TRANSPARENCY - Is the key to identifying councillors and council staff who might be abusing their positions of trust, to nip organized crime in the bud. The more a council, police force or other government official seek to cloud answerability, you know that office is more likely to be corrupt. We advocate Zero Tolerance to all persons in any chain of corruption that follows, including police officers, court officials and judges. Let's get rid of the rats in the system who are bleeding the ordinary man dry.
ORGANISED CRIME IN THE UK - When you hear about organised crime, you think of tough gangsters with knives and guns beating people up in dark alleys. You should be thinking about council staff in smart buildings and suits, who are on the take and crooked police officers who back them up in the taking. Yes, it is criminal and it is part of our culture, just as much as bribery is said to be part of the culture of Brazil, India, and many other countries, including the US where military contracts are involved - indeed courses are run on the subject of keeping bribery down to an acceptable level. AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL! This must surely be ZERO TOLERANCE.
LOCAL COUNCILS - We are sure that if you take a close look at the Councils in your area that there will be relatives of builders, architects and landowners on the committees. Look even closer and you will find that declarations of interest are rarely made and when those exist that the councilor concerned, or maybe even a planning officer with an interest, will not leave the room. Records of interests may even be re-written retrospectively. It is all about manipulating property values so that only certain people benefit.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING - Nobody gets reasonably priced accommodation in the UK. You either buy a house where all the professionals in the chain have had their cut of your wages, or you apply for planning permission - where once again all those in the chain insist on a slice of your cake. Yes, your cake - a slice of your life. And that is why millions of youngsters will never break free of the renting society that these crooked officers have operated for years to create and control and make English landlords fat from what many might describe as immoral earnings. It's a great system for those in positions of trust, and as with Jimmy Saville and the BBC, they get the protection of the state.
KEEPING CONTROL - To keep control, executive officers in councils have a secret agenda to resist any development that has not been approved by them - unless they've had their pound of flesh. If you develop a site without paying them first (applying for planning permission with back handers), councils come down on you like a ton of bricks, even though such development may be lawful.
Councils, and other agencies who with them, employ the courts to obtain orders using false evidence, and for the most part the Judges are in on it more than happy to help the Old Boys Brigade. The Courts are not independent as they are supposed to be, neither are the police. All UK agencies work together to pile on the pressure to discredit and demoralize any person who challenges their right to profit from a system that is supposed to be fair. These agencies are immune from data protection and privacy laws and routinely abuse your rights.
Councils are skilled at involving MAPPA agencies to enforce mercilessly until they break you, both mentally and financially. But, every once in a while a citizen fights back. In one case we are following, the citizen was unlucky enough to buy an old building in the Wealden area. That was in 1982. More to the point, having beaten them into a corner on the origins of the building by about 2000, they tried first to bankrupt the citizen in 2003 using costs obtained by a defective (fraudulent) enforcement notice with the help of Dame Butler-Sloss, then when that failed to stop him winning client cases, they did their hardest to discredit the citizen, because he was winning cases for clients by using their own tactics against them, even to the point of effecting citizens arrests at illegal site visits - and this they knew would lead to an eventual prosecution of their officers - and exposure of the corruption in the system: Organized Crime, with a few Masons in the mix to add yet more intrigue.
THE WORST CASE OF LOCAL AUTHORITY CORRUPTION - In all the cases we have reviewed on this website, this is by far the worst of institutionalized discrimination that we have witnessed. As the case is so scandalous, we know that readers will not believe it. We also know that the perpetrators will seek to deny any and everything and again try to discredit the Victim and say his claims are unsupported. For that reason, we are publishing the key documents - so that you can see for yourself the level of conspiracy between agencies - here supported by documentary proof to the criminal standard. We hope that the general public might learn from this tragic tale of mental torture how it is that your council and local police work together using the courts, to pervert the course of justice. You will also be amazed to learn that Crime Commissioners almost never take chief constables to task for their criminal involvement. It is of course a crime to fail to investigate a crime.
THE HEAD OF STATE - When fresh evidence shows that a conviction is unsafe it falls to the Criminal Cases Review Commission to test the evidence in the Court of Appeal. Unfortunately, the corruption is so strong and at such a high level where Masonic influence is involved (as in this case) that even the CCRC may not be counted on to act impartially and without discrimination, or to act at all.
If it is that the CCRC have also become entangled in a cover up, then the only recourse for any victim is the Head of State. A Prime Minister is only a temporary head of state. If no satisfaction may be obtained from such a temporary appointee, then the matter devolves the the permanent head of state, which at the time of writing is Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth on England. Article 13 of the Convention of Human Rights provides every European citizen with the right to an effective remedy. If you take a look at the UK's Human Rights Act 1998, you will find that there is no Article 13. This is another example of English organised crime at the very highest level. As a country we helped draft the Convention to bind all of the other countries in Europe to our will, but then opted out ourselves. Who can you place your trust in knowing that? God? In England you are deprived of the right to an effective remedy. Europe will say that in such cases the effective remedy resides with the head of state. If the temporary appointee fails to act (any prime minister) your effective remedy devolves to Her Majesty - or so logic dictates. It is worth writing to the head of state to ask who it is that guarantees your Article 13 rights - and please let us know what you are told - if anything.
