This is a very long story involving a very large number of lawbreakers and criminals. Even a brief account must be quite lengthy if it is to be anywhere near complete and accurate. The following account is heavily condensed, and does not include full details of everything. There is DOCUMENTARY PROOF of most of the crimes detailed below. Criminals involved include High Court judges, two Directors of Public Prosecutions, a Chief Constable, a Member of Parliament, many police officers, members of the notorious criminal gang known as 'Independent Police Complaints Commission', and many more.
In 2002, as a consequence of a Government policy, my job was transferred from one Local Authority to another. Although contract law and employment law (TUPE) forbid it, the new employer - City of Sunderland Council - later officially abolished legally-protected jobs (in reality simply renamed existing jobs) and imposed degraded terms and conditions such as increased working hours and reduced leave. They made various excuses claiming that they were allowed to do this but refused to back them up with any fact or legal document. I spoke to my trade union representative many times but Unison did absolutely nothing for years before eventually ignoring official complaints, repeatedly losing and ignoring communications, refusing to take any action against its' own staff for gross misconduct, gross negligence, and gross incompetence, and refusing to provide any help, advice or legal assistance. I briefly consulted several solicitors but none would even talk about legal action against Unison, and none were sufficiently competent to suggest any appropriate legal action against Sunderland Council.
In March 2007 I contacted Swinburne and Jackson (solicitors). Christian H. Swinburne said that I had good cases against Sunderland Council and Unison, that he would begin by writing to both of them, and that he expected to recover all legal costs from them. I instructed Swinburne to do this work and to provide specific legal advice on a number of issues surrounding these matters. A week later they asked for £500 advance payment on account and I paid. Over the next 6 months SJ did no work, ignored some communications, repeatedly lied (both Michael Jackson and Swinburne promised to take action immediately, but continued to do nothing), and ignored an official complaint. Eventually I received a letter from Jackson but this made no mention of several of the issues which I had instructed SJ to advise on, no mention of recovering costs, was self-contradictory, and made completely unsupported statements with no explanation, reason, or citation of applicable legislation – they gave absolutely no genuine legal advice at all. Despite Swinburne having said that I had good cases Jackson said, with no reason or legal argument, that there was nothing I could do. By this point it had become obvious that they were never going to do the work or provide the legal advice which they had agreed to do and for which they had requested and received advance payment – they had simply stolen the money. I went to another firm of solicitors, Hathaways. Their Christopher Kyle said, again for no reason and without any explanation, that there was nothing I could do about any of this. They later demanded payment for this 'advice' and continued to fraudulently demand payment even after their response to an official complaint was libellous and proved that they had no idea of the facts of the case which I had told them, or even of what I had been seeking legal advice on.
I made a complaint about SJ to the (now defunct) 'Legal Complaints Service'. They 'outsourced' the complaint to Townshends LLP of Birmingham. In spite of proof that SJ had not done the work or provided any genuine legal advice Paul Derbyshire of Townshends insisted that they had done so, that they were entitled to keep all of the money I had paid, did not need to account for it and did not need to send a bill (contrary to 'Solicitors Regulation Authority' requirements), and that they had dealt fully and properly with my official complaint despite the fact that they had actually done nothing except to acknowledge it. I made a complaint to Jayne Willetts of Townshends who fully supported Derbyshire and insanely said of the £500 stolen by SJ that "They are not required to account to you as there is nothing to account for.". The LCS refused to report Townshends to the SRA or to take any other action against them. The LCS continued to insist that SJ had done all of the required work, and persisted in this even after one of their officials ADMITTED that they had not. They insanely claimed that they did not have jurisdiction to say that a solicitor MUST do work which he has agreed to do and for which he has requested and received advance payment, and much more. I made a complaint to the (also now defunct) 'Office of the Legal Services Ombudsman'. These criminals, led by ombudsman Zahida Manzoor, also insisted that SJ had done all of the required work, denied the fact that they had repeatedly lied, claimed that they were entitled to simply not do work they had promised – and been paid – to do in spite of SRA regulations, and much more. They ignored demands to take action against Townshends and the LCS for their criminal gross misconduct, and refused to take action when they uncovered a fraudulent 'bill' which proved that SJ had illegally claimed payment for dealing with complaints (this is forbidden by SRA regulations). I reported the criminals to the SRA but they ignored the complaint for 6 months. When I chased them up again they refused to do anything unless the criminals reported THEMSELVES to the SRA.
