS INCLUDE
    1. Refused medical attention
    2. Refused process legal aid form
    3. Refused access to lawyer in prison
    4. Refused glasses in court
    5. Refused legal papers in court
    6. Refused, either in court or in prison, to interview defence witnesses
    7. Refused access to his own funds 
    8. Refused outstanding relevant appeals/applications required to be heard first
    9.  
    10. Refused access to his legal papers in prison
    11. Refused the right to call defence witnesses

    12. Refused the his right to cross examine
    13. Refused Sect 8 police disclosure or basic primary disclosure despite promises, over 22 years, by countless South Wales Police and CPS personnel. 
This list is far from exhaustive
Maurice J Kirk A7306AT
HMP Cardiff
South Wales
UK 

[ Deja Vu? Who remembers Maurice rebuking R'olf Harris up on stage before 400 veterinary surgeons and police being called ?] 

Swansea incarceration (a whole new meaning to Oscar Wilde’s ‘Reading Gaol’ and the ‘book on the book’) 

 Swansea ‘tunnel types’ you may bump into when leaving Swansea train station via their underpass 

  

  

A Swansea Castle dungeon break out  

STOP PRESS  (10th July 2014)
 
South Wales Police’s  contentious NHS Zero Tolerance policy, to ‘arrest on sight’ anyone who dare question any one in a doctor’s surgery I have now witnessed for myself. Cardiff prison is full of them.   .
PLEASE NOTE
1. South Wales Police are refused some court applications, I am told, to ‘vary’ HM Prosecutor’s ‘Restraining Order’ as protection from being gaoled or struck off
2. My 17th Nov 14 Bristol Crown Court Appeal, moved to England as with previous ones to avoid the publicity, was first listed last November, yes, last November !!
3. Her Honour Judge Eleri Rees had agreed, last September,  it was to be heard first because of CPS failure to disclosure public court records
[ I am waiting for transcripts to arrive at me new Swansea residence in order to publish these public documents world wide].
 
4. If anyone out there can explain as to just what is going on then please, please comment on current blog or ring me 
5. Cardiff Cabal admit, in writing this time, I am registered MAPPA but for what? What nefarious conduct is afoot this time to delay my 22 year civil damages claim? Please, someone, advise
 
6. Please visit as  there is precious little time left and take me out for afternoon ‘tea’ in sweet sunny Swansea
7.  I have to report on the hour and  every hour between 6am and 6pm
8.  I am being ‘set up’ to an alleged breach of licence conditions so be quick!
9.  No proof is needed, as if there ever was in any Cardiff ‘court’, because:
         I will get arrested without any warning 
         I will not pass GO
         I will not collect £200
         I will go directly to prison
         I will not go via  any court
         I will get no appropriate appeal procedure
The decision will have been taken in the same MAPPA Barry police station office by the very same 8th June 2009 cabal that conspired for the ‘machine gun’ conspiracy shredding the records as they speak 
 
 
 
 
my tel:  07907937953 or 07598801723 I need your help
maurice’kirkflyingvet.com
 
 
Highly Dangerous’ Prisoner moved out for Rolf Harris.
MAPPA Level 3
1.       HM Probation Service officers joined us at the gates of the prison for a specially assembled HM prison van escort to somewhere out west. This unusual clearance was granted by Sir Peter Vaughan, The Chief Constable for South Wales Police, having personally chaired, most likely, the hurriedly needed MAPPA meeting at Barry police station for a quick disposal of one of their country’s registered top 5% most dangerous victims of the regime.
 
2.        On a previous but equally bizarre 2009 occasion I was left ‘at large’ for three weeks quite unaware of the Barry police station’s MAPPA decision. Then armed police with helicopter swooped on the family while we enjoyed a quiet Sunday’s afternoon tea in the garden.
 
3.       That 8th June 2009 MAPPA decision included The Vale of Glamorgan Probation Service and NHS Caswell Clinic, Bridgend, psychiatric staff sitting around discussing my fate. Were I to be incarcerated in Ashworth Psychiatric hospital IPP indefinitely or by introducing the Chief Constable’s new ‘shoot to kill’ policy and simply taking me out and having me shot?
 
 
4.       But I also had an urgent agenda after being locked up for a further nine months over the issuing of NHS fabricated medical records. Bang goes my four weeks again, I sighed, originally  requested to the County Court in order to complete closing legal submissions for my euphemistically so called ‘civil remedy’ route, anything to slow down police harassment.   
 
5.       It had not gone unnoticed by their victim, incidentally, on how the prison had taken the precaution in allowing him to leave with no money or signature required except for some ‘restraining order’ recently deemed as possibly ‘meaningless’ by a Cardiff Crown Court
 
6.       The hundred and sixty odd pounds found in my pockets, following my dubious October 2013 arrest in Barry police station, also failed to feature in ‘discharge’ papers explaining why, perhaps, they had withheld my passport last time despite court directions to the contrary.
 
7.       A prison van was also to join my entourage with two more government officials, dedicated to me for the whole day, simply to carry some forty odd bags of leaver arch files to some far away ‘lock up’. Somehow I was expected to visit it, each day, to prepare the civil damages claims but in between the MAPPA designated one hour compulsory ‘signing in’ ritual.
 
8.       What benefit, this time around, was it if for the South Wales Police to delay the civil proceedings if not identical to the Caswell Clinic 2009 fabricated police psychiatric reports  needing police officers to paint a WW1 Lewis machine gun just to fool yet another jury?
 
9.       My court designated Mackenzie friend, in order to bar him as an eye witness in this week’s Crown Court’s proceedings, had stood patiently throughout with alternative transportation.
 
10.   This will continue as long as no one  is found accountable   
and the money does not run out! 

  

South Wales Police’s MAPPA Level 3 ‘Approved Premises’ Swansea
Staff will be asked:
1.       Why do South Wales Police conveniently use 1997 Harassment Act in order to have me gaoled despite legal argument that it is clearly an abuse of process?
 
2.       Why will no one disclose, in writing, the purpose of this current Swansea incarceration?
 
3.       Why am I registered MAPPA level 3?
 
4.       When was I registered MAPPA level 3?
 
5.       Who caused my registration if not to obstruct current civil proceedings in County Court?
 
6.       Why was I registered in June 2009 and at Barry Police Station?
 
7.       Why was I then removed from the MAPPA register on 17th December 2009?
 
8.       Was it before or after the Newport Crown Court ‘machine gun’ hearing (transcript later)?
 
9.        Why am I again on the MAPPA register?
 
10.   Who caused my MAPPA registration again?
 
11.   Why  is the ‘Executive Summary’ for all MAPPA Barry police station decisions, with their contemporaneous notes, not now disclosed following November 2013 County Court ruling?
 
12.   Why do all Cardiff courts refuse PII MAPPA legal argument relating to my restraining order?
 
13.   Why refused the right to even apply for variation to my restraining order?
 
14.   Why not allowed to challenge the police application for my Ashworth IPP incarceration?
 
15.   Why is NHS (Wales) not allowed to correct or clarify my medical records?
 
MAPPA’s reason for my passport being ‘withheld’ for nearly a year and my being arrested ‘for entering a prison without permission’ trying to get it back is all to prolong this incarceration to further affect the 22 year running police malicious prosecution’s case. These letters, for example, display ‘what really goes on in our courts’ and you or someone ‘near and dear’ may be next
 
14 06 18 arbitration reminder.doc
 
Outside Supreme Court of Appeal and HM Privy Council with ‘trusty scribe’ and RCVS application 
 
To be continued with copies of ‘leaked’ MAPPA documents and transcripts 
Maurice J Kirk BVSc
Tel 07907937953 or 07598801723 
p3 of my licence I have taken down as there may be valid argument it is security sensitive……it was put up because the last judge rebuked me , while halving my prison sentance on appeal (MAPPA told prison to hold my valuables), saying if I had signed for my passport, in the first place, at the prison exit last September we need not have had all these court cases!
Marvelous! I never signed a purported licence this time around either, leaving the prison to Swansea ‘approved premises’, as there is no legal obligation AND as no one but no one,  to date, timed 315 hours local time on 11th July 1014, will explain why I am on MAPPA regime at all ?
Janet Kirk had the inicietive to get my passport out of the court despite my needing it for a vital defence exhibit 
t
 
14/05/14                Appellant to Criminal Court of Appeal             BS614159
                                                                                                                       T20131144                                                                                                                                    Etc
 
         3rd Breach of ‘Restraining Order’ 17th March14 Cardiff Crown Court Trial
My attempt to submit further ‘Grounds’ already with Criminal Court of Appeal 
GROUNDS INCLUDE
    1. Refused medical attention
    2. Refused process legal aid form
    3. Refused access to lawyer in prison
    4. Refused glasses in court
    5. Refused legal papers in court
    6. Refused, either in court or in prison, to interview defence witnesses
    7. Refused access to his own funds
    8. Refused outstanding relevant appeals/applications required to be heard first
    9. Refused access to his legal papers in prison
    10. Refused the right to call defence witnesses
    11. Refused the his right to cross examine
    12. Refused Sect 8 police disclosure or basic primary disclosure despite promises, over 22 years, by countless South Wales Police and CPS personnel. 
This list is far from exhaustive
Maurice J Kirk A7306AT
HMP Cardiff
South Wales
UK
I HAVE JUST RECEIVED  8,700 e-mails to read in order to update this current blog…….. when time!!!!  
 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

ENQUIRY ANNOUNCED INTO CHILD ABUSE, TV NEWS 8 JULY – PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS: WHERE ARE THE 114 MISSING FILES?

From the tv News =

GOVERNMENT CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE HELD – 8 JULY 2014

from butlincat1 on Vimeo.

Shown for educational purposes only

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION FOR A GOVT. ENQUIRY! / TELEGRAPH: Lord Tebbit: there ‘may well’ have been a Government cover-up of child abuse

The veteran former minister says it was the instinct of people at the time to protect ‘the system’ and not to delve too deeply into uncomfortable allegations

Norman Tebbit

Lord Tebbit says he thinks there may well have been an establishment cover-up of child abuse in the 1980s Photo: Andrew Crowley/The Telegraph
A veteran former Conservative minister who served in the cabinet with Lord Brittan has said there “may well” have been an establishment cover-up of child abuse in the 1980s.
Lord Tebbit, who served in a series of ministerial posts under Margaret Thatcher at the same time as Lord Brittan, the former Home Secretary, said the instinct of people at the time was to protect “the system” and not to delve too deeply into uncomfortable allegations.
His comments come as Francis Maude, the Cabinet minister, said a probe was necessary to finally “lift up the drains” on who knew what about historic allegations of child abuse.
The Home Office announced a fresh review into what happened to a file alleging paedophile activity at Westminster which was handed to the then home secretary Leon (now Lord) Brittan by the Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens.
Appearing on BBC1’s The Andrew Marr Show, Lord Tebbit said: “At that time I think most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected and if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system than to delve too far into it.

“That view, I think, was wrong then and it is spectacularly shown to be wrong because the abuses have grown.” Asked if he thought there had been a “big political cover-up” at the time, he said: “I think there may well have been. But it was almost unconscious. It was the thing that people did at that time.” Speaking on Pienaar’s politics on BBC Radio 5 live Maude added that “nobody can be above the law” and “justice has to be done” over the allegations of child abuse.

Nigel Evans, the Conservative MP, said that someone “within the Home Office” must know what happened to the file.

He told Pienaar’s politics: “There will be more than one person who would know that that file existed and has read that file and took the decision either to destroy it or if it’s not been destroyed, it is somewhere, and I think that they really do need now to turn the Home Office upside down.”

He added: “If nobody comes forward then they really do need to look absolutely everywhere to ensure that as Francis Maude said, nobody is above the law, we need to make sure that the people inside that file are properly investigated, and the question is, why weren’t they investigated in the first place?”

Lord Brittan, now a Conservative peer, was challenged over what he knew about the dossier detailing an alleged Westminster paedophile ring that was passed to him when he was home secretary and later disappeared.

Lord Brittan confirmed that he was handed a “substantial bundle of papers” when he was Home Secretary, an office he held from 1983 until 1983.

The papers were compiled by Geoffrey Dickens, then a Conservative MP, who had investigated child abuse networks.

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale, has said that the Dickens papers contained details of paedophiles operating a network around Westminster.

Lord Brittan said that he passed the papers to Home Office officials and asked them to “look carefully” at the material they contained to see if any action was needed.

That investigation found that Lord Brittan had acted appropriately, the Home Office said. It also “found no evidence of Mr Dickens expressing dissatisfaction about the action taken in respect of the information he had passed on”.

The Home Office investigation “shows that appropriate action and follow up happened” in relation to the papers, Lord Brittan said.

An internal review of hundreds of files last year found 13 previously undisclosed “items of information about alleged child abuse – including four implicating Home Office officials”.

Mark Sedwill, who has been appointed by David Cameron to investigate claims of a Whitehall cover-up of political paedophiles, revealed that 114 potentially relevant files” were “presumed destroyed, missing or not found”.

An independent legal figure, expected to be a promised QC, is to be appointed to conduct a review of the Home Office’s handling of the case.

The news comes as it emerged that Lord Brittan had been interviewed by police over a historical rape allegation.

The Independent on Sunday reported that Mr Britton was accused of raping a 19-year-old female student in 1967. He was not an MP at the time of the alleged incident at his London flat.

According to his lawyers Lord Brittan will not be making a comment today, but it is understood he strongly denies the allegation.

In a statement, a Metropolitan Police spokesman said a man in his 70s had been interviewed under caution. 

source:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10949428/Lord-Tebbit-there-may-well-have-been-a-Government-cover-up-of-child-abuse.html ###########>##########################################################################

PAEDOPHILES IN WESTMINSTER. THE GREAT COVER UP. 

5.7.14

The more you hear and read about ‘the lost dossier’ of papers surrounding a paedophile ring centred on Parliament, the more it stinks of conspiracy and cover up. The Tories are panicking and running for cover. Cameron should instigate a proper, formal and independent Inquiry, not a Home Office Investigation. Is he implicated in this too? Geoffrey Dickens MP had a half hour meeting in 1983 with the then Home Secretary Leon Brittan during which he presented a large dossier of proof and discussed its contents with Brittan. Bear in mind that this information was a potential nuclear bomb waiting to go off. Brittan says he just handed the papers to The Home office to deal with and now assumes that they took appropriate action. How could an intelligent politician leave such a potentially damaging time bomb at the back of his mind and not even check to see what was happening on at least a daily basis? Maybe we should rename him Pinocchio Brittan?

• In 1981, Dickens named the former British High Commissioner to Canada, Sir Peter Hayman, as a paedophile in the House of Commons, using parliamentary privilege so he could not get sued for slander. Dickens asked why he had not been jailed after the discovery on a bus of violent pornography. In April 1981 Sir Michael Havers, the Attorney General, said in parliament that while Hayman was a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange, he was never a member of the executive committee, so was not prosecuted as others were for publishing contact advertisements. Was Havers a part of the paedophile ring too? Or was he just covering up for his public school buddy?

• On 29 November 1985, Dickens complained in the House of Commons that he had suffered harassment following his naming of Hayman. “The noose around my neck grew tighter after I named a former high-flying British diplomat on the Floor of the House. Honourable Members will understand that where big money is involved, and as important names came into my possession, so the threats began. First, I received threatening telephone calls followed by two burglaries at my London home. Then, more seriously, my name appeared on a multi-killer’s hit list. By 17 May 1995 Dickens was dead, and his voice had been silenced.

• In February 2013, Labour MP Tom Watson asked the Home Office for Dickens’ dossier. A Home Office review in 2013 concluded that any information requiring investigation was referred to the police but revealed that Mr Dickens’ dossier was “not retained”. It had been destroyed. • In July 2014, the issue was raised again by Labour MP Simon Danczuk, Former Director of Public Prosecutions, Lord Macdonald, said the circumstances in which the dossier had gone missing was alarming and recommended an inquiry into the fate of the dossier. Prime Minister David Cameron asked the Home Office Permanent Secretary to investigate what had happened to the missing dossier. Danczuk responded that another internal inquiry was merely trying to limit damage, and that a public inquiry was necessary to retain public confidence.”

SIGN THE PETITION FOR AN ENQUIRY INTO CHILD ABUSE: The above from the comments:  

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-and-theresa-may-establish-a-national-inquiry-into-allegations-of-organised-child-abuse#

——————————————————————–

From the tv News =

GOVERNMENT CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE HELD – 8 JULY 2014

from butlincat1 on Vimeo.

Shown for educational purposes only

Photo: When will they tell us?Photo: 2Photo: 3

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

TELEGRAPH: JUDGE SLAMS HARINGEY COUNCIL OVER MY MOST SHOCKING FAMILY CASE EVER – CHRISTOPHE​R BOOKER

Haringey went ‘behind my back’, says Mr Justice Holman over forced break-up of family

Mr Justic Holman condemned Haringey for having deceitfully broken both procedures and the law Photo: Alamy
Of all the scores of cases I have followed over the past five years where families have been torn apart by social workers and the courts, one has stood out as more shocking and harrowing than any. From 2010 on, when five children were removed from a Nigerian couple, Mr and Mrs Musa, and then a sixth was violently wrested from Mrs Musa’s arms by six police and three social workers when she was lying helpless on a hospital bed breastfeeding the baby to which she had just given birth, I wrote about this case in heavily redacted form more than any other (a seventh child was later also taken from her at birth). I can only now name both Haringey council (of “Baby P” fame) and the Musas, thanks to three very remarkable recent High Court judgments by Mr Justice Holman, which he ordered to be published on the Bailii court website, specifically allowing both the council and the parents to be identified.
Holman only came into this case at the end of a four-year long saga that had already been before more than half a dozen other High Court judges. What he had to decide was whether, as an earlier judge had ruled they must be, the five older children, now in different foster homes, should be allowed to maintain contact with the two youngest (who have been sent for adoption and whom Haringey wishes to be given new names). Holman discovered, first, that Haringey had secretly and blatantly disobeyed that earlier ruling, by last year breaking off the children’s contact for several months until, in December, they were allowed to meet for a final “goodbye session”.
Holman repeatedly expressed his astonishment that the council had knowingly broken a court order in this way. But he was then even more astonished to discover that Haringey had managed to get the court website to remove the very judgment he had ordered to be published. In his own words, Haringey had, “gone completely behind my back”, to persuade “Bailii to remove from the public website” the judgment that he had “deliberately placed” there, “pursuant to the practice direction of the President of the Family Division” (Lord Justice Munby, who has been valiantly striving to open up the family courts to “the glare of publicity”).
Again and again in his forensically argued judgments, Holman condemned Haringey for having deceitfully broken both procedures and the law, expressing his “grave concern” at what the council had been doing. While he very reluctantly concluded that, following that illegal “goodbye session”, it was probably not practical to undo the damage, he ended one judgment by saying, “On that incredibly melancholy note, and with the utmost despair on my part, I draw the present hearing to a close.”
But Holman was careful to say that he was not familiar with all the earlier stages of this case, although he knew that it has been widely referred to on the internet and has aroused huge public concern in Nigeria. Had he in fact known all of what Haringey and the courts have done to this family since 2010, he would have been utterly appalled. Right from the start, the children were initially removed from their parents on allegations so implausible that the council eventually had to drop them and come up with new ones, quite different. After many more tragic twists and turns to the story, the parents ended up, following a very odd criminal trial, being given long prison sentences,
The children who, in the early days, were constantly pleading to be allowed to come home, have, for four years, been kept unhappily in foster care, where they are now condemned to remain. Mrs Musa, whom I knew as a smartly dressed, capable and obviously devoted mother, has been reduced by her beatings in prison to a physical wreck. If, one day, the full story of the fate of this family can be told, it will be seen as a truly major scandal. Haringey’s bid to have Holman’s judgment suppressed was only the latest instance of an official cover-up that has so far been terrifyingly successful. Last Thursday, by another, very different judge, the council was finally given almost everything over those poor children’s future it had asked for.

SOURCE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10946414/Judge-slams-Haringey-council-over-my-most-shocking-family-case-ever.html

Here is the HHJ Holman judgement of the 26 April 14: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2014/1341.html
Same case, from April: 

 Gloria Musa: her Deteriorating Health Condition in HMP Send:
5 July 2014

When I, with another friend visited Gloria Musa on Saturday 28th June 2012 on a social visit at HMP Send, we were shocked not only by at Gloria’s physical state of health and well-being, but also by what she told us on this visit.
She told us that she now had a “lump” in her groin area, presumably brought on by the infection she has as a result of bleeding from internally for so long since giving birth to a baby on March 10 2012. This ailment has never been addressed properly by any health official anywhere, as its obvious if this had happened Gloria would not be still bleeding, and, we are told, awakening each new day in bloodstained bedsheets.
It is thought this “lump” Gloria now has could also have been caused by her possibly having an untreated hernia, originating from the birth of her child in March 2014.
The authorities especially prison department personnel, including the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, and the Minsistry of Justice, N.O.M.S., and the I.M.B. have been told time and time again about Gloria’s serious medical conditions, including:

a] her painful hip and knee problems,
b] the “lump” she speaks of in her groin area,
c] along with a painful infection which carries with it “warts”in her groin area, making it very painful to sit down on anythuing except a cushion, we have been told, and
d] her continuous bleeding from her stomach, the blood exiting from her groin area,
e] Gloria is now vomiting continually also, and
f] her eyesight is failing.
g] Gloria speaks of having painful mouth ulcer alsos.
After a fall in the past from her wheelchair whilst in HMP Holloway it is understood, when she called supporters, she had a cut had which was possibly broken too. This hand has now reset but not to how it shouldve done. Gloria told us when calling in distress directly after her fall that when she asked for help in the prison she was told by warders that as she was a bishop she should “heal herself”. It is understood Gloria was finally given a plaster to put on the cut to her hand, but anyone seeing Gloria now can see the damage to her hand where the bones have not reset properly.

Most of these ailments have been with Gloria a very long time but nothing has been done by anybody to remedy and rectify properly these serious medical health conditions.On complaining to the Ministry of Justice [their reply is attatched to this note] their reply stated that all inmates get the best possibl;e NHS care. Other departments written to state whichever department cannot intervene in single case – apparently not even if they are as serious as Gloria’s obvious lack of medical treatment..

Furthermore, we were told on our visit on the 28 June that the standard waste bins in her cell are not being emptied, and the contents, which include items such as bloody tissues etc. used to deal with and clean her bleeding in her groin, and the contents from her continual vomiting are left to accumulate in these receptacles for periods of time. Gloria is bedridden and unable to clear this waste, she tells us.This is completely unhygenic, and surely goes against the Health and Safety Regulations in place at the prison.

We were also told how certain warders are telling Gloria that they “hate her” – showing her absolute contempt,which goes against these prison warders code of conduct for dealing with prison inmates.
We were also told how certain warders have been telling other inmates to avoid Gloria Musa at all costs, that she is an appalling mother guilty of heinous crimes. This again is completely unacceptable behaviour for a prison warder.

I ask you to understand what is going on here as this appalling lack of medical care and disgraceful victimisation against this vulnerable and very ill lady should not be taking place as it has been from day 1 of her entry into the UK prison system on the 28 November 2011.

Please see the attatched letter from the Ministry of Justice concerning inmates and the healthcare they supposedly get. This most definately is not the case for Gloria’ Musa, or if she is getting the best of healthcare, why is she still bleeding from internally for over 27 months, along with her numerous other continuing serious ailments?

J. Graham
Mckenzie friend to the Musa family and concerned citizen

UPDATED 5 July 2014 – this is a true sworn statement and for confirmation of anything written kindly confirm with Bishop Gloria Musa.

Attatched are a tiny sample from numerous replies from departments relating to Gloria Musa’s health and medical creonditions, including:

2 replies from the Inspector of Prisons

1 from the I.M.B.,

1 from N.O.M.S.

2 sheets from Prime Solicitors from August 2013 [entitled "gloria prime1 9aug"  + "gloria1 prime1 9aug"],

 plus an official complaint Gloria made re: being constantly harassed by certain prison personnel,

a letter from Killick, HMP Holloway governor, who states she will not be communicating with me re: Gloria – this sent after my very 1st communication to her. Maybe she knew something we didn’t?, viz., how Gloria would be treated whilst in her prison? Gloria’s health deteriorated rapidly after entering HMP Holloway. Needless to say, a great amount of discernment must be used when reading the government departments replies as they contain many inaccuracies – eg., Gloria has agreed to medical treatment, and we  swathe effects on a visit of her being on at least 5 unspecified medications, which made her ill – so ill in fact she had to come off these drugs. When asked for the names of the drugs Gloria was not told, worryingly. She  stated at the time, on a visit, that she was losing the sight of her left eye since taking the prescribed medications she knew not the names of, and suffered much nausea also. That is one fallacy in the letters of reply – there are more.

Also attatched is Gloria Musa’s affidavit 11/2011

REPLY FROM M.o.J. regarding prison inmates medical treatment:

white2 011aa.jpg2.jpgz

10 attachments — Download all attachments   View all images   Share all images  
HARDWICK REDAXCTED REPLY 20MAR134682.jpg HARDWICK  REPLY 20MAR134682.jpg
1739K   View   Share   Download  
HARDWICK 12 12 2012268 redacted.jpg HARDWICK 12 12 2012268 redacted.jpg
970K   View   Share   Download  
MOJ 15 JAN REDACT.jpg MOJ 15 JAN REDACT.jpg
2720K   View   Share   Download  
KIILLICK 10OCT12349 2.jpg KIILLICK 10OCT12349 2.jpg
1147K   View   Share   Download  
gloria3  9aug13277.jpg gloria3 9aug13277.jpg
3777K   View   Share   Download  
IMBLETTER  8 SEPT 12163A.jpg IMBLETTER 8 SEPT 12163A.jpg
730K   View   Share   Download  
gloria1 prime1 9aug13276A.jpg gloria1 prime1 9aug13276A.jpg
1230K   View   Share   Download  
gloria prime1 9aug13275.jpg gloria prime1 9aug13275.jpg
1598K   View   Share   Download  
a1.jpg a1.jpg
14K   View   Share   Download  
MUSA WALL 14 10 11 11_10_10_Affidavit.pdf MUSA WALL 14 10 11 11_10_10_Affidavit.pdf
424K  
View   Download  
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Let public into family courts, says top judge: Sir James Munby suggests ‘certain types of family case’ could be held as open hearings

Plan raises prospect of ordinary people being allowed to attend courts

Cases have been closed because of fears over damaging gossip
June 14 2014

Sir James Munby, said he would talk to lawyers, judges and social work chiefs about 'the possible hearing in public of certain types of family case'
Sir James Munby, said he would talk to lawyers, judges and social work chiefs about ‘the possible hearing in public of certain types of family case’

Members of the public could be allowed in to the family courts to watch cases for the first time, a senior judge said yesterday.

  •  The leading family law judge, Sir James Munby, said he would talk to lawyers, judges and social work chiefs about ‘the possible hearing in public of certain types of family case’.
    Sir James’ plan raises the prospect of ordinary people being allowed to attend courts as they decide on cases of children taken from their parents into state care, adoption, and where children should live when their families break up.
    In the past such cases have always been closed to the public because of fears that neighbours and those who knew the families could go to the family courts and then spread damaging gossip about children.
    The promise to gather ‘preliminary pre-consultation views’ on allowing the public into family courts will be part of a paper on ending secrecy in the courts to be published shortly by Sir James, who is President of the Family Division.
    The Daily Mail’s campaign against secret justice has highlighted controversial decisions made behind closed doors in the family courts and the closely-related and even more secretive Court of Protection, which deals with the affairs of vulnerable adults.
    Last year the Mail revealed that the Court of Protection secretly imprisoned a 50-year-old woman, Wanda Maddocks, for trying to get her elderly father out of a care home where she thought his life was in danger. 

Sir James has since forbidden secret imprisonment and has ordered that judges must publish their rulings in family and Court of Protection cases.
Yesterday he said in a circular sent to judges that he is to press for further moves towards openness.
Approved journalists have been allowed in to family court hearings since 2009 following an attempt to open up the courts by Labour Justice Secretary Jack Straw.
However Mr Straw’s rules  applied only to journalists, not to members of the public, and allowed judges to apply reporting restrictions so that nothing about the cases they observed could be published.
Sir James’ circular also promised that his consultation, to be published ‘shortly’, will press for the publication of court documents, so that outsiders who attend family courts will be able to understand lawyers and judges who argue their case by reference to secret documents.
It will also call for better announcements in advance of what cases will be in the courts and when.
‘I will be canvassing views as to any ways in which the guidance can be improved, and, perhaps, extended,’ Sir James said.

source:: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2661967/Let-public-family-courts-says-judge-Sir-James-Munby-suggests-certain-types-family-case-held-open-hearings.html#ixzz35p9wWhpL

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

Conference: Children Screaming To Be Heard – 25 JULY 2014

Has anything changed regarding the child removals, like the figures going down at all over the years? They continue rising, with Cameron setting ever higher targets:

JANUARY 2013:

Children waiting for adoption figures at all time high:

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/121893/ADOPTION__FIGURES_AT_ALL_TIME_HIGH_OF_CHILDREN_IN_CARE_WAITING_FOR_ADOPTION__SKY_NEWS_21_JAN_13/

—————————————————-
Sir James Munby, “President of the Family Division”

Appeal judge slams decision which led to baby being taken from parents unjustly

Sir James Munby#s reforms – what happened?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2583949/Ministers-blocking-secret-court-reform-Concerns-falling-deaf-ears-says-judge.html#ixzz2wTLzn9wl

—————————————————-

MailOnline article 26 July 2013 by Sue Reid: “For years I fought against secret courts breaking up families. At last there’s hope?”
What happened??

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2377084/SUE-REID-For-years-I-fought-secret-courts-breaking-families-At-theres-hope.html#ixzz2aJqP7uQa

——————————————
res

UPCOMING CONFERENCE 25 JULY 2014:

http://www.researchingreform.net/2014/06/23/conference-children-screaming-to-be-heard-attend-attend-attend/

Conference: Children Screaming To Be Heard – Attend, Attend, Attend!

Posted by Natasha in Children

Maggie Tuttle over at Children Screaming to Be Heard, a charity dedicated to helping children inside the care system find their voice and speak out about the often appalling treatment they receive (including denial of contact with parents and extended family), has put together a cracking conference, and worth going to if you can find the time.

The tickets are absolutely free. The event takes place on 25th July, from 9am-5pm, at Resource for London, on Holloway Road.

We’ve added the press release for you, below:

Children Screaming to be Heard Conference

(Registered Charity No. 1144679)

A Voice for the Silent Witnesses and their Families

25 July 2014 at 9am – 5pm

Resource For London, 356, Holloway Road, London N7 6PA

http://www.resourceforlondon.org/contact-us/how-to-find-us

9.45 Albina Koumirova will speak of her art exhibition for the children – 15 minutes

10.00 Rosie, the little girl who spoke in the House of Commons last year, told MP’s how she was denied her rights to be with her family as a child – 20 minutes

10.20 Michael Unsworth. Short video from the Australian who wrote and recorded the song Calling Me, Calling You- 10 minutes

10.30 Laura Lian, the sculptress, who has designed the monument for the abused children – 10 minutes

10.40 The Emperor Rosko, famous DJ. A short statement read out on why he is supporting the charity -5 minutes

10.45 Tim Spearman, author of the book launched at the conference and written for the children – 15 minutes

11.00 John Hemming MP – 30 minutes – with questions and answers

11.30 Vicky Haigh via video link – pedophiles and the families – 15 minutes

11.45 Coffee Break

12.15 Sonia Poulton, journalist and broadcaster, a voice for the people – 20 minutes

12.35 Brian Daniels, Citizens Commission on Human Rights, speaking on the drugging of children – 25 minutes

13.00 Lunch until 14.30

14.30 Ian Joseph – forced adoption, a punishment without a crime – 30 minutes

15.00 Dr. C. Dennhey, Child Psychiatrist speaking on extended families – 30 minutes

15.30 Michael Bailey, Barrister of Tanfield Chambers – 30 minutes

16.00-17.00 Questions and Answers

The Charity – do check out their website, it’s very nicely done and informative, too.

http://www.childrenscreamingtobeheard.com

Free Tickets for the conference

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/children-screaming-to-be-heard-the-silent-witnesses-conference-tickets-10908400319

—Painting by guest speaker, Albina Koumirova

source: http://researchingreform.net/2014/06/23/conference-children-screaming-to-be-heard-attend-attend-attend/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Social Services chief’s husband was drug-addicted violent terrorist

 photo mailza_zps16af3326.gif

Quote from below: “…he had computer memory sticks and confidential files relating to scandals about children in care in the county. “

ByMartin Delgado, Mail on Sunday Reporterand Andrew Young
ok
lisa christensen
Boss: Lisa Christensen, head of Norfolk children’s services

A Social Services chief who played a key role in the forcible adoption of three children is married to a convicted terrorist with a history of drink and drug abuse.

Lisa Christensen, director of children’s services in Norfolk, is the wife of Jack Prescott, who was given a 15-year prison sentence for involvement in a bomb attack on the home of a Tory Cabinet Minister.

Prescott, 64 – a self-confessed former heroin addict and thief – was a founder member of the Angry Brigade, Britain’s only home-grown urban terrorist group, which carried out 25 attacks on Government buildings, embassies and corporations.

His past has come to light because he was recently convicted of assaulting Ms Christensen.

She failed to tell Norfolk County Council about her husband’s violent past when she was appointed head of Social Services in 2002.

Two years later, she became the authority’s £120,000-a-year director of children’s services with responsibility for schools, child protection ad young people in care.

In that role, she approved the forced removal of Mark and Nicky Webster’s three children, all then under five – a decision condemned by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb as ‘an appalling miscarriage of justice’ and which has been highlighted by The Mail on Sunday.

The Websters fought a long battle to prove they had not harmed their children. Last year, experts agreed that leg injuries suffered by one youngster were due not to physical abuse but to a disorder that stopped him eating anything other than soya milk.

jack prescott
Husband: Jack Prescott under arrest in 1971.

The couple, who have since had another child, are now making legal history by trying to reverse the adoption of their three older children.

Mr Prescott’s past was revealed last week when he made a series of drunken phone calls to his wife’s office, following a court case in which he admitted assaulting her during a row at the family home.

In one call, he told Ms Christensen’s secretary that he had computer memory sticks and confidential files relating to scandals about children in care in the county.

Although a police investigation concluded that he held no such information, Ms Christensen, 52, was embarrassed and upset by the calls. She is understood to have felt obliged at this point to tell town hall chiefs about her husband’s criminal record.

The couple, who married in 1992, are now separated, although they are still listed at the same address on the electoral roll. Neighbours in the Norfolk village of Mattishall, where the couple have a £350,000 detached Victorian cottage, said they were living together until just a few weeks ago.

angry brigade attack

Angry Brigade attack on the Minister’s house

One woman, who declined to be named, said: ‘Those of us who knew him fairly well were aware he has a problem with alcohol. It was something he’s quite open about. But it’s a real shock to hear he’s been violent as well.’

Another friend said: ‘He was certainly living with Lisa until the incident when the police were called. I think she threw him out after that, but whether permanently or not
I don’t know.’

Prescott was considered highly dangerous as a result of his terrorist exploits and when he was sentenced at the Old Bailey in 1971 the judge, Mr Justice Melford Stevenson, told the painter and decorator he had been convicted of complicity ‘in the most evil conspiracy I have ever had to deal with’.

When he was arrested over the bomb plot, Prescott was on parole from prison, where he had been serving five years for firearms offences.

Then 27, he already had convictions for theft, housebreaking and assault but his sentence on the terrorism charges was later cut from 15 years to ten by the Court of Appeal.

Unlike other members of the Angry Brigade, most of whom were middle-class and university-educated, Prescott came from a staunchly working-class Scottish background.

Born in Dunfermline, he was brought up in an orphanage after the death of
his mother. He committed his first offence, the theft of a bicycle, at 14 and became a heroin addict.

He told the jury at his terrorism trial: ‘I was taking eight grains of heroin and other drugs every day and I sold all my personal possessions to buy drugs.’

In November 1970, the Angry Brigade, which embraced an anarchistic, anti-capitalist ideology, exploded a device under a BBC van at the Miss World contest. Shortly afterwards, a document was delivered to a London newspaper. Headed ‘Communique No1’, it claimed responsibility for the outrage.

Two more bombs were detonated outside the North London home of Employment Secretary Robert Carr and this was followed by further attacks on political targets. No one was killed in the campaign but one person was injured.

The cell was broken up when detectives raided a rented flat in Stoke Newington, North London.

Five of the group were convicted of conspiracy but no one was ever found guilty of planting the bombs.

After serving his sentence, however, Prescott wrote to Carr and his family to apologise for his role in leaving the bombs at his home.

Mr Prescott is now in custody after Thetford magistrates heard he slapped his wife several times on the nose and cheeks, leaving her uninjured but with a tingling feeling in her face. The court was told he had alcohol and mental health problems and should be given credit for pleading guilty. He will be sentenced on December 22.

Last night, Norfolk County Council chief executive David White said: ‘Lisa Christensen was still a schoolgirl when the man who later became her husband was arrested in 1971 and the couple didn’t meet until long after he had served his sentence.

‘We rightly require job candidates to supply information about any criminal convictions they may hold but that does not apply to their partners and Lisa did not share that information with us when she was appointed, probably because it is something that happened more than 35 years ago.

‘I am sad for her and her family that Jack’s personal demons should now be a source of such trauma.’

A council spokesman added: ‘We only became aware of Jack Prescott’s past last week following the domestic assault which led to him being arrested and appearing in court.’

Ms Christensen said: ‘This is a very sad matter for me and my family and we sincerely hope that expert treatment will be offered to Jack and taken up by him.’

Other members of the Angry Brigade have disappeared from view over the years.

But Angela Mason, who was tried and acquitted of planting bombs, is
a former leader of gay rights group Stonewall and now works for the Government as national adviser at the Improvement and Development Agency for local government.

Chris Bott, who was also acquitted, was marketing manager of the
ill-fated Left-wing newspaper News on Sunday, which closed after a few months in 1987. He lives in France.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1094490/Social-Services-chiefs-husband-drug-addicted-violent-terrorist.html#ixzz35L2OHLEb

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

NORMAN SCARTH WRITES 13 JUNE 14 – SECRET COURTS ARE NOT NEW! + PART 2

Norman Scarth

16:53 (2 hours ago)

to guyvassall-ada., joshua, rwhittamqc, anestaweekes, teamm, clerks, lawinaction, richardfowler

To Mr Guy Vassal-Adams, Barrister, Matrix Chambers.

(Cc to Presenter Joshua Rosenberg, to the LAW IN ACTION team, & to the legal experts who spoke on the BBC Radio 4 programme broadcast on Thursday 12th June 2104.)

Sir,

Answering Mr Joshua Rosenberg’s question about criminal trials being heard in secret, you said it was ‘Unprecedented': That you had ‘never heard of the whole of a criminal trial being held in secret’ (or words to that effect).

For all your studying & experience, it would appear there is a most important gap in your knowledge of law as it is practiced in Britain. There is at least one case which, in some respects, was even more disturbing than the current one which is causing such a furore.

The case was Regina v Norman Scarth, heard before Judge David Ronald Bentley in Sheffield Crown Court in April 2001. The fact that it have been moved from the Defendant’s home area, making it a difficult journey for the 75 year old World War II veteran to get to the court, or for his supporters to attend, was only one of the many oppressive features. Bentley having banned The Press (see below, & see attachment) he made no attempt to hide his hatred for the Litigant In Person – this one in particular! (for his reasons, see elsewhere).

At the very beginning of the ‘hearing’, the defending barrister asked to retire from the case, claiming, quite rightly, that she knew nothing about it, having received no briefing whatsoever from the solicitor! Just five minutes later, the solicitor herself asked to be excused – leaving the Defendant completely unrepresented!

Bentley refused the old man’s request for an adjournment to find other representation. More than that, he refused to allow him even five minutes to prepare his own defence, but said “Get on with it!”. None of this was reported in The Press. It couldn’t be, as he had banned Press Reporting! (Attached is his Order). One might have expected this to have started alarm bells ringing with those who claim to be concerned about such things, & brought protests from The Press (as has happened with the current case!)

There were none: They were happy to say away for the whole of the ‘trial’. Not till it was over did The Press publish their ‘Reports’. Which prompts the question: How were they able to do this, when no reporters were ever present? Obviously, they published what they were told by the prosecution. Needless to say, THEY didn’t tell how Bentley had not only banned Press Reporting, but also banned the Defendant’s witnesses & evidence! Or how Bentley had this veteran of the Arctic Convoys of WW2 literally dragged & thrown back down to the cells when he dared to complain at Bentley’s gross mis-conduct!

Having himself fed monstrous lies & distortions of the truth to the jury to get the ‘guilty’ verdict he wanted, for a first ‘offence’ by this 75 year old veteran (where others would have been given Probation, Community Service, Suspended Sentence or similar), Bentley imposed a sentence to ensure he died in prison: Six years in prison plus four years on extended licence.

How do I know so much? Well, the victim of this Secret Trial was me. And no, I didn’t die during the six years of incarceration, but lived to continue my mission in life – as in my email address!

Lived long enough to be imprisoned AGAIN, at the age of 85 – for Contempt of Court by Judge Jonathan Rose, who sentenced me to six months in the ‘Hell Hole’ known as Armley Gaol.

Lived long enough to have TWO MORE prison sentences imposed on me for the same ‘offence’ at the age of 87 – by no less a person than LCJ Lord Igor Judge!

(Quite a coincidence he was one of the ‘experts’ on your programme? Another co-incidence: That my alleged ‘offence’ was that I had ‘recorded a hearing’, one of the subjects in your programme being the RECORDED trial of Oscar Pistorious in South Africa.)

Fortunately, I had belatedly realised that Britain is not a safe place for those who dare to tell the truth, & had fled to the safety of Ireland, able to cock a snook at Lord Judge from afar!