HOW DOES THE QUEEN FEEL ABOUT THAT AT THE AGE OF 90?
Why the Queen you might think? Because the Queen is Head of State in every case. The buck stops with her at the moment. It will eventually be her successor. The get out for the Queen, is that she transfers her power to an elected Government and from that point on the Prime Minister is ultimately responsible. Acts of Parliament, no matter how unjust - or in some cases unlawful under European or International law, receive Royal assent - and only then pass into law with support of the Spiritual Lord Bishops.
The Queen is responsible for appointing the Prime Minister after a general election or a resignation. In a General Election The Queen will appoint the candidate who is likely to have the most support of the House of Commons.
Dissolution (the act of dissolving) happens when: the Government's fixed four-year term is complete, the Government loses a vote on important bills – the budget, for example – in the House of Commons, or impropriety is uncovered. Typically, the Queen will avoid such scandal with an arrangement that a minister will resign, such as when Tony Blair's was called a war criminal by protestors for invading Iraq.
TO BE CONTINUED ......
US SEX CASE EVIDENCE - The testimony on Myron T Scholberg FBI, invoked the certainties of science to guide a Jury and the ruse did its job: the verdict came in guilty - sending Kirk Odom to jail for 22 years on bogus hair evidence. On the basis of a single hair Kirk Odom was to spend the next 22 years in prison and a further nine living the half-life of a paroled sex offender. The trouble is that Scholberg’s testimony wasn’t scientific, and it wasn’t true. Fast forward to 2009, by which time Odom had spent 28 years in prison and on parole. In that year the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (NRCNAS) released a landmark report into the practice of forensic analysis in the US. The NRCNAS report pointed out a basic problem with the idea that you can compare two hair samples and produce a positive match. No statistics exist that map the distribution of hair properties in the general population, and that renders it impossible to make any meaningful calculations about the probabilities of a particular hair type being found. As a result, “all analyst testimony … stating that a crime scene hair was ‘highly likely’ to have come, ‘very probably’ came, or did come from the defendant violates the basic scientific criterion that expressions of probability must be supported by data”. To put that in plain English, Scholberg’s statement to the jury at the Odom trial – that the match he had found between the defendant’s and the rapist’s hair was a “very rare phenomenon” – was complete fantasy.
The FBI’s 1977 pamphlet Microscopy of Hair: A Practical Guide and Manual.
The assumption running through its 53 pages is that with the help of a microscope a skilled examiner can positively match two hairs to the same person with a high probability of
accuracy. Clarence Kelley, then director of the FBI, wrote a starry-eyed foreword to the manual in which he expressed his hope that it would promote “maximum use of physical evidence in our criminal justice system of America”.
At its peak the microscopic analysis unit in Washington had 11 special agents devoted entirely to hair comparisons, working on up to 2,000 cases a year and testifying 250 times annually. Between 1972 and 1999, the unit produced at least 2,500 positive hair matches that were used in criminal cases, and tens of thousands more may have resulted from FBI
“so-called experts” training detectives to use the technique in states across the country.
UK PRIME MINISTERS - In our opinion David Cameron failed to tackle accountability for the ordinary taxpayer. Will Theresa May give every citizen an equal opportunity in dealings with their local Council and the Police? Hardly! She called a general election not long after taking office. Why?
JULIAN ASSANGE - If you go about revealing all about politicians and their sneaky tactics, you are bound to find yourself accused of something unsavory. Wikileaks! Nice one Julian. Freedom of speech and transparency in office. If they abided by those principles for real, the world would be a safer place.
UK SEX CASE EVIDENCE SIMILARITIES - Substitute Myron Scholberg for Melanie Liebenberg and anatomical evidence, rather than the matching of a hair - Mr Odom's conviction was obtained using the same methods used in the UK by the CPS. The CPS knowingly called out of date medical evidence to seal a wrongful conviction, the FBI used outdated anatomical evidence. It's time the UK did the needed research to not only convict those guilty of offences based on scientific data rather than fantasy opinion, but also to protect those falsely accused of crimes. Ref: Extracts from a Guardian article by Ed Pilkington
APPEAL HEARINGS CAN NOW BE FILMED AND TWEETED
This site is free of © Copyright except where specifically stated 1997 - 2017. Any person may download, use and quote any reference or any link, and is guaranteed such right to freedom of information and speech under the Human Rights and Freedom of Information Acts. However, be aware that we cannot be held liable for the accuracy of the information provided. All users should therefore research matters for themselves and seek their own legal advice and this information is provided simply by way of a guide. Horse Sanctuary Trust UK All trademarks herby acknowledged. Contact Us.