I also made a complaint to the LCS about Hathaways. They ADMITTED that Hathaways had broken SRA regulations by demanding payment without having given any information about costs beforehand, but they dismissed this as trivial and refused to report this serious violation of regulations. They insisted that Hathaways had given full and proper legal advice and that it was not necessary for them to know the facts of the case or even what I was seeking advice on in order to do this. They ignored demands to report them for gross negligence and gross incompetence for not knowing what I had told them. They admitted that Hathaways' response to my complaint did not mention either of the two issues I complained about but insisted (obviously without explanation) that they had handled the complaint fully, properly and completely.
In March 2010 I went to Gateshead police station (Northumbria Police) to report the crimes. Criminals there insisted that fraud, theft and misconduct in public office are NOT crimes but are civil matters, refused to do anything, and offensively said that I should report the matters to the Citizens Advice Bureau. I made a complaint to the so-called 'Independent Police Complaints Commission'. I later learned that this notorious criminal gang almost NEVER do anything except hand complaints back to the police force whose officers committed reported offences for them to cover-up, as they did in this case. I also later learned that the law requires that police MUST refer reports of serious corruption (what the law calls 'relevant offences') to the IPCC, but the criminals immediately decided to break this law and launch an internal cover-up instead. NP then proceeded to ignore communications, break promises to contact me, ignore the crimes I had initially reported, ignore the crimes committed by their officers, and refuse to make a complaint recording decision. I made an appeal to the IPCC and they ordered NP to make a decision. Criminal Howard Jobson illegally declared that my complaint was not a complaint under the Police Reform Act in spite of the fact that it fitted all of the criteria, and further broke the law by failing to give any reason for his outrageous lie. I made another appeal to the IPCC and their Peter Hunt ordered the criminals to record my complaints and to contact me. The gang repeatedly ignored Hunt's instructions. Eventually I demanded that the IPCC carry out their own independent investigation. On each of the three occasions Hunt told me that the IPCC had no power to do anything and that it MUST be dealt with by NP. I later learned that he had repeatedly lied and committed criminal acts of misconduct in public office by refusing to do anything, and that the IPCC could have taken various actions at any time.
When the criminals did eventually contact me months later, they had apparently recorded partial and falsified versions of some complaints and did not record complaints against most of the offenders as Hunt had not explicitly named them. Over the next 4 months officers visited me 3 times but continued to do nothing. On the third occasion they confirmed that they were now officially refusing to act upon the crimes I had initially reported rather than simply continuing to ignore them. Obviously they had no lawful reason for this refusal, but instead used lies and libellous excuses. In February 2011 – almost a year after the Gateshead criminals had committed their offences – I made a further 25 complaints to NP's so-called 'Professional Standards Department', the criminal gang which covers-up crimes committed by their officers and staff as well as other complaints. The gang argued with the IPCC for the right to ignore these further complaints but they were ordered to record them. I heard nothing further for yet another two months while NP began their so-called 'investigation' and prepared their so-called 'investigation report'.