You might like to look at

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21845753

for David Cameron expressing ‘the gratitude of the nation’ to some of the few men who are left who served on the Arctic Convoys, as I did, though, needless to say, I was not present at Downing Street. Then consider how Judge Bentley, Judge Jonathan Rose, LCJ Lord Judge & a host of other legal professionals have shown their ‘gratitude’ to me.

Perhaps you people, who are so concerned about ‘Human Rights’, ‘Fair Trials’ etc., etc., will be more aware of the ‘debt you owe’ to those like me, & will take up the matter? Not for MY sake (I wear my convictions as badges of honour), but to prove your commitment to the principles you claim to espouse?

That which is above is a tiny part of the full horror story.

I await your responses with baited breath.

Failure to respond will say more than a million words.

SCARTH 13JUNE14.jpg2

Part Two:

To Mr Guy Vassal-Adams, Barrister, Matrix Chambers.

(Cc to Presenter Joshua Rosenberg, to the LAW IN ACTION team, & to the legal experts who spoke on the BBC Radio 4 programme broadcast on Thursday 12th June 2104.)

(The original message is included at the bottom, with a couple of typos corrected, & syntax improved).

SECRET TRIALS: PART TWO.

In the original message, I told how Bentley made no attempt to hide his hatred of me & that readers should ‘see elsewhere’ for the reasons. Time to tell them now.

UNTIL THE AGE OF 70, I was proud to be British, proud to have ‘Done My Bit’ to keep Hitler from our shores, lucky to survive when brave men (of both sides), were dying around me in large numbers. I believed, as we were constantly told, the ‘British Judges Are The Finest In The World’.

FROM THE AGE OF 70 came a succession of shocks, all my life long beliefs shattered, as I learned there were many rotten apples in the judiciary, that corruption is rampant in the courts. In memory of all those men who had died around me, & what we BELIEVED we were fighting for, I could not turn my back, & made it my mission in life to expose the rotten apples. Needless to say, this did not endear me to the profession.

In 1997 I stood as a candidate at the General Election as an Independent Old Age Pension, & published the book, ‘CAUSE for CONCERN’. My main point, in manifesto & book, was about violent attacks on the old & vulnerable – virtually UNHEARD of until the 1960s, but which, by then, had become daily occurrences.

My second point was corruption in the courts, of which I had newly become aware. At the time I was regarded by TPTB as a noisy old buffoon, a Parliamentary No-Hoper.

This changed with my SINGLE-HANDED success in the European Court of Human Rights, Scarth v UK, 33745/96. It brought a vital change in British law, incorporated into the 1998 Human Rights Act. (See letter dated 1/9/98 from Geoffrey Hoon MP, then Lord Chancellor Irvine’s spokesman in The Commons, attached). One might have expected this to have brought me some respect from the professionals? Not so: They dislike trespassers on ‘their’ patch. The change was much hated by lawyers & judges – & I am hated for it!

Up till then, hearings ‘In Chambers’ had always been in secret, barristers & judge in a huddle together. Cynics would say that was when it was decided who was going to win!

As a result of the ECt-HR ruling in Scarth v UK, ALL hearings – INCLUDING those ‘In Chambers’, MUST be open to the public, ‘other than in exceptional circumstances’, which must of course be stated.

It is ironic that the man who brought this about should himself suffer the injustice of a grotesque, Star Chamber ‘trial’. True, the public gallery was open, but with no Press, & no-one in the gallery allowed to make any record, not even with pencil & paper, it was effectively in secret.

In fact, two of my supporters were there, but Bentley had them arrested!!

He then asked the Attorney General (or some such official) to think of something they could be charged with, but the AG declined & they were released, though badly shaken by such intimidation.

There is much more, but that must wait for Part Three.

Norman Scarth.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Social workers snatched mother’s baby from her minutes after birth with no warning because ‘they thought she might kill herself if she discovered what they were planning’

  • First of its kind secret court decision meant mother was not told of plans
  • Council feared woman might kill herself if they knew baby would be taken
  • Newborn was taken last month but decision was only made public today
  • Campaigners attack secrecy insisting other options should have been tried
Social workers gave a mother no prior warning before taking away her baby minutes after her birth, it emerged today.
Following an unprecedented secret court ruling, authorities told neither the woman nor her family of their plans.
The move was attacked by campaigners today, who said alternative methods of looking after both mother and baby should have been tried.
It emerged today that the mother’s low IQ and history of mental illness prompted North Somerset Council to petition courts for the right to take her baby daughter into care from birth.
But the local authority went to what has been called the ‘extremity of what is permissible’ in law to obtain the order in secret.
The gagging order – a legal first – meant the 24-year-old mum was given no warning her baby would be taken and no opportunity to fight the order.
It is understood the authorities took the ‘draconian’ steps in secret because they feared the mother would commit suicide if she discovered her baby would be removed.
But maternity groups labelled the move an ‘absolute scandal’ and a sign of a worrying and growing trend for secret hearings.

The Association for Improvements in the Maternity Services slammed the move, saying said the mother should have been given a chance to mount a legal defence. 

Jean Robinson, president of the campaign group, said she thought it was the very first time a gagging order has been used in this way.
She said: ‘I gather the fear in this case was that the mother would commit suicide if she knew. Of course, she is quite likely to do so now her baby has been taken away.

The High Court ruled the woman should not be told of social workers plans to take her baby after birth

‘The secret hearing does not give the mother any opportunity to instruct solicitors to prevent it, or even approach solicitors or even her own family member to create an alternative.
‘There may well have been no alternative, but of course the problem is that was never explored. The fact that the mother only found out the moment she had given birth, it’s terrible.
‘Of course the baby’s life was saved, but what about the mother? Suicide is one of the major causes of death associated with child birth. Social services taking babies is actually killing mothers.
‘It is scandalous in this country that there aren’t more mother and baby psychiatric units. She would have got appropriate care and the baby could have been kept safe.
‘I am sure the judge was not told about that option. I gather with her problems she would have lost the baby anyway, but it would not have been in such dramatic circumstances.
‘It is an absolute scandal. We have had a number of ghastly cases recently, but this is the first one I have heard where a gagging order has been applied pre-birth.’
The court order was granted in April and the child taken in May, but the gagging order has only this week been lifted, allowing the secret order to be reported.
 

North Somerset Council refused to comment on the case but said such decisions were 'rarely straighforward'

Granting the order, High Court Judge Michael Joseph Keehan admitted it was ‘draconian’ and ‘at the extremity of what is permissible under the European Convention’.
He said: ‘I recognise the order sought by the local authority is extremely unusual. I am in no doubt whatsoever that the order sought by the local authority was a proportionate response to the identified risks and was essential to secure the child’s safety.
‘In those circumstances I am satisfied that if the mother were to learn of the plan to remove her child at birth there is a very real risk she would harm herself and a very, very real risk she would cause physical harm to her baby.’
The Daily Mail has campaigned against secret courts

A spokesman for North Somerset Council refused to comment on the individual case, but said: ‘Cases such as this are rarely straightforward, and the decision on whether it is best for a child to remain with its birth parent or be taken into care is never taken without extensive consideration.

‘The care of a child only transfers to the council when all options have been considered and with the court’s agreement.’The Daily Mail has campaigned against secret courts and exposed a series of major scandals over the past year resulting from justice being conducted behind closed doors.Earlier this week it emerged two men, known only as AB and CD, are due to enter a dock at the Old Bailey on June 16 accused of a terror plot.

But the case will be held in secret and the public will not even know the men’s names for unknown ‘national security’ reasons.

And last year it was revealed that social services in Essex forcibly delivered a baby by caesarean section because of fears over her mother’s mental health, following a court ruling that was kept secret for months.


The Mail's campaign

 

source:   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2650787/Social-workers-snatched-mothers-baby-minutes-birth-no-warning-secret-court-ruling.html#ixzz33uFTeYNs
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

UPDATED 6 JUNE 14: SECRET CRIMINAL COURT TRIALS NOW IN THE UK?? APPEAL JUDGES TO DECIDE

 photo secrettrial6june14_zpsf3718f2b.jpg

above: “Daily Mail” 6 June 2014

5 June 2014 – BBC TV News

Shown for educational purposes only


Copyright held by  BBC TV

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

Feb. 2013: Here is a List of 100 Paedophile Councillors or UK Political Party Affiliated Members ~ They are Amongst the People Who Supposedly Run Our Country

From – Cuthulan’s Blog -

As a follow up to my previous post about child molesters in the Government and the blackmail potential

http://cuthulan.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/uk-government-blackmailed-into-war-blair-covers-mps-paedophile-ring-and-the-dunblane-massacre/

Here is a FOI (Freedom Of Information) request about alleged peadophiles past and present with connections to the Halls of power today.

A Freedom of Information request to Home Office by Derek Canning LLB [HONS] and Francis.P.

A LIST OF CHILD SEX OFFENDERS INSIDE THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

Tory Party General election candidate, Michael Powell – Convicted and jailed for 3 years for downloading hardcore child porn.

Tory Party Liaison Manager on the London Assembly, Douglas Campbell, who’s job includes running the Tory GLA website. Arrested for allegedly downloading child porn. He is currently suspended while the Police investigation continues.

Labour Councillor (North Lincolnshire) David Spooner – Convicted and jailed for 1 year for masturbating in front of 2 young boys.

Tory Party Councillor (Folkestone – in Leader, Michael Howard’s constituency), Robert Richdale – 41 year history of crime, involving 30 convictions and 5 prison sentences. Richdales enormous criminal record, which covers 10 pages of A4 paper, includes convictions for assault, theft, causing death by dangerous driving, forgery, drugs offences, possession of an offensive weapon, and sex attacks against underage schoolgirls. The Tory Party election campaign literature described Richdale as “a family man” who had a “compassionate personality”

Tory Party Councillor (Wickbar/Bristol) Roger Talboys – Convicted and jailed for 6 years for multiple sex attacks on children.

Tory Party Councillor ( Stratford-upon-Avon ) Christopher Pilkington – Convicted of downloading hardcore child porn on his PC.

Labour Councillor (Newton Aycliffe) Martin Locklyn – Convicted and jailed for 15 years for sexually abusing 3 14-year-old boys.

Prominent Labour Party activist Mark Tann (who has met Tony & Cherie at Party functions) recently got a 15-year sentence for raping a 4-year old girl on 2 separate occasions.

.Tory Party MP (Billericay) Harvey Proctor – Stood trial for sex offences of a sado-masochistic nature against teenage boys.

Tory Party Mayor ( North Tyneside ), Chris Morgan – Forced to resign after being arrested twice in 2 weeks, for indecent assault on a 15-year old girl, and for suspicion of downloading child porn.

Labour Party activist and serial child-molester Mark Trotter, who died from AIDS before he could be convicted.

Labour Councillor (Manchester), George Harding – Charged with indecent assault on a girl of 12.

Tory Party councillor ( Coventry ), Peter Stidworthy – Charged with indecent assault of a 15-year old boy.

Tory Party Councillor (Folkestone – in Leader, Michael Howard’s constituency), Robert Richdale – 41 year history of crime,

Labour Mayor (Westhoughton/Lancashire) Nicholas Green – Convicted and jailed for 10 years for 3 rapes and 13 counts of indecent assault.

Labour Councillor (Manchester), George Harding – Charged with indecent assault on a girl of 12.

William Straw – Son of Labour Foreign Secretary, and former Home Secretary – Jack Straw, was cautioned by Police for drug dealing, amid a frantic Government attempt to cover up the matter and gag the media as to his identity. Jack Straw also has a brother who was convicted of a sex attack on a schoolgirl.

Homosexual mass murderer; Dennis Nielsen, who strangled and dismembered 16 young men in the 1980`s, was also a highly active member of Labour fringe groups such as the Anti-Nazi League, and the SWP. That’s when he wasn’t busy boiling peoples heads in a pot, or masturbating over the corpses of his victims.

Lib-Dem Council candidate (Tower Hamlets), Justin Sillman – Convicted and jailed for 2 years for sexual abuse of young boys.

Lib-Dem Councillor and Mayoral Candidate ( Sheffield ), Francis Butler- Prosecuted for indecent assault of a young boy.

Lib-Dem Councillor ( Stockport ) Neil Derbyshire – Sexually assaulted a 16-year old boy in a public toilet. He was caught with a plastic bag containing lubricant, plastic surgical gloves, a condom, and underpants.

Lib-Dem Councillor ( Preston ), Bill Chadwick – Charged with: Making an indecent photograph of a child, Incitement to rape, Incitement to murder, Incitement to kidnap, and Incitement to torture. Chadwick’s gay lover – Alan Valentine, is also a Lib-Dem councillor.

High Level Masons such as Chief Superintendent Gordon Angelsea and at least 12 of his colleagues were “let off the hook” for sexual abuse crimes on children (some of who are now dead) in the North Wales Paedophile Ring Cover-Up.

High Level Government Masons such as Lord McAlpine, ex aid to Margaret Thatcher, was accused by numerous children of sexual crimes in the North Wales Child Abuse Cover-Ups. He escaped public exposure by a specifically appointed Masonic Paedophile Judge,Lord Cullen who was appointed to the investigation and “100 year cover up” of Thomas Hamilton’s Mass Murder spree – were BOTH members of the same “boy’s club”.

Thomas Hamilton was the name of the Mass Murderer responsible for the Dunblane Massacre. He was a Freemason.Thomas Hamilton was granted a gun licence by his Masonic “brother” Inspector McMurdo, to a amass his arsenal of weapons, even although he was well known to be of “odd character” with paedophilic tendencies. The two Liaison Officers assigned to the murder investigation of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were known to the British Police hierarchy as Paedophiles at least 3 months prior to the investigation, due to Operation Ore.

According to media reports, the names of 2 former Labour Cabinet Ministers said to be `Household names` appear on the `Operation Ore ` list of subscribers to hard-core child pornography. The same FBI investigation, which led to the arrest of rock star Pete Townshend. So who are they Mr Gordon Brown?

BUT I think we can work that one out for ourselves……see post

http://cuthulan.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/uk-government-blackmailed-into-war-blair-covers-mps-paedophile-ring-and-the-dunblane-massacre/

This we are afraid is only the tip of the iceberg. This will be continued…

Waiting for an internal review by Home Office of their handling of this request

www.tpuc.org

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_safety_of_your_children_2

OUR GOVERNMENT HAS PUT 2 GOVERNMENT PAEDOPHILE RINGS UNDER A D-NOTICE FOR 100 YEARS

THE DUNBLANE PAEDOPHILE RING INCLUDING LABOUR LORD GEORGE ROBERTSON

AND

THE NORTH WALES PAEDOPHILE RING INCLUDING TORY LORD MACALPINE …EX THATCHER AID

SO do NOT expect a Tory Government to release the information ,OR even to stop MOLESTING YOUR CHILDREN!!!

PLEASE PEOPLE WE must stop these monsters having the power of LIFE AND DEATH over us and our kids!

Its the 21st Century AD and we can NOW defy the “Laws of gods” ,that do NOT appeal ,BUT we cannot defy the laws of  MEN?

If you can believe in MORALITY without god and religion, why NOT society without government ?

FYI

Switzerland has survived with less crime and higher living standards and has completely missed the destruction of 2 World Wars and completely AVOIDED the current illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the terrorist bombings that would inevitabley follow (thanks to our government sponcered terrorists)  and they managed to do all this WITHOUT A “DEMOCRATIC” GOVERNMENT

officially the Swiss Confederation (Confoederatio Helvetica in Latin, hence its ISO country codes CH and CHE), is a federal republic consisting of 26 cantons. its Federal state, with parliamentary system and direct democracy .Direct democracy, classically termed pure democracy,[1] comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein sovereignty is lodged in the assembly of all citizens who choose to participate. Depending on the particular system, this assembly might pass executive motions, make laws, elect or dismiss officials, and conduct trials. Direct democracy stands in contrast to representative democracy, (UK/USA)where sovereignty is exercised by a subset of the people, usually on the basis of election)  FYI “Direct democracy” is a form of ANARCHISM!

THE SWISS HAVE NO STANDING ARMY!!!!!! The Swiss Confederation has a long history of neutrality—it has not been in a state of war internationally since 1815.The Swiss Armed Forces, including the Land Forces and the Air Force, are composed of conscripts: professional soldiers constitute only about 5 percent of the military personnel.The structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their own personal equipment, including all personal weapons, at home.

THERE IS NOT AN ARMY ON EARTH THAT COULD TAKE SWITZERLAND!!!

IT IS TIME TO FOLLOW THE SWISS EXAMPLE , DISBAND THE PARLIMENTRY DICTATORSHIP (THE UK AND USA HAVE AN ELECTED DICTATORSHIP …….OR PARLIMENTRY DEMOCRACY AS POLITIONS CALL IT)

This way we can expose paedophiles in government instead of covering for them for a 100 years!!!

AND ITS TIME TO DISBAND OUR STANDING ARMIES (WHICH HAVE DONE NOTHING BUT INVADE OTHER PEOPLES COUNTRIES!!!!!!)

This would stop ” blackmailed ” MP’s using the army to invade other countries that are no threat to us and inflicting untold damage and suffering on the world.

LIBERTARIAN SOCIALISM IS THE ANSWER

http://cuthulan.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/libertarian-vs-authoritarian-todays-real-politic/

For those who think we NEED governments please offer YOUR KIDS ,for sex and slaughter ,to these monsters!!!!!!

Hopefully it will stop them molesting mine!!

http://www.cuthulan.wordpress.com/2013/02/20/here-is-a-list-of-100-paedophile-councillors-or-uk-political-party-affiliated-members-they-are-among-the-people-who-help-run-our-country/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

WHO IS JUDGING THE JUDGES? THE PORTON DOWN COVERUP

 photo GUARD_zps0fea3210.jpg

We know a lot more about judicial complaints than we used to but it remains the case that judges themselves judge judges  


In 2009, the lord chancellor and the lord chief justice agreed to name judges who were disciplined for misconduct, adding brief details of the offence and sanction. Photograph: Sang Tan/AP

Two senior judges who specialise in criminal law have agreed not to hear any criminal cases for the time being. Another judge, of some seniority, has resigned after a finding of serious misconduct. Who, then, is judging the judges?

The answer is, ultimately, the judges themselves – though the lord chancellor still has a formal role. Chris Grayling and the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, are supported by a group of officials known as the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO). Like the Office for Judicial Complaints, which it replaced last October, the JCIO was created under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. Before that, complaints about judges were a matter for the lord chancellor alone.

We know a lot more about judicial complaints than we used to. In 2009, the lord chancellor and the lord chief justice agreed to name judges who were disciplined for misconduct, adding brief details of the offence and sanction. This roll of dishonour is freely available online. Among those reprimanded (and, where appropriate, sacked) have been high court judges, coroners, part-time judges, tribunal members and magistrates. There was even an appeal judge reprimanded over a driving ban but his name seems to have slipped off the bottom of the 2012 list.
As Shetreet and Turenne note in the long-awaited second edition of Judges on Trial, “details of the allegations [against judges] are often rather elliptic”. That was certainly true of the announcement on 14 March about Steven Whitaker, who was senior master of the high court (pdf), a type of junior judge. He also held the post of Queen’s remembrancer, created 860 years ago and the oldest judicial position continuously held by a judge. A judicial investigation found that Whitaker “made misleading entries in his Outlook diary with the intent to mislead anyone who might scrutinise the record”. The lord chancellor and a senior judge “had concluded that this behaviour amounted to serious misconduct and would have removed the senior master from office had he not voluntarily resigned”.
Despite announcements that sometimes conceal more than they reveal, the JCIO’s website tells us most of the things we might want to know about the office – except the names of the officials who run it. A particularly useful innovation is the “news” section, from which we learn that the JCIO has recently started an investigation into complaints about Lord Justice Fulford. These presumably relate to the allegations in the Mail on Sunday two weeks ago and reported here; my own analysis is at the foot of that page.
In response to the allegations, the appeal judge said he was sorry that a gay rights committee, which he had supported as a barrister, allowed members of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) to attend the committee’s meetings.
Fulford had also been concerned at the use by prosecutors of the judge-made, catch-all offence of conspiracy to corrupt public morals. The director of public prosecutions had brought that charge against Tom O’Carroll and two other PIE members in 1981 after they sent a booklet to MPs advocating acceptance of adult love for children. O’Carroll was jailed for two years.
The Mail on Sunday returned to the story a week ago, pointing out that critics of the catch-all offence at the time also included Peter Thornton – as Wikipedia had previously noted.
Thornton, then a barrister, now a circuit judge and chief coroner of England and Wales, was also criticised for having represented a PIE member in court.
So it should have come as no surprise to read on the JCIO website that Thornton, like Fulford, is the subject of an investigation. In his case, though, it opened before any complaints were received. Regulations made under the Constitutional Reform Act (pdf) and rules made under those regulations (pdf) explain how this could happen.

All complaints received by the JCIO are sifted by caseworkers. In clear-cut cases of misconduct, the JCIO may advise the lord chancellor and the lord chief justice to sack the judge concerned.

Alternatively, the JCIO may refer the complaint to a nominated judge of at least the same rank as the judge under investigation. The nominated judge will advise the lord chancellor and lord chief justice whether there has been misconduct and, if so, what sanction is appropriate. Under rule 97, the nominated judge may refer a case without a complaint. This is what happened in Thornton’s case. It was an attempt to speed up the proceedings.

If the nominated judge thinks a complaint is sufficiently serious or complicated, he or she may refer the case to an investigating judge, who must be senior in rank to the judge being investigated.

Needless to say, the judge under investigation must be given a chance to respond. If that judge is at risk of removal or suspension, he or she can demand to appear before a disciplinary panel. So all this can take a very long time.

From what I have read about the allegations against Fulford and Thornton, I would expect the nominated judge to decide reasonably swiftly that no misconduct has taken place. The allegations against them relate to their time as barristers, not judges. It is not misconduct for a barrister to support law reform. It is not misconduct for a barrister to represent unpopular offenders. Barristers do not necessarily share the views of their clients.

What I cannot understand, though, is why Fulford and Thornton have been asked not to hear any new criminal cases pending the outcome of the JCIO’s investigation. Judges do not sit while they themselves are facing criminal charges, as we have seen. But a complaint of misconduct, especially one related to a period before the judge was appointed, should not be sufficient to trigger even an informal or partial suspension.

If it is, then why allow Fulford to continue hearing civil appeals and Thornton to continue conducting inquests? Do those matters not demand as much judicial integrity as criminal appeals and trials?

Voluntary semi-suspension is illogical as well as unnecessary. Unless the nominated judge can resolve these matters without delay, the lord chief justice should let Fulford and Thornton resume their full duties while investigations continue.
############################################

Comments:

Gordon Bell commented on Who is judging the judges?
25 Mar 2014 4:21pm

The corrupt protecting the corrupt!

I refer to the Porton Down cover-up that involved the killing of 39 Porton Down veterans who died as a result of being injected with a bacteria derived from salmonella – abortus equi – in an altered state. (source FOI) Upper Tribunal Judge Edward Jacobs (unlike Judge Brian Kennedy QC) who ordered details of the deaths to be made public) did purposely support the MoD by allowing them to keep secret ALL facts related to the killings. Judge Edward Jacobs also ignored a 3.72 million pounds fraudulent payment (stolen from public funds) awarded to Martyn Day Senior Partner with the London law firm Leigh Day & Co. It was Martyn Day who supposedly represented 39 family members of deceased veterans. In effect Jacobs by his very silence and by allowing crimes of this nature to be kept under wraps did himself become party to the crime. Full details on the comment can be had from <gordon_bell9@hotmail.com>

##############################################

HybridMoments
25 March 2014 11:30am
What the UK judiciary gets away with is utterly horrifying. That they palm it off as ‘isolated cases’ is bad enough, but hiding behind the pretence that people ‘don’t know the facts’ is even worse.
The move to a system of locally elected (ie, accountable) judges is long overdue.
DieHerzogin HybridMoments
25 March 2014 6:50pm
Elected? Do you really want Judge Morphonius on the bench?
Violator HybridMoments
25 March 2014 9:21pm
The move to a system of locally elected (ie, accountable) judges is long overdue.
Good grief!
What an appalling idea.
Ministryoftruth HybridMoments
25 March 2014 11:51pm
Americans have elected judges.
This has not stopped Judicial malfeasance there, it can actually create new forms of it.
newthought HybridMoments
25 March 2014 11:56pm
The judiciary regularly get away with complete and utter cheap lies in their judgments. They are unaccountable as it only takes two more judges to refuse permission to challenge the lies and that’s the end of the matter. In one of my cases I asked to audio-record (my own case). Both the judge and government barrister insisted I would not be alllowed to record. The reason for this refusal of recording is so that there is no record of the filthy lies judges deploy in the smaller civil court rooms where there are no reporters. One important subset of lies is about the limitation act. Supposedly fact means possibility, knowledge means suspicion, and was means might be – well that’s what high court judges say these words mean, and the fact that loads of dictionaries say otherwise is of no power against them.
We need every litigant to have the right to record their own cases.
Cynical007 HybridMoments
26 March 2014 8:31pm

The move to a system of locally elected (ie, accountable) judges is long overdue.
A tribunal consisting of elected politicians is not a real court
26 March 2014 8:31pm
sonofblake
25 March 2014 11:57am
One of the key elements of the English judiciary is that it is NOT elected. The executive and legislature are the elected bits and thus the judiciary must defer to them in terms of law-making and keep to their own province of interpreting the law – true it can be a fuzzy line at times but it is a hugely important part of the functioning of the rule of law. Elected judges would be a disaster for many reasons.
JohntheLith
25 March 2014 12:01pm
Who is judging the judges?
We know a lot more about judicial complaints than we used to but it remains the case that judges themselves judge judges
I find it amusing that a journalist in a National Newspaper is writing an article about a group of self interested people being able to judge themselves.
Who handles complaints about newspapers? I’ll give you a clue with a quote fro the Press Complaints Commission’s website:

The Press Complaints Commission is currently in a phase of transition; and it will soon be replaced by a new structure of independent self-regulation for the newspaper and magazine industries.
Self-regulation. Sounds a bit like what the judges do.
I smell hypocrisy.

Hywelliau JohntheLith
25 March 2014 3:30pm
Yes but in the midst of the usual press anarchy, a few wise words from Joshua are surely not out of order?
The predilection of cheap jack town magistrates describing themselves as Judges, takes some beating. The powers of local authorities to press
their own non-criminal “charges” can be rather unpleasant, and quite happy to present fictitious evidence in abundance, backed up by such “judges”.
JohntheLith Hywelliau
25 March 2014 9:20pm
ok, but… The Press “often” have more influence on Society than the Judiciary. Ergo, who needs to watched more?
Cynical007 JohntheLith
26 March 2014 8:32pm
Journalists are not state officials, and do not have the power to imprison citizens. There is no right to be a judge (so state regulation of judges is legitimate) whereas there is a right to freedom of speech (so state regulation of journalism is not legitimate).
timmyb
25 March 2014 12:11pm
Given the complexities of UK common law, regardless of the rights and wrongs, I cannot foresee anyone else being able to scrutinise them properly.
anusplatt
25 March 2014 12:41pm
This age old practice of letting “professionals” regulate themselves is thankfully in decline but not quickly enough. They didn’t regulate themselves, they protected each other like brothers in crime. Lawyers, police, bankers, religious institutions, doctors banded together to give themselves maximum benefit. And the pompous indignation when Joe Public dared to question them. I have always felt that these groups pulled the wool over our eyes. I laugh at the term “professional” often they are far from it.
photonal
25 March 2014 1:11pm
The whole judicial system needs an overall.
Justice and access to it should be a cornerstone of our society – except that in its current form, it is reduced to a cleverly disguised commodity – whereby the ‘truth’ / ‘justice’ can be purchased by paying for expensive lawyers.
PatrickLogicman photonal
25 March 2014 1:42pm
“The whole judicial system needs an overall.”
Each? But then you couldn’t tell a judge from a janitor. They tried that in China. It didn’t work. Call me old-fashioned, but I rather like the wigs and gowns.
;-)
Photonal PatrickLogicman
26 March 2014 7:16am
Bugger! lol
I did mean of course i meant Overhaul!!! :)
* I wish there was an edit button *
worksforcommunityorg
25 March 2014 1:23pm
I have for many decades thought that most judges are daft old fools, out of touch with reality. My opinion has been confirmed by many examples.
I’m not up enough with the law to be able to suggest a better alternative, those who know what they are talking about should do that. However, I was pleased to see the web site linked to in the article, which seems to be a small step in the right direction.
theacademic
25 March 2014 1:38pm
The comments in this section so far could hardly be more wrong. Perhaps self-regulation does not work for most professions, but in the case of judges it seems to “over-work” and the desire to ensure that judges are seen as people of integrity seems to take over at times. On the basis of JR’s article, there seems very clearly to be no substance in the allegations against either Fulford or Thornton. When normal people face such baseless allegations, the case is struck out, or a responsible prosecutor stops it. So the impression here is that the regulator is afraid to be thought to sweeping things under the carpet and so the process continues – and absurdity is piled onto absurdity when the judges are even suspended from work in the meantime.
Turenne and Shetreet’s book, referred to in the text, notes instances when judges not only face complaints but actually receive criticism for doing things which others can do and might even be expected to do. For example, it seems that judges should plead guilty to minor traffic offences if they are guilty, and should not seek technical ways that might exist to defeat the charges (ie ways that are not based on the merits of the case). This may be a good idea, of course, but it further ridicules any notion that the regulator is soft.
Robthablob theacademic
25 March 2014 3:44pm
“The comments in this section so far could hardly be more wrong”
I don’t know, I though Patrick Logicman was spot on with his “But then you couldn’t tell them from janitors” remark above.
Theacademic Robthablob
25 March 2014 3:56pm
yes, though that was a later comment.
Vizier theacademic
25 March 2014 5:53pm
“When normal people face such baseless allegations, the case is struck out, or a responsible prosecutor stops it”
Or rather the ordinary person is found guilty and spends years in prison.
PatrickLogicman
25 March 2014 2:21pm
It is a tradition in this country that, freedom of speech notwithstanding, judges do not respond to attacks on them in the media. This means that we often hear the attack, but not the defence. Let me illustrate this with an example from history which shows that judges can be right, even when non-lawyers think they are obviously wrong.
If the media and some members of Parliament had got their own way, Mr. Justice Grantham would have been sacked after instructing a jury in strong terms that a prison warder charged with manslaughter, against whom the evidence of guilt was overwhelming, was nevertheless not guilty. It transpired about two years later that the single prosecution witness had lied: the “victim” was dead before the warder entered the room. I understand that the warder was named Mitchell and, despite being acquitted, did not get his job back.
Had Mr. Justice Grantham been sacked he could not have investigated the Adolph Beck case, the true facts might never have come out and we might still not have a criminal appeals process.
“The credit for resolving this miscarriage of justice lay firstly with the 1904 trial judge, Mr Justice Grantham, who had lingering doubts about Beck’s guilt and had delayed concluding the case despite apparently strong prosecution evidence and procedures. It was in this period of delay, before being sentenced, that the crucial arrest of the real offender took place.”
Source – historybytheyard.co.uk
profester
25 March 2014 2:45pm
My experience of the judiciary convinces me that it functions principally to protect the establishment. This is perhaps seen most blatantly in the employment tribunal, where judges make virtually unchallengeable findings of “fact” that contradict incontrovertible evidence that they simply ignore in order to exculpate defendants in race and religous discrimination cases. Sometimes they collude with defendants to pervert the course of justice by accepting fabricated documents as genuine, despite the existence of the genuine documents showing their inauthenticity (which they do not mention as they are irreconcilable with the documents that they wish to represent as genuine). Sometimes, they make important findings based on key documents that they have never seen, which the claimant dispute ever existed and the defendants claim they have lost. At other times, the judges just simply lie about the evidence if that is required to discredit the complainant. Such phenomena are well-documented (e.g., http://www.irr.org.uk/news/culture-of-disbelief-why-race-discrimination-claims-fail-in-the-employment-tribunal/). However, maybe because sex, drugs and death are not involved – and it only affects Blacks, after all – no-one seems at all interested, no programmes get made about this or articles get written in the mainstream media even when prominent journalists have the evidence of its occurrence.
ID7776906 profester
25 March 2014 3:28pm
If you review most Laws in Britain,USA Canada,etc they were enacted worded and favored the very rich and property owners when passed.
Judge`s hands are really tied to the laws of the land and it is the rich bias
and regulations that keep the poor in their place that Judges are restricted by when looking to dispense justice [as far as the law allows].
Same applies to the Police they didn`t make the laws.The Justice system and the Police have been deliberately kept apart from society so they identify more with conservatism and the status quo and even identify with it as elitists.
newthought profester
26 March 2014 12:03am
Judicial lies are far from confined to racism-motivated instances. The whole systsm of “justice” is the biggest scam on the planet. That’s why they don’t allow recording of your own hearing.
Ozymandius
25 March 2014 2:56pm
Suspending a judge from duty pending investigation is rather like a judge confining a separated father to a supervised contact centre while his ex’s phony allegations are looked into. All rather unnecessary but what do you do?
theacademic Ozymandius
25 March 2014 3:27pm
The difference is that the father needs to be suspended in case the allegations prove to be true, because something important is alleged. Here the allegations against the judges seem to be about nothing – nothing obviously wrong has happened even if the facts are true.
Ozymandius theacademic
26 March 2014 1:08pm
I wouldn’t say that. Inference could be drawn that their past interventions were derived from sinister, personal interest. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility, particularly when you consider the likes of what Harriet Harman and other were up to at the time in supporting the campaign to lower the age of consent. There could have been quite a lot of people involved all round including these individuals. There must be some pervert judges around.
DigitalAsian
25 March 2014 3:19pm

In my experience of the judiciary in criminal trials is that they do have a tendency to protect the Police and even on the odd occasion pervert the course of justice to protect them. You cannot assume that any judge will be impartial in any case or inquiry especially if police corruption is being investigated or has been alleged. In my view you trust a judge to be independent and impartial at your own risk.
ripteam
25 March 2014 4:16pm
Was the judge who handed down six months to a student for stealing a water bottle ever investigated for serious misconduct?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/poll/2011/aug/12/riots-water-theft-punishment

•Report
geoffk
25 March 2014 4:20pm
The grand lodge?
##############################################
Gordon Bell
25 March 2014 4:21pm
The corrupt protecting the corrupt!
I refer to the Porton Down cover-up that involved the killing of 39 Porton Down veterans who died as a result of being injected with a bacteria derived from salmonella – abortus equi – in an altered state. (source FOI) Upper Tribunal Judge Edward Jacobs (unlike Judge Brian Kennedy QC) who ordered details of the deaths to be made public) did purposely support the MoD by allowing them to keep secret ALL facts related to the killings. Judge Edward Jacobs also ignored a 3.72 million pounds fraudulent payment (stolen from public funds) awarded to Martyn Day Senior Partner with the London law firm Leigh Day & Co. It was Martyn Day who supposedly represented 39 family members of deceased veterans. In effect Jacobs by his very silence and by allowing crimes of this nature to be kept under wraps did himself become party to the crime.

Gordon Bell
25 March 2014 4:26pm
Full details on the above comment can be had from
###############################################
gogogob
25 March 2014 4:54pm
It is reassuring to learn that judges get fair hearing.
At least somebody does!
JaniceP
25 March 2014 5:15pm
The internet is awash with people who have been unfairly treated by the Justice system. Court observers have commented on the familiarity between Judges and business men in employment tribunal cases, and the employee losing, and also losing an appeal. Has anybody ever tried to get an employment judge’s notes from the case? Impossible. Ultimately when the judge says the notes are not to be released under any circumstances (why not if they have nothing to hide) and the Trbunal President when asked under a data protection request, tells you that the data controller, is, yes the original judge who won’t release them under any circumstances, is it any wonder that people have no faith in the British Justice system, or should we rename it Old Boys Network system?

Vizier
25 March 2014 5:56pm
I have to say I think that most magistrates are firmly in the pockets of the police. So really most of them are corrupt.
Whitecross Vizier
25 March 2014 6:51pm
I just knew the coppers had those big pockets for some thing!
whitecross
25 March 2014 6:44pm
Corruption is the word and has been for some time.
•Report
arvindkc77
25 March 2014 8:45pm
My recent experience of JCIO is not entirely sanguine. I represented myself in a child custody case in Birmingham. The Cafcass favoured my child to stay with me. The Circuit Judge presiding over the case, lied in his judgement three times in order to favour my ex. When I took the matter to the appeal in High Court, the Law Lord presiding practically said that because the Circuit Judge is experienced, he is entitled to lie. I was quite gobsmacked. JCIO were completely unmoved by my protestations. It is apparent that truth is diminished if you are a layman fighting the excesses of establishment.
•Report
Ursultana
25 March 2014 10:34pm
And perhaps that needs review.After all, they are all members of same brotherhood or society, and all operate from under Londons Bar .So is no independence at all.
•Report
pictish22
26 March 2014 1:59am
You also need to remember that judges work within a system which is controlled by politics, press start complaining about high number of car thefts, car thieves suddenly start getting jailed while house breakers do not.
There are also other parts of the system for instance social work reports, often made about people who know the systems inside out, know exactly what to say and when to say it. Lawyers who are simply there to lie, on both sides of the case with full knowledge they are doing it. Police who are more concerned about getting results than actually justice. And finally the judges themselves who all appear to have totally different interpretations of the law, I have seen grown men break down when they find out they are getting 1 judge over another and that was just the lawyers.

profester
26 March 2014 10:29am

Judges are lawyers: a rapacious breed drawn predominantly from and representing the “highest” stratum of society. They are expert at presenting one-sided arguments, whatever the facts and evidence. They provide “blue chip justice” favouring that social segment that can afford to hire lawyers and so keep the legal sector in work. They know how to wear down complainants (often of limited means) with unjustified decisions that have to be appealed at every stage of proceedings. They are assisted by absurb laws which deem them virtually infallible in jurisdictions such as the Employment Tribunal, where it is, in practice, not an “error of law” to find something impossible to be true or to make a finding contrary to the weight of evidence, or without evidential basis (and invariably favouring the employer). Even when an indefatigable complainant succeeds in an appeal against a rotten judgement, they often find their case “remitted” for a rehearing before the same biased tribunal or another made up of the friends and colleagues of the first, and likewise of the employer. Many contributors here, and all employment lawyers, know this to be true, yet this unjust system persists. What criticisms of it there are focus on ultimately minor issues such as whether one should have to pay fees to lodge complaints, rather than the more important issue of its institutional racialism and the virtual impossibility of Black people being successful in complaints against members of the establishment within it.

meewaan
26 March 2014 2:04pm
I had a judge in Ipswich County court asked me degrading questions, when i complained to the JCIO they get the tape to listen to it and the case worker wrote to me, stating she “did not hear” those remarks from the tape recording. She did not state “the Judge did not remarks”. This is another trick for the JCIO fobbing off the complainants, they know very well that if you want to prove it, you need to obtain a copy transcript by an approved official firms, it could easily cost you hundred of pounds. Well, before you decide if you want to spend hundreds of pounds to obtain a copy, you think to yourself if the staff in JCIO has probably deleted those remarks or even the transcript proved the judge made those remarks, giving JCIO’s initial response, namely, “i did not hear those remarks”, you realise that JCIO is here to serve as the first barrier for you to jump.e

PatrickLogicman meewaan
26 March 2014 5:58pm

“i did not hear those remarks”
And in like circumstances the corrupt police officer, says:
“He was shouting your Honour, but it was all incoherent.”
This excuses the officer for not taking the notes required by PACE codes of practice at the same as it makes the defendant appear to have been in some way out of control, thus prejudicing the jury against him or her.•Report
Janice
26 March 2014 3:29pm
Hi profester, well said, however take it from me you don’t have to be Black to be unsuccessful in complaining against the “establishment”. I have heard of people being told how dare they bring an employment complaint against this “reputable company” so we all know where that one was going! The Judge ultimately has the upper hand and like you correctly point out all the errors are impossible to refute. My husband has just had an employers costs awarded against him for £5000, for daring to bring a claim against a massive company in Cambridge, with a £billion turnover (where he worked very successfully for over 10 years until a new regime decided to Fire Fast and Hire Slow), and more money than the family owned business could ever spend in their lifetime. Costs awards are supposed to be the exception rather than the rule, only affecting 1% of truly hopeless cases and the average award is £1300. It has gone on for 4 years.We have spent our life savings, borrowed money, my husband is in a lesser paid job now, with fewer benefits, we help care for my mother in a wheelchair aged 85 after a massive stroke, have a severely autistic son requiring 24/7 care and I am recovering from breast cancer-who said there is no compassion in the world? One of the company witnesses lied and was proven to be lying under oath, and yet the panel deemed him to be “an honest historian and reliable witness” knowing full well this type of comment cannot be challenged at an appeal, but the effect was the “Breach” was able to be downgraded from Bad Faith, meaning we would have won, to just Bad Practice and a slap on the wrist for the employer plus costs! Do we think there are enough of us, that is 100,000 for a campaign on Change.org? Have these people no shame? I don’t know how they sleep at night!

Aquinasotic
30 March 2014 9:27am

t present there is no way of disciplining a retired judge who trades on his former title of “Judge” and his rank of QC to give advice to lay people (without any up-to-date knowledge of law or professional indemnity insurance) and then speak on their behalf as a McKenzie Friend in Court.
I know of a case where this actually happened – a retired Chancery Circuit Judge intervened in a case involving a religious charity when he has no known connection to the faith in question. His intervention was distinctly unhelpful for the parties and impeded the proper administration of justice. But nothing could be done about his unprofessional and meddling behaviour.
•Report
• Share this comment on Twitter
• Share this comment on Facebook

JaniceP

31 March 2014 5:47pm
Maybe we could take a leaf out of the Metroplitan Police new initiative announced today:
Next month the Met will be piloting 500 body-worn cameras with police officers on the beat in nine London boroughs.
If successful, it will be rolled out across Britain’s biggest police force .
In Rialto, Southern California where they have carried out a pioneering experiment with officers wearing the body cameras for over a year, the use of force there fell 60% and complaints against officers dropped by more than 80%.
Wearing body cameras and recording during Employment Law tribunals would most certainly cut the disgusting bias currently shown by Judges in favour of Employers, and the deliberate lying and covering up/changing of evidence so that the employers are able to inexplicably win the case.
Call me cynical but it is about time something was done!
Democracy? Discuss!

source: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/25/who-judges-the-judges

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

NORMAN SCARTH WRITES – 28 MAY 14

Norman Scarth writes:

Norman Scarth
to —
Living in the Manningham district of Bradford, I believed I was on good terms with the Muslims who make up 90% of the population there.
In 2010(?) there were protests in many cities about Israel attacks on Gaza. I attended the start of one such march. While there I offered a few leaflets of my own asking ‘When is there going to be a march protesting about the stoning to death of a 13 year old girl in Somalia?’
Aged 85 then, I was seated on a shopping trolley chair which I invariably take with me because I am unable to stand for long periods. Having taken one of my leaflets, a young Muslim ripped it up, then attacked me, robbed me of my few remaining leaflets, & threw me to the ground, resulting in a minor injury to my hand.
While on the ground, I called out for help to police, who were only 25 yards away. They turned their backs. After being helped to my feet by older Muslims, I went to the police, told them I had been attacked & robbed, & that I could point out my assailant. They said, “Report it to a Police Station”.
Once a month, a very pleasant young Muslim male used to deliver to me medication from the local chemist. On telling him of the attack he said, “That’s terrible!” but when I told him the reason for the attack, he said, with hate in his eyes, “SERVES YOU RIGHT!”
I also told moderate Muslim friends, who also said the attack was terrible. However, on telling them of the reason for the attack, they umm’d, ah’d & prevaricated, saying ‘It’s a very delicate subject’. NONE would condemn the practice: This is either because they agree with it, or are fearful of their own safety if they dare to condemn it.
Martin Luther King said, “I fear not the words of the violent, but I do fear the silence of the honest”. I paraphrase his words in saying, “I fear not the Muslim preachers of hate, but I DO fear the silence of the moderates”.
We already have a considerable number of ‘Honour'(???) Killings in Britain. It is my forecast that within 40/50 years we will also have stoning to death – BY LAW!
The attack by the young Muslim was minor in itself, but very significant as an indication for the future for Britain.
Norman Scarth (Veteran of the Arctic Convoys of WW2)
PS: For those who are not aware. I have suffered far, FAR worse from the Quislings who now control every aspect of life in Britain, the people who, for whatever reason, are encouraging the Islamification of the nation. The persecution by the Quislings has been so great that, at the age of 86, with every reason to be in fear for my life, I fled the land of my birth, to seek safety in the Republic of Ireland.
NS.

They cannot of been true Muslims – believers in God do not promote murder, or condone it.

The same as the police – the police you spoke to weren’t real police – just members of the public obtaining money [their astronimical​ wages] by deception – a crime under British law.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

FEE-CHARGING MCKENZIE FRIENDS – BEWARE!!!

Note: Be very careful when choosing a Mckenzie friend. I am a M F. and would never dream of charging money for anything connected to being a M.F. Beware of Associations – there are in existence organisations who will claim to offer help as M. F.’s but really all they do is gather information to use against the subject defendant[s], as has already been found out. Do not trust Associations who have no proper history of helping defendants – these are FAKE organisations and yes, they do exist in the UK!!!

Fee-charging McKenzie Friends

April 2014 Fee-charging McKenzie Friends I 2

CONTENTS

1 Executive summary 2

2 Introduction 8

3 An emerging market 11

4 Benefits and risks 17

5 Issues 27

6 Regulatory response 35

7 Recommendations 40

Annex 1 – Volunteer McKenzie Friends 41

Annex 2 – Consumer principles worksheet 43

1 Executive summary

An emerging market

The issue

1.1. For approaching 50 years, litigants in person have used McKenzie Friends to provide moral support, take notes, help with case papers, and quietly give advice on any aspect of the conduct of the case. Traditionally, this lay support has been provided on a voluntary basis by a family member or friend, although for some time there have been people who charge a fee for this service. However, there are reports of a rise in fee-charging McKenzie Friends aiming to meet the needs of litigants who are no longer eligible for legal aid funding but cannot afford legal representation.

1.2. Such McKenzie Friends divide opinion. One school of thought is that this lay assistance improves access to justice by providing valuable support for litigants in person who face challenges using a court system which is designed around the needs of lawyers. This help is also seen to benefit other litigants and the courts. However, another view worries that McKenzie Friends may provide poor advice that harms their client and third parties, offer little in the way of consumer protection, prey on the vulnerable and exploit litigants as parrots to promote personal causes.

1.3. Little is known about these McKenzie Friends and their services. The Panel saw there was a need to build a better evidence base on the current situation in order to develop policy that strikes

the right balance between access to justice and consumer protection. We did this by gathering information through a website trawl and interviews with McKenzie Friends, discussions with stakeholders and obtaining case studies to illustrate the benefits and risks to consumers in this market.

A typology of McKenzie Friends

1.4. We have classified McKenzie Friends into four types. This is important as we think the policy response to each should differ, in particular volunteer initiatives present a lower risk profile:

The family member or friend who gives one-off assistance

Volunteer McKenzie Friends attached to an institution/charity

Fee-charging McKenzie Friends offering the conventional limited service understood by this role

Fee-charging McKenzie Friends offering a wider range of services including general legal advice and speaking on behalf of clients in court

1.5. The focus of this report is on the last two categories, although we also draw parallels with voluntary schemes to inform our assessment of risk. These initiatives are variously run by charities, local government, advice agencies and law schools, many using pro bono support from lawyers.

SEE MORE:

http://www.legalservicesconsumerpanel.org.uk/publications/research_and_reports/documents/2014%2004%2017%20MKF_Final.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

GERMAN POLICE TO ARREST GRANDMA B?

*GERMAN POLICE TO PRESS CHARGES AGAINST GRANDMA B?”

From Peter Hofschroer 20 May 2014:

“We have just heard from our lawyers in Germany.
It seems the German police want to press criminal charges against both Grandma B and her carer. We do not yet have any firm information as to what for, but suspect it has to with the unlawful raid by German police on her refuge in Germany on 6th May 2014, in which they kidnapped her and handed her over to her abusers.
Please see:     https://www.grandmabarbara.wordpress.com/1-new-items/german-police-kidnap-grandma-b/
Both Grandma B and her carer were ill in bed when the German police broke into their flat without an arrest warrant, a search warrant or any lawful reason to be there.
Hearing the noise of a dozen or so police officers breaking down the front door and an inside door of their flat to the protests of their neighbours, Grandma B asked her carer what she should do. She was in bed ill, wearing only her nightdress.
Her carer suggested she should put on her underwear and out in her teeth so she should have at least some dignity before the police burst into her bedroom.
When they did, they attacked her carer, who, as a registered invalid, was incapable of offering any resistance.
The last Grandma B saw of her carer was when he was handcuffed on the floor in front of her and had pepper gas sprayed into his  eyes at point-blank range, before he was thrown down the stairs and carted away to a police cell. So much gas was released that Grandma B was choked.
She was then spirited off to England, when she is now being held prisoner.
So what charges are the German police going to press against Grandma B? She is 85 years old, an invalid and bed-ridden. As such she could not have raised a finger in self-defence. But knowing how strong her spirit is, she may well have spat in the faces of these German police perverts.
More news when we have it.” 

source: http://www.grandmabarbara.wordpress.com/1-new-items/german-police-to-press-charges-against-grandm-b/
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

ROBERT GREEN REFUSED BAIL

Received Sunday 18 May 2014:

“1. Yesterday the judge was willing to grant Robert bail but with conditions attached and Robert was willing to accept this but the procurator fiscal (prosecutor) immediately appealed against this bail and so Robert cannot be released until the outcome of the appeal hearing IF that outcome is in his favour.

2. The appeal against Robert’s bail is likely to be heard on Wednesday 21 May in Edinburgh.

But date not 100% confirmed yet, will let you know when this happens.

Robert is not permitted to attend it and Mr. Sweeney is finding another lawyer based there to represent Robert at the appeal against his bail as Sweeney is not able to get to the appeal.

VERY IMPORTANT TO PRAY THAT THE PROCURATOR FISCAL WILL COMPLETELY LOSE THIS APPEAL AGAINST ROBERT’S BAIL – IF THAT HAPPENS THEN ROBERT MUST BE RELEASED ON BAIL.

PRAY ALSO THAT THE RIGHT LAWYER WILL REPRESENT ROBERT AT THE APPEAL AND THAT GOD WILL GUIDE HIM/HER IN HIS/HER DECISIONS AND WORDS.

3. The court hearing on the challenge to Scotland’s jurisdiction to have Robert arrested and imprisoned has been fixed for 30 May.

It was not dealt with yesterday because Robert’s solicitor lacks the Legal Aid to get a sufficiently senior Barrister to help prepare the case.

Very important to pray for this challenge to be completely successful. Then the whole case against Robert has to be dropped.

But to have a much better chance of mounting this challenge successfully Legal Aid is urgently needed for both a senior and junior QC (Barristers) to be allocated to Robert and the Scottish Legal Aid Board has so far refused such Legal Aid for Robert.

So as I previously indicated E-Mails/letters need to be sent to that Legal Aid Board urging that Robert be granted Legal Aid to have both senior and junior counsel.

I will be in contact with you again soon on this matter with a suggested E-mail/Letter to send on this subject of Robert receiving sufficient Legal Aid.

As you can see from the above information the Scottish authorities are hellbent on keeping Robert in prison for as long as possible and also to deny him the Legal Aid he needs to mount a successful legal challenge against his arrest and detention.

Robert commented that the proceedings against him are Vexatious and Vindictive.

A great pity that the Scottish authorities can’t demonstrate such doggedness when it comes to pursuing suspected child sex abusers.

Will let you know when I have more info.

Many thanks for all your prayers and action in support of Robert Green and the Hollie Greig case.

Robert is really grateful to you for your action and prayers.

best wishes”

Hollie_Robert_Anne__Peter_RSJ_27_Oct_2011

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

CAUL GRANT AND OTHERS JAILED AND FINED 14 MAY 14

UPDATE: 15 MAY 2014: CAUL GRANT + others JAILED


received:


Caul Grant got 28 days for contempt of court. Caul Grant and Michael Cohen were also fined £700, other protester Fiona was fined £500, Jackie Fergus was acquitted as no evidence. 
The four were in court yesterday for alleged charges related to breaching a police order whilst peacefully protesting on the Zebra crossings outside Royal Courts of injustice last year September 2013. Caul Grant of ‘Campaign for Truth and Justice’ began peacefully protesting after the tragic avoidable death and cover up of his 15 month baby son Prince Grant in a NHS hospital..


His quest for justice led him to become the subject of two decades of persecution and torture involving false imprisonment on previous occasions instigated by the highly corrupt law firm Bindman and Partners who had been sued by Mr. Grant ( Bindmans and Partners are also the part of the very same criminal cartel involved in my case). I don’t have any details as to what happened in court yesterday as i sadly was not there. But am told that Caul has since been taken to Wandsworth Prison..

 Once again we see yet another example of the victims/ survivors (peaceful protesters against injustice) being arrested and penalised by either imprisonment or fine, while the actual real guilty parties( serious criminals) are wrongly protected by the state. 


Shall update once I know more”

 
From 24 September 2013:

Caul Grant and others ARRESTED!!
 


Caul Grant of ‘Campaign For Truth and Justice’ has been arrested today 23 Sept. together with three other people named, Fiona, Jacqui  and a scientist  African Professor.
 All were arrested today for peacefully protesting outside the notoriously corrupt ‘Royal Courts of Justice’. The four have been taken to Charing Cross Police station to be charged!!
 Please spread the word on all your social networks!!!
 Protests concluded today for the second instalment of the Weekly ‘Empowerment Mondays Protests’ , whereby outraged UK protesters who are also victims of heinous Crimes covered up by the UK courts, have joined forces and were repeatedly crossing the Zebra crossings outside the RCJ to highlight the disgust at the rampant corruption and criminality taking place by corrupt Lawyers and Judges inside British Courts.
 Now dubbed ‘Royal Courts Of Injustice’ due to the outrageous scale that members of the British public are being grossly abused, protesters have gathered outside the courts today and held up the traffic to raise awareness of the horrific scale of the court corruption and judicial abuse and cover ups.
 The inquest of Mark Duggan concludes this week, you may remember the case as he was the British Black young man whose killing triggered off the start of the London Riots in 2011.
 This inquest also taking place within the ‘Royal Court of Injustice’, and the general British public have absolutely no confidence that the truth will be told or that Justice will be done.
 UK courts and the entire Judiciary are being run likened to a mafia cartel with Judges blatantly lying on oath and concealing victims vital evidence to act in favour of wealthy criminal bosses, mobsters and those brazenly abusing public offices.
 Ruthless uncover abusive tactics as were used against the Lawrence family during their quest for justice after the Racist Murder of their son Stephen Lawrence are also being employed against innocent members of the British public with concrete evidence of crimes being covered up by the Judiciary. With agents and Trolls engaged in smear campaigns to discredit legitimate cases that reveal horrendous crimes and cover ups being concealed within the Judiciary.
 In short every possible avenue in which victims can attain justice and redress is being blocked.
 Instead of British Courts and the Judiciary addressing cases fairly in accordance with the ‘Rule of Law’ they have now built a fortress based on deceit, fraud and blatant corruption to ensure that no legitimate victim in the British public ever attains Justice within a British court.
 This is an absolute outrage and we the British public say.. Enough is Enough!!
 For info about Caul Grant and ‘Campaign For Truth and Justice’ (CTJ) see:
www.ctj.org.uk
 Caul Grant has endured two decades of being abused and tortured for trying to seek justice and have the death of his 15 month old baby son addressed inside a British Court due to a NHS negligence cover up.
 Sadly, Mr. Grants case is by no means unique  there are regular reports of other shocking cases with victims being abused for seeking justice in the UK up and down the country.
 In Mr. Grants efforts to seek justice from a UK court, he has sustained being falsely imprisoned and suffered a series of other horrendous silencing attempts by the notoriously corrupt London law firm named ‘Bindman and Partners’
 Please be warned about the corrupt Bindman and Partners law firm as there are many crimes including suspicious deaths connected to this law firm, so warn all your friends and family not to go there!!
 Bindman and Partners name has come up again and again in many other disturbing shocking cases whereby innocent members of the British Public with legitimate cases have been grossly targeted and abused and even in some instances murdered in highly sinister horrific ways..
 Such crimes against humanity cannot be allowed to continue in the UK without being addressed, therefore we urge everyone to support the UK protests and protestors.
 See:
www.ctj.org.
 For more information on rampant UK court and Judicial corruption perpetrated by the Law Firm Bindmans and other corrupt UK corporations.
 see:
www.thefarrellreport.net
 If you know about or have experienced court / judicial corruption join the efforts to address the abuse taking place by joining the weekly ‘Empowerment Monday protests’ every Monday outside the Royal Courts of Injustice!!
 Also Patrick Cullinane another Royal Courts of Injustice victim,  shall be starting protests from 1st of October until the 4th of October 2013, please also attend these protests to demand court investigations and reforms!!

INJUSTICE AGAINST ONE IS INJUSTICE AGAINST ALL!!!!

STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS IN THE UK!

NO LAW BREAKER CAN BE A LAW ENFORCER!!!

PLEASE MAKE THIS INFO VIRAL TO PROTECT THE ARRESTED PEACEFUL PROTESTORS SAFETY!!!!

Tweet, Blog, Vlog, Rap.. Do whatever you can to share this Breaking News!!!

WE HAVE THE RIGHT AND DUTY TO PROTEST TO STOP THE HORRIFIC CRIMES AND CORRUPTION COVERED UP IN THE UK

RULE OF LAW MUST BE RESTORED IN THE UK!!!!

SO PLEASE MAKE YOUR VOICES HEARD!!!!

Videos of todays Protests and Arrests to follow on shortly!!!


===============================




In November 1994, Mr. Grant retained the services of Bindman & Partners Solicitors to pursue a complaint against King’s College NHS Hospital Trust for negligently giving false information about the circumstances leading up to the death of his 14 month old son. Bindman & Partners advised him in writing, that there was no law in the United Kingdom which gave protection against false advice. Mr. Grant found this very difficult to accept and sought the advice of several other law firms, who all told him Bindman’s were wrong. Mr. Grant tried to have his Legal Aid Certificate transferred to a firm who were prepared to properly represent his interest, but Bindman’s refused to release it. In August 1997 Mr. Grant then issued a writ against Bindman & Partners for several breaches of the Solicitors Code of Conduct. They included a breach of contract, willfully giving false advice and failure to act in the best interest of the client. Bindman & Partners were represented by another firm of Solicitors, Reynolds Porter Chamberlain (RPC). They offered no defence to the claim and sought only to rely on the influence of their friends or families within the Judiciary. The Senior Partner at RPC, Alan Toulson, is the brother of a High Court Judge, Mr. Justice Toulson. Alan Toulson, or his firm, went to his brother and arranged to have Mr. Grant’s claim willfully struck out of Court. RPC also arranged, with Justice Toulson, an unlawful injunction against him contacting Bindman’s directly.


The actions of Justice Toulson and his brother, or brother’s law firm, is a direct contravention of Article 6, Section 1 of The European Convention. During the abuse of process and infringement of his rights, Mr. Grant made several complains to Downing Street, Members of Parliament, the media and to Her Majesty the Queen, but no help was forthcoming. In an effort to attract public attention to all what was taking place, he spray painted the windows of the offices of Bindman & Partners. Mr. Grant was subsequently arrested and prosecuted for criminal damage. He pleaded not guilty as a result of circumstances. The following Morning, 13th August 1997, he was brought before a District Judge, Mr. Baker and despite the documented fact that there were no conditions attached to his bail, the Judge remanded him to 4 days in prison. On the 17th August 1997 he was taken back to the same Court before a different Judge, Mr. Johnstone, who stated in Court, he would not become involved in what was taking place and he confirmed that there were no conditions attached to his bail and released him from custody.


In June 1998 Mr. Grant was eventually convicted for the allegation of criminal damage. He appealed against the conviction and in July 1998 the conviction was overturned. The Appellate Court presided over by His Honor Judge Inman, accepted his defence of duress of circumstances.

By now Mr. Grant had also received a reply to his complaint from Buckingham Palace, written on behalf of the Queen. It is clear from that letter that the Queen could not intervene directly.


However, she instructed that Mr. Grant’s letter of complaint be sent direct to the former Head of the Judiciary, Lord Irvine. The letter from Buckingham Palace also confirmed Lord Irvine’s awareness of his case. Lord Irvine’s failure to act on the issues raised in his complaint allowed the corruption to spread out of control and because he was the Head of the Judiciary Mr. Grant was denied the right to be heard by an impartial, independent Tribunal, the basic principles of fairness. In September 1998 Mr Grant reissued his writ, this time there were four Defendants, Bindman & Partners for reasons already given, the Solicitors Indemnity Fund, the Hospital responsible for subjecting him to mental torture and the Hospital responsible for deliberately over prescribing him antidepressants. Alan Toulson, or his firm, went back to his brother to have Mr. Grant’s writ struck out, again unlawfully. In an effort to break him once and for all, RPC also alleged that Mr. Grant had breached their unlawful injunction.


 In February 1999 Mr. Justice Toulson conducted a hearing, in Mr. Grant’s absence, without legal representation and without his knowledge, prosecuted by his brother or his brother’s law firm. At the conclusion of that unlawful hearing, Justice Toulson ordered that Mr Grant should go to Prison and serve 6 months for Contempt of Court


source: http://www.ctj.org.uk/#/genesis-of-the-problem/4559046061
—————————————————–

Photobucket

——————————————————————– 

14 month old Prince Anthony Grant who died of Dehydation after being left unattended with no fluids whilst in care of Kings College Hospital NHS Trust Sometime in April 1999 Mr. Grant was presented before Mr. Justice Buckley. He ordered that if he agreed to see the Prison Medics he would consider releasing him, but he was afraid and untrusting of his order. Mr. Grant did not then, nor currently, have a mental problem. He had not committed any crime or been convicted for any crime. According to the Judge, his imprisonment was for contempt of Court and did not see or understand what his stage of mind had to do with wanting his release from unlawful imprisonment. Mr. Grant refused to see the Medics and was re-presented on 28th May 1999. He told Mr. Justice Buckley why he had refused and he turned and told Mr. Grant, “Mr. Grant the background of your case is extremely tragic. There are many ways in which you can pursue it, go home to your family” Subsequently Mr. Grant tried to get on with his life. However in February 2000 and May 2001 he was employed in the London Borough of Westminster as a Traffic Warden Supervisor. His responsibilities included the issuing of Penalty Charge Notices (PCN’s) and the supervision of others issuing PCN’s. His employers wanted him to engage and encourage others to engage in activity aimed at targeting motorists in order to increase the number of PCN’s and therefore increase revenue. Mr. Grant refused to deliberately target unsuspecting drivers and refused to encourage his team members to do the same. This led to his suspension, and despite the employers’ Lawyers advising them to allow him back to work; dismissed him from employment. As a direct result of the United Kingdom’s failure to afford him the protection of Law, he was unable to take the employers to Court for unfair dismissal. At the time, he have three children within his current relationship and three from a previous marriage, which was destroyed by the State. Mr. Grant’s persecution by the United Kingdom impacted upon his ability to lawfully earn a living which would afford him the dignity to do the best he can towards the welfare of his children. It was at this point Mr. Grant decided that the UK Authorities cannot deny him all protection of Law and still seek to punish him by the same Law. Rebellion was a last recourse against the flagrant abuse, total disregard and contempt of the Rule of Law by the UK and its Judicial Authorities. In fact the United Kingdom has ignored citations from its own Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, who quoted Justice Brandeis of the United States of America who said, over 50 years ago: “In a Government of Laws, existence of the Government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the Law scrupulously. Government is the potent omnipresent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. If the Government becomes a Lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the Law and invites every man to become a Law unto himself, it invites anarchy”.


source:  http://www.ctj.org.uk


see videos too: http://www.youtube.com/jetblakink


 


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

MAURICE KIRK BAIL APPLICATION HEARING 13 MAY 2014

The latest re: Maurice Kirk, who weas due in court for a bail application, but was AGAIN disallowed his papers, as before:

Thank you for your speedy reply, Mr. T,

Regarding the appalling treatment Mr. Maurice J. Kirk, 68, has been suffering in HMP Cardiff, a tiny part thereof I have already informed this department about before may I draw your attention to the latest bout of persecution and targeting by certain personnel, be they prison staff, or Geoamy contractors acting under the orders of prison staff, for they surely would not do or take the law into their own hands enacting this latest which has unfortunately occurred to Mr. Kirk.

Yesterday I received a phone call which was cut off by presumably the prison [as no one else would, or could, I allege] which is selfexplanatory: http://www.onetruemedia.com/shared?p=12cf6ce49d01a215a09b50e&skin_id=1603&utm_source=otm&utm_medium=text_url

but a much more detailed message comes from his sister, a former magistrate, who he also phoned, around the same time: this message reads, received 13 May 14:

” He [Maurice Kirk] phoned again in the afternoon yesterday (12 May 14)to say
A. he was due in Bristol court today on application for bail.
B. Paper under door of cell told him of his Rowlands (restraining order) sentence. He had not been informed before!
C. He was/might be eligible for a tagged release on application.
D. His long awaited doctor’s appointment (6th May) had been mysteriously cancelled.
E. He was v short of telephone money

Today:

Went [MK] to reception for transport to Bristol with a copy of Rowe transcript to hand to judge. Told he had to hand it over to GeoAmy. He refused as when he came to Cardiff court he was unable to access his legal papers which had been left in the cell below the court (24/25 March) and Judge Rowlands admitted he had no power to order the papers to come up to court.

Maurice was not allowing that to happen again. (The papers were in a slim folder which the prison staff could inspect.) As he had had very little warning of this Bristol appearance he wanted to study the papers before arriving in court as he was defending himself.
Of course the Prison Staff could not guarantee that he would receive the file back once he had arrived at Bristol. So he refused to travel without his legal documents being available in Bristol.

I ask HOW CAN AN ESCORT AGENCY HAVE SUCH JURISDICTION OVER OUR JUSTICE SERVICE?

Now only 85p on his telephone account!”

Mr. T, I surely do not need to point out the irresponsibility of these prison staff and prison contracted staff undertaking these actions described above – on the 12 May and before, as described by Mr. Kirk – obviously to the detriment of Mr. Kirk AND LEGAL PROCESS, also their breaking of the rules, guidelines and codes under which they are required to act in the role of a prison warder or contracted staff.

I protest and complain most strongly about this behaviour, and please could you see to it the culprits performing these breaches of Mr. Kirk’s human rights, and rights as a convicted prisoner are brought to book, and that they are reprimanded for their gross indifference to the rules etc. in place regarding dealing with an inmate, his possession of his legal paperwork, and how that relates to the relavent court hearing happening at the time. The way the prison staff work closely with the contracted Geoamy staff and others to make a mockery out of British justice and the rights of inmates is a public scandal.

Please see to it nothing like what is described ever happens again and those responsible for the appalling behaviour as described above are, as I say, properly reprimanded.

Thank you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

GRANDMA B – UPDATE 10 MAY 14

grandz

Peter Hofschroer writes 10 May 14:

“Eye-witness account:

Nigel Spackman left an annotation (10 May 2014)

Mr Robert Hofschroer was in Gutersloh in Germany today. His main aim was to take his mother Barbara back to UK and put her in a care home. His brother Peter Hofschroer is her officially appointed carer-appointed by the courts in the UK but this point was disregarded by Robert Hofschroer.

I went to the hospital where she was being “held” and where Peter Hofschroer, her official carer for a few years now, was refused admission to see his mother.

Barbara wanted to know when Peter was coming. Robert Hofschroer who I had never met was in her room. He asked her who I was. She said I was a friend of Peter’s. He then appeared to go through motions similar to experiencing a seizure and said to me “leave the room now”. As he is not an employee of the hospital I ignored him and he ran off to get a doctor. I told the doctor that there was no problem and I was having a chat with Barbara who seemed most upset that Peter wasn’t coming to see her.

Robert Hofschroer then wheeled his wheelchair bound mother out of the room at speed and into a communal room on the ward. I followed and beckoned to him to come to talk to me. He stuck his middle finger in his mouth and then gave the middle finger sign to me, becoming increasingly agitated by the minute. This is a man who appears to have mental issues. He did not react in a way normal people would.

I fear for Barbara’s mental health once she’s back in UK and under the dark influence of a man who should be locked up. Please Google Barbara Hofschroer or Grandma B and read what has happened in the continuing story of fraud and abuse against a senior citizen. It will make your jaw drop.

If you want any further information you can ask me question on here.

Nigel Spackman

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/corruption_in_york_social_servic#comment-50031

Follow at whatsotheyknow site: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/corruption_in_york_social_servic#comment-50031

Scroll down for more

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

UPDATED 7 MAY: GRANDMA B, 83 KIDNAPPED BY GERMAN AUTHORITIE​S WITH THE HELP OF MI5, MILITARY POLICE AND UK SOCIAL WORKERS – WHERE IS SHE??

UPDATE 7 May 2014 – Peter Hofschroer writes:

“Mum’s GP has just phoned to say she is being held in a local hospital.
That is a relief
More news when we get it.”

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Peter Hofschröer
Date: 7 May 2014 06:03
Subject: Kidnapped
To:

Last morning there was a very sinister development in our case.

Around a dozen police officers broke into our flat and stormed into the bedroom were Mum was in bed ill.

They attacked me, pushed me to the ground, handcuffed me and sprayed pepper into my eyes. I was then held for four hours, handcuffed, and released without charge.

Mum has been taken away, but I don’t know where or how she is. The police are refusing to tell me.

I’m told that British social workers and possibly military police were involved. They’ve taken Mum’s passport. I fear the worst.

GRANDMA B RADIO I’VIEW + UPDATE – 3 SEPT 13: Ombudsman declines to investigate Grandma B’s Case

grandz

grandmab

The radio interview from Anonymous Radio with Peter Hofschroer which outlines the details of this schocking case:

http://www.onetruemedia.com/otm_site/view_shared?p=11d595277423e9978346ffa&skin_id=701&utm_source=otm&utm_medium=text_url

The Abuse of Grandma B – a sad story told by Peter Hofschröer

Grandma B is now 82 years old. She is wheelchair-bound and very frail. The past three years of her life have been horrendous. She lost her husband of 60 years, but that was the easy part. She has also been the victim of sustained and systematic abuse in which she has been defrauded of her house, subjected to threats and harassment because she will not hand over her life savings to her abusers, then unlawfully evicted from her house and stranded abroad, with her abusers trying, fortunately unsuccessfully, to fraudulently sell her house.
You may well ask who would do such an awful thing to a little, old lady in a wheelchair. Sadly, most abuse takes place within the family and this is very much the case here. The main abusers are Grandma B’s older son, his wife and her two adult grandchildren.
Grandma B’s younger son was working abroad when he noticed something was very wrong. He immediately rushed back home, where his worst fears were confirmed. While he was travelling, his 87 year-old father was admitted to hospital with a serious heart complaint caused by neglect. His mother too was seriously ill due to neglect. His older brother and his family lived just around the corner, but had done little to help Grandma B and her very sick husband.
A year before this, Grandma B and her husband had signed over their house to the older son and his family on the understanding they would care for them. Their younger son agreed to this, because he was living and working abroad and could not provide the level of care needed. Hardly was the ink on the agreement dry when the older son and his family started running Grandma B and her husband down, hoping they would pass on as soon as possible.
When, in April 2008, the younger son arrived in the parental home, he was horrified by what he saw. He dropped what he was doing, gave up his job and home and became the full-time carer for his parents. His father led a full and happy life in his last months. His mother’s physical health has improved dramatically since the younger son took over her care.
As soon as the younger son took over the care of his parents, the older son and his family started a campaign of harassment designed to drive him out of the parental home and to seize control of their finances. Matters reached such a level in September 2008, that the younger son reported the criminal offences to the police and the abuse to social services.
What followed from there can only be described as a nightmare. The police made several attempts to arrest the carer on the basis of false allegations, while social services fabricated allegations against him in an attempt to have his powers of attorney revoked and the care of his parents placed in the hands of their abusers.
A few days after the younger son made his complaint, the police arrived at the parental home to investigate a complaint he has “stolen” his parents’ money. They had no evidence to support this allegation made by the abusers, but refused to record a complaint of harassment by the abusers.
Social services blocked all attempts at getting the abuse investigated. Grandma B’s social worker made a false allegation of assault against her carer, an unfit, middle-aged man. Social services withdrew this allegation when they were shown evidence that the social worker was a black-belt in martial arts. His claim to have been overpowered and physically ejected from the parental home without injury looked a little ridiculous, to say the least.
On the morning Grandma B’s husband of 60 years died, the police unlawfully raided her house. They allowed her abusers to charge in, assault her and bawl insults at her over her husband’s still warm corpse. When her carer stood between her and her abusers to protect her, the police officers pushed him out of the way and threatened to arrest him.
In the following months, the abusers stalked Grandma B, attempted to break into her house and send her abusive letters. The police refused to uphold the law and arrest the criminals in question.
An independent investigation into Social Service’s handling of the case criticised them and required them to reopen the safeguarding investigation. Months later, they did, but the police and Social Services withheld all evidence of abuse.
Instead, they fabricated abuse allegations against the carer and applied to the Office of the Public Guardian to have his powers of attorney annulled. The Office of the Public Guardian established the allegations made by Social Services were false and rejected the application.
Grandma B then went on her wheelchair to a local council meeting to hand out a leaflet protesting about the way the police and social services were treating her. Her local ward councillors set police officers in stab-vests on to her, threatening to arrest her for distributing a “defamatory” leaflet. When her carer pointed out that defamation is a civil matter and not a police matter, the officers looked a little flummoxed, but still tried to prevent her from exercising her democratic right of peaceful protest. Grandma B is a veteran of the Second World War and stood her ground. When her carer called out to the police sergeant attending the meeting in front of the 30 or so members of the public present that she should arrest these officers for harassing a vulnerable person, they beat a hasty retreat. The sergeant refused to uphold the law.
Instead, two days later, the local police fabricated the first Harassment Warning against her carer. A couple of weeks later, they fabricated a second warning and were clearly intending to fabricate a third, at which point the carer could have been arrested.
In the ensuing two years, the carer’s legal representatives both in Britain and abroad have made a couple of dozen requests for sight of the evidence to support these unsigned, undated harassment warnings which are not legally valid. The police have produced nothing other than excuses and have refused every opportunity to sign these warnings for fear of perjuring themselves. The police inspector that issued the warnings took “early retirement” when challenged by the carer’s solicitor to produce the evidence.
Exhausted by this constant harassment, Grandma B went abroad on holiday for Christmas 2009. The police tipped off her abusers she was away from home, who then forced entry, changed the locks and unlawfully evicted her. After stealing her valuables in full view of the police, they tried to fraudulently sell her house. Fortunately, Grandma B’s solicitor prevented them from doing so.
However, her abusers and their friends in the police and local authority then fabricated a kidnapping allegation against her carer. This request to arrest the carer went from the local CID to Special Branch, to SOCA, to New Scotland Yard, to Interpol London, Interpol in the country in question, then to the national police headquarters and provincial police headquarters before landing on the desk of a local police officer in a remote Alpine village.
The expectation here was obvious: the local country bumpkin plod would be so impressed by the provenance of this request that he would summon up reinforcements before daring to attempt to tackle this known, hardened, serious international criminal.
It did not quite work out like that. Two weeks before this request arrived, the police officer and his good wife had been among the many guests at the local pub at Grandma B’s 82nd birthday party. He had been sceptical about the stories he had heard about official corruption in Britain, but now he was supposed to arrest the carer for kidnapping his mother, holding her against her will and incommunicado. He obviously knew these allegations were false, but being a professional, he carried out a proper investigation. His report made it clear that the British police had knowingly lied to Interpol to help corrupt officers defraud a little, old lady on a wheelchair.
This attempt by corrupt British police to abuse honest local police officers to carry out criminal acts on their behalf is now under investigation by the local foreign ministry.
Had the carer not been so lucky, then the chances are he would have been remanded in custody pending extradition, while Grandma B would have been returned to Britain and to the tender mercies of social services. Her assets would then have been plundered and divided up between the gang of criminals running this racket.
There have now been five independent reviews of this case. All have called for it to be reopened. Both the police and local authority have ignored these requests.
So what is going on here and who is involved? The main abuser is employed by local social services. He, his wife and daughter have provided support services to the local police. They all know who the isolated old people in their area with assets are. It would seem they are systematically targeting defenceless old people and seizing control of their assets before bundling them off into a council home, then selling their assets. The cash then gets laundered through a dodgy private care company as “care fees” and the police officers, social workers, council officials and local politicians involved then pocket the money. The perfect crime, as who is going to listen to a confused, old lady in a home, whose contact with the outside world they are controlling?
This is rampant corruption and serious, organised crime. Nobody in authority in North Yorkshire – including a certain senior police officer in the news at present – will respond to correspondence and deal with this case.
How many more victims are there?”

############################################################
Ombudsman declines to investigate Grandma B’s Case
UPDATE

Well, it came as no surprise to hear that the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) decided there was nothing to investigate here. There is nothing like transparency in government, eh?

However, in the same post as the PHSO’s letter was a parcel from the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) containing the bulk of Grandma B’s file. This revealing evidence shows that the OPG deliberately misled the PHSO, prejudicing the outcome of its investigation. Bit of an own goal that one, eh?

Grandma B seized the opportunity and has requested the PHSO to reconsider their adjudication.

We await a reply….

Anyway, here’s the original article:

Ombudsman to Investigate Grandma B’s Case?

The PHSO has confirmed that a decision on whether or not to proceed with the following complaint will be announced within approximately one week that:
◾The OPG should report the City of York Council (CYC) to the Police for its attempts to defraud Grandma B by having her carer’s Lasting Powers of Attorney annulled and instead given to her abusers.
◾The OPG carry out a full investigation into CYC’s attempts to defraud vulnerable people in, or subject to its care, as the evidence indicates that Grandma B’s case is the tip of the iceberg and that senior officers of CYC are participating in a crime syndicate.
◾The OPG send a copy of Grandma B’s file under the Freedom of Information Act. The OPG has been refusing to do so, leading to speculation they are attempting to hide the fraud committed by CYC.

Background

In December 2008, the Court of Protection granted Grandma B’s carer Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) for his father. Due to a clerical error, it took a few more weeks for him to be granted an LPA for Grandma B.

This act confirmed that the Court of Protection recognised Peter Hofschröer’s position as sole carer and legal guardian for his elderly parents. Peter was now in a position to prevent their main abuser York social worker Robert Hofschröer from seizing their remaining assets.

Obviously, this caused disconcertion to Robert’s colleagues, who were evidently expecting a share of the proceeds of this crime. After all, they had made considerable efforts to help their colleague in his criminal acts by fabricating an assault allegation against Grandma B’s carer, by unlawfully blocking his Stage 1 complaint against them, by surreptitiously cancelling his parents’ application for sheltered housing and by falsifying the record to cover their tracks.

Grandma B’s carer later established that the social worker who illegally blocked the Stage 1 investigation was Sophie Tweed, who was running a dodgy private care company, the one suspected of laundering the assets of the victims of this racket, at the same time she was working for York Social Services (YSS). She was the manager of Mark Bednarski, the social worker and black-belt in Kung Fu, who fabricated the assault allegation against Grandma B’s carer.

Grandma B’s carer, a determined chap, did not let these attempts to stop him protecting his parents from the criminal acts of York social workers, and insisted a Stage 2 investigation. After considerable pressure, CYC reluctantly agreed to this. Grandma B’s carer then insisted that the partners in crime, Bednarski and Tweed, be taken off the case. On 23 December 2008, their manager Anne Bygrave, wrote to Grandma B’s carer telling him they had indeed been taken off the case. She lied.

The record, a redacted copy of Grandma B’s social services file obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, shows inappropriate e-mail contacts between Mark Bednarski, Sophie Tweed and Robert Hofschröer in January 2009, discussing how YSS could help Robert have Peter’s LPA cancelled and passed to Robert. That is clearly a serious criminal offence – conspiracy to defraud.

Bednarski and Tweed were trying to assist Robert to obtain control over Grandma B and her savings at a time when they knew he was the subject of allegations of abuse and had abandoned her.

Bednarski was not acting on his own initiative, as copies of his correspondence with the OPG were circulated to the senior management of YSS, including Anne Bygrave, Ralph Edwards and Anne Tidd.

The Local Government Ombudsman’s report confirms that Bednarski and Tweed were left on this case until the end of March 2009 – when an investigation into their criminal activities started.

What is worse, acting in concern with Grandma B’s main abuser, senior managers of YSS, along with Tweed and Bednarski held an unlawful safeguarding conference on Grandma B’s carer on 16 January 2009 without informing him – in the case of abuse allegations, the alleged abuser is required to be informed of the allegations, so he can offer a defence. Clearly, YSS did not want Grandma B’s carer to answer the latest false allegations they had fabricated to discredit him, which were that he had “stolen” his parents’ life savings. The police had already investigated these allegations the previous September and had found them to be without substance, so YSS was clearly aware their allegations were without foundation.

Obviously, YSS were not going to let a mere technicality like the fact their allegations were clearly false from preventing them help their colleague seize his recently bereaved mother’s assets against her will – presumably for a share of the proceeds.

The same day, Bednarski made enquiries to the OPG regarding the status of Grandma B’s LPA and what steps they would need to have it annulled. This is further evidence of how senior York social workers are conspiring with a known abuser to plunder a vulnerable person’s assets. This is serious organised crime.

Obviously, neither Chief Constable Grahame Maxwell of North Yorkshire Police nor Chief Executive Kersten England of CYC have a problem with such rampant corruption within the organisations they lead. Neither do CYC’s councillors, nor York’s MP’s, nor the members of North Yorkshire Police Authority. It does not take much imagination to work out why.

The OPG investigated the false allegations of financial abuse made against Grandma B’s carer by YSS, as is shown by a heavily redacted copy of the file he obtained from the OPG after considerable effort over a period of months. It was clear the OPG was very reluctant to release anything that could be used in evidence against the criminal activities of York social workers. Furthermore, although it was clear to Martin John, the chief executive of the OPG, that YSS had knowingly made false allegations against Grandma B in an attempt to defraud her of her assets, yet he declined to report this serious crime to the police.

As the disproportionate efforts made by YSS to discredit Grandma B’s carer and to fraudulently seize her assets raised suspicions that her case was merely the tip of an iceberg and that CYC, YSS, NYP and local politicians are running a racket in which isolated vulnerable people are systematically defrauded, Grandma B’s carer requested the OPG to investigate his allegations, as it was likely that the corrupt officials involved in Grandma B’s case would have obtained powers of attorney over other suspected victims.

The OPG prevaricated, evaded the issue and then claimed to have investigated the allegations without sight of the evidence the professional fraud investigator working on this case had accumulated in two years.

It would seem the OPG is trying to cover up something unwholesome.

Let us hope that the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman will conduct a full, thorough and open investigation in the public interest and resolve these open questions and very serious allegations.
##########################################################

grandmab* £10,000 REWARD for the arrest and imprisonment of Detective Superintendent Heather Pearson

pearson h

Heather_Pearson

This pervert abuses little, old ladies. She is, after all, an officer of Jimmy Savile’s favourite police force, the North Yorkshire perverts-in-blue. One wonders if she diddles kiddies as well. That seems to be “normal” for police officers in the once proud country of Britain.

Do see:

http://www.real-whitby.co.uk/exculsive-durham-police-confirm-fraud-investigation

When she joined in attempts to defraud Grandma B of her assets, she was a mere Detective Chief Inspector, but once her skills in abusing the vulnerable became apparent, North Yorkshire Police could not wait to promote her. That is how SICK the British police are.