While waiting for the NP 'report' I reported the original crimes to Durham Constabulary. Richardson 1076 behaved offensively, repeatedly calling my attempts to get criminals prosecuted a 'crusade', insanely claiming that because SRA regulations are not the law then it cannot be against the law to break them (even though these regulations forbid solicitors from breaking the law), refusing to admit the fact that SJ did not advise on negligence despite looking at the documentary proof, and refusing to take any action against the criminals and falsely claiming that Durham Constabulary could not do so because NP had refused to do so. I made a complaint to Durham's 'Professional Standards Department'. An Inspector Ransome libelled me by falsely claiming (for no given reason and completely without justification) that my complaint was vexatious and an abuse of the complaints process. They referred the complaint to the IPCC who told me that Durham had applied for a dispensation (the right to ignore the complaint). The IPCC refused and ordered that the complaint be recorded. Durham Constabulary's so-called 'investigation report' stated that they had obtained and examined all available evidence, that I had reported crimes committed by members of the IPCC gang months BEFORE they had been committed, that I had reported the crimes committed by Northumbria Police (which I had not), that they could not investigate the original reported crimes because NP had refused to do so, and that PSD officers cannot investigate crimes other than those committed by officers of their force. I appealed to the IPCC. The ruling by Joe Hibbert made claims which do not correspond with the actual complaints which I made. Hibbert simply said that there was no evidence that I had reported the IPCC crimes which had not been committed at the time but ignored the fact that Durham police had LIED in an official report about this. He ADMITTED that Durham Constabulary had only talked to Richardson and had NOT obtained any other evidence (i.e. they LIED AGAIN in an official police report) but again ignored this complaint. Hibbert denied the fact that IPCC statutory guidance says that officers assigned to the PSD can investigate ANY crime which they become aware of as an 'ancillary matter'. He ADMITTED that officers assigned to the PSD can report crimes to other officers for them to investigate, but ignored the complaint that officers had committed criminal acts of misconduct in public office by refusing to take any action to ensure that the reported crimes were dealt with. He claimed (without any supporting reason or citation of legislation) that officers of one force cannot investigate crimes committed by those of another force, despite the fact that I had made it clear that I had never asked DC to investigate the NP crimes. Hibbert refused to take any action of any kind against any DC officer.
When the NP 'investigation report' finally arrived it was full of lies, libel, vital information which they had illegally conspired to keep secret, conflicting accounts, utterly nonsensical claims, matters which they simply ignored and did not mention at all, and much more. I began to prepare an appeal to the IPCC. I asked for more time to respond to the muddled 60-page 'report' regarding 26 complaints but was told that the IPCC could not grant such extensions. I knew that this was a lie but did not have time to complain at that stage. I did the best I could in the limited time available and submitted the appeal. I was told it would take a completely unacceptable 6 to 8 weeks before they could even look at it. TWELVE weeks later I had heard nothing and contacted them again. Shireece Webster replied, saying that it had been referred to her at their Central office as their North office was simply too busy to deal with it. A few days later Webster gave her 'ruling'. She had simply ignored all facts, proof, evidence and complaints and instead declared all NP officers and staff to be completely innocent of all crimes and other misconduct for no reason and completely without justification. Not even NP had done this. They had ruled that just one officer – the criminal DCI Jobson – was guilty of minor misconduct, though on falsified and massively watered-down grounds. I made a complaint to the IPCC's so-called 'Internal Investigations Unit' about Webster, Hunt, and Hannah Skelton (who had lied that the deadline for my appeal could not be extended). It appears that this 'Unit' is a fabrication – no more than an e-mail address – and any communication sent to it will simply be forwarded to the offender's manager for them to ignore, deny, refuse to deal with and to insult and libel the victim. Complaints to this phantom 'Unit' are not investigated. Webster's manager, criminal Melanie Kifffin, replied but ignored the serious criminal misconduct of IPCC gang members and refused to take action of any kind against the guilty staff.