Your children are not safe from them, because they will pick them up, take them back to the nick and abuse them. They make lots of dosh from the videos. Do see:

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/lambeth-police-raped-and-tortured.html

You are not safe from them, because if you complain about their criminal activities, then they will arrest you and put you in jail. Google: “Wanda Maddox” for just one example of this.

Then if they target your parents or grandparents, lives and liberty are in danger. Just read this blog.

The bottom line is that nobody in Britain can be safe to walk the streets or live in their own homes so long as police officers are at large.

In the Public Interest, Grandma B is willing to offer a REWARD of £10,000 to anybody who can successfully convict this sick, perverted psychopath and remove her from the streets for life.”

source:

http://grandmabarbara.wordpress.com/1-new-items/10000-reward-for-the-arrest-and-imprisonment-of-detective-superintendent-heather-pearson/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , ,

Patrick Cullinane, Tony Farrell & Joseph Henry interviewe​d by Charles Seven in the grounds of Kenwood Hall Hotel (Sheffield​) on 15 April 2014

PATRICK CULLINANE – UK GOVERNMENT INFILTRATED BY CRIMINAL GANGS – VIDEO

Dear People and Others,

Interviewed In this order: -

Patrick Cullinane, Tony Farrell and Joseph Henry interviewed by Charles Seven in the grounds of Kenwood Hall Hotel (Sheffield) on 15 April 2014, which is self-explanatory and a WAKE-UP call: -

VIDEO:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxcqdrYqgy0TTTdmQm56dGVTWHM/edit

THIRTEEN High Court Judges denied me my Constitutional Common Law rights under Magna Carta 1215 to a Trial by Jury: = HIGH TREASON

The Independent: By Tom Harper, Investigations Reporter on Friday 10 January 2014

The corruption of Britain: UK’s key institutions infiltrated by criminals

Secret report shows how organised crime infiltrated judicial system as well as police with prison service and HM Revenue & Customs also compromised

Tiberius disclosed that the Met interviewed the journalist who wrote the story after the murder of Solly Nahome, a Jewish money launderer credited as the “brains” behind the Adams’ criminal empire.

The Turkish drug dealer was later convicted and told police he was an HMRC informant. He said he knew of “corrupt contacts within the police” and had a Cyprus-based customs officer as a handler who “took money off him”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-corruption-of-britain-uks-key-institutions-infiltrated-by-criminals-9052617.html

Now you/we know why the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are NOT prosecuting FRAUD against We the People: -

The Independent: By Tom Harper, Investigations Reporter on Sunday 12 January 2014

Revealed: How gangs used the Freemasons to corrupt police

Gangsters able to recruit police officers through secret society, says investigation for Scotland Yard

Secret networks of Freemasons have been used by organised crime gangs to corrupt the criminal justice system, according to a bombshell Metropolitan Police report leaked to The Independent.

Freemasonry has long been suspected of having members who work in the criminal justice system – notably the judiciary and the police.

The political establishment and much of the media often dismiss such ideas as the work of conspiracy theorists

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/revealed-how-gangs-used-the-freemasons-to-corrupt-police-9054670.html

Thirteen High Court Judges CONSPIRED with HMRC, the Insolvency Service, the Official receiver, KPMG my Trustee in Bankruptcy, Moon Beever my Trustees Solicitors, MPs, the Bailiffs, the Police; Lord Chancellors, CPS and Psychiatrists to DEFRAUD me of my home, and my worldly possessions. How was I made Bankrupted when I had NO debt and the Inland Revenue owing me over £5,000 in tax rebates? –

Report by Phillip Inman of The Guardian, Financial Section, Monday 25 August 2008

Evidence put to the high court shows that Cullinane, far from owing tax, was due a rebate.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/aug/25/tax.taxandspending1

The 13 High Court Judges who conspired in Patrick Cullinane’s case to cover-up the HMRC’s INFORMANT and defraud him: -
1.Mr Registrar Pimm

2.Mr Registrar Simmonds

3.Mr Registrar Baister

4.Mr Justice Jacobs

5.Mr Justice Neuberger – Promoted for Crime: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jul/12/lord-neuberger-appointed-supreme-court-president

6.Lord Justice Stewart-Smith – Also covered-up the Hillsborough disaster.

7.Mr Jonathan Parker

8.Mr Justice Hart

9.Master Leslie

10.Mrs Justice Ebsworth

11.Mr Justice Ferris

12.Mr Justice Pumfrey

13.Mr Justice Mann

Thirteen JURISDICTIONLESS High Court ‘Judges’ denied me a DISCLOSURE of the Inland Revenue’s Proof of Claim against me and also violated my guaranteed rights in Common Law to a Trial by my Peers. For his crimes; ‘Lord Justice’ David Neuberger was promoted to the highest Judge in the UK having STOLEN my home and possessions by CONSPIRING to pervert the course of justice and denying me Due Process via the Constitutional Common Law of the Land: –

Magna Carta (1215) {Article 38} reads: “In future no official shall put anyone to trial merely on his own testimony, without reliable witnesses produced for this purpose.”

{Article 39} reads: “No freeman shall be arrested or imprisoned or deprived of his freehold or outlawed or banished or in any way ruined, nor will we take or order action against him, except by the lawful judgment of his equals (Trial by Jury) and according to the law of the land.”

{Article 40} reads: “To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay Right or Justice.”

{Article 45} reads: “We will appoint as justices, constables, sheriffs, or bailiffs only such as know the law of the realm and mean to observe it well.

http://www.iamm.com/magnaarticles.htm

Therefore, the Rule of Judge or Magistrate is NOT the Rule of Law! – It is TREASON!

The Constitutional Common Law of the Land has been HIJACKED by the; “Inside Britain’s Israel Lobby” –

Video – Channel 4 UK – Broadcast November 16, 2009

Dispatches: Inside Britain’s Israel Lobby

Dispatches investigates one of the most powerful and influential political lobbies in Britain, which is working in support of the interests of the State of Israel.

Political commentator Peter Oborne investigates how accountable, transparent and open to scrutiny the lobby is, particularly in regard to its funding and financial support of MPs.

Oborne examines how the lobby operates from within parliament and the tactics it employs behind the scenes when engaging with print and broadcast media.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/33719/inside_britains_israel_lobby/

The Police in the UK are so INFILTRATED and CORRUPT now that they treat blatant FRAUD by Government Organisations against We the People as a CIVIL matter: -

The police have told me on VIDEO that the robbery of my home and possessions is a civil matter: -

The Police and the CPS cannot prosecute the crimes of FRAUD against an immigrant Irishman, but they CAN prosecute an immigrant Irishman, and splash it all over the INTERNET, to discredit him, before his MOCK trial at Isleworth Crown Court tomorrow 6 May 2014, and NO Victim Statements or Victims pushing this case! Without a VICTIM, the Police, CPS and Ealing Council have CONSPIRED to make themselves the ‘VICTIMS’ to ROB and destroy yet another immigrant Irishman in the UK: -

How can Thomas Maher get, A Fair Hearing, tomorrow with the POLICE STATEMENTS splashed all over the Internet for EVERYONE to see, including the Jury? – And what has this malicious and unlawful prosecution with, NO VICTIM, cost the TAXPAYERS’ in the UK?

Maher’s Irish Bar Greenford – Thomas Maher is being prosecuted by the Police, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Ealing Council and NO Statement from the VICTIM, as you can see here on Ealing Council’s Website: -

http://ealing.cmis.uk.com/Ealing/Document.ashx?czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=cjOKgA7Ao3Dc2HdORXlq%2BFRnuyO4Yi%2BKH%2Bxukw7k1POI3CtlmgeGUQ%3D%3D&rUzwRPf%2BZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3D%3D=pwRE6AGJFLDNlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2FLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3D%3D&mCTIbCubSFfXsDGW9IXnlg%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&kCx1AnS9%2FpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2BAJvYtyA%3D%3D=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&FgPlIEJYlotS%2BYGoBi5olA%3D%3D=NHdURQburHA%3D&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3D

I have just spoken to, Thomas Maher, who is very STRESSED, and he has assured me that the Police case against him is a pack of lies: – The medical reports are doctored and the iron bar that the Police have, turns out to be the bar that Mr Maher use for the cellar doors. Who exactly authorised Ealing Council to put Thomas Maher’s case ALL OVER the Internet BEFORE his TRIAL; to pervert the course of justice?

How can Thomas Maher’s legal team represent him; when they are Officers of the Court and are controlled by the Bar Counsel and the Law Society? – And what do they know about the Law of the Land and their Irish client’s Constitutional Common Law rights to a Trial by an INDEPENDENT INFORMED Jury; and NOT by members of a Jury who have sworn an Oath of Allegiance to the Crown? – Plain clothes Police Officers, Solicitors, Barristers and Judges in a Jury is TREASON! Cherrie Blair has sat on an English Jury to pervert the course of Common Law and Natural Justice.

Mr Maher has just told me that his case is postponed for tomorrow, and it is not on the Daily List, as these CONSPIRING Gangsters want to drive Thomas Maher to a Mental Breakdown and drag out his case for more REVENUE, which is the object of their scheming from day one. This is how these LAW-BREAKING TERRORISTS cleansed the immigrant Irish community from the UK, having ROBBED them of EVERYTHING in THEIR Commercial Kangaroo Courts

The Crown Court

at ISLEWORTH

Daily List for Tuesday 6 May 2014

http://www.courtserve2.net/courtlists/current/crown/islew_T140506.02.htm

It is the Police, corrupted by the Freemasons, that are running Organised Crime Gangs up and down the UK; now these very same MAFIA GANGSTERS have accused immigrant Irishman, Thomas Maher, of organised crime to, OPPRESS, ROB and DESTROY him? Is it any wonder that the Irish community in the UK took to ALCOHOL to ease the PAIN of this unrelenting, DISCRIMINATION, TORTURE and OPPRESSION by infiltrated corrupt Government Organisations? – It was their ONLY ESCAPE into a BARREL of ALCOHOL from these TERRORISTS, as the Rule of Mafia Gangsters do NOT protect anybody but THEMSELVES: -

There are MILLIONS of VICTIMS out here like myself, ROBBED of EVERYTHING and NO recourse to JUSTICE; only continuous persecution and TERRORISM from these warmongering TERRORISTS stealing our properties and Children with impunity to date!

However, with the help of God and His Holy Mother, the following will very soon change ALL of that, and put the REAL GANGSTERS in suits and uniforms in JAIL where the belong for their, HIJACK of the Law of the Land, and their Organised Crimes against We the People in the UK: -

Please sign up as:

Common Law Grand Jury Volunteers

http://www.icj2.webs.com

God Bless, We the People, and keep us safe from these TERRORISTS while we RESTORE the Rule of Common Law in the UK, which the Mafia Gangsters in OUR Courts and in power do NOT want. – As THEIR crimes’, against We the People, are paying them BIG dividends. – And whoever said, Organised Crime do not pay, had better think again, and FAST? -

Yours truthfully,

Patrick Cullinane, Common Law Lawyer and Victim of the UK’s COMMERCIAL Kangaroo Courts.

PS. In the public interest and the interest of JUSTICE, please get this, WAKE-UP correspondence out to your family, friends, and EVERYONE on your lists. Thanks in advance for your, worthwhile, efforts to bring Natural Common Law Justice to the UK – And a Court near you!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

MAURICE KIRK SENTENCING 2 MAY 2014

Maurice Kirk has been moved back to the notorious HMP CARDIFF – back to the warders who [allegedly] have beaten him up on many occasions, the S Wales police refusing to act, or refusing to even take statements for months about matters – then doing nothing.
This below sounds good, but aince then it has been updated with outrageous happenings.

From X, regarding Maurice Kirk sentencing, today, 2 May 2014:
“Sentence was passed today over video link. He’s got off very lightly.

8 months on each charge to run consecutively, making 16 months in total, minus the six weeks he also got for the Rogal assault, although if he wins that. that sentence will of course be quashed.
Rowlands didn’t order the restraining order to be amended. He stated that he was taking into account Maurice’s age and medical problems.
There was also no application for costs by the CPS. [which could've been £20000+...ed.]
If the six weeks for the Rogan appeal is taken into account he will be due for release sometime in the middle of August, on licence for the remainder of the sentence.
We were all expecting a three or a four, so he’s got off very lightly.
The judge cut off Maurice’s speech as it wasn’t mitigation and proceeded to pass his sentence.
We think the judge was running scared to give him such a light sentence.
——————————————————————————-
From earlier:
“The maximum for the breach of the restraining order is 5 years.
The maximum for the threat to damage property is 10 years.
He does have some previous convictions which were read out at the end of the trial, and these would also be taken into account I’m afraid.
The judge can also either order both sentences consecutive or concurrent. We will just have to wait and see what he does.”
The above from a supporter re: Maurice Kirk.
It is stated above “he does have previous convictions”, but how many of them carried through where he was framed? He has also been acquitted on serious charges before, found not guilty by a jury, and numerous cases of imprisonment have taken place for MK where the charges were later dropped completely,making a mockery of those charges and the behaviour of S Wales police + others. there have been 20 incarcerationson remand or whatever since 2009, i am told, mostly on fabricated charges.”

kirk 1ba

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

NORMAN SCARTH UPDATE 29 04 2014 – THEY ARE FULLY PROTECTED FROM THEIR OUTRAGEOUS MISCONDUCT

Norman Scarth 29 April 2014

This is self explanatory.
NS.

From: againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk
To: headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk; info@buckingham.ac.uk
CC: sec-ofstate@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: Misconduct at the HIGHEST LEVEL!
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:01:39 +0100

To Admiral Sir John Brigstocke KCB, Judicial Appointments & Conduct Ombudsman.
Sir,
The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office at least apologise for the delay in responding, but admit it is too big for them (see below).
Is it too big for you?
Norman Scarth.
Veteran of the Arctic Convoys & the Scharnhorst battle.
From: Dave.Woods@jcio.gsi.gov.uk
To: againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 17:46:55 +0100
Subject: RE: Misconduct at the HIGHEST LEVEL!

Dear Mr Scarth,

I refer to your email dated 27th March 2014 and apologise for the delay in responding.

I note that you provided this office with the email that you sent to the Supreme Court and then in a separate email asked ‘what steps you intend to take about the deplorable conduct from those AT THE VERY TOP OF THE TREE, as described below?’

I have read your e-mail to the Supreme Court and it makes reference to;

Igor Judge

Lord Justices Kerr, Clarke and Toulson

Registrar Louise di Mambro

This office cannot investigate a person no longer in judicial office. Lord Judge retired in 2013.

Lord Justices Kerr, Clarke and Toulson are Judges of the Supreme Court and do not fall within our remit to investigate. Similarly, Registrar Louise di Mambro is also of the Supreme Court and cannot be investigated by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.

I’m afraid this office cannot help you any further in this matter.

Dave Woods

Allocation Manager

Judicial Conduct Investigations Office

81-82 Queens Building

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London WC2A 2LL

0207 073 4731

DX44450 Strand

From: Norman Scarth [mailto:againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk]
Sent: 27 March 2014 16:20
To: Customer OJC
Cc: gallowayforbradfordwest@gmail.com
Subject: Misconduct at the HIGHEST LEVEL!

To the JUDICIAL CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS OFFICE.
In your previous existence as the OFFICE FOR JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS, any Litigant In Person (LIP) who did make complaint to you soon found out that your function was to protect incompetent & corrupt judges.
Does the change of name mean you have changed your ways? That the public (particularly the LIP) might now have some remedy against incompetence (& worse) from judges?
We hope so, & ask what steps you intend to take about the deplorable conduct from those AT THE VERY TOP OF THE TREE, as described below?

From: againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk
To: registry@supremecourt.uk
CC: gallowayforbradfordwest@gmail.com
Subject: APPALLING ignorance of law – UKSC!
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:28:54 +0000

Only too well aware of the state of what purports to be ‘Justice’ in Britain, the latest display of ignorance of the law – BY THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM – is beyond all belief! That said, it is not really ignorance of law, – but contempt for it – by Law Lords Kerr, Clarke, Toulson & their apparatchik, Registrar Louise di Mambro!
To recap briefly: In July 2012 Attorney General Dominic Greave made A CIVIL Application to the HIGH COURT of JUSTICE of the UNITED KINGDOM, for my ‘COMMITTAL’ (for ‘Contempt’).
A small army of other highly paid people joined in the hounding, & eventually, on 23rd January 2013, Lord Chief Justice Lord Igor Judge DID make Orders for my COMMITTAL to Prison (my ‘reward’ for serving on the Arctic Convoys of WW2, & a lifetime of honest, hard work).

See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21845753). Fortunately, I had had the good sense to flee the land of my birth & seek safety in the Republic of Ireland, so was able to watch these antics from afar.
My Appeal to the UK Supreme Court was accepted by Registrar Mambro, who, it must be said, was most helpful, – at that stage.

On 17th March 2014 Lords Kerr, Clarke & Toulson delivered their ‘Judgment’, responding to my 12,000 words, (virtually ALL of them dealing with ‘Points of Law’) in just 33 contemptuous words, the essential ones being, “… permission to appeal BE REFUSED …”.
I wrote to Ms di Mambro, pointing out, inter alia, that my case was actually an Appeal, NOT an ‘Application for Permission to Appeal’. Also a Court of Appeal ruling that a party to an action “has a DUTY to challenge a judge whose reasoning is wrong”.
Her letter in response, attached to an email from Angela Chandler, said,

“… I refer you to my letter of 18 July 2013 which made it clear that your case was issued as an application for permission to appeal. …”. (Indeed it did, but see lower down) Her letter continued, “The Justices have made their decision and so further correspondence from you will receive neither an acknowledgement nor a reply.”

Typical of the arrogance of the profession, ignoring the ‘Duty’
mentioned above.

However, as regards whether mine was an ‘Appeal’, or an ‘Application for Permission to Appeal': Below is an extract from THE FIRST PAGE of my appeal documents, stamped with the court’s stamp, indicating it had been received by them – and accepted! (They had no option).

Point two:

The Notes For Guidance which relate to Form N161, say quite specifically:

“Section 4: Permission to appeal

“You will usually need permission to appeal the decision of a judge of the High Court or a county court.

“You do not need permission if the order you are appealing against is one of the following:

“• a committal order;” EmojiEmoji

No ‘ifs & buts’, no ambiguity, no exceptions, just 17 words saying “You do not need permission if the order you are appealing against is a Committal Order”. It just so happens that a few months ago I was in communication with Louise di Mambro, Registrar of the Supreme Court on this very subject, asking if the new Supreme Court followed the same rules as the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords had done in the past. She did not answer my question but said curtly, “I am afraid you have been mis-informed about the position in the House of Lords: permission to appeal was required even if there was a human rights issue”.

Now which is it? Is permission required or not? Seems that apparatchiks make up the Rules on a whim.

I submit that if there IS contradiction or ambiguity in ‘The Rules’, they should be interpreted in favour of the person who is disadvantaged by any of them.

That said, it exemplifies the lack of ‘Freedom’ in Britain today, that ANY British person (much less one who fought to keep the Nazis from our shores) should, when seeking a remedy for injustice, have to grovel like a serf for ‘Permission’ from one of those who place themselves on a plane above ordinary mortals, (Quisling MPs & the propagandist ‘News Media’ quoting them as though God himself had spoken), who have done by stealth what Hitler failed to do by force, who have, with supreme arrogance, installed themselves as the new ‘Master Race’ (not the one Hitler envisaged), turning Britain into an Orwellian Police State just as bad as Nazi Germany, but less honest, the victims fewer – AS YET!

I WAS ‘appealing against a Committal Order’! Do I need to say more?

Is it possible that Louise di Mambro MIGHT now consider that she & Her Lordships MIGHT have been wrong?
Norman Scarth

In the Republic of Ireland.

from: registry@supremecourt.uk
To: againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk
Subject: Letter from the Registrar
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:43:27 +0000

Dear Mr Scarth

Please see the attached letter from the Registrar.

Yours sincerely

Angela Chandler

On behalf of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Parliament Square

London SW1P 3BD

DX: 157230 Parliament Square 4

T: 020 7960 1991/1992 F: 020 7960 1901 http://www.supremecourt.uk

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Seven & Patrick Cullunane Expose Lies, Corruption & TPV’S Agent Mark Windows



URGENT MAKE VIRAL!!!!! Part 1 Key Witness in Case of ‘Seven’ Exposes TPV’S NWO Agent Mark Windows




Seven4Justice Seven4Justice·

 
Published on 30 Mar 2014
 
RAW VIDEO  Part 1- Key Witness in case of ‘Seven VS Gossage and Nine Others’, The cousin Roni Nicholas of Targeted individual/ Organised crime survivor ‘Seven’ here Speaks out in anger to expose and demolish the lies being concocted by David Ickes ‘The Peoples Voice TV presenter racist NWO Agent Troll,Shill named Mark Windows.

Here Roni reads out his written Witness Statement to the public horrified after watching the lies broadcasted on David Ickes TV channel and the attempts by Mark Windows and other known state hired NWO Agent racists (Don) Donny Jackson, Eddy Boyce, Deborah Williams, Ian Fantom and David Shayler to conceal the monstrous crimes and cover up in the case of ‘Seven’. This family demand a public apology for the foul treacherous lies being told by these nasty rotten people. Roni’s written Witness Statement read out here will also be posted online soon




URGENT MAKE VIRAL!!!!! Part 2 Key Witness in Case of ‘Seven’ Exposes TPV’S NWO Agent Mark Windows

Published on 30 Mar 2014

RAW VIDEO- Part 2 – Key Witness in case of ‘Seven VS Gossage and Nine Others’, The cousin Roni Nicholas of Targeted individual/ Organised crime survivor ‘Seven’ here Speaks out in anger to expose and demolish the lies being concocted by David Ickes ‘The Peoples Voice TV presenter racist NWO Agent Troll,Shill named Mark Windows.

Here Roni reads out his written Witness Statement to the public horrified after watching the lies broadcasted on David Ickes TV channel and the attempts by Mark Windows and other known state hired NWO Agent racists (Don) Donny Jackson, Eddy Boyce, Deborah Williams, Ian Fantom and David Shayler to conceal the monstrous crimes and cover up in the case of ‘Seven’. This family demand a public apology for the foul treacherous lies being told by these nasty rotten people. Roni’s written Witness Statement read out here will also be posted online soon

WARNING TO THE PUBLIC

Mark Windows IS a ‘KNOWN’ NWO Agent, seeking to get rich by professional lying in public (as was done to Stephen Lawrence’s grieving family) to smear and discredit the honourable names of a genuine Targeted Torture Survivors, Truth Speakers, Whistle-blowers and Peace Activists. Since 2012 Windows has been caught with those named above engineering a campaign of endless lies, cyber stalking, defamation in hopes to profiteer by silencing Truth Speakers on behalf of Satanic paymasters. We warn the public to expose and shun these nasty people and warn others about the foul racist evil misconduct.

If you have also been the Target of any of these sick evil people we encourage you to also speak out to make these rats know that their lies and abuse will NOT be tolerated. We encourage everyone to set up support networks to stop and protect targeted people from the abuses by these despicable liars . Thank You.

For further evidence to see exactly who Mark Windows and his racist agents friends really are, please view or download ‘The Rebuttal Report’ on The Farrell Report Website links below.: Please share to make viral. Thank You

http://www.thefarrellreport.net

http://www.thefarrellreport.net/repor…

http://www.thefarrellreport.net/repor…

http://www.thefarrellreport.net/repor…

Please stay tuned to this channel for other important interviews.
Note previous interviews have mysteriously all disappeared from the channel, but will be re-uploading them again very soon. Thank You for your patience and continued support it is much appreciated.###




 


RAW VIDEO — Targeted corruption victim/survivor ‘Seven’ and the brilliant outspoken Common Law Lawyer and anti corruption advocate Patrick Cullinane share damning evidence from ‘The Farrell Report’ by former police intelligence analyst turned whistle-blower the brave honorable Tony Farrell to expose the extent of ‘The Corruption of Britain’ and discuss the remedies and solutions required for public protection to prevent more people becoming afflicted. 

Seven and Patrick provide detailed insight into evidence proving the UK to be fully complicit in a long history and epidemic of sinister practices against corruption victims to deliberately thwart their legitimate claims for Justice to keep serious crimes concealed. 

Tactics exposed here are namely vast ‘gang stalking’ operations, the use of fake fabricated bailiff’s demands and the faking and misuse of official court documents to doctor and alter court rulings to favour guilty criminal freemasons and cabal members. Also exposed in this must see video is some of the sinister methods employed to target, terrorize, rob, abuse, torture and silence genuine victims, survivors, truth speakers, whistle-blowers and activists. In addition flagged up is the deeply disturbing smear campaigns and employment of a host of NWO Agents, Troll’s, Shill’s and Perps such as Mark Windows on tax payers money who many of you are already aware had usurped David Ickes TV channel called ‘The People’s Voice’. 

The despicable illegal tactics to rob then block Seven and Patrick Cullinane from attaining justice, are also covertly being carried out on thousands of other victims across the United Kingdom, as was recently highlighted in the press against Stephen Lawrence’s grieving family for 21 years, proving just how far they are going to torture the population into misery silence and submission.

This video is designed not only to bring the truth behind concealed crimes such as 7/7 to the world’s immediate attention so that everyone can clearly identify those guilty and responsible, but also to encourage achievable solutions such as setting up support networks around victims, survivors and truth speakers. It is important that we fully expose the damage professional liars cause survivors and the resolution process. 

A special Thank You to Patrick’s niece for allowing us to film in her home Please share to help make this important truth and cover up viral. Thank You!!

For further information view or download:

www.thefarrellreport.net 

http://www.thefarrellreport.net/report_2__the_main_report_and_the_rebuttal.html

http://www.thefarrellreport.net/report_3__appendices.html

http://www.thefarrellreport.net/report_5__judge_pumfrey_is_dead_-_the_audio_tapes.html

Contact Patrick Cullinane at:
Twitter: @PatrickCulinane
Email: Patrick.Cullinane@tiscali.co.uk

Please note previous interviews uploaded to this channel have disappeared but will all be re-uploaded again shortly. Stay tuned to this channel for more important interviews. Thank You all for your patience and continued support.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

JOIN THE GRANDMA B FACEBOOK GROUP – SEE THE RADIO SHOW BELOW, AND MORE ABOUT THE ABUSE BY THE AUTHORITIES OF ELDERLY GRANDMA B

grandz

PLEASE JOIN THIS FACEBOOK GROUP AND SEE THE OFFICIAL SITE AND GOOGLE “GRANDMA B” – – GRANDMA B – AND FIND OUT WHAT THEY DID TO AN 89 YEAR OLD WHEELCHAIR-BOUND OLD LADY – THEY TOOK ALL HER PRIVATE POSSESSIONS AND THEN HOUNDED THE FAMILY – THIS IS THE POLICE!! AND OTHER CRONIES…JOIN THE GROUP AND FIND OUT WHY LORD MAGINNIS WAS FITTED UP BY THE POLICE FOR DARING TO SUPPORT GRANDMA B AND ASK QUESTIONS IN PARLIAMENT ABOUT THIS LONG-RUNNING SCANDAL – A LORD BEING TARGETED? TRULY OUTRAGEOUS!! A MUST FOR ARMCHAIR ENTHUSIASTS!!

SEE:

https://www.facebook.com/TheAbuseofGrandmaB?notif_t=fbpage_fan_invite

AND STAND UP!!!

The Abuse of Grandma B
Community

and scroll down for more posts on the ABUSE OF GRANDMA B !!

RADIO INTERVIEW WITH PETER HOFSCHROER – 19 mins 8/8/12: http://www.onetruemedia.com/shared?p=11d595277423e9978346ffa&skin_id=701&utm_source=otm&utm_medium=text_url
—————————————————-

On Sun, 16/12/12, feldmeier & feldmeier ; wrote:
Subject: F/A/O HOMEOFFICE Re; Council Contractors WITHOLD PASSPORTS & ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS OF IDENTITY ETC To: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Date: Sunday, 16 December, 2012, 12:07

IN AND FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST

PASSPORTS BEING WITHELD FROM MOTHER AND DAUGHTER

FOR NOW 22 MONTHS!

Please would you tell us how we can go about getting our PASSPORTS,ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES, & ALL OTHER PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTAL DOCUMENTS…

WE HAVE NOTHING TO PROOVE OUR IDENTITY…..

ALL LIFE TIME POSSESSIONS WAS PLACED FOR SAFE KEEPING WITH COUNCIL CONTRACTORS WHILST UNDER THE HOMELESSNESS ACT……..UPON BEING REHOUSED ETC…THE COMPANY REFUSED RETURN….

BLACKMAILING MS E FELDMEIER (TRUE OWNER OF ALL HER LIFE TIME POSSESSIONS AND ENTIRE HOME CONTENTS…

LEAVING US IN ABSOLUTE POVERTY,WITHOUT BASIC ESSENTALS

WE HAVE NO SOFA,NO BEDS,NO WASHING MACHINE (SLEEPING ON BLOW UP AIRBED ON FLOOR)

CANNOT AFFORD TO REPLACE ANYTHING…AS MS E FELDMEIER IS SERIOUSLY INCAPACITATED (DISABLED) WITH LIFE THREATENING MEDICAL CONDITIONS….IS UNABLE TO START OVER AT AGE 61….

AS ON DLA…………….ETC….

PLEASE PLEASE ADVISE US HOW TO MAKE THE COUNCIL CONTRACTORS UPHOLD THE LAW,….

C.A.B ARE UNABLE TO HELP DUE TO THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND THEIR CONTRACTORS NOT REPLYING,WE ALSO HAVE BEEN TOLD THERE IS NO LEGAL AID FOR THIS…AND CANNOT AFFORD REPRESENTATION ETC

THANK YOU

PP. E Feldmeier

THE SCANDAL OF GRANDMA B – THE RADIO I’VIEW BACK ONLINE – MUST LISTEN!!

* RADIO INTERVIEW BACK ONLINE *

http://www.onetruemedia.com/shared?p=11d595277423e9978346ffa&skin_id=701&utm_source=otm&utm_medium=text_url

the story of how corrupt police officers and social workers are abusing a little, old lady on a wheelchair

Grandma B on 01/10/2012• Permalink

Posted by Grandma B on 01/10/2012 http://www.grandmabarbara.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/radio-interview-back-online/

Pages
•1) NEW ITEMS ◦* RADIO INTERVIEW BACK ONLINE *
◦AN OPEN LETTER TO JULIA MULLIGAN
◦Message to Cllr Ruth Potter (Lab – York)
◦MORE CORRUPTION IN NORTH YORKSHIRE POLICE
◦Transparency International

•2) UPDATES ◦ARREST JANE KENYON!
◦Bad Will from Goodwill

•3) THE ABUSE OF GRANDMA B ◦Archbishop of York declines to help Grandma B
◦CORRUPTION – Press Comments
◦CORRUPTION IN YORK LABOUR PARTY
◦GSCC refuses to discipline Corrupt Social Worker
◦GUILTY – Corrupt Social Worker Mark Bednarski
◦HAPPY BIRTHDAY GRANDMA B!
◦How Age UK abuses the Elderly
◦LATEST NEWS
◦Misconduct in Public Office
◦NAME & SHAME exposé of corruption
◦Ombudsman declines to investigate Grandma B’s Case
◦Open Letter to Hugh Bayley MP
◦OPEN LETTER TO LABOUR CHIEF WHIP ROSIE WINTERTON
◦QUESTION IN PARLIAMENT
◦Sturdy or Wobbly?
◦The Abuse of Grandma B – How Corrupt Officials are plundering the Assets of the Elderly

•4) THE ROTTEN BOROUGH OF YORK ◦An Open Letter to Kersten England, Chief Executive of York Council
◦Brave New Labour
◦Cllr Simpson-Laing abuses 82 year-old invalid
◦Corrupt York Councillors & Social Worker decline to issue Denial
◦How Can a Corrupt Council be a Fair Council?
◦Ian Floyd – Director of York Council – lies to Nigel Ward on Defamation Allegations
◦Why has Robert Hofschröer not been arrested?
◦York Council commits further Criminal Offences against Grandma B
◦York Council tries to bully Critics into Silence
◦York Social Worker burgles 82 year old Great-Grandmother

•5) CRIMES COMMITTED BY THE POLICE
◦ARREST CHIEF CONSTABLE MAXWELL NOW!
◦BREAKING NEWS
◦Corrupt British Officials abuse Interpol to try to arrest Grandma B’s Carer
◦DEMO IN LONDON AGAINST POLICE CORRUPTION – 12 June 2012
◦Every Chief Officer of North York Police facing Criminal Charges
◦FOUND – ex-Inspector Colin Moreton
◦How North Yorkshire Police handle a Freedom of Information Request….
◦IPCC CORRUPTION
◦Letter to Chief Constable Grahame Maxwell
◦Maxwell facing Criminal Investigation
◦Maxwell lies to Home Secretary in the “Worst Corruption Case in History of British Police”
◦Police Abuse 86 Year-Old War Veteran
◦Police threaten Action against Grandma B Supporter
◦Questions in the House
◦STILL AT LARGE – Superintendent Lisa Winward
◦The Tip of the Iceberg…
◦THE WORST CASE OF POLICE CORRUPTION IN BRITISH HISTORY?
◦VERY SERIOUS BREACH OF PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE

GRANDMA B – UPDATE 16 OCT. 13

We seem to be making progress in our new place of refuge.
We are renting a small flat, while we look for somewhere more permanent.
We have sorted out most of the formalities.
Our lawyer here advised us to apply for a block on releasing official information on us to third parties.
On hearing our story and seeing the evidence, the relevant local government officer put us in the highest category of persecuted people. As we are in a EU country and are EU citizens, we could not get asylum status. However, we can now live here incognito, which is a great relief.
This is the first time that the UK and Austrian governments have been assessed as undertaking such serious persecution of its citizens / residents. That puts them at the level of Zimbabwe, Somalia, etc.
Our next step is to discuss the case with the local police with a view of pursuing criminal charges against the UK and Austrian governments. More news when I have it!

Peter Hofschroer update – see http://www.grandmabarbara.wordpress.com:

received 1 Oct.:
“Ladies & Gentlemen,
I am writing to you in your role as members of the Special Committee on Organised Crime, Corruption and Money Laundering to inform you of a case of cross-border corruption involving officials in both Britain and Austria.
My 84 year-old mother, Barbara Hofschröer,a British citizen, is disabled after a stroke. She is the victim of a serious fraud in which incessant attempts have been made to unlawfully seize her assets. The criminal gang that has targeted her consists of senior British police officers, social workers, local authority officials and members, as well as certain family members. As her local MP is also actively involved in this criminal activity, Lord Maginnis of Drumglass was so concerned about this blatant official corruption that he has raised my mother case in the British Parliament on several occasions, including:
“The Hofschroer case has been on my desk for several years now. A widow in her 80s was dispossessed of her home in a way that implies collusion between certain family members and the Social Services. A son who has come to the rescue has been harried by the North Yorkshire police (that particularly dubious constabulary merits careful investigation) to the extent that he and his aged mother have been pursued through an Interpol warrant to their “refuge” in Austria.

http://www.epolitix.com/latestnews/article-detail/newsarticle/proper-delegation-please-not-abdication/

“Does anyone in authority care that social services and police in North Yorkshire have conspired in the persecution of Mrs Hofschroer and her son? Are details of dismissals, forced retirements and other shady and costly measures pertaining to North Yorkshire Police available to legislators in Parliament? “

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2012-05-15a.258.7&s=Hofschroer#g332.0:

The accused have not denied these very serious allegations made in a very public place. Under English common law, this amounts to a tacit admission of guilt. Despite that, the British government has refused to act to uphold the law.
My mother and I went to Austria for a Christmas holiday at the end of 2009.
Her abusers, who had been stalking her for more than a year saw that she was not at home. Social services enquired at her day club and established she was on holiday abroad. The police then made enquires with the neighbours and confirmed this. Family members then forced entry to her house, changed the locks and unlawfully evicted her. When neighbours saw them removing our belongings, they called the police. However, the officers attending stood by watching this crime being committed before telling our neighbours to mind their own business.
The police and social services then fabricated allegations of crime against me, telling me I would be arrested if I returned home.
My mother and I were now stranded in a foreign country and have been ever since.
The police then approached the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) making false claims of financial abuse against me in an attempt to have my powers of attorney over my mother revoked. The OPG investigated the allegations and established they were without foundation.
Nevertheless, my mother’s abusers then tried to fraudulently sell her house, which her lawyers were fortunately able to stop. We were able to regain control of our house and intended to return home, but the authorities refused to safeguard my mother, who has received death threats from her abusers.
Her abusers then made further attempts to get me out of the way. Social services held a safeguarding meeting at which I was declared an abuser. This conference was unlawful, as I was not informed it was taking place and was not given an opportunity of answering the allegations.
A civilian worker of North Yorkshire Police (NYP) then started the process of attempting to have me arrested in Austria via Interpol. This arrest request was unlawful, as only police officers are allowed to make them.
Despite the fact this arrest request was unlawful, no crime had been committed, no crime was reported and no evidence of a crime was produced, NYP passed this arrest request to Special Branch, who passed it to the Serious Organised Crime Agency, who passed it to New Scotland Yard, who passed it to Interpol, who then requested the Austrian police to investigate this matter and arrest me if necessary. The Austrian police conducted a thorough investigation before establishing that no crime had been committed and that there was no evidence of any crime having been committed.
Thwarted by this failed attempt to silence me, this criminal gang then found an Austrian judge prepared to abet their criminal activities.
In June 2011, there was a court hearing in Austria against various member of this criminal gang. As, after five minutes, it was very clear the presiding judge was partial and acting in common purpose with this criminal gang, I applied for the case to be stayed pending developments.
This came when, on 15 May 2012, Lord Maginnis tabled the above questions in the British Parliament.
On 24 May 2012, my lawyers in Austria applied for the case to be reopened, as we now had incontrovertible proof of the defendants’ guilt.
On 16 June 2012, the presiding judge declared me to be “mentally incapacitated” on the basis of blatant falsehoods.
On 21 June 2012, NYP wrote to me making further threats to arrest me on the basis of false allegations.
On 4 July 2012, family members again forced entry to our house in England and then made a further attempt to fraudulently sell it. We were again able to stop them.
Since then, the Austrian judiciary – including a dozen or more judges and officials of the state prosecutors office have made increasingly aggressive attempts to have me declared “mentally incapacitated” and have now fabricated criminal charges against me.
I have attempted to pursue complaints through official complaints channels in Austria, but have been blocked at every stage. The High Court has rejected my complaints, the President of the Supreme Court has ignored my requests for intervention, the Minster of Justice appears to be exercising her right of silence, while the President of Austria has evaded my request for an investigation into this official corruption.
Meanwhile, we have started to pursue legal action through the English courts.
On 5 July 2013, Bradford County Court issued an injunction preventing members of this criminal gang from fraudulently selling my mother’s house in England, which I had obtained on my mother’s behalf..
On 8 July 2013, the Austrian State Prosecutor wrote to me telling me I had been accused of committing a criminal offence. I deny this and have never seen or been given any evidence of this. Furthermore, I have not been arrested or questioned by the police.
On 11 July 2013, the District Court of Liezen issued the first of a series of court orders declaring me “mentally incapacitated” with the specific objective of preventing me from undertaking any further litigation. This is a breach of the English court order and the Austrian judiciary is now in contempt of court.
This sequence of events clearly indicates that the Austrian judiciary is acting corruptly in common purpose with this British criminal gang.
As our human rights have been massively violated by the Austrian government, we have made an application to the European Court of Human Rights and anticipate pursuing this case in Strasbourg.
Meanwhile, the Austrian authorities have appointed an attorney to prevent me from pursuing further legal action against them and their accomplices in England.
We clearly have a case of serious, cross-border crime here involving the government of two EU countries, who are intent on defrauding my elderly mother and I, a registered invalid, of our assets.
Interpol have not responded to my requests for an investigation into the unlawful attempt to arrest me.
Europol has kindly replied to my enquiries, but have pointed out that until a national government requests their intervention, there is nothing they can do.
As I am a German citizen, I have requested to German authorities to intervene and await their response.
Meanwhile, my elderly mother. whose only wish is to be able to return to her home and spend the remainder of her days there living in peace and safety, has become seriously ill as a result of this abuse and crime. Her needs are now very urgent, as she does not wish to die in a foreign country.
As a victim of cross-border official corruption and crime, I have made every reasonable attempt to pursue the matter through official channels, Sadly, none of these attempts to see that the law is upheld have been successful.
It would also seem that the EU lacks the powers to deal with governmental corruption by member states, so its citizens lack any defence against criminal governments.
I do hope this this causes you concern and that you can suggest a viable course of action here.
Should you wish sight of the substantial amount of evidence of official corruption in the EU which I have accumulated, please do not hesitate t contact me.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Hofschröer
see http://www.grandmabarbara.wordpress.com for more.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

COMPLAINT TO IPCC – MAURICE KIRK

KIRKAA Maurice at Tottenham police station showing the now boarded up window broken by his removing himself from a room there where he was being unlawfully detained – Sept. 2011

Subject: IPCC Reference: 2014/025117 SOUTH WALES POLICE
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 06:05:58 -0700

Dear Chief Superintendent X,

Thank you for your response.

I shall be grateful if you will please acknowledge this email by issuing me a complaint file number immediately, as is required by protocol.

Cardiff Crown Court, April 8, 2014 Case Number A20140005, before Judge Crowther

I am reliably informed that the prison duty governor admitted under oath that the police are monitoring Maurice Kirk’s phone calls from the prison, and have put one of his supporters on a no contact list. This information should be in the court transcripts. Mr. Kirk was on remand at the time. He is a civil prisoner.

That alone is an indicator of direct police interference with the health, welfare, and rights of Maurice Kirk,

and it is in the public interest that this complaint be followed through in its entirety, please.

It is alleged that Mr. Kirk is being denied his right to medical attention, has been, and is being, subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment as a direct result of overt police interference with his rights, health, and welfare.

This allegation is besides the fact that Maurice Kirk has allegedly been inhumanely treated and persecuted in an unlawful manner by South Wales police over a great many years, as a result of his successful civil litigation against South Wales Police. Here I cut and paste the testimony of Maurice Kirk’s sister which is to form part of this complaint, along with testimonies of those outlined in the email chain below:

“Time to start connecting the dots

I set out below the complaint I have sent into ABM NHS Trust and the organisation representing victims of the South Wales Hospital.

As you can see this involves the South Wales Police in the first place, then the NHS and more horrifically the CPS and Prison Service.

The story below is a synopsis of what has been happening to my brother over the past 22 years.

Truly Shocking.

Intro
I am sister to Maurice John KIRK (dob 12.3.45) who is currently being held in Cardiff Prison awaiting sentence for a trumped up crime. He is thus unable to furnish information personally. I live in Jersey but was in Cardiff last month and attended a ‘victims of ABMU’ meeting on Tuesday 26th March 2014 in Bridgend.

Case:
A. Maurice Kirk has had a long battle with South Wales Police who continually picked on him for relatively minor motoring offences which he continually disproved in the magistrates’ courts of South Wales over a period of some 18 years. I believe the record would show that he won over 80% of his appearances. Weekly he would be stopped and asked to produce his driving licence and insurance documents at some police station or other as he went about his business.

B. He was a well-respected Veterinary Surgeon who would always drop whatever he was doing socially/family/middle of the night to attend an injured animal if surgery was closed. Our father was also a veterinary surgeon and held the same view that an animal in pain required immediate attention.

C. The Police asked him to attend an injured dog found under the cliffs at Llantwit beach. (They had asked other vets in the area but as it was Saturday afternoon they refused!) My brother with his damaged ankle walked several hundred meters along the beach over stones to retrieve the dog and as people looked on he struggled to carry the mangy animal back to his car to treat in the surgery. He was reported to the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons where his motoring offences were noted. The police took statements from some on-lookers who did not understand the situation (the dog had been hurled off the cliff by uncaring owners and my brother was not going to be paid for his efforts to save the dog but this did not matter to him). They failed to admit that a retired magistrate watching the event with her sister had nothing but praise for the vet and did not submit this evidence to the Royal College.

D. Subsequently my brother was banned from practising as a vet. This had been initiated because Kirk had decided to take the South Wales Police to the Civil Court for their behaviour over the last 18 years.

The Police turned up the pressure and one day in June 2009 they arrested him for possession of an unlicensed and illegal firearm. He was imprisoned on remand and S W Police asked Dr. W to verify my brother’s state of mental health. The court duly placed him in C CLINIC for 28 days. During this time the DOCTOR and team was unable to come to a conclusion about his diagnosis and so twice more the court was asked to extend the incarceration in C Clinic. (My brother said it was a truly frightening place to be as most of the inmates really were suffering from mental illness).

E. My brother was determined to defend himself in court as he knew the real story and he would not have been able to afford legal representation and anyway, could find no reliable Welsh defence lawyer. The Police were anxious to stop him speaking the truth in court so unbeknownst to the defendant he was illegally placed on MAPPA Level 3 and made a subject of Public Interest Immunity (IIP) and therefore should be incarcerated to Ashworth Hospital for LIFE!. (Before they picked him up in June 2009 an order had gone out that he was to be shot on sight if seen near the home of the Chief Constable Barbara Wilding. Luckily for Maurice he did not go down that road as he did not know where she lived and had received no notice that he would be shot if he did. This is all unbelievable I hear you say but there is a paper trail to prove it)

F. The Court needed two psychiatrists to sign the document to declare that Kirk was unfit to plead. Although whilst in his prison cell in HMP Cardiff I understand eleven psychiatrists tried to interview him a second doctor could not be found to corroborate that my brother had paranoid delusional disorder and was unfit to defend himself in court.

G. On 2nd December 2009 I ordered the transcript of the bail application hearing in front of Judge Bidder. (received 20th Jan. 2010) My brother was not allowed to be present and so had no representative in court to hear Dr. W testimony that Maurice John KIRK has paranoid delusional disorder, a degree of brain damage and possibly brain cancer.

H. His application for bail failed but surprisingly whilst awaiting trial no Prison Doctor came near him and no hospital appointment was made in relation to ‘possible brain tumour’!

I. Needless to say he was extremely worried about his health once he had sight of the transcript and the doctor’s evidence. NO TREATMENT offered.

J. The Firearms Jury Trial was rumbled as a made-up case by South Wales Police as we were told after the three week trial that the Jury were pretty sure that the Police had fabricated evidence from Day One. Maurice was released.

K. During the subsequent years (now 4 years) he has attempted to have this false medical report removed from his health records and those held by HMP Cardiff. It has been in vain.

L. He desperately needed a hip replacement operation as his ankle injury had put pressure on the hip joint. The anaesthetist was unable to accept him for treatment due to this incorrect report and in the end he had the operation in France.

M. He re-applied for his Private Pilots Licence but this was refused because of the Doctor’s report. He re-applied to be reinstated at the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons but this was refused based on Dr. W’s false medical report.

N. He had full scans on his brain at his expense (not in South Wales as the health service refused him) to ascertain that he DID NOT have a brain tumour nor appreciable brain damage.

O. Last year the CAA awarded him his Private Pilots Licence again and after being incarcerated again in HMP Cardiff on another Police make-believe case to prevent the 20 week Civil Action against the South Wales Police in Court from concluding he had to go on hunger strike before the Prison Medical Service admitted that the information in Dr. W’s medical Report of September 2009 was incorrect in its conclusions.

P. I should add that my brother, (aged 69, oldest prisoner in the prison)) who has a prolapsed colon ( as he defended himself this was the only route he could take to get important evidence into Court from his Prison Cell) is in regular 5 hours of pain but is obliged to queue in line with the methadone chaps on his drug wing for a paracetamol which he is obliged to take then (8am and 4pm) and so is unable to receive pain relief when he needs it later in the evening. He is down to see the Prison Doctor in 6 weeks time! When you see how he treated animals in pain he now wishes he was an animal not a Human Being in the South Wales Health area.

Q. He has tried and tried to get this false report removed from his file but it has proved impossible. NHS Wales have never co-operated in this.

signed on the victim’s behalf :

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

MAURICE KIRK UPDATE – FROM 7 APRIL 2014

Latest News

Time to start connecting the dots

I set out below the complaint I have sent into ABM NHS Trust and the organisation representing victims of the South Wales Hospital.

As you can see this involves the South Wales Police in the first place, then the NHS and more horrifically the CPS and Prison Service.

The story below is a synopsis of what has been happening to my brother over the past 22 years.

Truly Shocking.

Intro
I am sister to Maurice John KIRK (dob 12.3.45) who is currently being held in Cardiff Prison awaiting sentence for a trumped up crime. He is thus unable to furnish information personally. I live in Jersey but was in Cardiff last month and attended a ‘victims of ABMU’ meeting on Tuesday 26th March 2014 in Bridgend.

Case:
A. Maurice Kirk has had a long battle with South Wales Police who continually picked on him for relatively minor motoring offences which he continually disproved in the magistrates’ courts of South Wales over a period of some 18 years. I believe the record would show that he won over 80% of his appearances. Weekly he would be stopped and asked to produce his driving licence and insurance documents at some police station or other as he went about his business.

B. He was a well-respected Veterinary Surgeon who would always drop whatever he was doing socially/family/middle of the night to attend an injured animal if surgery was closed. Our father was also a veterinary surgeon and held the same view that an animal in pain required immediate attention.

C. The Police asked him to attend an injured dog found under the cliffs at Llantwit beach. (They had asked other vets in the area but as it was Saturday afternoon they refused!) My brother with his damaged ankle walked several hundred meters along the beach over stones to retrieve the dog and as people looked on he struggled to carry the mangy animal back to his car to treat in the surgery. He was reported to the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons where his motoring offences were noted. The police took statements from some on-lookers who did not understand the situation (the dog had been hurled off the cliff by uncaring owners and my brother was not going to be paid for his efforts to save the dog but this did not matter to him). They failed to admit that a retired magistrate watching the event with her sister had nothing but praise for the vet and did not submit this evidence to the Royal College.

D. Subsequently my brother was banned from practising as a vet. This had been initiated because Kirk had decided to take the South Wales Police to the Civil Court for their behaviour over the last 18 years.

The Police turned up the pressure and one day in June 2009 they arrested him for possession of an unlicensed and illegal firearm. He was imprisoned on remand and S W Police asked Dr. W to verify my brother’s state of mental health. The court duly placed him in C CLINIC for 28 days. During this time the DOCTOR and team was unable to come to a conclusion about his diagnosis and so twice more the court was asked to extend the incarceration in C Clinic. (My brother said it was a truly frightening place to be as most of the inmates really were suffering from mental illness).

E. My brother was determined to defend himself in court as he knew the real story and he would not have been able to afford legal representation and anyway, could find no reliable Welsh defence lawyer. The Police were anxious to stop him speaking the truth in court so unbeknownst to the defendant he was illegally placed on MAPPA Level 3 and made a subject of Public Interest Immunity (IIP) and therefore should be incarcerated to Ashworth Hospital for LIFE!. (Before they picked him up in June 2009 an order had gone out that he was to be shot on sight if seen near the home of the Chief Constable Barbara Wilding. Luckily for Maurice he did not go down that road as he did not know where she lived and had received no notice that he would be shot if he did. This is all unbelievable I hear you say but there is a paper trail to prove it)

F. The Court needed two psychiatrists to sign the document to declare that Kirk was unfit to plead. Although whilst in his prison cell in HMP Cardiff I understand eleven psychiatrists tried to interview him a second doctor could not be found to corroborate that my brother had paranoid delusional disorder and was unfit to defend himself in court.

G. On 2nd December 2009 I ordered the transcript of the bail application hearing in front of Judge Bidder. (received 20th Jan. 2010) My brother was not allowed to be present and so had no representative in court to hear Dr. W testimony that Maurice John KIRK has paranoid delusional disorder, a degree of brain damage and possibly brain cancer.

H. His application for bail failed but surprisingly whilst awaiting trial no Prison Doctor came near him and no hospital appointment was made in relation to ‘possible brain tumour’!

I. Needless to say he was extremely worried about his health once he had sight of the transcript and the doctor’s evidence. NO TREATMENT offered.

J. The Firearms Jury Trial was rumbled as a made-up case by South Wales Police as we were told after the three week trial that the Jury were pretty sure that the Police had fabricated evidence from Day One. Maurice was released.

K. During the subsequent years (now 4 years) he has attempted to have this false medical report removed from his health records and those held by HMP Cardiff. It has been in vain.

L. He desperately needed a hip replacement operation as his ankle injury had put pressure on the hip joint. The anaesthetist was unable to accept him for treatment due to this incorrect report and in the end he had the operation in France.

M. He re-applied for his Private Pilots Licence but this was refused because of the Doctor’s report. He re-applied to be reinstated at the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons but this was refused based on Dr. W’s false medical report.

N. He had full scans on his brain at his expense (not in South Wales as the health service refused him) to ascertain that he DID NOT have a brain tumour nor appreciable brain damage.

O. Last year the CAA awarded him his Private Pilots Licence again and after being incarcerated again in HMP Cardiff on another Police make-believe case to prevent the 20 week Civil Action against the South Wales Police in Court from concluding he had to go on hunger strike before the Prison Medical Service admitted that the information in Dr. W’s medical Report of September 2009 was incorrect in its conclusions.

P. I should add that my brother, (aged 69, oldest prisoner in the prison)) who has a prolapsed colon ( as he defended himself this was the only route he could take to get important evidence into Court from his Prison Cell) is in regular 5 hours of pain but is obliged to queue in line with the methadone chaps on his drug wing for a paracetamol which he is obliged to take then (8am and 4pm) and so is unable to receive pain relief when he needs it later in the evening. He is down to see the Prison Doctor in 6 weeks time! When you see how he treated animals in pain he now wishes he was an animal not a Human Being in the South Wales Health area.

Q. He has tried and tried to get this false report removed from his file but it has proved impossible. NHS Wales have never co-operated in this.

signed on the victim’s behalf : Celia L. Jeune (nee Kirk)

Ok, guess what they have done now?

Maurice’s appeal against assault conviction, which was heard on Monday and Tuesday of this week and which culminated then in the revelation by a duty governor at the prison, from the witness box and under oath, that the prison phone line was monitored and controlled by the south Wales police, has now been adjourned untill 30th JUNE of this year, some 80 days from now!

So that is another 80 days on remand then, another 80 days of isolation.

One can only wonder why this would be. One thing that can be stated with certainty is that it is not in the pursuit of justice!

___________________________________________________

Here is an interesting development that happened on Tuesday.

Whilst under cross examination by Maurice, a duty governor from Cardiff prison admitted that a legal supporter was prevented from communicating with him regarding his ongoing civil case against the South Wales police, whilst he was in the prison on trumped up charges by the South Wales police (that were later dropped).

Apparently the block on the phone number of the said supporter was arranged by the same people he was in the process of sueing, namely………….THE SOUTH WALES POLICE! Obviously this is now on the record, perverting the course of justice anyone?

This is only the admission of one witness about one incident, there have been numerous other incidents of visitors names being removed from the list and other phone numbers being blocked at critical times, as has been reported on this site over the last three years.

The court will not be sitting on Wednesday or Thursday and apparently can only sit on Friday with two judges instead of three!

Maurice seems to think he may be sentenced on Friday for the breach of the void in Law restraining order that he was convicted of a couple of weeks ago, although we are not sure why they would do that in the middle of the appeal against assault on the prison officer Rogan and before the appeal against assault on the barrister Gareth Evans. Perhaps they think they can stop the details of the truth from coming out?

In any case we think it likely that they will drop the Evans case in order to prevent him from having to take the stand and be cross examined by Maurice!

The truth is coming out, slowly, drip by drip but it is coming out none the less.

Softly softly, catchee Monkey(s)

__________________________

Some interesting points came up yesterday, one of the most notable being that the judge banned anyone in the public gallery from taking notes! One has to wonder why he doesn’t want the general public making a record of official proceedings in open court? Particularly as the general public are paying for the court and are ultimately the observers to ensure that justice is done.

Which actually brings me to the second point of note, although this appeal is being heard in a different courtroom, number 7 as it happens, the ubiquitous fish tank made an unwelcome re-appearance. It was noted in this case for it’s superior ability to block out both the sound and vision of observers at the back of the court! Not only that but it was connected to the cells by a glass, no doubt bulletproof, tunnel which intruded even further into the courtroom.

One got to wondering, whilst straining to hear the proceedings, about this bulletproof dock, connected as it is to the cells by locked doors in the tunnel which required the private security guards to open with a key. This dock, in the court, isn’t actually a dock at all. Rather it is a cell, connected to the other cells and completely insulated from the court.

According to British Law, the accused is innocent, unless and until he is proven guilty. He may be remanded in custody until his trial begins, but once he enters the court he does so as an innocent man. How then is it possible to put him in a cell and have him in court at the same time? The purpose of the remand is to ensure that he appears in the court, to prevent flight, but once he enters the court the custody of the gaol is suspended and he stands in the court as an innocent man.

It is against the Law of this land to confine an innocent man in a cell! The court is not there to imprison him (ostensibly), the court is there to decide if he is guilty as charged. How can he appear in court, if he is still effectively in the cells?

This reminds me of the machine gun farce, you know the one where the police produced gender changing witnesses, hidden behind screens, in the interests of national security! When, after the jury found him not guilty, the judge insisted that he would be released after he had been “processed” down in the cells, but he was an innocent man! The jury, the highest law in the land, had just said so, yet he was dragged back out of the courtroom and down to the cells, to be unceremoniously kicked out of the side entrance some hours later. So yet again they imprisoned an innocent man.

They cannot do this under British Law! It is called unlawful imprisonment, or alternatively kidnapping and the penalties are severe! The ONLY conclusion that can be reached is that they are not doing it under British Law, they are in fact using continental law, code Napoleon, the inquisitory system! The main difference between the two? Code Napoleon presumes a man’s guilt until he is proven innocent and if they are presuming his guilt then they can of course put him in a cell.

Of course this also conflicts with another pillar of British justice, that of equality before the law. Maurice is representing himself; so he is in effect his own legal counsel for the defence. Now the counsel for the prosecution has at his disposal a large desk upon which to spread his legal papers, an assistant to sit behind him, and the benefit of being clearly heard by the court, (apart from those in the public gallery), he even has a ready supply of water to drink, should the proceedings dry him up!

Maurice on the other hand, is confined in the aforementioned fish tank, he has no desk upon which to spread the legal papers for his defence, which he also doesn’t have. he has no assistant to sit behind him and spent most of the day with his lips pressed to the one inch gap between the bulletproof panels in an effort to be heard. No water is provided for his refreshment.

How can it possibly be said that he enjoys equality with the prosecution? He is plainly at a disadvantage from the start.

___________________________________

Maurice appears in court again this morning, before Judge Crowther at 10 am. This time for an appeal against conviction for assaulting a prison officer.

Maurice claims that he arrested the prison officer Rogan for commiting a crime when he failed to return his passport which was being unlawfully withheld after he had been released from prison. The authorities of course had to cover this up and so they initially charged him with unlawfully entering a prison, then they changed the charge to assault!

They convicted him of course, in the usual manner. Strangely enough, although this took place right in front of the main entrance to Cardiff prison, which, as you would expect, is watched continuously by a security camera, there was no video evidence available for that day to settle the matter one way or the other! Apparently the camera was not working at the time of the incident, either it was broken or it was switched off, much like the cameras in the Pont d’Alma tunnel were switched off on the day that they murdered Diana.

One has to wonder why his appeal is being heard in the Cardiff courts where he was convicted? Surely it should be in the London appeal court? Never mind, I can pretty much guarantee that it will be a rerun of his last appeal against conviction in the Cardiff crown court, which of course was held in the ……….Cardiff crown court!

During his recent trial for breaking the restraining order, Maurice was prevented from presenting his medical evidence to the jury, the evidence which shows that he does not have brain damage or a tumour. The evidence that discredits the medical report produced by the doctor who must, in the interests of “justice”, remain nameless. The same evidence that was used to unlawfully incarcerate him for 8 months before the jury spotted the lies of the police and aquitted him of dealing in machine guns!

It was deemed by the judge to be irrelevant. Of course if it had been presented, then it would have proved that he was not guilty of harassment as he was pursuing and exposing a crime, which in turn would mean that the restraining order was unfounded in the first place. Just as well it was irrelevant then, otherwise it would have proved that they have unlawfully locked him up for the last three years or so!

Maurice puts this down to the “zero tolerance” policy of the South Wales Police to accusations against NHS medical staff. He insists that they are pursuing a policy of immunity to prosecution for medical staff.

The NHS of course is one of the biggest gravy trains in town. The opportunities for enriching the masonic cabal are at least equal to if not bigger than the opportunities provided by the “law enforcement/ judicial” gravy train that was milked only last year to the tune of 30 million of our pounds by the bent cops and robbers, sorry, the bent cops and lawyers of the Cardiff cabal!

Does anyone remember the link I posted a while back to an article in the Independent? The one that told how masonic corruption and control of the police, judges and most of the rest of civic society has reached out of control epidemic proportions, well here it is, in the flesh so to speak! Was it this link: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-corruption-of-britain-uks-key-institutions-infiltrated-by-criminals-9052617.html ?

Getting back to the appeal later on this morning, it is rumoured that the judge Crowther QC, appointed by the queen no less, does in fact know the barrister Gareth Evans, who Maurice also arrested for breaking the Law and was again convicted of assault. If this turns out to be the case then obviously the judge will need to recuse himself. He could hardly be expected to be impartial in such circumstances……………could he?

Published Apr 07 2014, 01:04 AM

source: http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/news/archive/2014/04/07/time-to-start-connecting-the-dots.aspx

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

CHERRY GROCE CAMPAIGN GRANTED LEGAL AID!!!

Change.org

After almost a thirty year battle to find justice for my mother Cherry Groce, we’ve finally been granted legal aid. This will allow us to have professional representation and actively participate fairly in her inquest.

Independent reports said that the events in 1985, when my innocent mother was shot by a police officer, sparking the Brixton riots, were a significant factor in her death in 2011. Despite numerous calls for legal aid to represent us at the inquest and unlock the truth surrounding her death our appeals were denied by The Legal Aid Agency.

But following our campaign, with over 133,000 of you supporting our family, national media coverage and help from Brixton MP Chuka Umunna, the Ministry of Justice were forced to intervene.

On Friday 11 April 2014 they said;

“Legal aid funding for lawyers to represent the family of Ms Groce at the forthcoming inquest into her death has now been granted. Having considered the request of the Legal Aid Agency, ministers have decided to authorise funding for this case. We hope that this legal representation will help her family and those who knew Ms Groce find out more about the circumstances leading to her death.”

Please share this news — click here to tweet — it will come as a beacon of hope to others in my shoes who feel they are not being heard. When we come together, we can’t be ignored.

This is not the end, we need to make sure that the inquest brings us justice. The inquest is due to start on 30 June. In the meantime you can follow me on Twitter for updates: @mrleelawrence

Thank you for all that you’ve done for our campaign.

Lee Lawrence,
Son of Cherry Groce

PS We have set up a charity to honour our mother’s legacy dedicated to supporting those who have become disabled through tragedy, illness or accident. Please visit and support at: http://www.cherrytreetrust.org

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

AUSTRIAN GESTAPO VICTIMISE AND PERSECUTE GRANDMA B AGAIN!!

KEYSTONE GESTAPO RAIDS GRANDMA B’S HOUSE AGAIN!

“Well, what a surprise.

After having spent many man-days examining the data on a disabled great-grandmother’s mobile and camera, as well a dead man’s PC, Dr Paedophile Fotr, the Austrian court-accredited expert witness found no incriminating evidence whatsoever on the materials he stole from Grandma B’s house. Let’s hope he does the decent thing and returns them!

However, the Keystone Gestapo did not let the latest failed attempt put them off. After all, they have a reputation for getting their man, no matter what.

Lo and behold!

A second search of the said house found items missed in the first through search conducted by professionals, who located an envelope in minutes, namely a collection of historic weapons. Surprising that, considering Grandma B’s carer is a well-known historian. How did they manage not to notice the Brown Bess hanging up on the wall the first time?

The muzzle-loading 18th century firearms in his collection have now been removed and are being kept in a safe place, along with the accompanying bag of flints. Heaven knows what he might have done with them. After all, there was a story in the papers only yesterday about a criminal gang dressed in Napoleonic uniforms, who tried to rob a bank. They gave up when their weapons all misfired. A flash in the pan and nothing else! But who knows, they might have tried again, after putting in a new flint!

And then this time they of course found a number of suspicious looking videos. Presumably more items from Dr Paedophile Fotr’s collection.

We can only wonder how all this incriminating evidence was missed the first time by the people who found one tiny little envelope in minutes the first time.

Does anybody need three guesses here?

For the first two parts of this farce, do see:

https://www.grandmabarbara.wordpress.com/1-new-items/austrian-police-burgle-grandma-bs-refuge/

Source: http://grandmabarbara.wordpress.com/1-new-items/keystone-gestapo-raids-grandma-bs-house-again/

Scroll down for more articles on this outrageous persecution

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

THE SHOCKING MUSA CASE – CHILDREN’S IDENTITIES CHANGE HEARINGS + HHJ HOLMAN JUDGEMENT 16 APRIL 14

musa-coupleA

Regarding Haringey Council’s abominable actions towards the Musa children, regarding the enforced  stopping of the mutual contact visits between all the Musa children, which went totally against the judgement of another judge, HHJ Charles in 2011, HHJ Holman said at the end of his personal participation in the hearings =

“It is probable, therefore, that today is my last personal involvement in this case. I can only say that I part from it with a sense of the utmost despair that a terrible thing has happened in relation to all these children which should never, without due consideration, have been allowed to happen. “

It must be said Haringey councils flouting of the orders, along with their previous behaviour within the Musa case, showed the utmost irresponsibility and bland unprofessionalism.

======================================

From: =http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed128794

Local authority seeks new identities for two children in care

Holman J calls Haringey Council to ‘pause for thought’

The London Borough of Haringey has applied for an order permitting it to change the forenames and surname of two children whom it is placing for adoption.

In London Borough of Haringey v Musa [2014] EWHC 962 (Fam) the court heard applications concerning a sibling group of seven children. The parents are Nigerian, but have lived in England and are currently in prison serving sentences after convictions of ill-treatment of all or some of their children.

The five eldest children are all in the care of Haringey, but adoption has not been contemplated for any of them. They are currently all placed in long term foster homes in three different homes. In May 2012 placement orders were made in relation to the two youngest children. In the latter proceedings, in the view of the guardian, then representing all seven children, there needed to be “high priority” to long-term direct contact between all seven children.

Haringey sought leave to change the surname of the youngest two children to a new surname and, whilst not expressly referred to in the formal application, made “absolutely plain” that it desired to change the forenames of both those children. The local authority was fearful that unless the two youngest children were given completely new identities with completely new names, they would be tracked down by the parents and the placement potentially destabilised.

Holman J, hearing the application, said:

“[T]o change now the forenames by which a child, now almost four, has been known and has known herself throughout her whole life obviously raises considerable issues with regard to her sense of identity and self-esteem. She is old enough to appreciate that some rather radical change is being made in relation to her identity, but nowhere near old enough to understand the reasons why that is proposed. It seems to me, therefore, that in relation both these children (and especially the older of the two) the application to change their names, and particularly their forenames, is one of considerable delicacy and difficulty which will require very careful consideration by the court.”

The local authority also sought permission to terminate all direct contact between the five oldest children on the one hand and the two youngest children on the other hand.

Holman J, refusing to consider either matter in the single day which had been estimated for them, said:

“[U]ntil today it does not seem to have occurred to anyone that this is an application upon which a guardian needs to be appointed, not only for the two youngest children, but also separately for the eldest children.”

Later he said:

“It is patent that this application, in particular in relation to contact, directly engages and impacts upon both the rights and the welfare of all of them. They are currently regularly seeing their youngest two siblings. There is patently, therefore, a “family life” between all seven of them, and the rights of the five eldest children under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights are patently engaged by this case (as also are the rights under Article 8 of the two youngest children).”

He added:

“[T]hey [the local authority] need to pause for thought and to recall that at the time of the making of the placement orders the expert, … the children’s own guardian, and also the judge himself all clearly and strongly considered that high priority must be given to long-term direct contact between all seven siblings.”

Noting the delay which had already occurred, the judge fixed a further hearing specifically for directions only in just over three weeks’ time.”

The  full HHJ Holman judgment is below.

17/4/14

source: http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed128794

—————————————————————–

From Capital Bay 18 Febuary 2014

http://www.capitalbay.com/latest-news1/473806-appeal-judge-slams-decision-which-led-to-baby-being-taken-from-parents-unjustly.html%5B

Sir James Munby, “President of the  Family Division”

Appeal judge slams decision which led to baby being taken from parents unjustly 

Judges and social workers have been conspiring to remove children unjustly from their parents, scathing High Court ruling said today

•Condemned family court judges for ‘clandestine arrangement’ in which they rubber-stamped the demands of social workers without fair hearing

•By Steve Doughty
PUBLISHED: 18 February 2014 

•Judges and social workers have been conspiring to remove children unjustly from their parents, a scathing High Court ruling said today.
• It condemned family court judges for a ‘clandestine arrangement’ which meant that they simply rubber-stamped the demands of social workers without giving a fair hearing to the pleas of parents.
•Rulings by family judges were ‘cut and pasted’ from recommendations emailed to the court by social workers, the High Court found.

Judges and social workers have been conspiring to remove children unjustly from their parents, a High Court ruling suggested today (stock picture)Judges and social workers have been conspiring to remove children unjustly from their parents, a High Court ruling suggested today (stock picture)
The secret dealings between council officials and local judges were revealed in a High Court appeal in which Mrs Justice Pauffley ordered that a mother be re-united with her baby.
The baby was taken by social workers following a court case described by Mrs Justice Pauffley as ‘profoundly alarming’.
The High Court judge warned that ‘the practices I have described are not confined to this area but are widespread across the country’.
She said of the case, which involved judges at an unnamed family court and social workers employed by an unnamed council: ‘It is difficult to view the justices as having been independent and impartial if, as happened here, they simply adopted the local authority’s analysis of what their findings and reasons might comprise.
‘Just because there may be tacit acceptance on the part of many professionals within the family justice system that the practice which operated here exists, that does not mean it is right.
‘It is patently wrong, must stop at once and never happen again.’
The order to end collusion between judges and social workers was endorsed yesterday by the most senior family judge, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby.
In a circular to lawyers, Sir James warned all judges and lawyers to ‘carefully consider’ the case and added that Mrs Justice Pauffley ‘had to deal with circumstances which I hope will never recur.’ The scandal over secret deals between judges and social workers is the latest upheaval in a year of growing controversy over the family courts, the closely-associated Court of Protection, and the way the public has been routinely prevented from knowing what goes on in them.
Last year the Daily Mail revealed that a judge at the Court of Protection had sent a woman to jail in secret after she refused to stop trying to remove her father from a care home where she believed his life was in danger. All information about the imprisonment of Wanda Maddocks was banned from publication until the Mail investigated the case.
In December the Court of Protection was discovered to have ordered behind closed doors that a pregnant Italian woman must undergo a compulsory caesarean operation. The mother, Alessandra Pacchieri, was later told by a family court judge, again in secret, that her baby would be taken for adoption in Essex.

The order to end collusion between judges and social workers was endorsed yesterday by the most senior family judge, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby
 
The order to end collusion between judges and social workers was endorsed yesterday by the most senior family judge, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby
The secrecy surrounding the two court systems is now being loosened on the instructions of Sir James, who has acted to prevent both clandestine imprisonment and the removal of children from foreign mothers by British judges.
The exposure of private arrangements between family judges and social workers was exposed following an appeal by a mother whose child was taken into care.
The 32-year-old mother, a longstanding drug and drink abuser with a history of domestic violence, had had seven previous children. Six are living with their two fathers and one is in the process of being adopted. When she became pregnant again, she was given a place in a unit run by a specialist family drugs and alcohol service.
Mrs Justice Pauffley said it was ‘plain’ that social workers took a decision in advance to remove her baby, who was born in October last year. They cited the mother’s bleak history.
Family judges first heard the case on 1 November. They were presented with an expert report on the mother, commissioned by social workers and prepared by chartered clinical psychologist Dr Celest Van Rooyen. The psychologist, who also gave ‘very strong and powerful’ evidence in person, said the baby was at risk of harm.
The judges declared that ‘the immediate risk of harm is such that his safety requires the continuing removal from his mother’s care. It is proportionate and in his best interests.’ At a second hearing a week later, the same judges said the baby should stay with foster parents because ‘he needs to form an attachment with his primary carers.’ Mrs Justice Pauffley criticised the handling of the case in blunt and uncompromising language.
She said the Van Rooyen report on the mother had been researched and written in a day and the psychologist had spoken neither to the mother nor the medical and psychological experts with whom she and the baby were living. Instead, Dr Van Rooyen had relied on documents and a phone call to a social worker.
Mrs Justice Pauffley said: ‘It surprises and alarms me that Dr Van Rooyen was asked, and was prepared, to provide a report during the course of a single working day, a terrifyingly tight timeframe, and on the basis of papers supplemented by a telephone conversation with a local authority professional who had never met the mother.
‘I struggle to understand how Dr Van Rooyen’s apparently firm opinions, adverse to the mother, could have been formed given the complete absence of any kind of discussion with her.’ The High court judge said the family court judges had not written their own ‘findings of fact and reasons’ – their ruling in the case. The entire document had instead been emailed to them by lawyers for the local council before the 1 November hearing.

John Hemming, the Lib Dem MP who has campaigned against secrecy in the family courts, said: ‘I am pleased that the senior judges are acting to stop stitch ups and “clandestine” fixing of decisions in the lower courts’

John Hemming, the Lib Dem MP who has campaigned against secrecy in the family courts, said: ‘I am pleased that the senior judges are acting to stop stitch ups and “clandestine” fixing of decisions in the lower courts’
A near-identical document was drawn up by the judges after the second hearing. Mrs Justice Pauffley said this was ‘the result, almost certainly of cutting and pasting.’ Mrs Justice Pauffley said this practice ‘has become the norm’ in local family courts.
She said she was ‘profoundly alarmed’ at the practice, which was widespread.
‘There was, apparently, an established but largely clandestine arrangement between the local authority and the court which, to my mind, has considerable repercussions for justice.’ Mrs Justice Pauffley added: ‘In public law proceedings the local authority is the applicant. It is not and should never be seen as the decision maker. That is the role of the court.
‘There is no room for confusion. Justice must be upheld. There is no scope for dilution of that fundamental concept.’
John Hemming, the Lib Dem MP who has campaigned against secrecy in the family courts, said: ‘I am pleased that the senior judges are acting to stop stitch ups and “clandestine” fixing of decisions in the lower courts.
‘What really matters, however, is getting independent evidence into the process rather than the opinion of local authority employees who are instructed in what to say by their management, who are instructed by government as to what outcomes they want.

source:  http://www.capitalbay.com/latest-news1/473806-appeal-judge-slams-decision-which-led-to-baby-being-taken-from-parents-unjustly.html

=====================================

A report  of the hearing on April 11 2014 by someone who was present [not myself!!]

“Haringey are unbelievable having maintained today at the point where Mr Justice Holman intended determining the scope of the assessments that the CAFCASS officers were to conduct into contact continuing between the 5 older and the 2 younger Musa children that they had already had a farewell contact in the middle of December?!!!
 Mr Justice Holman was furious as this meant that Haringey had unilaterally decided to breach a High Court order, having only submitted their application for a cessation of contact between the sibling groups on 16/1/14 yet their having allegedly pulled the plug on contact and according to them let the children know this would be their last contact a month earlier!! This advise  came completely out of the blue since the judge had had a clear expectation and understanding from the social worker’s statement produced in February and from what was said at the last hearing on March19th that contact was proceeding and regular and that it was to be properly assessed.
 Quoting from his judgement of 19/3/14 para8 he read out : ‘the formal order of CharlesJ dated 8thMay 2012..provides that:
 “Until further order of the court… The applicant and any persons with whom(the youngest two children) are placed shall allow (the youngest two children) to together have reasonable direct contact with their siblings…” The five eldest children are then named.
 Then in para 9: ‘since then, time has, of course, gone by. I understand that there is indeed regular, though not necessarily frequent, direct face-to-face contact involving all seven children. It appears that all the children enjoy and gain support from that contact.’
 Then at para 14: ‘At paragraph44 of her second statement in support of this application, dated 10th February2014, the current social worker, Miss x, said as follows:
 “The grief caused to the eldest five siblings at losing direct contact with their two younger siblings until they are at least 18 years of age will be painful. The job of the caring adults in their lives(their foster carers,social workers, therapists)is to help them cope with their pain and loss by conducting an ongoing narrative about their journey into care and providing them with a safe therapeutic space to talk about their feelings and emotions.”
 It was clearly evident that for all these stated concerns in respect of potentially terminating contact between the children Haringey had brazenly gone ahead and terminated contact almost 4 months ago PRIOR to submitting an application to Court seeking authority to do so and Without putting in place Any of the therapeutic interventions which they maintained would be so vital if contact between the 2 sibling groups were to be terminated.
 Mr Justice Holman referred to his ‘righteous anger’ at what had occurred and strenuously took Haringey to task over this however it appeared that he was ready to accept this unexpected advice Without checking it out or Verifying it via speaking to the children especially the elder child who is now 13. (I say this although I had to leave at 4.30pm to return home]
 Very disappointingly as well the barrister for Gloria had met with the 2 CAFCASS officers/Guardians prior to the hearing commencing and was clearly ready to support the outcomes Haringey had set out to achieve by accepting that in the circumstances ie since contact had allegedly already been unlawfully terminated and the children purportedly told that they were having a farewell contact back in December (although no corroboration of this was provided or sought) the CAFCASS officers would not intend to visit and speak to the children or to witness contact between them.
 The representative for one of the Guardian’s maintained that she was speaking entirely on behalf of the children despite the fact that the only assessment that she was proposing was to speak to the adoptive parents in respect of their views about the issue of the younger children’s  names changing (including christian names) and in respect of sibling contact, the outcome of which is entirely easy to predict, and then went on to emphasise that it had taken Haringey Council 18 months to identify this adoptive couple and that if this placement fell through it would be ‘catastrophic’ for the younger 2 children and very difficult to find them an alternative adoptive placement. There is of course always the option of their not being adopted. Mr Justice Holman was not particularly impressed with this either and emphasised the fact that Haringey had been fully aware from the outset of the order of Mr Justice Charles emphasising the importance of the continuation of sibling contact and should therefore have been mindful of this when looking to find an appropriate placement for the children.
 This represented another reason for the judge being enfuriated and challenging them about their submissions since he had fully intended ordering that they conduct a full assessment of contact.
 Interestingly the judge’s attention had been drawn to the internet coverage of the case by the Local Authority barrister and she had rather shot herself in the foot in doing this as this opened Mr Justice Holman’e eyes to the outspoken concerns of many parties to the iniquities in respect of the management and conduct of this case.
 This then led to his ignoring the Guardian’s legal representative when she maintained that it would not be in the children’s best interests for the judgements on bailii to display the family name Musa. Mr Justice Holman at this point delivered fairly lengthy and careful deliberations about the importance of freedom of expression and the public’s right to know about a case in which it was clearly taking a very close interest. He even referred to other very high profile cases which had been in the glare of the media citing the Jon Venables and Robert Thompson case (the killers of Jamie Bulger) and the Mary Bell case and stating that the public had a right to know about these cases.
 He further referred to the Magna Carta ie the Great Charter of the Liberties of England in an endeavour to demonstrate the importance of the public’s right to know – in this case when the authorities themselves have clearly been up to no good.
 He expanded on how he recognised this case to be of strong public interest by citing the number of websites and blogs devoted to coverage of it, plus the keen interest shown by Nigerian citizens based in the UK as evidenced by the attendance and advice of Francis Enya and the lawyer from the Nigeria High Commission plus he referred to the case having been discussed on the floor of the Nigerian parliament.
 Mr Justice Holman was also highly critical of Haringey for having his judgement of 19/3/14 removed from bailii and did provide his detailed directions that ALL judgements pertaining to the Musa case should appear on bailii with the family name Musa clearly displayed plus Haringey Council named and ordered that any subsequent reproductions in any format be entitled to contain the names also.
 Re the contempt of court issue whereby Haringey wilfully flouted and breached the order of Mr Justice Charles of 8/5/12 expressly advising that even after the 2 younger children had been placed they should continue to have contact with their older siblings Mr Justice Holman granted Haringey the right to draft a reply in defence of the accusations being made against them prior to his delivering his judgement on the matter. He stated that having looked into the matter he had regretfully discovered the fact that because the order of Mr Justice Charles of 8/5/12 had not contained a penal notice he would not be in a position to impose a fine upon Haringey Council for their serious wrongdoing nor indeed would he be legally entitled to seek to have those responsible prosecuted. He made it plain however that he would not tolerate this behaviour and that that the authority Would be Named and Shamed.
 A further hearing at which Mr Justice Holman will deliver his outstanding judgement following receipt of Haringey Council’s submissions in defence of their actions is likely to have been agreed for some time shortly after Easter however since I was forced to leave around 4.30pm prior to the end of what should have been a fairly short hearing in order to catch my 5.30pm coach from Victoria back to Norwich I do not at this point know the further date that had been agreed nor in fact the specific directions Mr Justice Holman must inevitably have given in respect of assessments to be conducted and the dates by which these need to be concluded.”
April 11 2014.

=======================================================================

The previous hearing to the above hearing on the 11 April, on the 3 April:

DAILY TELEGRAPH  3 APRIL 2014

Plan to give adopted children new identities to stop birth parents finding them

Social services ask High Court to give two young children new names and even cut links with other siblings to protect them from abusive parents

By  John Bingham, Social Affairs Editor

 03 Apr 2014

Two young children currently being placed for adoption should be given completely new identities to prevent their abusive parents tracking them down through an internet campaign, the High Court has been told.

Social workers also want to sever all contact between the children, aged two and three, and their five older brothers and sisters to make it more difficult for their parents, who are currently in prison, to re-establish contact.

But Mr Justice Holman urged caution over the “highly unusual” plan set out by social workers from Haringey, north London, and urged them to “pause for thought” despite a desire to prevent any further delay in the adoption process.

He said that while it is common for children to be given new surnames on adoption it was highly unusual to give children new first names, except occasionally for babies.

The change could, he said, have a profound effect on them, particularly on the older of the two children, a girl who is now almost four.

Related Articles 
Secret adoption register opened to would-be parents
 01 Mar 2014
Mother loses custody battle over ‘permissive’ parenting style
 17 Feb 2014

He added that it was clear the plan to cut contact would also cause “grief, pain and loss” to the five other children who, although they don’t live with them, know their younger siblings and have a bond with them.

Adjourning the case for further expert input, he said he was “frankly astonished” that there had been an expectation he would reach a decision in a single day’s hearing, as previously planned.

Details of the Family Division case emerged in a judgment which has been published. The five older children, who range in age from six to 13 were all taken into care several years ago and are now in long-term foster placements.

The parents, who are Nigerian, are in prison for abuse and are banned from further contact.

But the younger pair were taken into care later and the adoption process begun.

As part of the plan Haringey social workers have proposed giving them new names and banning contact with the older children in case this enabled the parents eventually to intrude into their new lives.

“I understand that the essential reasoning and justification that lies behind that is that the parents of the children promoted a considerable campaign on the internet and in other places with regard to this case so that the names of their children have apparently gained some notoriety,” the judge explained.