It occurred to me that there was a small possibility that Sue Sim, the Chief Constable of NP, might not be just another criminal. I wrote to her. Although the letter and envelope were clearly marked as private and for Sim's personal attention only, Sim did not respond and instead a reply came from a Superintendent Simmons who simply passed the matter on to one of the criminals who had committed the reported offences – Chief Superintendent Thomson, the head of the 'Professional Standards Department' gang. I wrote to Sim again. This time she passed the matter directly to another member of the gang, DCI Lillico for him to dismiss as before. I wrote to Roger Kelly of the (now defunct) Northumbria Police Authority to report the crimes committed by Sim and the other offenders. He replied claiming to have contacted Sim and the IPCC. I never heard from them, and I never heard from Kelly again. When I eventually chased up the matter Kelly had retired and the new Chief Executive of NPA was Mike Barker. Barker claimed that Sim was entitled to delegate responsibility for dealing with crimes to any police officer and that it did not matter that she had made criminals responsible for dealing with their own crimes. I appealed against this to the IPCC and also reported the criminals Simmons, Thomson and Lillico. In his ruling, criminal Shardesh Ramchurn falsely claimed that my complaint was that Sim did not act personally on crimes reported to her personally. I wrote to remind Ramchurn that in fact this was NOT my complaint. Ramchurn insisted that it was. He refused to rule on my ACTUAL complaint that Sim had initially allowed responsibility for dealing with reported crimes to be handed to some of the criminals who had committed them and later directly passed such responsibility to criminals. I complained to the so-called 'Internal Investigations Unit'. My complaint was initially ignored before criminal John-Paul Napier eventually libelled me and fully supported Ramchurn in spite of the fact that he had made up a false complaint and refused to rule upon my ACTUAL complaint.
The IPCC referred my complaints against the criminals Simmons, Thomson and Lillico back to NP's 'Professional Standards Department' – the gang of which Thomson was head and the others were members - in spite of the fact that the law requires police to refer reports of serious corruption to the IPCC. Although they did not make a complaint recording decision within the allowed time, when I made an appeal Marie Lydon insisted that they had done so. In spite of having offered to clarify and explain her decision Lydon then refused to do so, instead simply insisting that she was right for no given reason and refusing to provide any reason or justification. In spite of this very serious misconduct, Napier libelled me, falsely and offensively dismissing my complaints about Ramchurn and Lydon as an abuse of the complaints process. The fake 'IIU' (L. Hyland in this case) refused to take any action. The NP gang applied to the IPCC for the right to ignore reported crimes (a 'dispensation') and despite the fact that my complaint included reports of crimes which had never been reported to police before, criminal Claire Parsons granted the dispensation.
Catherine McKinnell MP - Crimes Against Humanity
In early November 2011 I attended a 'surgery' held by Catherine McKinnell MP. I had prepared a brief printed account of the story for her to study in more detail after the meeting, but I made the mistake of giving this to her immediately. Instead of paying attention and listening to me as I tried to tell my story the ill-mannered lout instead sat there reading the prinout. She interrupted constantly and refused to listen to my account of the massive corruption in Northumbria Police, the IPCC and others. She promised to arrange a separate meeting to discuss the matter, but she lied and never did so. This criminal waited several weeks until a vital legal deadline had passed before contacting me and lied that there was nothing that anyone could do about any of this and I should simply forget it and accept it as a failure of the legal system. I reported the criminal to the 'Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards' but their reply was completely nonsensical and they refused to act for no intelligible reason.
I think it was around 3 and a half to 4 years later that I made an astonishing discovery. I found the website of the Global Organisation of Parliamentarians Against Corruption - GOPAC. The UK arm of this organisation is the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Anti-Corruption.The criminal McKinnell was a co-founder of this group, and just hours after refusing to listen to my account of massive corruption in the UK was welcoming delegates to the inaugural meeting of the group. On their website GOPAC were campaigning to have crimes of Grand Corruption recognised as crimes against humanity. Grand corruption occurs when corrupt acts are perpetrated by those responsible for making, administering and enforcing the law - such as police officers, MPs, the IPCC and many others. McKinnell expressed support for this campaign and is quoted on the website as saying ;-
“I am backing GOPAC’s campaign because corruption is a crime that affects everyone. It affects individuals, harms society and damages economic progress and in developing countries it can be a killer – when governments are deprived of their own resources to invest in health care, food security or essential infrastructure, corruption costs lives. If we are to eradicate poverty by 2030 we need to come together and recognise corruption for what it truly is: a crime against humanity.”