“The local authority – and maybe also the prospective adopters – are fearful that unless the two youngest children are given completely new identities with completely new names, they will be tracked down and the placement potentially destabilised.”

He said that, although the plan was well intended: “To change now the forenames by which a child, now almost four, has been known and has known herself throughout her whole life obviously raises considerable issues with regard to her sense of identity and self-esteem.

“She is old enough to appreciate that some rather radical change is being made in relation to her identity, but nowhere near old enough to understand the reasons why that is proposed.

“It seems to me, therefore, that in relation both these children (and especially the older of the two) the application to change their names, and particularly their forenames, is one of considerable delicacy and difficulty which will require very careful consideration by the court.”

A further hearing will take place next week. [see  report above dated 11 April] .

source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10742205/Plan-to-give-adopted-children-new-identities-to-stop-birth-parents-finding-them.html

===================================-

HHJ Holman’s Judgement 16 April 2014:

England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions


You are here:BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions >> London Borough of Haringey v Musa [2014] EWHC 1341 (Fam) (16 April 2014)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2014/1341.html
Cite as: [2014] EWHC 1341 (Fam)


[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]


 

Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 1341 (Fam)
Case No. FD14P00069

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
16th April 2014

B e f o r e :

MR JUSTICE HOLMAN
(sitting throughout in public)
B E T W E E N :

____________________

LONDON BOROUGH OF HARINGEY Applicants
- and -
MUSA Respondents

____________________

MR R. HOWLING QC (instructed by the Legal Services Department of the London Borough of
Haringey) appeared on behalf of the applicants.
MISS J. ATKINSON (instructed by Sam Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the respondent mother.
THE RESPONDENT FATHER did not appear and was not represented.

____________________

HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT
____________________

Crown Copyright ©

MR JUSTICE HOLMAN: 

  1. I have heard this case throughout today in public and now give this judgment in public. It follows on from two previous recent hearings before me, also in public, on the 19th March 2014 and the 11th April 2014. The judgments that I gave on each of those dates are also fully public judgments and publicly available on the Bailii website. As a matter of identification, the judgment of the 19th March 2014 is under neutral citation number [2014] EWHC 962 (Fam), and the judgment of the 11th April 2014 is under neutral citation number [2014] EWHC 1200 (Fam). Each of those judgments were to some extent sequential, the one to the other, and this judgment is clearly sequential to both of them. For those reasons, I will not repeat at any length what is already set out in those two judgments. Effectively, anyone who chooses to read the present judgment needs first to read both of those judgments.
  2.  
  3. However, the position that has now emerged since my judgment of last Friday, the 11th April 2014, is, in my view, one of great gravity, and in order to put it into context I must, as briefly as possible, summarise the facts. The case concerns a sibling group of seven children who are full siblings of each other. They now fall into two sub-groups. The five eldest range in age from 13 to nearly seven; the two youngest are aged about three-and-three-quarters and just two. There was a long hearing before a High Court judge, Charles J, in May 2012. The applicants in these proceedings and at that hearing were the local authority, the London Borough of Haringey. For reasons which are very fully explained in the judgment of Charles J of May 2012, he decided that the five eldest children should be placed in the care of the London Borough of Haringey on care plans which contemplated that they would be fostered throughout the remainder of their childhoods, but not adopted. The two youngest children were made the subject of placement orders which authorised the London Borough of Haringey to place them with a view to adoption. At that time all the children, although living in a number of different settings, had contact with each other, although the seventh and youngest child was merely a baby. The case therefore raised, in obvious and stark form, the question whether or not, and to what extent and by what means, there should be long-term contact between the various children both before and after the contemplated adoption of the two youngest. 
  4.  
  5. There was considerable evidence as to that issue, including the report and recommendation of a consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist who is referred to in the judgment of Charles J as Dr A. The outcome, insofar as it concerned contact, was summarised by me in a passage between paragraphs 5 to 8 of my judgment of the 19th March 2014. At the risk of repetition, but because it is the essential backcloth to, and context of, the present judgment, I will just read out those paragraphs.  

    “5. During the course of the hearing before him (which related not only to the two youngest children but to all seven children – see the heading to his judgment and resulting order) Charles J gave careful consideration to whether or not there should be longer term direct contact between the five eldest children on the one hand and the two youngest children on the other hand, even after placement and ultimate adoption. As I understand it, an expert who had given advice in the case very strongly recommended that there should be ongoing long-term direct contact [that is, face-to-face contact] between all seven children in the overall best interests of them all. At paragraph 158 of his judgment Charles J said: 

    ‘Neither the local authority, nor the guardian, sought an order for sibling contact and both invited me to make a placement order with a recital, proposed by the guardian, indicating that the local authority accepted the evidence and considerations of Dr A and the guardian that high priority be given to direct post-placement contact between all the siblings.’

    6. Pausing there, it can be seen, therefore, that in the view of the guardian, then representing all seven children, there needed to be ‘high priority’ to long-term direct contact. At paragraph 159 of his judgment Charles J continued: 

    ‘To my mind, if prospective adopters are told that high priority is being given to inter-sibling contact, and thus far it seems to me if the process is to be transparent and true to its word, the children will not be placed with them unless they are prepared to offer it, it is difficult to see why an order that provides for this would put them off.’

    7. At paragraph 164 he continued: 

    ‘So, I will make an interim contact order that, unless and until the court orders otherwise, both before and after placement the local authority and any persons with whom they are placed under the placement orders are to allow [the two youngest children] together to have reasonable direct contact with all of their full siblings.’

    8. In order to give effect to that, the formal order of Charles J dated 8th May 2012 (I understand that he formally handed down his judgment a week or so later) provides that: 

    ‘… until further of the court … the applicant and any persons with whom [the youngest two children] are placed shall allow [the youngest two children] to together have reasonable contact with their siblings …’

    The five eldest children are then named.”

  6. I may be naïve, but it seems to me that those words of Charles J in his judgment, and the language of his formal order could not be more clear nor more straightforward. So, just to summarise this situation as this case left Charles J in May 2012:  (1) All parties, including the local authority, considered that “high priority” needed to be given to direct contact between all the siblings, not only before but also after placement with a view to adoption. (2) The anticipation of Charles J clearly was that prospective adopters could and should be found who would not be “put off” by that prospect. (3) There was an order in the clearest possible terms that the local authority had to allow direct contact between all the siblings both before and also after placement. That follows from the language of the order which binds not only the local authority but also “any persons with whom [the youngest two children] are placed …” The involvement of the persons with whom the children were placed was obviously only of relevance because the judge clearly intended and ordered that direct contact should continue not only before but after placement. 
  7. For an appreciable period of time direct contact did take place regularly between the five eldest children and the two youngest children, although the seventh and youngest of all did not always attend due to his very young age. 
  8.  
  9. During 2013 the local authority identified the present prospective adoptive family. I have learned from documents produced by the local authority today that it was in May 2013 that there was an assessment of the prospective adopters as to their suitability to adopt these particular children, and it was during May that those prospective adopters were first informed about these particular children. 
  10.  
  11. As I have explained in my first two judgments, this case proceeded in the court room until part way through the hearing last Friday morning on a clear understanding on my part, shared by the Queen’s Counsel then appearing on behalf of the local authority, Miss Sarah Morgan QC, that arrangements for direct contact between all the children were still current. As I described in my judgment of the 11th April 2014, it came as a considerable surprise and shock to me and to many other people in the court room (and, I infer, also to Miss Morgan herself) when during the course of that hearing she was passed a note to the effect that there had actually been a “goodbye” or “farewell” occasion of contact between all seven children as long ago as Saturday the 14th December 2013. It is impossible to overstate the profundity and implications of that for the future course of this case and the future lives of all seven of these children. Until that moment I personally had totally understood and assumed that the contact was continuing and that the issue for the court to decide in the present applications was whether, after thoroughly investigating and weighing all relevant factors, that contact should later be drawn to a close. The reason why the local authority say that direct contact must end is an understandable reason. They say that it is of the utmost importance for the two youngest children to preserve and protect the confidentiality of the family and whereabouts in which those children are to live. There is an obvious problem when a sibling group of children meet that things may be said, or slip out, such that one or more of the elder children learn the identity of the adoptive family or their whereabouts; and that that information might very rapidly find its way to one or both of the parents of the children or generally into the public domain, and the adoptive placement might be imperilled. 
  12.  
  13. All of that is a familiar problem and risk in cases of this kind, and one which I readily understand. But there is another side to it which requires very careful consideration also. That is the very point that had been described, and indeed ruled upon, by Charles J after that long hearing in May 2012, namely the importance of, and “high priority” which needed to be given to, maintaining an inter-sibling relationship between all seven of these children. It is my experience that social workers and others sometimes overlook in these tragic situations that relationships between siblings may be the most enduring of all relationships in many people’s lives. Put bluntly, these children are all likely to be alive long after most of us in the court room, and prospective adopters and others, are long since dead. So there is always very considerable importance in these tragic situations of fragmented families in very carefully considering whether or not, and if so, how, long-term inter-sibling contact can be maintained even after adoption. 
  14.  
  15. At all events, the application by the local authority before the court is effectively to vary the subsisting order by Charles J as to long-term direct contact so as to enable it to be terminated. However, as I said in paragraph 23 of my judgment of the 11th April 2014, “It may not be possible now to unscramble the egg”. It is not for me at this short hearing to prejudge what the final decision will be as to direct contact at the three-day hearing that has been fixed to start on the 1st July 2014. But, speaking for myself, I very clearly understand how extraordinarily difficult it may now be to resume and recreate any direct contact between the five eldest children on the one hand and the two youngest children on the other hand. 
  16.  
  17. It necessarily follows from the fact that the local authority arranged that “goodbye” or “farewell” contact on the 14th December 2013, with the intention that there should be no further direct contact at all between the five eldest children and the two youngest children, that the local authority have put themselves in a state of, frankly, flagrant breach of the order of Charles J of the 8th May 2012 from which I have quoted. It simply should not have happened that way. Last Friday Miss Morgan was not in a position to give to me and the other parties any account, description or explanation of how this frankly catastrophic situation had arisen, so I made an order last Friday that:  

    “The local authority must by [today] file and serve a detailed statement which is limited to, but deals in full with, when, why, and by whom the decision was made that on the 14th December 2013 a contact meeting between all seven children took place which has been described in court today as a ‘goodbye’ contact meeting and that no further direct contact would take place thereafter …” 

    I then arranged for this further hearing today in order that I could give consideration to that evidence once it had been assembled and filed by the local authority. I explained at the time that I regretted having to give such a relatively short period of time for the local authority in which to prepare that evidence, but today is the last day of the legal term before Easter and if this hearing had not taken place today there would have been a long and undesirable further delay. So I express my gratitude to the London Borough of Haringey and, in particular, to the two makers of statements to which I will shortly refer, for the speed with which they have indeed attempted to comply with that part of my order last week. 

  18. In the upshot, I now have two statements. One is by Miss Annie Walker, who is the deputy head of services for the Children in Care Court Team of the London Borough of Haringey. She exhibits to her statement a volume of minutes of children in care meetings and other meetings that are described as “professionals’ meetings”. The other statement is by Ms. Elaine Redding, who is the assistant director of Children and Young People’s Services for the London Borough of Haringey. I intend to quote at a little length from those two statements for they tell the tale in their own words. At paragraph 5 of her statement Miss Walker says:  

    “… Although there are records referring to the issue of contact, I have not been able in this process to identify any decision making documentation which would assist me and the court in pinpointing when and who made the decision to terminate contact, prior to the matter being resorted to court and to arrange and undertake goodbye contact on the 14th December 2013.” 

    Pausing there, the date upon which the matter was “resorted to court” was as recently as the 16th January 2014, when the formal application for permission to terminate contact was first issued in the court. Continuing with the statement of Miss Walker: 

    “6. I have located looked after review records which refer to the reduction or variation of contact but they did not assist me in identifying who made and when, the decisions in respect of which the court seeks clarity. The current social work team were allocated in October 2013 and from my discussion with them they continued with what they mistakenly believed was the decision to cease contact …” 

    Miss Walker then describes the process of identifying prospective adopters and that the present prospective adopters were approved as adopters in July 2013. She then says at paragraph 15: 

    “15. A hiatus in contact between the two younger children and their older siblings took place and there was no contact in August 2013, September and October 2013. October’s contact did not take place due to severe weather conditions. I am unable to see any written material indicating either how or why the decision was made for August or September contact to be cancelled. This omission is being taken very seriously and will be incorporated into our learning.” 

    Miss Walker then refers to: 

    “A professionals’ meeting was held on the 11th December 2013. At this meeting a goodbye visit/wish you well visit was arranged for the 14th December 2013 to take place in the older siblings’ placement facilitated by the foster carers …”

    She then describes how the eldest children were prepared for that meeting by their social worker and the youngest children were prepared by a psychotherapist. Still referring to the professionals’ meeting on the 11th December 2013 Miss Walker then says, at paragraph 21: 

    “21. The documents record the need to seek permission of the court to vary the contact order of Mr Justice Charles. This part of the document is legally privileged but this submission is made so that this court can clearly understand that the need to approach the court for a variation had been understood but it had not been married to the impending farewell visit. This is the central mistake in the case and one which the local authority both recognises and apologises for.” 

    It is right to say, as Mr Rex Howling QC, who appears on behalf of the London Borough of Haringey today, pointed out, that the minutes of the professionals’ meeting of the 11th December 2013 record that the legal adviser, Rosita Moise, was not present at the meeting but had sent apologies. It appears, therefore, that there was no lawyer or representative of the legal department of the London Borough of Haringey present at that critically important meeting of the 11th December 2013. 

  19. Despite everything that Mr Howling has said, I remain frankly baffled as to how those who were present at that meeting, which included such senior staff of the local authority as the adoption team manager who was chairing the meeting, can have thought that it was right and appropriate to allow a goodbye or farewell contact to take place about three days later when they knew, as the redacted minutes of that meeting apparently record, that they needed the permission of the court to vary the contact order of Charles J, and yet did not first pause to take legal advice from their own legal department, if not counsel. 
  20.  
  21. In her statement Ms. Redding, the assistant director of children’s services, says, at paragraph 3:  

    “3. It is my opinion that there was well intentioned change effected around the planning for these children which incorrectly failed to take into account the legal framework. It is clear that aspects of the team’s compliance with court orders made in respect of the children fell unacceptably short of good practice.” 

    A little further on she says, at paragraph 5: 

    “5. I am satisfied that in this case there was good liaison between professionals to support the children’s welfare needs, regular direct liaison between the social work and adoption teams and that the looked after children reviews took place. It is, however, unclear to me precisely when the decision was made to both reduce contact and arrange a farewell visit.” 

    Ms. Redding concludes her statement by saying, at paragraph 6: 

    “6. This authority takes its statutory responsibility seriously and it is my intention to ensure full compliance. In light of the lessons brought to my attention as a result of this case, the authority will review internal processes to ensure that best practice is adhered to at all times. In particular, I intend to ensure that every child’s care plan for each LAC review contains details of the current contact arrangements. I am confident that my managers will share my commitment to effect appropriate change.” 

  22. Judges should avoid cynicism, but I cannot help observing how often in recent decades one has read and heard of local authorities learning lessons and proposing to review internal processes to ensure that failures will not happen again. The essential failures in this case almost beggar belief. Over a period of several months last year this local authority seem to have got themselves into a position whereby they were proposing to act, and then did act, in direct breach of the order of the court, which, I stress, had originally been made for reasons with which the local authority themselves agreed. There seems to have been a great lack of communication between a range of different professionals such that in the end no one knew what had been decided by whom or when or why, and everyone seems completely to have overlooked, at any rate until the professionals’ meeting on the 11th December 2013, that there was in place a very clear court order in relation to these children. Mr Rex Howling QC himself has said this morning that there was in this case “systemic corporate failure”. 
  23.  
  24. It provisionally appears to me that the failure goes even further. Since amendments were made to the Children Act 1989 in 2008, local authorities have been required to appoint an “independent reviewing officer” for the case of every child whom they are looking after. By section 25B of the Children Act 1989 the first listed of the duties and functions of the independent reviewing officer are to “monitor the performance by the local authority of their functions in relation to the child’s case”. The whole point and purpose of the system and machinery of independent reviewing officers is precisely to keep the local authority (who are no doubt extraordinarily busy and overworked) on their toes and to be asking awkward questions. An independent reviewing officer clearly had been appointed in relation to all seven of these children, although I do not currently know the date when she was appointed. In all or most of the minutes of meetings throughout 2013 that are exhibited to the statement of Miss Walker dated the 15th April 2014 there are clear references to a named independent reviewing officer being present at a whole series of meetings. Specifically, the independent reviewing officer was present at a meeting on the 29th October 2013 in the minutes of which the following passage appears:  

    “[The sixth of the children] is one of seven children. She and her five older siblings had regular contact but a decision was made to stop this contact and she has not seen her siblings since July. It is not clear how this decision was made and it is a concern that contact should stop without adequate preparation. [The social worker] will discuss restarting contact with the siblings with her manager and the IRO will also ask that it start again. Ideally contact should take place again and then a farewell contact arranged for all the siblings at a time appropriate in terms of the adoption plan.”

    So just pausing there, that is a minute of a meeting at which the independent reviewing officer was present which records that, for reasons which were “not clear”, the contact had stopped since July. It is true that the minutes then record that the IRO will ask that it start again, but they go on clearly to contemplate that contact would take place again “and then a farewell contact arranged …”. So the question inevitably arises, how was it that the independent reviewing officer, whose statutory duty was to monitor the performance by the local authority of their functions in relation to these children, was not saying loud and clear at the meeting, and subsequent to the meeting, that there could not lawfully be a farewell contact unless and until this matter had first been raised with the court? Instead, the minutes record that “The IRO is in agreement with the plan.”

  25. It provisionally appears that the role and involvement of the IRO in this case failed to give to all these children the protection which her role was intended to afford. However, the IRO in question (whom I have deliberately not named in this judgment) is not present and may, to date, know very little about recent events in these proceedings. I accordingly intend to make an order today that she must file and serve a detailed statement in which she: (i) states the date of her appointment as IRO in this case; (ii) identifies for which children she is IRO [although I have been told today that she is the IRO for all seven]; (iii) specifies the date and scope of every meeting attended by her since her appointment; (iv) explains in detail and in full when and how she first became aware of any decision by the local authority to terminate contact between the five eldest and the two youngest children; (v) explains in detail and in full when and how she first became aware that contact between the five eldest and the two youngest children had in fact been terminated or suspended; and (vi) describes what steps, if any, she took to ensure that the local authority did not act in breach of paragraph 3 (b) of the order of Charles J made on the 8th May 2012 with regard to inter-sibling contact. So far as that aspect of the case is concerned, one can only wait and see what emerges. 
  26.  
  27. On behalf of the London Borough of Haringey, Mr Howling, both by his written position statement dated today and also by his oral submissions today, has made the following points and submissions. First, he stresses that the local authority have taken very seriously the thrust of my order last Friday requiring them to produce a statement and all relevant minutes and records. He says, and I readily accept, that considerable resources, time and effort have been thrown into addressing the concerns which I expressed last Friday. Second, he says, however, that despite a “thorough trawl” through the minutes and records it remains the position that the local authority cannot identify when, where or by whom the fateful decision was taken, nor can they explain why it was not fully and properly minuted. He has said that the lesson for the local authority is “the need for an audit trail” and at that point said that there had been “systemic corporate failure”. Third, he submitted that the main lesson to be learned is that local authority minutes need to include with every minute the current contact arrangements and the details of any relevant court order. 
  28.  
  29. I cannot help feeling that this is, frankly, a very elementary point that one would have thought was part of the basic training of any social worker. Precisely because local authorities are under-resourced and over-stretched, and precisely because individual social workers and other staff members may come and go from a particular case (and I am very conscious that the present social worker was only first involved in this case last October), it is of the utmost and blindingly obvious importance that reliable, detailed records need to be maintained of every important decision, when it was taken, by whom it was taken, and why it was taken. I would have thought also that it was blindingly obvious that if there is a court order having ongoing impact on a case (as an order for contact does) then that should be very prominently attached to every file and, frankly, every important minute or record in a case such as this. On behalf of the local authority, Mr Howling has repeated the apology that is expressed in the statement of Miss Walker at paragraph 21 that I have read. He says that an apology is due on two levels. One is to the court, and the other is to the children concerned. I am, frankly, least bothered in this case about an apology as such to the court. But as these children grow up, and when they are adult, each of them will need a clear narrative and explanation as to events that took place in their lives and, so far as the present matter is concerned, how it came about that the five eldest lost all direct contact with the two youngest. In my view, some very clear and abject documents need to be prepared by this local authority, addressed to each of these children, explaining to them these events and how it all came about, and apologising to them. 
  30.  
  31. Apologies are also due to the parents of these children. It is perfectly true that both parents are currently serving prison sentences for, as I understand it, offences against some of these children. It is perfectly true that under the order of, I think, Charles J, neither parent is currently entitled to any direct contact with any of their children. But they remain the parents of the children and they share parental responsibility for these children with the local authority. They continue to be concerned about the welfare and wellbeing of their children. The mother, in particular, has made recent statements in which she repeatedly implores that direct contact be maintained between all seven of her children. It is unclear whether she knows even now that that contact had already been broken. I do not know her reaction to it, for her solicitors and counsel have not yet been able to obtain instructions from her because of the difficulty of access to her in prison. But she and the father knew and know that in May 2012 a High Court judge, for the reasons he gave, made the order that he did with regard to direct contact. They were entitled to assume that the London Borough of Haringey would obey the order of the court. They, too, would be justified in feeling surprise and shock, and probably much more extreme emotions, on learning that, in defiance of that order, that contact has now completely ended. So, in my view, the London Borough of Haringey owe and must convey abject apologies also to the parents of these children. 
  32.  
  33. I have already given directions for a three day hearing starting on Tuesday, 1st July 2014 both on the issue of changes of names for the two youngest children and on this issue of inter-sibling direct contact. As I have said, it may now be too late to unscramble the egg on the issue of contact, and the local authority may most probably have created a fait accompli. I am not scheduled to be the judge who hears that hearing due to other commitments. It is probable, therefore, that today is my last personal involvement in this case. I can only say that I part from it with a sense of the utmost despair that a terrible thing has happened in relation to all these children which should never, without due consideration, have been allowed to happen.  _________
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged ,

MAURICE KIRK – VICTIM OF CORRUPTION

From:Doug
Subject: Fw: Corruption: Brazen, Blatant & Bare-faced!
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 22:06:49 +0100
A good letter Norman and an excellent exposition of Maurice’s perilous, inhuman and unlawful incarceration…
—– Original Message —–

From:
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 5:32 PM
Subject: Corruption: Brazen, Blatant & Bare-faced!

To Lord Goodhart,

Sir, We note from Hansard your statement & question in the House of Lords on 6th September 2011, in which you said,

“My Lords, Transparency International UK, of which I am a member, published in June this year a document called ‘Corruption in the United Kingdom’.  It concluded that corruption is a greater problem than has been recognised and is being recognised by governments.  Have the present government considered that document and have they got the Serious Fraud Office adequately into the picture?”

-       – – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – –

We suggest that no corruption is more BRAZEN, BLATANT & BAREFACED than that described below.

Barbara Wilding was Chief Constable of South Wales Police.  She was (& may still be) Chairwoman of a Big Lottery Fund which hands out large sums of money to Mental Hospitals in South Wales.

Maurice Kirk (‘The Flying Vet’) has many court actions (civil & criminal) against South Wales Police, & there is obviously no love lost between them.

A keen amateur pilot, he bought a replica World War I biplane which had attached to it a piece of ornamental ironmongery which had once been a Lewis Gun, but was no longer capable of being used as such.  Kirk was prosecuted for ‘Dealing in Firearms Without a Licence’. though neither the previous nor subsequent owners were prosecuted.  Kirk was remanded in custody in HM Prison Cardiff, but certain people were anxious the ridiculous charge would never come to trial.

-       – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – -

DR. X is a psychiatrist who runs Caswell Clinic ‘Mental Hospital’ in Bridgend.

So, ‘Dr’ X  was persuaded to give a completely false diagnosis (mental illness, brain tumour etc.) to take Kirk into his clinic, following which he recommended that Kirk should be transferred to a High Security Mental Hospital such as Ashworth or Broadmoor.

That meant there would be no need for SW Police or the CPS to prove his guilt, but this man who was such a nuisance to them would be locked away, silenced for ever!

We quote Nobel Laureate Alekzandr Solzhenitsyn, “To put a sane person in a madhouse (his word) is worse than the gas chambers: the torture is more cruel, death takes longer”.

X proved himself not only a sadist, but extremely stupid: he put in writing as reasons for holding Kirk captive, “If released he would probably take action through the courts against SW Police”.

The General Medical Council were told of this, but, astonishingly, could see nothing wrong with it – even when reminded of how they had covered up for Harold Shipman, thus allowing him to kill many more after he should have been stopped

Fortunately, Kirk escaped the fate Dr. X had in store for him & was returned to HM Prison Cardiff.  The trial DID eventually take place, & he was acquitted by a jury who knew the difference between right & wrong.

One might think that with so much egg on the faces of the police, the CPS & Dr. Williams they would cease their persecution of Kirk.

INSTEAD, IT HAS INCREASED!!!

This 66 year old man is AGAIN in HMP Cardiff on remand, this time having been charged with ‘harassing’ Dr. X  (or something similar).   The truth is that he has been trying very hard to get a copy of his medical records from X who (perhaps not surprisingly) is determined Kirk will not even get sight of them!

Lord Goodhart:

We note that apart from being a Commissioner of the International Court of Justice, you also hold other important positions within that field, viz. the International Commission of Jurists, ‘Justice’, the Parliamentary Committee on Standards in Public Life, et al.

We trust that you will do something about the diabolical situation described above, using such influence as you have to ensure that Maurice Kirk gets bail (at the very LEAST), & that the Serious Fraud Office show they are more than puppets.  Hopefully it will help to improve the low opinion held by many abroad of the standards of ‘Justice’ & ‘Human Rights’ in Britain.

Norman Scarth.

World War II Veteran.  Associate of the Article 6 Group.

———————————————————————-

Chronology of Collusion – or Dare we Call it Conspiracy?
This chronology was written by Maurice J Kirk BVSc.

Remember he was struck off the Register of Veterinary
Surgeons and known as the ‘flying vet’, as he was also a famous pilot. South Wales Police colluded with lawyers to
get him struck off with their 40 odd ‘incidents of harassment’ for which Maurice is trying to claim damages since 20
years. But in the process of trying to get fair trails and compensation, he’s encountered what other victims of white
collar crimes have experienced:
any variation of “fraud”: a crime and a civil law violation,
the non-investigation of crimes by Police,
corruption among solicitors, judges and court staff,
the absence of fair trials (Article 6) and an effective remedy before national authorities (Article 13) according
to the European Convention on Human Rights
and generally, in mild terms, dishonesty and white collar crimes.
Maurice wrote the chronology below whilst in Cardiff Prison since 23rd September 2011 – without any written
documentation for the reasons of his current imprisonment. His conditions are more than draconian: no medical
attention, limits to stamps, paper, pen, envelopes, no law books and above all, lies about him refusing to attend
court, when, in fact, he hasn’t been told about hearings.

Only on 13th October was he before a Magistrates Court where I witnessed four allegations before the Court. That
day only one was dealt with: the harassment of Dr X, the forensic psychiatrist responsible for
labelling him with “paranoid delusional disorder”, “significant brain damage” and “possible brain tumour”. Maurice
was not granted bail. When I visited him in prison six days later (that was the waiting time imposed on us!), he said
that he knew he wouldn’t get bail. For he is a ‘political’ prisoner. His case for damages must not get before the
courts, because South Wales Police are made to look not just guilty of bullying and harassment, but also like fools.
For the way that they treated the replica of a machine gun, attached to an historic aeroplane, was distinctly over the
top: armed police officers with helicopter, imprisonment for nearly eight months, three of which in a psychiatric
clinic, MAPPA (Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangement) registration, as if he was a terrorist or sex offender.
Leaked documents revealed that South Wales Police had a ‘shoot to kill’ policy.

Of course, your personal experiences that formed your outlook on life in general and justice in particular will
determine how you respond to this account. From my perspective as web publisher and McKenzie Friend of many
victims of white collar crimes, this is distinctly the worst in terms of police harassment and yet it confirms what many
others have experienced:

The lack of integrity that lawyers and judges have demonstrated, thus causing victims to represent
themselves
o Maurice has failed to find legal representation for the adversarial system that lawyers rely upon for
their livelihood can’t possibly be questioned
The serious disadvantage that Litigants in Person experience
o Instead of victims getting fair trials and access to justice, solicitors are expected to make money from
representing them – independent of the outcome for victims
The desperate need for any organisation to ‘save face’ rather than admit to any mistake – whether it’s
Haringey Council regarding the stealing of six Nigerian children or South Wales Police regarding the ‘machine
gun’ as ‘possessing and trading with firearms’:
o In 2009, ten Cardiff judges “believed” the statements by Dr X that Maurice was “too
dangerous to be released”
o In 2011, his bail application was apparently heard, but Maurice wasn’t told in prison and couldn’t be
there, could he…
Chronology
1993 Crown Court ignored Witness Affidavit recording police at Magistrates Court saying “We will get the bastard
talking human rights.”
1993 Magistrates sent me to prison until Police identified me.
1997 Crown Court ignored the CPS Barrister who summed up in his letter to the RCVS (Royal College of Veterinary
Surgeons) of CPS/ Police / HM Court Service (Wales) conspiracy to alter or withhold documents
1998 Crown Court ignored Jury complaining of senior police officer signalling to each of his mates during their
cross examination
1999 CPS ignored proven Police conspiracy, on oath, to frame me under the Terrorism Act, of flying my aircraft to
Southern Ireland
2001 Current trial judge, in my damages claim, acting then as Crown Court judge, ignored my GP and surgeon’s
medical reports that I was unable to attend court, dismissing my motoring appeal and later, in 2010, dismissing it as
part of my civil claim
2001 Magistrates had to dismiss all charges, but ignore the fact that all four Police motoring allegations were
fabricated
2003 County Court manager’s clandestine activities refuse my barrister sight of court files, sending and losing
some of my 130 files to HM Solicitor General’s Office in Whitehall, attempting to have me registered as vexatious
litigant. County Court staff later leak internal memos as proof that the investigation continued for at least 5 years.
2004 County Court appeal, heard in Swansea, refused me a Jury Trial for damages claim. I’m refused a Jury for any
combination of the 35 police incidents in the first three of my eight civil actions for damages. Appeal was heard by
an earlier judge in 1987, in the civil proceedings, just to keep it in the family.
2005 County Court refuses to order Police disclosure of relevant incident numbers (I’d lost them) of around 100
Police Officers on their PNC (Police National Computer).
2008 County Court refuses me access to Court building, unless in Court hearing. County Court allows Police to
continue withholding identity of now 150 Police Officers in some 70 incidents, all subject to litigation for damages.
2009 Magistrates refuse ‘due process’ of my private prosecution, following Chief Constable’s false sworn Affidavit
stating she was ‘unaware’ of Police break-in to my veterinary surgery, identification of Police at 35 recorded
incidents and Magistrates hearings, all supporting the evidence of a conspiracy to pervert the Course of Justice
2009 Crown Court, HM Court Service and CPS all withhold prior knowledge of MAPPA conspiracy, weeks before
my June arrest for being in possession of a machine gun that Police were aware their conduct was likely to get me
shot. This was later confirmed by MAPPA minutes leaked from Caswell Clinic, Psychiatric Prison, Bridgend.
2009 60th law firm refused to represent me, while Crown Court judges tried to get me to employ their laundered
variety of independent legal representation
2009 Nine Crown Court judges knew or should have known, when refusing bail, that the Police forensic history
was false and had employed a rogue Dr X to falsify a psychiatric report without patient examination
and later stating I had ‘significant brain damage’ and possibly brain tumour with neither qualification or evidence.
2009/10 Successive Crown Court judges deliberately ignored my applications for proper disclosure which
would have shown Police painted the ‘machine gun’ a different colour to fool the Jury, leaving me to cause the Jury
to ask “Just how many machine guns feature in this case?”
2009 During my custody, my trial judge for civil action hands down a £50,000 compensation judgement on my
2008 false imprisonment only for it to be overturned in a lower Court, by a District Judge. He accepted, if you wish to
believe it, that the same HM Court Manager as in 2003, ‘forgot’ to serve the Particulars of Claim despite Police, the
2nd Defendant, admitting receiving it, with prisoner not allowed to produce any affidavit or record from the then
Governor, in rebuttal.
2010 Crown Court refused to order NHS / Caswell Clinic / South Wales Police to disclose my full medical records
during my custody. I am sent to prison for arguing. This leads to nine months of litigation delay, due to ill health and
refused medical County Court trial judge refuses to prosecute Police lawyers who, despite his previous order to
disclose, continue to this day to refuse to reveal their joint statement of complaint with the Chief Constable to have
me arrested by armed police unit with helicopter of that year.
2011 Both Crown and Magistrates Court block ongoing private prosecution first accepted in English Court with
both Welsh Courts ignoring my correspondence and now blocking my access to their public counter.
Sept. Magistrates oppose my bail accepting South Wales Police PNC printout falsely identifying under ‘Warning’:
firearms, weapons, violent, escaper, sex offender and long list including 08/09/11 “states concealed items in his
rectum in 2008 to effect escape.”
Oct. Both Crown & Magistrates accept HM Prison lying that I refuse to attend Court for bail applications. Both
Courts are aware I am refused proper medical attention for over 7 days in prison, have refused me letters, stamps /
canteen from private cash, access to telephone or appropriate staff to liaise with courts.
Oct 12th I will continue my hunger strike until I have return of my legal papers from Police, I obtain
appropriate medical attention, a writ of Habeas Corpus appropriately filed in the right Court, a successful Crown
Court appeal for bail, Welsh acceptance of filed private prosecutions and / or proper Police disclosure in my civil
actions to allow my lawyers to serve on Dr Tegwyn Williams appropriate Particulars of Claim for punitive damages
with Police as Co-Defendant.
In his commitment of helping and supporting other victims, Maurice made remarkable efforts of finding out where
the six stolen Nigerian children are. In the process he got himself arrested three times which, ultimately led to him
being transferred to HMP Cardiff.
His statements relating to these arrests are
1. Criminal Damage
2. Public Order Charge
3. Conspiracy to Abduct Children

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UPDATE – HUMAN TRAFFICKING – THE BAYLIS FAMILY

LATE UPDATE – 21 10 11 = on behalf of Maryna Baylis 

Sent: 21 October 2011 15:13:53
 
“apparently nissen made an application at the RCJ today for the children to be in his care”  —

                 ————————————————-

“On October 10th, Kevin Baylis and Jenvey Baylis were snatched right from their homes by a person who has sexually and physically abused them for almost one decade. The aggressor provided fake legal papers in order to have the UK embassy enforce his horrific act. The parents of the two boys explain what happened and what you can do to aid them in getting their children back.”

New video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEOYRsp-Suo&feature=uploademail
 
About Justice -

FROM: http://baylis-family.info/author/justice/

I am Justice Master from Canberra Australia and setup this blog to help with justice for the Baylis Family
A Brief Introduction
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
The following information pertains to one particular family who has been subjected to human trafficking. Currently in the world, a rough estimate of people being trafficked soars at a whopping 12.3 million and being the fastest and second largest illegal market trailing only to drug trafficking. This means that 1.8 of every 1000 people falls victim to this horrific crime and increasingly to 3 to every 1000 people in Asia and the Pacific. Human Trafficking generates an estimated $35-$36 billion dollars annually and comes in all shapes and sizes.

Human Trafficking in essence is nothing more than a modern term for slavery, where people are forced either into labor, or sexual exploitation against their will. Statistically speaking women are most vulnerable to being traffic making up 56% of all adults and children being trafficked worldwide. Almost 70% of these cases are directly relating to sexual trafficking, in which the victim is abducted and forced into sexual activities.

Even though most of the victims originate from impoverished Third-World Countries, the destinations of the trafficked victims are generally intended for the First-World. Even though the means of human trafficking have become incredibly sophisticated the truth remains; slavery is as real as it was hundreds of years ago, the industry has only gone covert.

In order for a victim to be trafficked into a country many things need to occur. The first incident is the actual abduction which requires man power and resources. From that moment the person may be shipped to their destination where “fake passports and birth certificates” can be obtained from corrupt government officials. Finally the victim may be sold or traded to a buyer of where they will be drugged, abused, exploited and ultimately murdered in cold blood. This is the sad and tragic tales of millions of people from all over the world.

The United Kingdom is one of the major destinations for all human trafficked victims coming from across the globe. Most of the victims being brought into the United Kingdom are women and children used for all sorts of illicit purposes.

To fully understand the issue it is necessary to listen to the “voices of the invisible”, the people who are made silent in captivity. We will be guiding the reader through the story of the Baylis family, who has been subjected to the horrors of human trafficking in 1997. The ultimate goal of the Baylis family is not only to create awareness on the issue, but most importantly to obtain freedom from their oppressors. To this day the people who were responsible for abruptly and violently kidnapping and trafficking the mother and the children, are still in search of the family who has been granted humanitarian asylum in Mexico.

In order to make you, the reader, become fully aware of the extent of this evil and illicit market, the Baylis have dared to step out and tell their story. The following information is 100% real and current and explained from the view point of the victims themselves.

We hope that this information will “create awareness” and hopefully “inspire action” from all societies and all individuals from around the globe. This is a very real and serious issue that must be made a global priority to pursuit and capture all criminals involved.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply The birth of a family
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
We all know the story about boy meets girl, they fall in love, get married, have children and live happily ever after. This is the story that most people aims to achieve sometime throughout their lives. We all know that the “happily ever after” part of the story sometimes is a bit harder to achieve than it sounds, but nonetheless we still pursuit it with great zeal. The story of the Baylis may have started something similar, but is surely didn’t end that way.

Jeremy Baylis, an American, was sent to South-Africa in 1992 for work purposes, where he met a man named Carl du Plessis. During their time together the two men formed a close friendship. A year later Carl introduced his sister, Maryna, to Jeremy and instantly there was what we call “chemistry” between the two.  A year after they met Maryna and Jeremy started a relationship.

Carl and Jeremy carried out several other missions throughout this time. Maryna was in the South-African police department working vice. Regardless of their hectic work schedules Maryna and Jeremy still found time for each other and kept on building on their relationship.

In March of 1996 Maryna learnt that she was pregnant with Jeremy’s child. Both soon-to-be parents were incredibly happy at the news, and Maryna decided to go for her check ups. She was sent to Somerset Hospital in Cape Town due to evidence that suggested that the baby was under “a lot of stress”. This hospital was the only one in Cape Town that had a high risk unit and thus was the recommended hospital. Maryna continued to go to the hospital for regular check ups until October 11 1996 when an emergency C-section was considered to save the life of the child.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply The birth of Kevin
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
Kevin was born on the 11th October at 23:50, weighing 9 pounds 4 ounces, measuring in at 64cm. It was a normal natural birth. Kevin was not breathing and was rushed away by pediatrics he was brought back 45 min later, his first Apgar score was at 43 min and was 3 and his next was at 50 min and was 9. Towards the end of Kevin’s 2nd week on earth he was very ill, Maryna took Kevin via public transport to Milnerton Medi city to see the pediatrician Dr. Grinling, where they discovered an abnormal heartbeat and saw signs of a viral infection. Dr. Grinling referred her straight away to Red Cross children hospital. Kevin underwent a lumber punch on his back; he also under went a series of blood test and heart scans. Kevin was diagnosed with Staphylococcus Meningococcal septicemia, of which he was admitted to yet another hospital. If this wasn’t enough, the doctors also detected that Kevin’s blood flow through the heart was in reverse, yet it was not problematic or any treatment was necessary, he would just have to avoid too much salt in his diet and other fatty products.

During all this time Jeremy was completely involved even though he was required at times to go on missions for work purposes. All financial support was given from Jeremy to Maryna and his new baby boy.

Kevin crawled early, walked early and was over all a normal baby. Yet due to his medical conditions he needed to be screened for health risks throughout this time. It wasn’t until 1997 when Kevin needed to go for further neurological studies when their whole world would turn upside down.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply From Family to Victims
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
In 1997, when Kevin needed to be transferred to another hospital to continue his neurological studies, both Maryna and Kevin were abducted by a man named Dennis Nissen into the United Kingdom.It all happened when Maryna picked up Kevin from daycare and was on her way to the hospital. Unsuspectingly a car crashed into theirs rendering both unconscious.

Two days later Maryna and Kevin woke up in the UK feeling very drowsy and disoriented. This suggests that the aggressor drugged the victims and moved them with to the UK under falsified passports. They were forced to live with this man as “part of the family” or at least the twisted views on family life of Mr. Nissen.

It was only after four to five weeks that Jeremy found out about what happened to his family through Maryna’s brother Carl. Obviously this sent Jeremy into a state of worry as he spent all his efforts in finding out what happened to his family.

From building a relationship, to making a family to eventually falling subject to the horrors of being trafficked, the Baylis family would never be the same again.

For those of you who asked for more information about Mr Nissen and his involvement. Both Maryna and Jeremy work on classified assignments, in their line off duty and there is enough proof that Nissen were an object of interest in the case they were working on.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply What occurred in Nottingham
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
Maryna and Kevin, forced to live with a stranger were severely abused. They were not allowed to talk to neighbors; they were to remain quiet after the beatings and the sexual assaults. For Maryna it seemed that there was very little hope glimmering over the horizon.

Some of the neighbors became worried over all the commotion happening in the house that they called the police. Yet every time the police arrived they were sent off by the aggressor. It appears that Mr. Nissen has connections within the local government of the UK as most police efforts were rendered useless. For Maryna and Kevin things only seemed to be getting worse.

Eventually Maryna managed to contact her brother in South-Africa and Jeremy. The situation was a difficult one. Maryna and Kevin all of a sudden had SA Passports, and were “legally” bound to their aggressor. It didn’t matter what they said, or what they did, in the end they were completely subjected to the abuse of Mr. Nissen without any legal path to follow. Jeremy did what he could; he began to support his family financially while working on a way to get them out.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply The abuse escalates
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
The week days were the worst, as Mr. Nissen would violently rape and abuse both Kevin and Maryna. They both longed for the weekends as the abuser would leave to go on sailing trips and keep both the victims under lock and key.

On one occasion Kevin and Maryna were forced to go camping with the aggressor. During this trip Mr. Nissin completely lost it and left Kevin (who was only a little child at the moment) in a bloody state. The police were informed but Mr. Nissen didn’t allow the police to talk to either Maryna or Kevin.

They continued to be moved all over the place as to not raise suspicion. They were kept to minimal communication and it was until their neighbor’s son asked Maryna and Kevin to take care of his 80 year old mother when he was at work that things began to shift. After a lot of abuse and warning Maryna and Kevin were allowed to take care of the old lady. It was here when things began to take on a different form. Jeremy now could send money directly to the neighbor and Maryna obtained a slight window of freedom to communicate with her loved ones. As time continued Mr. Nissin began traveling more which started opening a window for them to escape.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply In the midst of chaos
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
In the beginning stages of 1999 when the world was preparing for the change of the millennia, the Baylis began preparing for something very different. Since Mr. Nissen was away a lot more, it gave Jeremy a time to visit Maryna and Kevin. During this time it was when Jeremy and Maryna conceived their second child, Jenvey.

Jenvey was born in the year 2000 in Kingsmill Hospital in Nottingham. By this time both Jeremy and Carl (Maryna’s brother) had made plans of their escape.

They eventually achieved their goal by getting Maryna and the boys out of England in November. It was almost like a big weight had been lifted off of Maryna who with their “new found freedom” had difficulty adjusting. The boys on the other hand could experience for the first time what it is to be part of a loving family. For the next three months there was an apparent moment of sanity in this chaotic mess. It wasn’t till 2001 when the world flipped upside down for the Baylis once more.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply Government involvement
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
1
2001 started off nicely for the Baylis family who were finally reunited once more. They celebrated the holidays together and found some sort of peace in their situation. Then, even before the holiday left-overs were completely devoured, Mr. Nissen showed up once more, except this time he wasn’t alone.

It became completely apparent that Mr. Nissen had ties with the UK government, as he showed up with the UK embassy and forced Maryna and both her children back to England against their will. According to Mr. Nissen he had a legal right over the family and that if they were not to comply, they would forcefully take the children under the accounts of kidnapping.

Imagine being bound by law to the abuser that violently disrupted your life. Legally the Baylis could do nothing and Maryna and the boys were flown back to England. During this time they were moved to separate locations in Nottingham as to make communication and escape more difficult.

As the abuse and the violent rape continued, Maryna took the situation back into her own hands, or so she thought. She managed to escape from her house, and with the money that Jeremy had given her was able to get her own place. It wasn’t long until the police came knocking on her door and she was forced to let Mr. Nissen back into her London home. Obviously the enraged abuser took out all his violence and frustration out on the Baylis. In addition there was an incident where Nissen’s rage left Jenvey with 96 stitches. The small child was hurled against a fireplace in a fit of violence by the aggressor. Luckily he wasn’t permanently injured, but the boy was definitely left in a state of pain and shock, as life was incredibly uncertain for the victims.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Reply The Knife incident
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
It was right here in the London home where one of the most horrific events took place. It appeared that Mr. Nissen’s unstable condition made him become more violent. Several times he pulled a knife on the children in order to force the mother and her kids to stay in line. The initial incidents weren’t as severe as what happened on Christmas Eve of 2002.

During what most people would celebrate as a time for family and friends, Mr. Nissen went one step further. Kevin who was about six years old threatened to leave the house he was being held at. The result was a knife to his neck from the aggressor saying that if he doesn’t go into the house, he will slit his throat. Kevin complied with tear shed eyes and went back into the house where he would later be abused.

Maryna filed a police report but the police refused to remove Mr. Nissen from the house. Once more we get to see how much power and influence this man truly had in the local government. The only way that Maryna and the boys could somehow escape from all the madness was to go work part time and get the boys into daycare and school.

It was then when Maryna decided to do something that she would regret for the rest of her life.

  Maryna asked Jeremy to move on with his life as she lost hope of salvation. Jeremy continued to stay in touch.

The Baylis family was living in desperate times, and their situation didn’t seem to be improving whatsoever.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply The court battles
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
2
Maryna became fearful that one of these days Mr. Nissen might kill one of them. Regardless of the police reports, and regardless of all the evidence against Nissen, the UK social services deemed that the kids were fine and were in no danger of Nissen. They even went a step further and named Kevin’s uncle as the abuser even though Kevin named on record Nissen as the source of all the abuse.

Eventually by 2009 after all the legal battles and court rulings, after having escaped several times and having been forced back to Nissen, the UK courts found that Maryna was not tied to Nissen in any way or manner and was granted to leave the country. Jeremy was ecstatic about this and moved to the UK to help them leave.

Nissen in retaliation went on a rampage of abuse but as time worked against him, he eventually disappeared from their lives in June of 2009, or so they thought. After all Maryna’s belongings that she obtained throughout her time in England were put in a storage unit, the Baylis left to go to Mexico.

Nissen did the only thing he could think off when he realized that Maryna and the boys were out of his reach. He broke into the storage unit, stole all their belongings, including copies of the children’s South african birthcertificates. He altered all the evidence into his favour, went to the courts and told them he only have photocopies of the childrens birth certificates, but he needs his children back in the UK. This opened a door for him in trying to hunt them down and force them back. He were hoping that his lies would be believed and that Maryna and Jeremy would not have the original certificates to fight back.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Replies

http://baylis-family.info/author/justice/

EARLIER VIDEO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s68Ox9oKLM&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

…b.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

THE MUSAS AT THE RCJ – WEDS 19 10 11

AT THE ROYAL COURT YESTERDAY, WEDS 19 10 2011, BEFORE THE HEARING WITH SIR NICHOLAS WALL, THE PRESIDENT PRESIDING, HARINGEY COUNCIL TRIED TO GIVE MUSAS THE PAPERS ON WHAT WAS HAPPENING THAT DAY BUT THEY REFUSED TO TAKE THEM.

THE “GUARDIAN SOLICITOR “FOR THE MUSA CHILDREN “JONQUIL HOUGHTON”, WHO ACTS FOR THE COUNCIL RATHER THAT THE MUSA CHILDREN {AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT ABOUT THIS PERSON HAS BEEN SENT TO THE REGULATORY BODIES MANY TIMES, BUT HAS BEEN IGNORED AND BRUSHED ASIDE MANY TIMES TOO} SAID THEY HAD SENT THE DOCUMENTS VIA EMAIL TO THE MUSAS THE PREVIOUS NIGHT – OBVIOUSLY NOT GIVING THEM ANY WARNING OF WHAT WAS TO COME, OR TIME TO REFLECT ON THE PAPERS SENT. THIS IS NORMAL BEFORE A COURT CASE INVOLVING HARINGEY COUNCILAND THE MUSA PARENTS – NOT GIVING THE DEFENDANTS TIME TO GET THEIR RESPONSE TOGETHER BEFORE THE HEARING, OFTEN THE VERY NEXT DAY, AS IT WAS IN THIS CASE.

 THE MUSAS ARE NOT ENTERING COURT AGAIN WITHOUT THE NIGERIAN HIGH COMMISSION BEING PRESENT FROM NOW ON.

 THIS HEARING WAS ABOUT THE BABY, AND THE POLICE OFFICER PRESENT OFFERED NO EVIDENCE IN THE HEARING AND ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE CASE, AND WALKED OUT HALFWAY THROUGH THE HEARING, AS NO DRUGS WERE ADMINISTERED TO THE BABY AND THERE IS NO CASE AND THEY HAD NOTHING TO SAY OR ADD. THERE WERE NO DRUGS FOUND IN THE BABY AT THE TIME SHE WAS TAKEN TO HOSPITAL ON THE 27 JUNE, AND SHE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN REMOVED ON MR. PETER LEES HEARSAY COMMENTS, WHICH BORE NO RESEMBLANCE TO REALITY, IT HAS NOW TRANSPIRED THROUGH THE R.O.A.R. REPORT, WHICH STATES CATEGORICALLY THAT NO DRUGS WERE FOUND IN THE BABIES BODY, OR THE PARENTS EITHER.

 THE COUNCIL ARE DESPERATE TO KEEP THIS BABY, AND ARE NOW THREATENING TO DO ANYTHING TO KEEP HER. THERE IS A “FACT-FINDING” HEARING ON THE 31st, TO LAST DAYS, WHERE TOXICOLOGISTS AND VARIOUS OTHERS HARINGEY COUNCIL HAVE CONTACTED TO GET AROUND THERE BEING NO DRUGS FOUND IN THE BABY.

WHAT RUBBISH IS THIS?

 WHEN THE BABY SHOULD BE GIVEN BACK WHEN IT WAS REMOVED ON FALSE PRETENCES!! LEE, THE FORMER MANAGER IN HARINGEY COUNCIL, SAID THE BABY “SHOWED SYMPTOMS OF BEING ADMINISTERED DRUGS”, AND SHE WASNT – WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? WHY HAS THE BABY NOT BEEN RETURNED TO THE RIGHTFUL PARENTS NOW THIS ALLEGATION HAS BEEN TOTALLY DISPROVEN BY AN OFFICIAL REPORT FROM AN OFFICIAL FULL POLICE INVESTIGATION INTO WHETHER THE BABY HAD ANY DRUGS IN HER AT ALL, GIVEN TO HER BY HER PARENTS?

 THE CONTACT VISITS:

 EVEN THO THE CONTACT VISITS HAVE BEEN REESTABLISHED BETWEEN THE MUSAS AND THEIR CHILDREN, BY ORDERS OF SIR NICHOLAS WALL AT THE LAST HEARING STILL THEY ARE BEING TOTALLY IGNORED BY THE COUNCIL, AND THE MUSAS STILL HAVE NOT SEEN THEIR CHILDREN – THE BABY SINCE JUNE 27, THE 4 OTHERS FOR OVER 6 MONTHS, AND FAVOUR SINCE OVER 14 MONTHS – THIS IS A DISGRACE TO WHICH HARINGEY COUNCIL ARE VERY MUCH LIABLE.

 WILL THEY BE HELD LIABLE? OF COURSE NOT!! THIS IS A DISGRACE!! WHY ARE THEY NOT BEING HELD LIABLE FOR BREAKING THE PRESIDENTS ORDERS??

 ALSO:

 It has been said: “The local Authority has altred and change the court bundle given to justice walls and we were not given a copy of the new altered court bundle and that will affect Justice walls decision on the 31 oct 2011 and they refuse to include our witness template.”

 SO, THIS COUNCIL IS INTERFERING WITH ACTUAL STATEMENTS BY THE MUSAS THEY HAVE GIVEN TO THE COURT, AND SIR NICHOLAS WALL!! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!

 MPs and MANY MORE WILL BE INFORMED OF THIS ILLEGAL ACTION {SEE EMAIL ADDS SENT TO} – THIS IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL TO CHANGE STATEMENTS HOW THIS COUNCIL HAS DONE!!

 EVERY SUPPORTER DEMANDS ACTION AGAINST THESE CRIMINALS WHO DO WHAT THEY WANT AND STEAL CHILDREN, PROBABLY TO ORDER!! THIS IS DISGUSTING AND MUST STOP AND THE CRIMINALS MUST BE BROUGHT TO BOOK AND PROSECUTED FORTHWITH IMMEDIATLY!!

 ———————————————————————————-

 As an update to my email earlier it has been pointed out that for the members of the NIGERIAN HIGH COMMISSION to have been refused access to the MUSA CHILDREN this is in complete contravention to the international Law and Treaty under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_2_1963.pdf

 Please see:

 Article 5 (a) = protecting in the receiving State the interests of the sending State and of its nationals, both individuals and bodies corporate, within the limits permitted by international law;

 (e) helping and assisting nationals, both individuals and bodies corporate, of the sending State;

 (h) safeguarding, within the limits imposed by the laws and regulations of the receiving State, the interests of minors and other persons lacking full capacity who are nationals of the sending State, particularly where any guardianship or trusteeship is required with respect to such persons; (i) subject to the practices and procedures obtaining in the receiving State, representing or arranging appropriate representation for nationals of the sending State before the tribunals and other authorities of the receiving State, for the purpose of obtaining, in accordance with the laws and regulations of the receiving State, provisional measures for the preservation of the rights and interests of these nationals,where, because of absence or any other reason, such nationals are unable at the proper time to assume the defence of their rights and interests; (j) transmitting judicial and extrajudicial documents or executing letters rogatory or commissions to take evidence for the courts of the sending State in accordance with international agreements in force or, in the absence of such international agreements, in any other manner compatible with the laws and regulations of the receiving State;

 Article 28 = Facilities for the work of the consular post The receiving State shall accord full facilities for the performance of the functions of the consular post. Article 36Communication and contact with nationalsof the sending State1.With a view to facilitating the exercise of consular functions relating to nationals of the sending State: (a) consular officers shall be free to communicate with nationals of the sending State and to have access to them. Nationals of the sending State shall have the same freedom with respect to communication with and access to consular officers of the sending State; (b) if he so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State shall, without delay, inform the consular post of the sending State if, within its consular district, a national of that State is arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is detained in any other manner. Any communication addressed to the consular post by the person arrested, in prison, custody or detention shall be forwarded by the said authorities without delay. The said authorities shall inform the person concerned without delay of his rights under this subparagraph; (c) consular officers shall have the right to visit a national of the sending State who is in prison, custody or detention, to converse and correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation. They shall also have the right to visit any national of the sending State who is in prison, custody or detention in their district in pursuance of a judgement. Nevertheless, consular officers shall refrain from taking action on behalf of a national who is in prison, custody or detention if he expressly opposes such action. (d) The rights referred to in paragraph 1 of this article shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the receiving State, subject to the proviso, however, that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purposes for which the rights accorded under this article are intended.

 Article 37 – Information in cases of deaths, guardianship or trusteeship, wrecks and air accidents If the relevant information is available to the competent authorities of the receiving State, such authorities shall have the duty: (a) in the case of the death of a national of the sending State, to inform without delay the consular post in whose district the death occurred; (b) to inform the competent consular post without delay of any case where the appointment of a guardian or trustee appears to be in the interests of a minor or other person lacking full capacity who is a national of the sending State. The giving of this information shall, however, be without prejudice to the operation of the laws and regulations of the receiving State concerning such appointments; Article 38Communication with the authorities of the receiving State In the exercise of their functions, consular officers may address: (a) the competent local authorities of their consular district;

 Thank you.

 ..namaste…b.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

MAURICE KIRK – ON FULL HUNGER STRIKE IN CARDIFF PRISON

Maurice points to the sheet of metal which replaced the window he smashed to attempt to remove himself from illegal incarceration at Tottenham police station whilst trying to help the M parents from being falsely arrested by Tottenham police.

Maurice Kirk is on full hunger strike in Cardiff prison.

He has been fighting the rancid corruption within the S. Wales councils + local governments for over 20 years, for which he has paid dearly at the hands of these corrupted entities – and the S. Wales police + judiciary, + others. Theyve even taken his licence to practice as a vet, thus destroying the mans livlihood. A “Dr.” X, who is about as professional as a dustbin, has made a very fake report saying Maurice has a brain tumour and is mad and needs to be locked away forever in Broadmoor, the notorious closed mental hospital, for his own safety and for that of the public. He also  says Maurice has a mental illness whereby he believes the police collude together to pervert the course of true justice, which of course is exactly what they have been doing for over 20 years with him. The only reason Dr X has not succeeded in his evil plan to lock Maurice away is because he could  not get any other professional to sign his dubious medical report – it needs 3 signatures to be enforcable to be able remove Maurice from society FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE. These professional doctors + psychiatrists  could all see using a fake report to put Maurice away for life was a complete perversion of justice and a pack of lies, and they were having none of it. Still now, 2 years later, this pack of lies in the form of X’s report IS STILL TO BE USED at Maurices next court appearance, on November 10, when he will face this person who will attempt yet again to have him locked away in a mental hospital forever. What a crock of b-llsh-t! The latest details on Maurices case will be posted here as and when they happen, and on his site www.kirkflyingvet.com.

The latest from Maurices site: http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/news/default.aspx =

Police Steal my Computer and Original Witness Statements Confirming their Conspiracy with Dr  X

Filed under: Judicial Review, South Wales Police, Caswell Clinic, Machine Gun, Dr Tegwyn Williams, MAPPA, SOCA

I have just been released from police cells only to be admitted into hospital for abdominal investigations. I enclose part of what I think is going on by the part prepared affidavit below. This is only my current draft preparation for a final sworn affidavit, when I am well enough, to account for my most recent bullying by the South Wales Police. 28th August 2011

Police Steal my Computer and Original Witness Statements to further Pervert the Course of Justice
Imprisonment from 22nd June 2009 to 9th February 2010

Replica Machine Gun Indictments

1. I, Maurice John Kirk, wish to state that on 23rd August 2011, at 10.20am, was outside Cardiff Central Police Station informing my solicitor as to my newly obtained witness information indicating that South Wales Police had modified prosecution Exhibit 1, a replica WW1 Lewis machine gun, before using it in my 2009 Cardiff Crown Court trial to obtain a mandatory 10 year prison sentence.

2. I was en route to the County Court in relation to my three imminent September Court of Appeal hearings re MAPPA failed disclosure, police ‘shoot to kill’ policy and nearly 20 years of malicious prosecutions, false imprisonments and deliberate failure to properly investigate crime committed on me, my family, staff and property associated with my veterinary hospital. The police bullying continues today. I wanted to go onto to my GP due to an ongoing illness, possibly requiring hospitalisation.

3. I entered the police station and asked, for the 4th time in as many weeks, for whoever was in charge of a related 22nd July 2011 incident when I had been interviewed by police following my having recently purchased a fire arm they saw on my website, www.kirkflyingvet.com.

Falsified Psychiatric Reports and ‘Significant Brain Damage’

4. I also asked to see the acting inspector who had taken my 5th July 2011 three hour complaint concerning a Dr X telling judges I had ‘significant brain damage’, possible brain tumour and too dangerous for release. This related to his questionable association with the South Wales Police using him with his false psychiatric reports to have me locked me up for nearly eight months – clearly because their ‘shoot to kill’ policy against me had, to date, failed.

Failed MAPPA Disclosure

5. This relationship was further recently revealed in Dr Tegwyn Williams’ own leaked MAPPA minutes from Caswell Clinic, Bridgend where police and he or his staff were in attendance at seven of the eight MAPPA meetings. The first MAPPA meeting was held on the 8th June 2009 in Barry police station when the ‘shoot to kill policy’ was again agreed.

New Fire Arm Allegation

6. There was again no police officer available to speak to in the police station foyer but, at last, I did manage to obtain the incident’s designated ‘occurrence number’, thereby identifying police in the purported fire arm investigation.

7. After being refused access to speak to any of those officers, yet again, I asked the female receptionist, behind the plate glass window, whether I would have to shoot the Mayor of Cardiff in order to be able to speak to a police officer?

8. The duty inspector, a Richard Moorcroft, eventually arrived and I asked if I could be shown to an interview room to continue my complaints of 5th July.

Content of New Lincolnshire Witness Statements

9. I outlined the evidence in the new witness statements, some brought with me, which indicate the following and requiring urgent police action:

a. The seized replica machine gun was painted black all over, save the brown wooden stock, when I had sold it in June 2008 and later collected by the owner’s wife, on 17th August, at Cardiff airport.

b. Within days of the replica gun arriving at the air museum, in Lincolnshire, it was re-painted, before the new owner bolted it back onto the nose of the DH2 replica aircraft.

c. The distinctive round ammunition magazine was painted, by the new owner, from black to silver.

d. The new owner also stated that the barrel was blocked. He also assumed that it had been part of the original decommissioning carried out in around 1977, to make it legal, before it was attached to the biplane for air displays.

e. The new owner, whilst painting the magazine silver, was witnessed by several in the hangar some of which feature in the new statements.

f. These statements further confirm that when the police seized the replica, on the day of my 22nd June 2009 arrest, the magazine colour was still in silver.

g. About two months later, when reexamined with police in attendance, the new owner states the barrel was no longer blocked, since he had been able to pass a wire from muzzle to breach head. Police told him they had just fired a 410 shot gun cartridge with it.

h. In Cardiff Crown court trial the prosecution had presented a video film, taken from my website, of my carrying the replica in August 2009, just days before its collection by the new owner’s wife. The magazine on the replica appeared on the video as black.

i. After the trial, the police returned the replica gun to its owner, but the magazine was now painted back to silver and a picture of such now appears on my website.

10. I explained to the inspector in Cardiff police station that during cross examination of police, in the trial, no one has prepared to account for the exact movements of the replica whilst countless South Wales Police, often single handed, hawked it almost 2000 miles around the United Kingdom in attempts to obtain proof, when I owned the replica, that it contravened the 1968 Fire Arms Act.

11. On his hearing of the new evidence the inspector’s face appeared to go white and he left the room, but not without his bound book recording parts of our conversation. The other police officer present also had made notes, both of which may now be difficult to recover.

Arrested for ‘Threats to Kill’

12. At 11am I was arrested for alleged ‘threats to kill’ (the Mayor of Cardiff!) and taken to Cardiff Bay Police Station cells.

Refused Right to have Someone Notified of my Custody

13. I was refused the right to have someone contacted and informed of my custody promptly. Because of that, the person, whose name and number I gave, did not become aware of the circumstances until nearly two days later and I was unable to bring my witnesses.

Current Medical Condition

14. My current medical condition had worsened with the passing of blood no doubt bleeding from the upper alimentary tract. The doctor who then examined me in custody said I needed further investigation in hospital assuming my release that night. When eventually released and owing to my worsening condition I was, in fact, admitted to hospital and held overnight. I was refused a doctor in the magistrates cell or a nurse.

Oppose Bail to Interfere with Court of Appeal Hearings

15. At 3am the police sergeant refused me bail from their cells reliant on a huge amount of documents, prepared much earlier. I was denied a copy, suggesting I would abscond to France by personally flying out of the country, I presume flaunting all the aviation regulations on the way.

16. Following interrogation through the night on the matter of ‘threats to kill’ it was promptly followed by another charge being considered, that of harassment of a Dr X. He had made a statement in rebuttal on the 6th July following the approach by police over my written complaint of falsifying my medical evidence the day before. My statement of complaint contained further information to the police that if I was not shot or receive a 10 year prison sentence I would, at least be sent to Broadmoor for life (IPP – Imprisonment for Public Protection). Police continue with their enquiries in order to bring some charge or other.

Refused to take Defendant’s Written Statement

17. The police, as with the ‘threats to kill’ charge, repeatedly refused to take a written statement from me, when I was trying to avoid any ambiguity of the truth.

Refused Right to Speak to Solicitor or Call Witnesses
18. 27th August 2011. Having been unable to speak to my witnesses from the police cells, to have them for the hearing, I attempted to speak on the phone to a solicitor from outside the area. I was now transferred to the court cells but was refused a direct confidential telephone call. The solicitor, however, was informed of my custody, but nearly two hours away and without instructions to act.

19. What I did not know, when I entered the court room in hand cuffs, was that the solicitor had spoken, in that short time, to the court and had understood the CPS, during the small hours of the morning, had objected to the ‘threats to kill’ charge, clearly only dreamed up by the police to keep me locked up for months, again to affect my ongoing civil proceedings against them.

20. So the police reduced the charge to a Section 4 Public Order offence which, in turn, was again reduced by the prosecutor in court after receiving more facts as to what actually happened.

Refused copy of New Charge

21. I was quickly offered the Section 5 for pleading but refused a copy to read.

Refused Communication with Solicitor

22. I asked to speak to my solicitor, in the sudden change of circumstances but was refused.

Blackmailed to Plead Guilty

23. There was an indication given that, if I pleaded ‘not guilty’ the CPS would no longer proceed but if not, I ran the risk of prolonged period on remand again and no early return of my computer and papers – all needed for the Court of Appeal preparation with the hearings due to be heard in September.

24. The police had, I believe, unlawfully taken my court papers and computer from my locked car (after I was arrested) to destroy the original witness statements from Lincolnshire. PC Paul Williams said I could have the computer and court papers back as soon as the ‘threats to kill’ case was finalised.

25. I therefore pleaded guilty. But police intrigue appeared again when the CPS then produced a PNC forensic history report on me significantly different to the version that a Derrick Hassan of South Wales Police had prepared for Dr X when it went before nine 2009 Cardiff Crown Court judges, considering my bail applications.

26. Mr Derrick Hassan, on 2nd November 20010, had also given evidence, in my absence, (Judicial Review in October), of my committing a ‘common assault’, after he had pushed me down the court steps on my crutches which led to my admission to hospital with a suspected fractured leg. A plethora of medical evidence explaining my not attending, accepted by other courts, was withheld from the sitting District Judge.

27. I asked to return to my cell as I was not well but insisted I give mitigation in court once the correct PNC printout had been established (for my private prosecution against Dr X, the papers currently with the Recorder of Cardiff and Cardiff Magistrates, for too many weeks now, to list for a hearing). I left the court and asked the custody officer in charge to ensure the court knew I had changed my plea to ‘not guilty’ as my Court of Appeal and bail was paramount.

28. I returned to the cells to be informed later I had received a £50 fine in my absence. I also now had time to read prosecution papers sent in by duty solicitor indicating even the two statements of receptionist and Inspector Moorcroft contradicted the main issue and the latter having written I had admitted the offence of ‘threats to kill’!

PC Paul Williams withholds Computer and Witness Statements

29. On release I rang the police officer with the computer who was amazed I had pleaded ‘guilty’, expecting to have the computer bag withheld for months, just like during the machine gun case, anything to prolong the unaccountable police bullying.

30. He reluctantly agreed to return the contents of my computer case, but on my arrival at the police station he refused to return the computer, scanner, camera accessories etc and Lincolnshire statements offering only an empty bag. He demanded a signature for it or I could not have the empty bag.

31. This then led to a scuffle fighting over the empty bag requiring some eleven police officers filling the Cardiff Bay Police Station foyer until I eventually managed to pull off them without the need for a signature.

Here’s a message from a Police Officer after Maurice was arrested on the “support blog”. {see M’s site for audio: http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/news/default.aspx }
To be continued after I have next visited the police station to demand my property back, including original witness statements.

http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/news/default.aspx

============================

At this very minute Maurice is in Cardiff prison awaiting the court case on the 12 November, where they will attempt to put him away for life in Broadmoor. Although very ill with bleeding stomach ulcers and having lost 9 kg in weight and in constant pain treatment is refused, as is admission to the hospital  in the prison, due to “orders from high up” we are told. This is just another disgraceful travesty Maurice has no choice but to suffer.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

AT THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE, 27 OCT. 2011

                     PRESS RELEASE INTERNATIONAL APPEAL

“The time has come to put an END to the Secrecy of the Family Courts”

Please attend

The Court of Appeal, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2

Thursday 27th October 2011, 9.30am – 4.00pm 

If you and your family have suffered at the hands of the Family Courts

YOU NEED to be HERE!

 Also, this could happen ANYTIME to ANY child or family!

On 27th October, in a landmark hearing in an OPEN Court of Appeal, a disabled young woman who claims to have been repeatedly abused by a high-level paedophile ring during her childhood will be asking for permission to pursue justice and her human rights against her former abusers. She and her mother have been silenced by people in official positions using and abusing their powers of secrecy to shield those who commit these horrific crimes against the young and vulnerable. In her own words, in mounting this appeal, this young woman is “fighting to stop other children being hurt”, as well as silenced and intimidated, both by the powerful perverts perpetrating the abuse and by the SECRECY of the family court system seemingly backing them up.

The young woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, may not have very much longer to live. She is already well-known both internationally and nationally and all eyes are on her. With the help of her many friends and supporters, despite her disability she is determined to achieve justice. She and her mother are making this stance in the Court of Appeal for their inalienable human rights, which have been denied them by the malicious and unlawful actions of their local authorities to shut them up. The authorities have used false claims of a thorough police investigation into the case which did not take place and denied the unlawful sectioning under the mental health act to silence her mother after the two women reported crimes of sexual abuse to the police

The Family Division of the UK Royal Courts of Justice (and its equivalent in Commonwealth countries) is known for its SECRECY and not for transparency nor for its compassion in listening to the voices and anguish of children/vulnerable adul…ts and their families. These are then sidelined by the courts who unlawfully force the appointment of the Official Solicitor under the guise of protecting the child/vulnerable adult. Significantly, localauthorities with the help of the Family Courts, receive substantial remuneration from central government for fulfilling ‘alternative placement targets’. In fact, every step of the process of putting a child/vulnerable adult into care, with the youngest ones being adopted generates cash for all involved. The sheer numbers beingprocessed annually suggests an agenda to break up families.

Or, has CHILD-TRAFFICKING, traditionally regarded as a Third World phenomenon become BRITISH REALITY?

http://www.againstchildtrafficking.org/

http://poundpuplegacy.org/node/41521

http://www.youtube.com/user/ukcolumn. 

Worse, could children ‘stolen’ by the State be feeding this country’s paedophile confraternity, of which our young woman due in court on 27th was a victim?

Please, if you love children and abhor any form of violence or injustice against them, sexual or otherwise, come to Royal Courts of Justice in London on 27th October.

THE TIME IS NOW – A BIGCROWD IS NEEDED both to fill the public gallery and to line the street outside. The action is to be peaceful and dignified, with no need for ‘gimmicks’, the issue speaks for itself and all we need is NUMBERS. Press, please be there! Just WHO in very high places is a closet child abuser, necessitating such a massive cover-up, as in the case of the disabled young woman about to appear in the High Court, with the biggest establishment guns trained on her and her very life on the line? You might not be allowed to publish the story but at least by close of play on 27th October you might know WHY you can’t!

{written by a supporter}

On the 23 Oct. 2011 – Stoke-on-Trent – Blowing The Whistle – Child Stealing By The State – Brian Gerrish =

A short introduction to the Child Stealing conference taking place at the Kings Hall in Stoke On Trent on the 23rd October 2011. It’s time to put an end to the abuse of the child care system which is being used as a cash cow by too many people.

See http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-whistle-child-stealing-state for details.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 5 Comments

MAURICE KIRK – THE COVERUP CONTINUES

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION: WANTED: Fair Trials and Compensation – instead of an Effective Remedy before National Authorities

http://www.gopetition.co.uk/petition/40825.html

… 02 Legal Battles

Finally, Maurice will Face Dr X in Court: November 10 At long last today, Maurice (watched by his “gang of four”) heard that there were four allegations before the Court, but in the end only one was dealt with: having allegedly harassed Dr Tegwyn Williams by displaying his photo on WANTED POSTERS The question is: whose ‘paranoid delusional order’ is worse: Dr X or supposedly Maurice’s? After all, Dr Williams and everybody he dealt with in the NHS, including the Welsh Assembly and the Health Minister at the time, Edwina Hart: colluded to label him with “paranoid delusional disorder”, “significant brain damage” and “potentially brain tumour” used such reports to keep him incarcerated in Caswell Clinic for the maximum of three months (in 2009) tried to use these reports to section him for life to Broadmoor refused to hand over these medical records required to get his hip replaced (which eventually took place in France).

This refusal of handing out medical records was the basis for campaigning with the petition WANTED: Fair Trials and Compensation, which can still be signed! This delay of the operation caused not only a LOT of damage due to the need for morphine, but also the necessity to attend to court cases, consequent “not surrendering to court” and other allegations. Of course, one has to wonder why Maurice had to be in prison since 21 September – without either being told that he is expected in court being given papers about the reasons for his imprisonment! But, the authorities always know best, don’t they!? The Court was reminded today that we fear for his health and safety. Hence please consider offering your support to Maurice: contact the Governor of HMP Prison on 02920 923 100 and ask whether the endoscopy he was promised has taken place ask whether Maurice will be transferred to the hospital wing sign the petition:

WANTED: Fair Trials and Compensation

write to prisoner no A7306AT in Knox Road, South Glamorgan CF24 0UG. Until Nov 10th, we also hope to be able to grow the “gang of four” into a more solid “network of McKenzie Angels”. Please email sabine@3d-metrics.com if you are interested!

Filed under: magistrates court, hmp cardiff

http://kirkflyingvet.com/blogs/legal/archive/2011/10/13/finally-maurice-can-face-dr-tegwyn-williams-in-court-november-10.aspx

==========

N.B. John Graham aka butlincat wishes to state categorically and emphatically that he is in no way aligned to one Sabine Mcneil or any of her alleged “organisations” or “sites”. Many people say she is working for the other side and he agrees with them!!=================================================================

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048807/Up-10-000-children-exploited-sex-gangs-says-childrens-commissioner.html

Up to 10,000 children being exploited by sex gangs, says children’s commissioner

By Chris Greenwood

Last updated at 1:56 AM on 14th October 2011

Concerns: The Children¿s Commissioner¿s Office estimate there are 10,000 children in England being sexually exploited by organised gangs

Concerns: An estimated 10,000 children in England are being sexually exploited by organised gangs

As many as 10,000 children could be the victims of gang-related sexual abuse, it was claimed last night.

And the Children’s Commissioner’s Office said many more could be subjected to exploitation.

It is launching a two-year inquiry aimed at lifting the lid on the scale of the shocking crimes that reach into all parts of society.

The investigation will examine how often vulnerable children are being sexually exploited by organised criminal gangs and other groups.

It will study the appalling phenomenon of Asian men grooming white girls for sex and how teenage girl gang members can be forced into prostitution.

Experts said there is a lack of reliable  official information about the true scale of sexual abuse across England.

Fears have been repeatedly raised that teachers, social workers and police are missing the warning signs when children fall prey to abusers.

 More…

Deputy Children’s Commissioner Sue Berelowitz, who is leading the inquiry, said estimates suggest up to 10,000 children could be victims.

But she said available evidence suggests many more girls and boys of all ages are being abused in much larger numbers.

TRICKSTER WHO LURED GIRLS FOR RAPE

Jailed: Evil Stephanie KnightJailed: Evil Stephanie Knight

A young woman who lured two white teenage girls to be raped by three Asian men was jailed for seven years last month.

Stephanie Knight, who was 17 at the time, told the pair they were going clubbing but instead plied them with vodka and drugs.

She forced them to have sex with ‘her boys’ after driving to a derelict terraced house in Accrington, Lancashire.

The two 16-year-old victims were subjected to an appalling ordeal in which both were threatened and subjected to sex attacks.

Three men, brothers Amjad Hussain, 34, and Shahid Hussain, 37, and their cousin, father-of-four Tanveer Butt, 39, were all convicted of rape.

They were jailed indefinitely at Preston Crown Court and must serve at least seven-and-a-half years before they can be considered for release.

The case was the latest to feature Pakistani sex attackers who preyed on vulnerable young white girls.

Politicians and police have repeatedly clashed over how best to tackle what some  suspect is a potentially incendiary hidden crimewave.

Jack Straw, former Home Secretary, has accused some Pakistani men in Britain of seeing white girls as ‘easy meat’ for sexual abuse.

Several police forces have investigations currently ongoing into gangs suspected of abusing young girls.

Children’s Minister Tim Loughton has suggested that closed Asian communities have turned a blind eye to child sex grooming by gangs of men.

The children's charity Barnardo's say children as young as 10 are being sexually exploited by organised gangs The children’s charity Barnardo’s say children as young as 10 are being sexually exploited by organised gangs

Mrs Berelowitz said: ‘Right now thousands of children are being horrifically abused by gangs and in groups. Children are being failed up and down the country – in every village, town and city. Accurate data is essential so that government, police, local authorities, schools, the youth justice sector and health professionals can properly identify and protect child victims.

Probe: Deputy Children's Commissioner Sue Berelowitz will lead the inquiry Probe: Deputy Children’s Commissioner Sue Berelowitz will lead the inquiry

‘As a society we have a collective responsibility to uncover the facts and deal with the grim reality so that children can be properly protected.’

The inquiry was announced after one academic study found much more needs to be done to protect children from sexual exploitation. Experts at the University of Bedfordshire found guidance issued two years ago on safeguarding children is not being followed in three out of four areas.

They found that children are coerced into sexual activity by grooming, pressure from a friend who is already a victim, or powerful neighbourhood gang members.

Children in local authority care are more than four times as likely to fall victim as those in families.Earlier this year an investigation found one in four men accused of street-grooming vulnerable underage girls for sex is Asian. It followed a series of shocking cases in which white girls were lured into abuse, often with drugs and alcohol.

The report was the most detailed assessment yet of the crime but the new inquiry will have a wider remit to include all types of abuse.

In January, Barnardo’s said children as young as 10 are being sexually exploited by organised gangs of men. It revealed staff were working with more than 1,000 children  who have been groomed, abused and trafficked for money, and the problem is growing.

The Government is due to  publish a renewed action plan later this year detailing how it will respond to concerns about child sexual exploitation.