So McKinnell recognises that the type of crimes which she committed - crimes of corruption - are crimes against humanity.
In November 2011 I also reported the crimes committed up to that date to the Serious Fraud Office. They claim that “Our aim is to protect society by combating major fraud and corruption” but their Jade Mackenzie claimed (without reason or explanation) that the serious corruption of Northumbria Police, the IPCC and other public officials is not within their remit. I complained and received a reply from their Chief Executive Phillipa Williamson. Although the corruption falls within some of the criteria which she quoted, she said that the SFO aren't at all interested in any fraud or corruption unless it involves the theft of a million pounds or more. Williamson said that the SFO can report crimes outside their remit to other authorities but, despite having ignored the facts and my invitation to provide DOCUMENTARY PROOF of many of the crimes, this criminal said that the SFO had not found sufficient evidence that any criminal offence had taken place, refused to report the crimes and in the process again libelled me. Williamson said that Mackenzie's refusal to act had been reviewed by a senior member of the SFO. This is contrary to SFO complaints procedure which says that complaints of serious misconduct or criminality will be referred to an INDEPENDENT reviewer outside the SFO. In accordance with the procedure I complained to the Attorney General's office. James Ross replied. He claimed that the SFO only deals with fraud involving the theft of over one million pounds and not with corruption. He ignored my complaints that the criminals Mackenzie and Williamson had refused to report the crimes to other prosecuting authorities, and that Williamson had libelled me and refused to comply with the SFO complaints procedure. Criminal Ross refused to do anything. I wrote directly to Attorney General Dominic Grieve. He ignored my letter, but a reply came from criminal Jeffrey Care who refused point-blank to do anything without further comment.
In June 2012 I sent a substantial report of all the crimes committed up to that date to Wendy Williams, the Chief Crown Prosecutor for the North East region of the Crown Prosecution Service. She claimed that the CPS was unable to do anything because no report of the crimes had been referred to them by police. I did not believe her and did some research. I found that she had lied, and that the Code for Crown Prosecutors and the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 both show conclusively that the CPS are meant to be completely INDEPENDENT and do not require a referral from police. I wrote to Williams again to point out these facts and to ask her to explain herself. Instead I received a reply from Christopher H. Enzor, the Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor. This criminal simply ignored all facts and questions, repeated criminal Williams' lie, refused to do anything, and said any further communication from me would be ignored.
In September 2012 I discovered that on May 1st there had been a demonstration by victims of the notorious criminal gang known as 'Independent Police Complaints Commission' outside the gang's headquarters in London. Protestors were demanding the abolition of the gang. I had never seen or heard any media report of this. As a result there was to be an inquiry by the 'Home Affairs Select Committee' into the gang. I e-mailed all eleven members of the committee. Not a single one of them replied. A response came from the committee secretary. It was never explained how he got an e-mail which was not addressed to him. He said that although the deadline for submission of evidence had passed they may still be able to accept my account. He asked me to prepare a condensed version of the extremely long story. I did so and sent it to him. I never heard from him again nor from any member of the committee. When their 'report' was published it made absolutely no mention whatsoever of any crimes committed by IPCC gang members, and recommended that they simply be given greater powers.
In October 2012 shortly before the elections for Police and Crime Commissioners I e-mailed all four candidates for the Northumbria area. I won't mention the other three any further here. Vera Baird did not reply. I e-mailed her again in early November to let her know that I would NOT be voting for any candidate who planned to ignore reports of police corruption. This time she did reply. She claimed to have no record and no memory of my previous e-mail. She said
"…I will take a strong stance against police corruption if I am elected." and
"I have received a couple other e mails alleging corruption and so, after the elections, I expect to give priority to examining the evidence that you and others offer to me, should I be elected"
In mid November Baird was elected. In a press release in late November she said "I have already announced a root and branch investigation into our policing."