Children’s Commissioner Maggie Atkinson said the inquiry will be ‘a wake-up call for us all’.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048807/Up-10-000-children-exploited-sex-gangs-says-childrens-commissioner.html#ixzz1ajGWLGUHwww.facebook.com/butlincat

—————————————————————————-

www.myspace.com/butlincat/blog

www.youtube.com/butlincat6

www.butlincat.blogspot.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

HUMAN TRAFFICKING – THE BAYLIS FAMILY

Baylis Family
Victims of Human Trafficking

SEE VIDEO:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s68Ox9oKLM&feature=share

Brief Introduction

Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
The following information pertains to one particular family who has been subjected to human trafficking. Currently in the world, a rough estimate of people being trafficked soars at a whopping 12.3 million and being the fastest and second largest illegal market trailing only to drug trafficking. This means that 1.8 of every 1000 people falls victim to this horrific crime and increasingly to 3 to every 1000 people in Asia and the Pacific. Human Trafficking generates an estimated $35-$36 billion dollars annually and comes in all shapes and sizes.
Human Trafficking in essence is nothing more than a modern term for slavery, where people are forced either into labor, or sexual exploitation against their will. Statistically speaking women are most vulnerable to being traffic making up 56% of all adults and children being trafficked worldwide. Almost 70% of these cases are directly relating to sexual trafficking, in which the victim is abducted and forced into sexual activities.
Even though most of the victims originate from impoverished Third-World Countries, the destinations of the trafficked victims are generally intended for the First-World. Even though the means of human trafficking have become incredibly sophisticated the truth remains; slavery is as real as it was hundreds of years ago, the industry has only gone covert.
In order for a victim to be trafficked into a country many things need to occur. The first incident is the actual abduction which requires man power and resources. From that moment the person may be shipped to their destination where “fake passports and birth certificates” can be obtained from corrupt government officials. Finally the victim may be sold or traded to a buyer of where they will be drugged, abused, exploited and ultimately murdered in cold blood. This is the sad and tragic tales of millions of people from all over the world.
The United Kingdom is one of the major destinations for all human trafficked victims coming from across the globe. Most of the victims being brought into the United Kingdom are women and children used for all sorts of illicit purposes.
To fully understand the issue it is necessary to listen to the “voices of the invisible”, the people who are made silent in captivity. We will be guiding the reader through the story of the Baylis family, who has been subjected to the horrors of human trafficking in 1997. The ultimate goal of the Baylis family is not only to create awareness on the issue, but most importantly to obtain freedom from their oppressors. To this day the people who were responsible for abruptly and violently kidnapping and trafficking the mother and the children, are still in search of the family who has been granted humanitarian asylum in Mexico.
In order to make you, the reader, become fully aware of the extent of this evil and illicit market, the Baylis have dared to step out and tell their story. The following information is 100% real and current and explained from the view point of the victims themselves.
We hope that this information will “create awareness” and hopefully “inspire action” from all societies and all individuals from around the globe. This is a very real and serious issue that must be made a global priority to pursuit and capture all criminals involved.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
The birth of a family
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
We all know the story about boy meets girl, they fall in love, get married, have children and live happily ever after. This is the story that most people aims to achieve sometime throughout their lives. We all know that the “happily ever after” part of the story sometimes is a bit harder to achieve than it sounds, but nonetheless we still pursuit it with great zeal. The story of the Baylis may have started something similar, but is surely didn’t end that way.
Jeremy Baylis, an American, was sent to South-Africa in 1992 for work purposes, where he met a man named Carl du Plessis. During their time together the two men formed a close friendship. A year later Carl introduced his sister, Maryna, to Jeremy and instantly there was what we call “chemistry” between the two. A year after they met Maryna and Jeremy started a relationship.
Carl and Jeremy carried out several other missions throughout this time. Maryna was in the South-African police department working vice. Regardless of their hectic work schedules Maryna and Jeremy still found time for each other and kept on building on their relationship.
In March of 1996 Maryna learnt that she was pregnant with Jeremy’s child. Both soon-to-be parents were incredibly happy at the news, and Maryna decided to go for her check ups. She was sent to Somerset Hospital in Cape Town due to evidence that suggested that the baby was under “a lot of stress”. This hospital was the only one in Cape Town that had a high risk unit and thus was the recommended hospital. Maryna continued to go to the hospital for regular check ups until October 11 1996 when an emergency C-section was considered to save the life of the child.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
The birth of Kevin
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
Kevin was born on the 11th October at 23:50, weighing 9 pounds 4 ounces, measuring in at 64cm. It was a normal natural birth. Kevin was not breathing and was rushed away by pediatrics he was brought back 45 min later, his first Apgar score was at 43 min and was 3 and his next was at 50 min and was 9. Towards the end of Kevin’s 2nd week on earth he was very ill, Maryna took Kevin via public transport to Milnerton Medi city to see the pediatrician Dr. Grinling, where they discovered an abnormal heartbeat and saw signs of a viral infection. Dr. Grinling referred her straight away to Red Cross children hospital. Kevin underwent a lumber punch on his back; he also under went a series of blood test and heart scans. Kevin was diagnosed with Staphylococcus Meningococcal septicemia, of which he was admitted to yet another hospital. If this wasn’t enough, the doctors also detected that Kevin’s blood flow through the heart was in reverse, yet it was not problematic or any treatment was necessary, he would just have to avoid too much salt in his diet and other fatty products.
During all this time Jeremy was completely involved even though he was required at times to go on missions for work purposes. All financial support was given from Jeremy to Maryna and his new baby boy.
Kevin crawled early, walked early and was over all a normal baby. Yet due to his medical conditions he needed to be screened for health risks throughout this time. It wasn’t until 1997 when Kevin needed to go for further neurological studies when their whole world would turn upside down.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
From Family to Victims
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
In 1997, when Kevin needed to be transferred to another hospital to continue his neurological studies, both Maryna and Kevin were abducted by a man named Dennis Nissen into the United Kingdom. It all happened when Maryna picked up Kevin from daycare and was on her way to the hospital. Unsuspectingly a car crashed into theirs rendering both unconscious.
Two days later Maryna and Kevin woke up in the UK feeling very drowsy and disoriented. This suggests that the aggressor drugged the victims and moved them with to the UK under falsified passports. They were forced to live with this man as “part of the family” or at least the twisted views on family life of Mr. Nissen.
It was only after four to five weeks that Jeremy found out about what happened to his family through Maryna’s brother Carl. Obviously this sent Jeremy into a state of worry as he spent all his efforts in finding out what happened to his family.
From building a relationship, to making a family to eventually falling subject to the horrors of being trafficked, the Baylis family would never be the same again.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
What occurred in Nottingham
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
Maryna and Kevin, forced to live with a stranger were severely abused. They were not allowed to talk to neighbors; they were to remain quiet after the beatings and the sexual assaults. For Maryna it seemed that there was very little hope glimmering over the horizon.
Some of the neighbors became worried over all the commotion happening in the house that they called the police. Yet every time the police arrived they were sent off by the aggressor. It appears that Mr. Nissen has connections within the local government of the UK as most police efforts were rendered useless. For Maryna and Kevin things only seemed to be getting worse.
Eventually Maryna managed to contact her brother in South-Africa and Jeremy. The situation was a difficult one. Maryna and Kevin all of a sudden had SA Passports, and were “legally” bound to their aggressor. It didn’t matter what they said, or what they did, in the end they were completely subjected to the abuse of Mr. Nissen without any legal path to follow. Jeremy did what he could; he began to support his family financially while working on a way to get them out.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
The abuse escalates
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
The week days were the worst, as Mr. Nissen would violently rape and abuse both Kevin and Maryna. They both longed for the weekends as the abuser would leave to go on sailing trips and keep both the victims under lock and key.
On one occasion Kevin and Maryna were forced to go camping with the aggressor. During this trip Mr. Nissin completely lost it and left Kevin (who was only a little child at the moment) in a bloody state. The police were informed but Mr. Nissen didn’t allow the police to talk to either Maryna or Kevin.
They continued to be moved all over the place as to not raise suspicion. They were kept to minimal communication and it was until their neighbor’s son asked Maryna and Kevin to take care of his 80 year old mother when he was at work that things began to shift. After a lot of abuse and warning Maryna and Kevin were allowed to take care of the old lady. It was here when things began to take on a different form. Jeremy now could send money directly to the neighbor and Maryna obtained a slight window of freedom to communicate with her loved ones. As time continued Mr. Nissin began traveling more which started opening a window for them to escape.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
In the midst of chaos
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
In the beginning stages of 1999 when the world was preparing for the change of the millennia, the Baylis began preparing for something very different. Since Mr. Nissen was away a lot more, it gave Jeremy a time to visit Maryna and Kevin. During this time it was when Jeremy and Maryna conceived their second child, Jenvey.
Jenvey was born in the year 2000 in Kingsmill Hospital in Nottingham. By this time both Jeremy and Carl (Maryna’s brother) had made plans of their escape.
They eventually achieved their goal by getting Maryna and the boys out of England in November. It was almost like a big weight had been lifted off of Maryna who with their “new found freedom” had difficulty adjusting. The boys on the other hand could experience for the first time what it is to be part of a loving family. For the next three months there was an apparent moment of sanity in this chaotic mess. It wasn’t till 2001 when the world flipped upside down for the Baylis once more.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
Government involvement
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
2001 started off nicely for the Baylis family who were finally reunited once more. They celebrated the holidays together and found some sort of peace in their situation. Then, even before the holiday left-overs were completely devoured, Mr. Nissen showed up once more, except this time he wasn’t alone.
It became completely apparent that Mr. Nissen had ties with the UK government, as he showed up with the UK embassy and forced Maryna and both her children back to England against their will. According to Mr. Nissen he had a legal right over the family and that if they were not to comply, they would forcefully take the children under the accounts of kidnapping.
Imagine being bound by law to the abuser that violently disrupted your life. Legally the Baylis could do nothing and Maryna and the boys were flown back to England. During this time they were moved to separate locations in Nottingham as to make communication and escape more difficult.
As the abuse and the violent rape continued, Maryna took the situation back into her own hands, or so she thought. She managed to escape from her house, and with the money that Jeremy had given her was able to get her own place. It wasn’t long until the police came knocking on her door and she was forced to let Mr. Nissen back into her London home. Obviously the enraged abuser took out all his violence and frustration out on the Baylis. In addition there was an incident where Nissen’s rage left Jenvey with 96 stitches. The small child was hurled against a fireplace in a fit of violence by the aggressor. Luckily he wasn’t permanently injured, but the boy was definitely left in a state of pain and shock, as life was incredibly uncertain for the victims.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
The Knife incident
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
Reply
It was right here in the London home where one of the most horrific events took place. It appeared that Mr. Nissen’s unstable condition made him become more violent. Several times he pulled a knife on the children in order to force the mother and her kids to stay in line. The initial incidents weren’t as severe as what happened on Christmas Eve of 2002.
During what most people would celebrate as a time for family and friends, Mr. Nissen went one step further. Kevin who was about six years old threatened to leave the house he was being held at. The result was a knife to his neck from the aggressor saying that if he doesn’t go into the house, he will slit his throat. Kevin complied with tear shed eyes and went back into the house where he would later be abused.
Maryna filed a police report but the police refused to remove Mr. Nissen from the house. Once more we get to see how much power and influence this man truly had in the local government. The only way that Maryna and the boys could somehow escape from all the madness was to go work part time and get the boys into daycare and school.
It was then when Maryna decided to do something that she would regret for the rest of her life. Maryna asked Jeremy to move on with his life as she lost hope of salvation. Jeremy continued to stay in touch.
The Baylis family was living in desperate times, and their situation didn’t seem to be improving whatsoever.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a reply
The court battles
Posted on September 26, 2011 by Justice
1
Maryna became fearful that one of these days Mr. Nissen might kill one of them. Regardless of the police reports, and regardless of all the evidence against Nissen, the UK social services deemed that the kids were fine and were in no danger of Nissen. They even went a step further and named Kevin’s uncle as the abuser even though Kevin named on record Nissen as the source of all the abuse.
Eventually by 2009 after all the legal battles and court rulings, after having escaped several times and having been forced back to Nissen, the UK courts found that Maryna was not tied to Nissen in any way or manner and was granted to leave the country. Jeremy was ecstatic about this and moved to the UK to help them leave.
Nissen in retaliation went on a rampage of abuse but as time worked against him, he eventually disappeared from their lives in June of 2009, or so they thought. After all Maryna’s belongings that she obtained throughout her time in England were put in a storage unit, the Baylis left to go to Mexico.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Reply

What is the latest on this case?
•Maryna on October 12, 2011 at 2:12 pm said:

the children has illegally been removed from mom and dad in mexico by Nissen and UK embassy. apparentlay nissen claim hague ruling the hague ruling apparently state they have to live with mom in the uk, for two months until the 11th December and then they can move to south Africa. where the mother will stay with the boys… the UK is refusing to let mom enter the UK or to let dad Jeremy Baylis enter. got a distressed email from kevin stating they are in need of urgent help… but ip trace to amsterdam not england so where is these children now.. mom got no signed papers from the mexican authorities so dont know how nissen got signed ones….

see: – http://baylis-family.info/

     <<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

www./facebook.com/butlincat
www.myspace.com/butlincat/blog
www.youtube.com/butlincat6
www.butlincat.blogspot.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 1 Comment

“Hundreds of trafficked children are disappearing from the care system…

Ian Josephs sends this 28 9 11
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/may/28/child-trafficking-local-authority-care

“Hundreds of trafficked children are disappearing from the care system. Government and social services departments are accused of failing to protect victims
 
 reddit this Mark Townsend, home affairs editor guardian.co.uk, Saturday 28 May 2011 21.05 BST Article history
Since police resources allocated to trafficking are small, many of the young victims smuggled into the UK each year remain unknown.
Hundreds of children who have been trafficked into the UK are disappearing each year from the care system, amid allegations that government and local authorities are failing to protect them.
The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, a government agency, estimates that at least 300 juveniles identified as trafficked have disappeared from local authority care over the past three years.
Collated figures from the NSPCC yesterday showed they had dealt with 549 trafficked children in the past three-and-a-half years, although there was no indication of how many had since disappeared after being delivered into care.
Charities have urged the government to adopt a scheme successfully piloted in Scotland, in which guardians are appointed to act as advocates and points of contact for all children believed to have been trafficked. The government has so far rejected proposals to extend the scheme to England. “Guardianship is an essential cost-effective way to prevent children from going missing from care,” said Christine Beddoe, director of child protection charity Ecpat UK.
“It would ensure that victims of child trafficking now in care have access to the safe housing, education and legal support which would prevent them slipping back into the hands of their exploiters.”
A policy document by the Conservatives in 2008 estimated that “over half of trafficked children disappear from social services”. The document also criticised the absence of “safe accommodation” providing 24-hour care for trafficked children. But concern is growing that the party has little appetite to tackle the issue now it is in power.
Home Office sources have suggested that a forthcoming strategy paper on human trafficking is unlikely to include a specific section on child trafficking, an omission that will infuriate campaigners. “We have worked tirelessly with government officials over the past five years to develop a national action plan and a robust protection framework for child victims of trafficking,” said Beddoe.
“To see this washed away almost overnight is a scandal. It’s as if the Home Office have shredded all the facts and figures.”
The government has a statutory duty to provide care to children regardless of nationality or immigration status.
New figures released by the children’s charity NSPCC show that during the year to April its child trafficking helpline dealt with 146 cases alone, although experts say this is merely a fragment of the true picture.
Scotland Yard will launch a freephone trafficking hotline to encourage victims to come forward in response to concern that the scale of the crime remains largely unknown.
Detective Inspector Gordon Valentine, the former head of Operation Paladin, Scotland Yard’s specialist anti child-trafficking team of police and UK Border Agency officials, said yesterday that the issue did not seem to be a priority for policymakers.
Valentine, who retired on Friday, said that although the Yard had made progress in identifying child victims, there was a concern that the team – which has just five officials – needed to be expanded if traffickers were to be dissuaded from targeting the UK. He added: “Paladin has been a real success and should be expanded, but one issue is that it sits between two stools, the UK Border Agency and the police, and there is an issue about who’s going to drive it. The Met are fully committed to Paladin: it’s just [a matter of] convincing the wider authorities. Logically, [tackling child trafficking] is cost-effective, but because you can’t put costings to it, it’s difficult to sell [to policymakers].”
Anne Marie Carrie, Barnardo’s chief executive said: “It is imperative that we identify these children quickly and accurately. Failure to do so means they are left without the help and support they so urgently need.”
Anthony Steen, former Conservative MP and head of the UK’s Human Trafficking Foundation, said: “Child trafficking remains unseen and children don’t complain or answer back.”
The Home Office said it took the issue extremely seriously and that it remained “core” police business.
See also
12 Aug 2003
Social services ‘failing many vulnerable children’
24 May 2011
Child trafficking not seen as a child protection issue
12 Mar 2009
How Whitehall betrayed social workers 
———————————————————————-

 Hello,
At 10 oclock on Tuesday 4th October 2011 the M family will attend a hearing at  
Queens Building
The President Court
Court 33
The Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL

in which the court will challenge and try to change the Habeas Corpus application made by the M’s – an order which requests the return of their 6 children who have been taken illegally using totally bogus allegations made by certain employees at Haringey council, London in collusion with numerous other government departments, including the judiciary and police.
Please attend if you can to show your support for the M family who have been systematically victimised, targetted, intimidated, threatened and unnecessarily harrassed by this dubious council and connected parties.
  The M case is just one of many cases whereby this council is using secret closed courts and even open courts to make totally illegal and therefore invalid judgements and orders regarding the 6 M children they have taken, for example many Interim Care Orders have been issued without the parents being present at the hearing, as is their right if they have issued an objection to an ICO being issued. The parents not being present makes any ICO issued completely null and void, yet ICOs have been issued this way and taken as valid and a legal document when it is not. It has been pointed out over and over {messages to the courts, MPs and other authorities below} that numerous ICOs have been issued that are null and void but all communications are of course completely ignored as is the norm in this atrocious case. The total number of children removed by this council wrongly and not in keeping with the strict laws governing the removal of a child I would conjure is staggering, if the many null and void ICOs, false allegations made, false arrests, false judgements, solicitors lies, barristers lies, and countless other very serious irregularities undertaken, including sexual abuse upon a minor, is anything to go by.

The latest trend seems to be trying to section in a mental hospital the M parents and the prominent supporter Maurice Kirk, who knows the law better than most and has used his knowledge to win cases against councils heinous actions which border on the atrocious. So far the attempts to lock these good people away have failed but one fears  it will happen knowing the lengths these characters will go to. Making up false stories is their forte and who knows what falseness they will come up with next.
 
There are reports of outrageous actions taken by Haringey council from 2008 which illustrate precisely the appalling modus operandii used when this council is allowed to ride roughshod over others human rights, even when the person accused is a child care worker herself working for a council and very familiar with the law governing children and any abuse shown towards them. The following report from the “Daily Mail” is typical of the lengths this council are prepared to go, completely abusing the law whereby a care worker herself was subjected to shocking targetting, intimidation and outrageous threats where even her children were to be removed for no sound reason. This poor lady had upset somebody in the council and how they reacted was beyond belief. The “Daily Mail” took up the story:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1086196/Baby-P-council-falsely-accused-abusing-child-reveals-whistleblower-feared-shed-lose-daughter.html#ixzz1Yp5v4TyQ
———————————————————————-
“Sunday Telegraph” – Christopher Booker:
The mystery of Haringey’s missing ‘Girl X’ makes a mockery of the Children Act.
SUNDAY 12 6 11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8570173/The-mystery-of-Haringeys-missing-Girl-X-makes-a-mockery-of-the-Children-Act.html
The family of a girl taken into care have not seen or heard from her for 10 months, writes Christopher Booker. Whilst in care this child, aged at the time 9 years old, was sexually abused by a member of the foster family she was placed with, and after telling her father about it on a contact visit she was never to be seen again, now for 13 months. The council never say anything about her when asked, and even the Nigerian Ambassador has not been allowed to see this child, let alone the parents which is of course their Human Right. Numerous complaints have been made about this to the Prime Minister, a chief constable, numerous MPs, and regulatory bodies for foster agencies {who shouldve reprimanded the agency concerned for allowing the child to be placed in a home with a paedophile in it} but all complaints and communications regarding this subject is completely ignored by all. The parents need to know if their child, now 11, is still alive, which I fear is not the case, this being the reason this council and their police underlings are going to such extraordinary lengths to keep everything so utterly wrapped tight that not a squeak out of anybody concerned ever emerges about her. In the past 10 days alone the police, acting for the council, have arrested the Musa parents and a supporter no less than 4 times between them on the flimsiest of charges, attempting to section them all too in mental hospitals in an effort to silence them. Of course the truth won out and these atrocious attempts to abuse the law yet again by these authorities, who should have known so much better, were foiled.

More here:
INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER CHRISTOPHER BOOKER, “SUNDAY TELEGRAPH”,
SUNDAY 25 9 11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8787134/Police-show-themselves-once-again-at-the-beck-and-call-of-social-workers.html

Another article by Christopher Booker: 
CHRISTOPHER  BOOKER “SUNDAY TELEGRAPH” ARTICLE 17 SEPT. 2011
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8771232/Couple-denied-legal-help-while-lawyers-make-1m-removing-their-children.html 
 
PLEASE SEE THESE 2 ARTICLES  FROM AN AFRICAN SUNDAY NEWSPAPER “THE LEADERSHIP” PUBLISHED ON THE 17 + 21 AUG. 2011, ON THE SHOCKING M CASE =
 
http://leadership.ng/nga/articles/5282/2011/09/17/british_journalist_writes_jonathan_over_seized_nigerian_children.html

http://leadership.ng/nga/articles/4068/2011/08/21/british_govt_detains_nigerian_couple%E2%80%99s_six_children.html
 
————————————————————————-
My message to the court about illegal Interim Care Orders issued which have kept the children from their parents. Just some of the many crimes committed by the British authorities.
 
6, 7,  9  Sept.  letters to Principle Registry Family Department, Holborn,London.
 
To whom it may concern,
 
 Having called the Principle Registry this afternoon Friday 9 Sept. 2011 on phone numbers 020 79477939 at 16.31 BST,  my call was hung up without notice, followed by a further call to number 02079476020 at the same address at 16.39 when i was hung up upon again, I finally rang 02079 477922 at again the same addresds to be told that there was noone there to take my call.
During the first call a young lady there told me that London councils can renew Interim Care Orders by phone, which was going to be the subject of my phone call had I been able to speak with anyone. I duly pointed out I had put in my emails the law which states otherwise – that ICO’s were not allowed to be issued if the parents had objected and were not present at the court hearing – as was the case when the M parents were not present in the court when this ICO was issued on the 5 Sept. 2011, and the said ICO was therefore null and void that was supposedly “issued” by judge Hess, the notification received by the M family by judge BERRY IN THE LATE AFTERNOON, AS MY RESUME DESCRIBES BELOW IN THE EMAILS UNANSWERED BY YOURSELVES.
 
I am concerned at the lady on the phone saying that ICOs are issued FOR LONDON COUNCILS IF THE PARENTS CONCERNED ARENT PRESENT, and although she claimed to be an “admin clerk”, this indeed is a serious statement of how this court works. I have solid evidence to prove this was said and what ive described occurred in its entirety.
 
Thank you,
 
——————————————————————–
From: adamski2012@hotmail.co.uk
To: mark.barford@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; lorraine.morichelli@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; dave.woods@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; admin@number10.gov.uk; pickles@communities.gsi.gov.uk; picklese@parliament.uk; supportline@victimsupport.org.uk; mayt@parliament.uk; lammyd@parliament.uk; ruffleyd@parliament.uk; prfd.privatelaw@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk; lee.grubb@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; camerond@parliament.uk; andrew@andrewgeorge.org.uk
Subject: FW: CASE NO FD10C00195 – THE M FAMILY AND THE ILLEGAL REMOVAL OF THEIR 5 CHILDREN
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 14:27:31 +0100
 
Dear Sir / Madam,
Further to my email dated 6 9 11 below can you please tell me exactly what action you intend to take about:
a} the illegalities involved – the ICO being issued contrary to the standard guidelines set within British law,
b} the children now removed under a null and void order – are they to be returned as no legal ICO is in place as is their right?
and
c} what is to be done about the persons who partook in the actions of issuing a meaningless and irregular Interim Care Order, in respect of those persons not acting responsibly and allowing such an ICO to be issued?
I may add this is the 4th time such an ICO has been issued, without the objecting parents being at the hearing which is their right according to British law.
This case – no. FD10C00195 –  is not only causing a lot of unnecessary distress to the parents and more than likely their children since the irregularities began on the 8 April 2010, brought about by government employees who seem set on working outside the law, but is also wasting a huge amount of taxpayers money in the process. No wonder there are silencing orders in place whereby the misdeeds and crimes that have been committed are kept from public scrutiny.
 It is an outright disgrace that things are allowed to continue by those put in office that are supposed to monitor and stop and correct such irregularities and crimes.
 
Thank you.
 
The articles below were written prior to the baby being removed on 28 June 2011:

From: butlincat . (adamski2012@hotmail.co.uk
Sent: 06 September 2011 11:22:03
To:  mark.barford@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; lorraine.morichelli@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; dave.woods@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; admin@number10.gov.uk; pickles@communities.gsi.gov.uk; picklese@parliament.uk; supportline@victimsupport.org.uk; mayt@parliament.uk; lammyd@parliament.uk; ruffleyd@parliament.uk; prfd.privatelaw@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk; lee.grubb@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk; camerond@parliament.uk
 
M FAMILY ANDTHE ILLEGAL REMOVAL OF THEIR 5 CHILDREN
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 11:22:03 +0100
 

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN,
 
CASE NO FD10C00195 – THE M FAMILY AND THEIR 5 CHILDREN.
 
Concerning an Interim Care Order issued yesterday 5 September 2011 regarding the 5 children belonging to the M parents G.  and C. M  at the 
Principle Registry of the Family Division, Holborn, London
this is an official complaint regarding the proceedings involving judge HESS, judge BERRY and all others concerned whereby an Interim Care Order was issued outside of British law at the above court.
It is understood JUDGE BERRY informed the MUSA parents GLORIA and CHIWAR MUSA of an ICO being issued via a telephone conversation between HARINGEY COUNCIL and a certain JUDGE HESS. Seeing as the M parents objects to this ICO being issued, and had notified the correct people of their objections, for this ICO to be issued in their absence renders the said ICO null and void.
 
MAY I POINT OUT BRITISH LAW, IN THAT IT IS ILLEGAL TO ISSUE AN ICO IF THE PARENTS HAVE OBJECTED AND ARE NOT IN THE COURT FOR THE ISSUANCE HEARING.  THE PARENTS HAD OBJECTED AND THESE CHARACTERS HARINGEY COUNCIL, JUDGE HESS, AND JUDGE BERRY HAVE PERVERTED THE COURSE OF TRUE JUSTICE BY ISSUING THE ORDER AND MUST BE HELD RESPONSIBLE. THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME AN ICO HAS BEEN ISSUED ILLEGALLY REGARDING THE MUSA CHILDREN, THE PARENTS NOT BEING PRESENT, HAVING OFFICIALLY RAISED OBJECTIONS AND FOLLOWING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE FOR SUCH OBJECTIONS.
 THE PARENTS HAD BEEN AT THER COURT READY FOR THE HEARING  WITH RELAVENT DOCUMENTS AT THE OPENING OF THE PREMISES IN THE MORNING ONLY TO BE TOLD JUST BEFORE IT CLOSED OF THIS ICO BEING ISSUED CONTRARY TO BRITISH LAW. IT IS DISGRACEFUL THAT THESE JUDGES, SUPPOSEDLY KNOWING THE LAW GOVERNING THE ISSUANCE OF THE SAID INTERIM CARE ORDERS COULD ACT IN THIS WAY, THE LAWS GOVERNING THE ISSUANCE BEING:
 
Rule 28 of the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 SI
1991/1395 which provides;
 
“A justice’s clerk or single justice shall not make an
order under section 11(3) or section 38(1) unless –
(a) A written request for such an order has been made to
which the other parties and children’s guardian consent
and which they or their representatives have signed;
(b) A previous such order has been made in the same
proceedings; and
(c) The terms of the order sought are the same as those of the last such
order made.”
 
The parents have consistently stated in writing that they do not agree to the
orders being renewed which means postal renewal cannot lawfully happen,
there must be a hearing whether the parents attend or not
 
This     is stated clearly in Neutral Citation no. (2002)     NIFam 11 Ref:    GILC3695 IN     THE MATTER OF SM (INTERIM CARE ORDERS: EXERCISE OF JUDGE’S DISCRETION)
 
Frankly I am not absolutely certain what the phrase `will be renewed administratively by Court Office until date of review hearing’means.  It was clear that counsel in this case were also somewhat unclear.  It may be helpful if I set out at this stage some comments on the renewal of Interim Care Orders;
 
1.         When an Interim Care Order is made it is normally necessary for the making of further Interim Care Orders to be considered on at least one occasion before the final hearing.  I am given to believe that there may be a variety of local practices for dealing with such cases and while it is not intended to encourage courts to depart unnecessarily from well-established local arrangements(particularly those which approximate closely to what I recommend below), some guidance may be helpful to ensure a degree of uniformity.  Although the makingof further Interim Care Orders is described as “renewal”, it must be rememberedthat the proper form of order is that the whole application is adjourned to the next date for further consideration.
 
2.         A court may not renew an Interim Care Order as a matter of course and without reconsideration.  At the expiration of every Interim Care Order, the granting of every further Interim Care Order must be considered independentlyon its merits.  It can never be right for a court granting an Interim Care Order at one sitting to attempt to lay down a policy which might fetter the discretion of any future sitting in regard to the grant or refusal of a further Interim Care Order – see Re P(Minors) (Interim Order) [1993]2 FLR 742.
 
3.         It is,therefore, necessary for the court to make a judgment regarding renewal in eachoccasion and the court should treat each further hearing as an opportunity to monitor the progress of the application.  This does not mean however that all parties should be required to attend a hearing on each occasion.  The court is perfectly entitled to deal with the matter on the basis of the attendance of the applicant only provided that written consents of the other parties are produced and no party objects.  Provision can therefore be made at the first direction hearing for further Interim Care Orders to made without the need for the personal attendance of all the parties.
4.        In the Family Care Centres where the Trust, who normally would be the applicant, produces consents from all the parties, confirms that directions have been complied with and the court considers that it might be unduly onerous to require the personal attendance of his representative eg due to the distance to be travelled or for some other good reason, then I can see no reason inprinciple why the court should not permit the applicant Trust in those circumstances to make a written application for renewal.  In such an instance, the responsibility would rest with the applicant to ensure that a written application was acceptable to the court, that all the consents were in order, and that all parties concerned were satisfied that the papers would reach the court file in time for the hearing.  That application must however be considered by the appropriate judicial officer.  Such aprocedure would be similar to the well-established practice of hearings on the papers presently carried on for example in the Court of Protection and beforemasters in the High Court.
 
 
 
I HEREBY ASK THAT THIS MATTER RECEIVES THE ATTENTION IT DESERVES BY THE POLICE AND OTHER REGULATORY BODIES WHO WILL BE INFORMED IMMEDIATLY OF THIS TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE, AND THE PERSONS ACTING OUTSIDE THE LAW BE BROUGHT TO BOOK, AND THE CHILDREN THIS FALSE ICO ISSUED WAS REGARDING BE RETURNED AT ONCETO THEIR RIGHTFUL PARENTS, THE CHILDREN BEING REMOVED FROM THOSE PARENTS BY ILLEGAL MEANS ANYWAY, viz. FALSE EVIDENCE AND ALLEGATIONS BY EMPLOYEES OF HARINGEY COUNCIL.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THESE VISITORS TO THIS COUNTRY – THE MANY CRIMES COMMITTED AGAINST THEM BY HARINGEY COUNCIL AND PERSONS CONNECTED TO THEM IN THE REMOVAL OF THEIR 6 CHILDREN,  SUCH AS THE ACTIONS OF THE GUARDIAN SOLICITOR ABOUT WHOM I HAVE ISSUED OFFICIAL COMPLAINTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY IGNORED  IS AN OUTRIGHT DISGRACE.
 
THANK YOU 
 
============================================================
Concerning Maurice Kirk, a silenced Mckenzie Friend for the M family, now banned from ever having contact with the M family forever, because he was campaigning for them re: the atrocious case against them by HARINGEY COUNCIL, who have committed numerous crimes against them in league with the police, judiciary, foster care agencies and every government department that has ever come into contact with them!
Pls. see www.kirkflyingvet.com – Maurice sits in a Cardiff cell on dubious charges awaiting his case!!!

Haringey Council’s Barrister and Children’s Solicitor make False Claims so that Judge Imprisons Maurice
Not being family means you don’t get information from Holborn Police Station. As McKenzie Friend, I was eventually told he was detained for nearly five hours until 6.10pm, without any charges or further action.

Meanwhile, I’ve pieced this together from a witness of the Nigerian parents whose story was reported in the national Nigerian paper Leadership on 21 August 2011: British Govt Detains Nigerian Couple’s Six Children as to some of what happened:
1.Maurice went to court with snatched children’s parents who have been named by the Nigerian newspaper.The children’s Guardian solicitor Jonquil Houghton, apparently in league with of Haringey Council’s barrister, Ms O’Donahugue, allowed several false claims before HHJ Carol Atkinson, new to the case
including:

a Coronation Street actress, I forget which and unsavory male habits appear to be mixed up in all this………the next blog, after I have spoken to her or her agent, may clarify the whereabouts of six stolen children so a few poeple can be jailed and the family can GO HOME
•that he was recording proceedings with a dictaphone or mobile neither of which he had in court.
•Neither barrister nor solicitor corrected the judge when the judge assumed that Maurice was Paul Randle-Jolliffe who had acted as McKenzie Friend for the M family before. [Both barrister and solicitor had acted before and had spoken to Paul numerous times in previous hearings but at 2pm deliberately told the judge, when Maurice was safely behind bars, that he was using two names to mislead the court!]
•Maurice believes they did this to bar him from future hearings, because he had suggested to the judge, both lawyers stating ‘the idea had never been considered’, to simply ‘deport’ the children, not the parents, in the care of the NHS to the aircraft and allow the Nigerian authorities to take over from that point.
•Maurice had also told the judge DNA tests, withheld from the parents for months, proved the six children was theirs afterall, making ‘child trafficking’ even more less likely
•Maurice also had told the judge that the police, if that concerned with an allegation, armed with a positive opium drug result, illicit drugs inflicted on a one year old baby, would of had one or more of the parents behind bars months ago.
•The drawback of this simple solution, pressed a year earlier by the parents, to send the children back to Nigeria, was that the huge ‘gravy train’, as Maurice calls it, would no longer be available.
•Maurice suspects the UK is the only country in the world with such secrecy law to disguise this day by day fraud.
That morning, in the presence of the parents and another witness, Maurice had arrested the solicitor for ‘perverting the course of justice’, by misleading the court and covering up, for the past 18 months, the original spurious reasons for the snatch that, so long ago, had been proved false. What finger has this law firm raised to help the children?

Maurice was told, by the clearly annoyed Holborn police due to being duped, that police drug analysis from the baby, in June11, would have been confirmed, either way,in a matter of days vwhich is one of the3 reasons why Hornsey police refuse to release the parents’ custody records, Maurice insists with, clearly, Haringey being told to shut up.
Maurice says, “either there are drugs involved or there are not—-if not then send the family home NOW” and that includes daughter, feared to be now dead.
Daughter’s last alleged handwriting, when the parents believed she was still alive, submitted by Haringey BUT refused to be even looked at, yet alone examined, by three or is it six judges now, is a pointer as to where the truth lies.
Death or worse is seriously now possible by examining the content of the 8th September 11 Haringey Council brief for the new judge, deliberately written to deceive: page 1, page 2 and see paragraph 17 of page 3 of this Case Summary, unless the Hornsey police have conspired in this enquiry from conception?
Incidentally, what  Maurice actually indicated, on the way out of court to get the police, was that he would use his megaphone, confiscated by court officials earlier, to call the public to save the family from this room full of criminals. The plan, put off until next time now, is for him to stand in the middle of Higher Holborn road, outside the 42-49 numbered Principal Registry of the Family Division, broadcasting the appalling facts and cover up by so many lawyers/judges and police all determined to swindle large sums from the tax payer by dragging out cases with no concern for the families in a secret environment unique within Europe.
With Maurice now safely locked up in the cells of Holborn police station and his captors now having perused court documents, they soon realised the lawyers had lied.
There never was a tape recorder and together with the false documentation the barrister had just served  on Her HonourJudge Atkinson and Maurice’s few words as the parents’s Mckenzie Friend, had caused her to swiftly vacate the court room. She soon realised, by her repeating the ICO Haringey application, would be unlawfully settled now  in court if it was done on 5th. Maurice has warned that the ordered transcipts would not be complete and to prolong yet another separation of children from each other and from each parent was further crimiinal conduct.
On the Monday, 5th September, when the ICO was ‘nodded’ through, with neither party, the lawyers now say, privy to it, now triggers an emergency Judicial Review Application commmencing after the parents visited to ‘that place’ in the Strand.
Examination of served papers, at commencement of the 8th September hearing, suggest the Council, if you wish to believe it, had ‘no knowledge’ of the Monday, 5th September, hearing, despite being listed before a District Judge for parents with the subsequent court order for the 5th Sept hearing (Copy redacted as identifies all six kids) served on both parties, to lodge rebuttal.
Maurice has studied numerous cases riddled with sharp practices and cover-ups in both South Wales and in the RCJ, indicating the problem is endemic in the cartel of ‘family law’ since incidents of child abuse were taken out of the criminal courts in 1948 to be hidden in this new but lucrative medium.
He vows he will therefore now campaign to make family courts go public and the crimes committed by lawyers to be put back into the criminal courts. Ther will be some exceptions, of course and supervised recording for the applicants’ immediate use and ownership is also of paramount importance. See The Secrecy of Family courts should be Lifted NOW! and Send the Musa Family back Home to Nigeria – WITH their Children!
What also is clearly outdated is the UK adversarial systerm, with no checks as to the voracity of the players, is no proper taxation of the huge bills fabricated for the tax papyer.
Here is custody record page 1 and here’s page 2.

What is clear from all this shambles is that avarice has once again prevailed and Haringey should be subjected to an external police enquiry.
Punishment without Crime is an article that Ian Josephs based on his experiences, with golden rules for parents.
 
…….Sex Worker/Child Trafficking/Paedophelia all concluded by police but Haringey Council continue withholding the whereabouts of the six children and if they are still all alive?
Filed under: family courts, Haringey Council, M family, Michelle Collins
Published Sep 09 2011, 06:56 AM by SabineKMcNeill
…namaste…b.
 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

THE MUSA FAMILY – 6 STOLEN CHILDREN BY A LONDON COUNCIL

The Musa Family, 6 STOLEN CHILDREN BY HARINGEY COUNCIL, LONDON – UPDATES

CHRISTOPHER BOOKER “SUNDAY TELEGRAPH” 25 9 11
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8787134/Police-show-themselves-once-again-at-the-beck-and-call-of-social-workers.html

Police show themselves once again at the beck and call of social workers

The latest disturbing developments in the case of a family who are battling to retrieve their six children.

Families are often torn apart by our system of 'child protection' - Police show themselves once again at the beck and call of social workers

Families are often torn apart by our system of ‘child protection’ Photo: ALAMY
 

9:25PM BST 24 Sep 2011

 

There have been further astonishing developments in the case I reported last week, of foreign-born parents repeatedly denied legal help in their battle to win back their six children, who were seized last year by the social workers of a London council. On Monday, the parents were yet again arrested, on a charge of conspiring to abduct their own children, to fly them in a private aircraft to France. This is utterly ludicrous since they have no idea where their children are. Four of them they have not seen for six months, and one for over a year; they have had no contact with their year-old baby for three months, since it was seized by the social workers for a second time.

The wife was forcibly stripped naked in front of a male policeman; the couple were held overnight in an unheated cell without blankets and the next morning taken to a mental hospital to be sectioned under the Mental Health Act. Five bemused doctors examined them, finding nothing wrong, and they were released. In the days following, after the street where they live had been cordoned off so that 28 police officers could search their flat, the couple were twice more arrested and released.

The treatment of this family has been so horrendous that I hope I can one day report it properly. But again, as so often in this and other family cases, why do the police seem so astonishingly compliant to the instructions of social workers? That is a mystery which I have never yet had satisfactorily explained.

Comments have been disabled for legal reasons

  ——————————————————-

C BOOKER “SUNDAY TELEGRAPH” 17 SEPT. 2011
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8771232/Couple-denied-legal-help-while-lawyers-make-1m-removing-their-children.html

Couple denied legal help while lawyers make £1m removing their children

Their English is poor, they are reduced to tears by their inability to understand what is going on in court, yet they are denied help in presenting their case.

Mother and child are often torn apart by our system of child protection - Child protection system tears two more happy families apart

Mother and child are often torn apart by our system of child protection Photo: ALAMY
 

8:23PM BST 17 Sep 2011

 

Ever more disturbing becomes that particular case of children snatched from distraught parents that I have written about here more than any other. Dozens of times in the past 18 months this couple have been in court, trying to challenge the extraordinary allegations made against them by social workers. Yet, although their English is poor and they have regularly been reduced to tears by their inability to understand what is going on in court, they have again and again been denied help in presenting their case.

Last Christmas, I paid £2,000 to one law firm to represent them until legal aid was arranged. But the Legal Services Commission turned down their application and the lawyer walked off the case. Ian Josephs, a successful businessman who runs the Forced Adoption website, paid £3,500 to another solicitor, who also walked off the case having done nothing. In February, when the couple wished to be assisted by Paul Randall-Joliffe as a McKenzie friend, he was thrown out of the court after apparently asking too many provocative questions.

On July 21, Mr Josephs, who has a law degree and has aided many families in family courts as a McKenzie friend, flew over from France to assist the mother, but was brusquely evicted from the court by Mr Justice Mostyn without any of the explanation required under court guidelines. (Mr Josephs’ complaint about this is being considered by the Office of Judicial Complaints.) Sabine McNeill, an expert IT consultant who had applied to assist the father, was treated likewise.

Oddest of all, on September 8, when Maurice Kirk appeared in court to assist, in front of yet another judge new to the case, the solicitor for the children’s guardian alleged that Mr Kirk was secretly recording the proceedings and furthermore that he was not Mr Kirk but Mr Randall-Joliffe, who had already been excluded from the court when she was present. I am told that the judge therefore ordered Mr Kirk’s arrest and he was marched off to a police cell. Here he had no difficulty in proving to the bemused policemen both his true identity and that he had no recording equipment with him, and was released. But yet again this meant the hapless couple were allowed no one to help them in their battle to win back their children, one of whom they have not been allowed to see for over a year.

Meanwhile, at taxpayers’ expense, the bill for three teams of barristers and solicitors, representing the council, the guardian and the children, may well have run to over £1 million. Truly our family courts all too often stand all the fondly-imagined principles of British justice on their head

THE ARTICLE FROM AN AFRICAN SUNDAY NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED 21 AUG. 2011, ON THE SHOCKING M CASE

http://leadership.ng/nga/articles/4068/2011/08/21/british_govt_detains_nigerian_couple%E2%80%99s_six_children.html

“Sunday Telegraph” reporter Christopher Bookers articles about the M family ordeal at the hands of Haringey council:

STILL NOTHING HAS BEEN HEARD ABOUT THIS MISSING GIRL AS OF 21.00 HRS GMT 25 September  2011:

SUNDAY 12 6 11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8570173/The-mystery-of-Haringeys-missing-Girl-X-makes-a-mockery-of-the-Children-Act.html

The mystery of Haringey’s missing ‘Girl X’ makes a mockery of the Children Act
The family of a girl taken into care have not seen or heard from her for 10 months, writes Christopher Booker.

Torn apart: the system of child protection is a national scandal
7:00PM BST 11 Jun 2011
The social workers of Haringey are notorious for having failed to prevent the deaths of Baby P and Victoria Climbié. But in their zeal to avoid any repetition of these tragedies, they are now at the forefront of those councils which have pushed the number of children taken into care to an all-time high. In all the cases I have been following where children have been taken from their families for what seem like dubious reasons, no single instance has been more disturbing than the plight of a 10-year-old girl seized by Haringey last year, who seems in the past 10 months to have vanished off the radar.

“Girl X”, as I shall call her, was taken into care on the basis of three allegations. One turned out to be so laughably erroneous that it was soon dropped; a second was likewise dropped when medical tests completely disproved the council’ s claims. The third, highly questionable, has still not been put to any evidential test.

The last time Girl X was seen by her mother was at a supervised contact session last August. Having complained of sexual abuse by her foster carer’s 19-year-old son, she asked to be given, as a birthday present, a journal with a lock in which she could record her “secret thoughts”. Since that day she has not been seen by her parents or, since the autumn, by her siblings, who are also in care. It seems she has since been interviewed by three people – an independent social worker, an independent psychiatrist and her guardian, all of whom reported that she wished to see and be reunited with her mother.

No one representing the family has been allowed to see her, including the girl’s grandparents, who came from abroad specifically to visit her. Her parents have been forbidden to telephone her or even send a Christmas card. Her whereabouts are a mystery. When I put questions about her to Haringey last year, the council’s only response was to ask for a court order forbidding me to refer to the case at all. (It was not granted.)

What makes all this particularly disturbing is that, in several respects, it seems to defy the Children Act, which insists that councils must do all they can to encourage contact between children taken into care and their parents, who continue to share parental responsibility until a child is adopted. “The responsible authority,” says the Act, “has a duty to endeavour to promote contact” with the parents and “any relative, friend or other person connected to the child”. In particular, parents must be allowed to see medical or school reports relating to their child. The law also insists that, if children are old enough, they should be allowed to appear in court to express their wishes. None of these things has happened.

Related Articles
Parents denied a voice in court against the child-snatchers
05 Mar 2011
The real scandal hidden by gags is what goes on in family courts
28 May 2011
How our judges deny human rights to children taken into care
04 Jun 2011

Why – when even Baby P’s mother was last year allowed out of prison to enjoy supervised contact with her surviving children – has Girl X been shut away as a silent prisoner, seemingly denied her rights? What has happened to Girl X?

For legal reasons, comments on this story have been disabled.

========================================
0} CHRISTOPHER BOOKERS SUNDAY TELEGRAPH ARTICLES CONDENSED relating to the MUSA case {excerpts shown where applicable}
1} http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7870342/Forced-adoption-is-a-truly-dreadful-scandal.html 3 July 2010

…namaste…butlincat

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 467 other followers