She did not contact me. I e-mailed her again in January 2013. She ignored the e-mail. I e-mailed on various addresses 3 more times. Baird ignored them all. I wrote and personally delivered a letter to Gateshead Civic Centre where Baird's office was located at the time. Although both the letter and envelope were clearly marked as private and for the personal attention of Baird only, I received an e-mail with an attachment from Baird's deputy Mark Dennett. Even though I had not asked Baird to investigate anything, but only to listen to the facts and look at the proof as she had promised, Dennett said that the PCC has no power to investigate crimes committed by the police. He refused to do anything at all. I e-mailed Baird again. Yet again she ignored me. I tried yet again and this time finally received a reply from Baird. She claimed that the law allows Dennett to open and deal with private and confidential communications sent to Baird. Baird said that she had received all of my correspondence and considered it (thereby admitting that she had repeatedly and persistently ignored reports and proof of serious crimes committed by Northumbria Police officers and staff), and simply referred me to Dennett's reply. Baird refused to do anything at all. In fact the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 states that a PCC must "secure that the police force is efficient and effective", must hold the Chief Constable to account for her actions and the actions of those under her direction and control, and has the power to suspend a Chief Constable or to demand that they resign or retire (which they then MUST do). Baird is a liar, having promised to examine proof of police corruption then later refused to do so. She is a criminal, having refused to carry out her duties under the law for no genuine reason. She is a traitor, having broken the oath which all PCCs are required to take before being allowed to take up the appointment. I have heard nothing further of her so-called 'root and branch investigation'.
It was obvious that no official would ever prosecute their fellow 'Criminals in Power' and that the only possible means of getting justice would be by launching private prosecutions. I made a last-ditch attempt to get officials to do their duty. I e-mailed Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer. There was no reply. I tried again. Again there was no reply. I e-mailed Starmer again via a general CPS address. There was nothing but an automatic response from their computer and they continued to do nothing.
In August 2013 I 'laid an Information' at Gateshead Magistrates' Court to begin the private prosecution of the criminal Shireece Webster of the IPCC gang. Magistrates issued a summons for the criminal to appear before the Court. I was alarmed when a letter arrived from Ian Palmer of the CPS, the criminal gang which had already illegally refused to take action against any criminal including Webster. Palmer asked for a copy of the evidence (actually PROOF) which I intended to use in court, and I provided it to him. I never heard from him again. Defence lawyers asked for a 4 week adjournment for the CPS to decide whether they wanted to take over the prosecution. The Court granted it. The next contact from the CPS was from the criminal Enzor. He had written to the court requesting an adjournment, and had lied that I had asked the CPS to take over the prosecution. He said that defence lawyers had also requested this. He asked for yet another 2 weeks for the CPS to make their decision. I wrote to the Court explaining my deep concern at CPS involvement and the fact that Enzor (as well as Williams) had already committed serious criminal acts by refusing to act upon reported crimes including the crimes committed by Webster. I explained that I had always intended to do everything possible to ensure that Williams and Enzor face prosecution for their crimes. The Court refused Enzor's request for an adjournment and passed the matter to the Crown Court. But before the date of the first Crown Court hearing the criminal Enzor wrote to say that he had decided to take over and stop the prosecution. In spite of documentary proof of the fact that the criminal Webster had ignored my complaints, Enzor lied that she addressed them all. Although Webster had falsely declared all police officers and staff to be completely innocent of all crimes and other acts of misconduct in spite of irrefutable documentary proof, criminal Enzor claimed that she may not have done anything wrong, that she did not act deliberately or with criminal intent, and even that it might not be possible to prove that she IS a public official. Obviously, criminal Enzor did not attempt to explain or justify his outrageous, monstrous lies. I made an appeal under the CPS's 'Victim's Right to Review'. Criminal Tracey Wareham totally ignored all of my complaints and questions and unreservedly supported Enzor without any reason or justification and allowed the prosecution of the criminal Webster to be stopped.
It was clear that the criminals Williams and Enzor could stop any prosecution simply on their say-so. There was no choice but to prosecute them next. I 'laid Informations', and eventually the criminals were summoned to appear before the Court. Nigel Gibbs of the CPS criminal gang on behalf of the gang leader Alison Saunders asked the Court to adjourn the scheduled hearing while they considered a Judicial Review of the Court's decision to issue the summonses. A District Judge refused the request, saying that there was no reason in law to grant it and quoting relevant legislation and case law. This was not what the gang demanded. They went to the High Court and demanded an immediate hearing, thus denying me my right to any representation. In their application the gang demanded that the appearance of the criminals Williams and Enzor in the Magistrates' Court be adjourned to a later date. They concealed the fact that a District Judge had already refused this on legal grounds, and gave no reason of their own – saying only that it must be done urgently because the hearing was scheduled to take place just a few days later. The form says that a 'draft order' MUST be attached (this appears to be what you are asking the Court to order). An order came from Mr. 'Justice' King. He referred to the lack of any draft order, but in spite of the fact that the application was incomplete and therefore invalid, and that the gang had given no reason WHY the prosecution should be stayed, and making no mention of the ruling of the District Judge, King perverted the course of justice by granting a stay of the prosecution simply because the gang demanded it.
The gang then began their claim for a judicial review. They REPEATEDLY LIED to the Court, concealed evidence, engaged in malicious fettering (sending large bundles of documents sometimes just hours before any Court proceedings, and even AFTER the final hearing), sent some bundles ONLY by post and not also (or instead) by e-mail in order to ensure that I could not possibly have time to respond even if I did receive them before any hearing. They made claims unsupported by any fact or evidence, and effectively called a Justice of the Peace grossly incompetent, grossly negligent and a liar – all without any supporting evidence. In spite of the gang's criminal abuses of process, High Court judges 'Justice' Jay and 'Lady Justice' Rafferty conspired to pervert the course of justice by allowing the Judicial Review to go ahead (unsurprisingly giving absolutely no reason for allowing it). In spite of PROOF of the fact that the criminals had committed the offences Jay and Rafferty made the false, offensive and libellous declaration that the prosecutions were vexatious, and (as always with absolutely no reason, evidence or justification) that the summonses were 'defective'. They simply regurgitated the same packs of lies, half-truths, irrelevancies and unsupported claims spouted by the CPS criminal gang and completely ignored all facts, evidence and proof which were in any way contradictory, harmful or fatal to their pre-determined pronouncements. They quashed the summonses and allowed the criminals Williams and Enzor to get away with their serious criminal offences.
I needed to appeal against this outrageous criminal ruling. It had been almost 8 days before the court had bothered to inform me of the outcome by sending a copy of this ruling. The time limit for lodging an appeal is 21 days. I desperately needed help. I found an outfit called "The Legal Company" which sounded perfect. I contacted them and got a reply from someone calling himself "Milton Firman". I began sending details and documents. Firman did not comment on them or give any legal advice. When I said that I must know urgently whether he would act for me he demanded immediate payment online, and continued to demand immediate payment when I explained that this was impossible. I did some more research and found an account from someone who said they had been defrauded by "The Legal Company", and also found that a 'Milton Firman' had been struck off as a solicitor in 2006. These fraudsters had wasted more than a week of my time. I now had no alternative but to make the appeal myself. It was difficult because criminals Jay and Rafferty had given absolutely no reason or justification for allowing the CPS criminals to abuse the Judicial Review process and no reasons for their orders and false and libellous pronouncements and insinuations. My appeal could only be on the grounds of total irrationality and gross unreasonability. I discovered that one of the documents which had to be submitted with the appeal is the "approved transcript of judgement". I contacted the Court to say that they had never provided this, and had never given any reason, excuse, legal argument or anything to attempt to justify their actions. The Court REFUSED to provide any such reasons and said that I must contact (and pay) a private company to obtain a copy of the transcript. I prepared the appeal as best I could and submitted it. The Court replied saying that my appeal did not meet the minimum required standard because I had not submitted a copy of a particular document. I had checked very carefully and repeatedly before making the appeal. I checked again. This document was NOT referred to at all in the appeal forms or guidance and is NOT one of the required documents. I asked the Court why they thought that my appeal was invalid because I had not provided a copy of a document which is not required. They completely ignored my question and instead changed their story, saying that the Deputy Master of the Court of Appeal had ruled (and never bothered to inform me) that the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal do not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal involving a criminal matter. It was a blatant lie. A judicial review is NOT a criminal matter. It's an administrative matter, a matter of the administration of justice. Even if it's about the administration of a criminal case it's still an administrative matter. This 'Deputy Master of the Court of Appeal' perverted the course of justice by lying that my appeal against the crooked pronouncements of the criminals Jay and Rafferty was outside the jurisdiction of the court. The CPS criminals had chosen to base their effort to pervert the course of justice - again - on attacking the decision of the magistrate to issue summonses to the criminals Williams and Enzor, an administrative matter. Obviously this raises the question of whether the Civil Division of the High Court really had jurisdiction to stop the prosecution of criminals in the first place.
I had planned to prosecute as many as possible of the criminals involved in this whole saga, but it is clear that any further attempt to prosecute any of the 'Criminals in Power' would be illegally stopped by these criminals who infest the so-called 'criminal justice system' throughout and to the highest levels, and beyond. I am now seeking a justice or human rights organisation which will provide expert legal help, or a person with the power and the will to sack these criminals from their positions of power and to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. So far all I have contacted ignore the matter or else refuse to do anything whatsoever.
Prior to the 2015 general election I e-mailed my story to all candidates for the constituency in which I live (with the exception of the criminal McKinnell of course). Not a single one of the five replied. I e-mailed the national offices of these parties (where there was one). None replied. The Liberal Democrats under the Name Sal Brinton (but actually their computer which addressed me as “Mr. nothing”) later responded but completely ignored my story and thought it was appropriate to send me some propaganda and an invitation to join their corrupt party.
In June 2015 Prime Minister David Cameron announced that he wants a “global purge of the cancer of corruption”. I wrote to him and my letter arrived (signed for on delivery) at Downing Street in August 2015. There has never been any reply. Shortly after the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party I e-mailed him. Three and a half months later I got a reply from a minion, a lackey, Sam Grist, who again ignored my communication and offensively spewed out Labour Party propaganda in place of a genuine reply claiming “Labour’s new direction is rooted in British values of decency and mutual respect”. I also e-mailed Labour’s new Deputy Leader, Tom Watson, and was again ignored. In May 2016 shortly before Cameron's anti-corruption summit I wrote to him again. This time the private and confidential letter was stolen by a criminal in Downing Street. This person gave no name, just an illegible scrawled signature. They claimed that Cameron cannot personally do anything about corruption and offensively said that I should contact the police.
In this brief account I have not detailed the dozens of lawyers who I contacted along the way and who ignored requests to take on my cases, effectively denying me my right to legal representation. Similarly I have not detailed the totally corrupt media – the many papers, television, 'sell my story' outfits, radio, so-called ‘investigative journalists’, and even some bodies which claim to support justice and human rights which have ignored the story, actively refused to listen, or denied documented facts. I am continuing my efforts to find an honest law-abiding person in a position of power and to let the public know how criminal gangs are shamelessly abusing the law and human rights with total impunity and the aid of unlimited access to taxpayer's money. A few media reports over many years have shown how the Criminals in Power can commit serious crimes such as rape and sexual abuse, safe in the knowledge that members of their gang will commit any crime required to ensure that they get away with their crimes completely. I am horrified and outraged at the unchecked spread of Cameron’s “cancer of corruption”. I am looking for people who want to help me demand a cure. In more than 13 years since I first contacted the BBC and asked them to tell the public all I have ever found are criminal collaborators who just ignore the story completely, and filthy backstabbing traitors who promise to help but actually do nothing at all.
What will YOU do to help?