EARL OF LYTTON on behalf of Victims of White Collar Crimes – comments on the Queen’s Speech

6 Comments

14 06 13 Earl of LyttonThis precious text came from Len Lawrence, the air pilot poisoned by organophosphates that killed thousands of farmers. George Wescott happened to have survived and accompanied Len to a meeting of Parliamentarians where, at long last, organophosphates were on the agenda.

This excerpt regarding white collar crimes on the occasion of the Queen’s Speech dates from Hansard on 09 June 2014.

The Earl of Lytton (Crossbench)

My Lords, the gracious Speech refers to a fairer society. The Minister mentioned the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, and rightly referred to the importance of the rule of law. However, I start with the Home Secretary’s address to the Police Federation on 21 May. She made a welcome promise of better protection for whistleblowers in the police. People such as James Patrick have put their entire careers on the line for the truth. However, the proposed new offence of police corruption is otiose. We already have laws enough on our statute books, although of course police co-operation in investigating themselves may be in doubt.

The Home Secretary suggested that leaving police operations unfettered would resist political pressures but that, to me, means inadequate oversight despite the beefing up of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary. Operations at the front line will always trump policy. We still have many questions but few answers to the points raised about police culture and operations. A senior judge has recently questioned the objectivity of that other safeguard, the IPCC, as mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Basildon.

Under anti-social behaviour legislation, the police have virtually untrammelled and incontestable powers. They decide ab initio who they think is the guilty party. The rampantly one-sided exercise of these in a case involving a Sussex MP has been corroborated by cases in South Wales, Devon and Cornwall, Thames Valley and, in the most recent, from Hampshire, police evidence seems to have been total fiction. I have been shown custody records altered post hoc to refer falsely to a more serious offence of violence. I have seen manifestly concocted properties for legal photographs used to procure convictions in magistrates’ courts. This I now find is very easy to do, and applies also to CCTV and audio files. This material is increasingly used as evidence in court proceedings. All that is required is slackness by witnesses and prosecution, and the guidance of ACPO on digital evidence to be ignored, and you have a recipe for misleading the court.

I learn of serious failure of prosecution to disclose documents as required, and of failure of defence teams and judges to ensure compliance. The Attorney-General’s recent guidance identifies this as a threat to a fair trial. I hear of documents that are unsigned or undated, possibly even forged, being accepted by the courts, and a failure to safeguard the interests of people under rulings from the Court of Protection.

Much of this is ongoing, with frequent accounts of files lost, court records deleted or unavailable, police notes absent or officer amnesia in the witness box. A solicitor categorised this for me as “gaming” the provisions of Section 117 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, because a police witness cannot be cross-examined on something he has forgotten, and if the only other evidence is documentary or electronic, however faulty, then that must stand unless the defence can have the evidence struck out: effectively a reversal of the burden of proof. It would also appear from a recent BBC “File on 4” programme that these and allied manipulation of rules of evidence and procedure continue at the highest administrative and professional levels.

Withdrawing most legal aid—a principle I applaud as a general concept—but without rendering the system of justice accessible and affordable to normal folk, as mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, seems to be a flawed policy. I question why two legal experts are required to represent a criminal defendant. However, if undeserving types were gaming the legal aid budget beforehand, we now appear to have police and prosecution gaming the procedures to the detriment of fair trials. Add these together and we have a situation once described to my father by his lawyer as follows: “Where there is muddle and confusion, dishonesty follows close behind”. I try to remember that.

Once an offence, police notification or occasion of arrest is established, the details go into a police computer system. The citizen does not have rights, or certainly has no adequate rights, to gain access to or check that for accuracy, yet may find material regurgitated at some future date in proceedings, shared with other agencies or disclosed in a CRB check. Necessary protections before the law remain inadequate, open to abuse, and are being manipulated to the unfair disadvantage for defendants in criminal proceedings in particular. This erodes trust in a vital sector of public administration. That imperils the rule of law and ultimately, the stability of society. Oversight must be restored. Senior law officers within the Government have long been aware of the situation, so why no action?

We should not be complacent or wag our finger at other jurisdictions, while all the while corrupt practices infect our own affairs. The Government need to act now—or if not this one, now, then a new one in 2015.

#ACPO #IPCC Experienced Victims, Savour this account from the Lords yesterday!

10 Comments

From Parliament’s Lords Debates yesterday, 05 December 2013 with links and bullet points added:

Police: Independent Police Commission Report

Motion to Take Note

4.11 pm

Moved by Lord Harris of Haringey

PLEASE SEE THE SPEECHES THAT FOLLOWED BEFORE LORD LYTTON ROSE TO HIS FEET

and particularly that by Lady A Harris on Forensic experts etc

5.29 pm
The Earl of Lytton (CB): My Lord, I too welcome the opportunity to debate this report. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Haringey, for that and to the noble Lord, Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington, for his work and for the work of his commission members as far as it goes.

We can all agree that good policing is of vital importance to all of us. My starting point is the historic understanding that policing would not be subject to political interference but would be self-governing. This meant that the police were also self-co-ordinating and self-managing in policy and operational terms.

The Association of Chief Police Officers—ACPO—effectively moved into that role as the embodiment of senior ranks, guardians of its professionalism and integrity and of police management. That embodiment remains pivotal. It advises the Home Office, represents Britain abroad in Interpol and Europol and co-ordinates the 43 police forces across England and Wales. In this role it issues guidance, directions and advice which carry great authority and are used in legal proceedings. It seems to me still to have a controlling if no longer a monopoly influence in the College of Policing and thereby a major say in policy, while retaining operational matters to itself. Its members and directors are senior police officers.

Given this unique and authoritative pan-police oversight, why do we continue to see instances of widespread and critical failings, More

COMPLAIN with CONFIDENCE!? A firewall of fob-offs protects public institutions and their employees

10 Comments

13 10 02 ComplainThis is the leaflet I found among the papers of Melissa Laird – after she got deported so that her son can by adopted  – thanks to the criminal activities of Barnet Council.

Meanwhile I received this email: “One year on from my husband’s avoidable death, thanks to you and others I realise how hopeless it is to follow the prescribed channels of complaint. Every path leads nowhere.

The manipulators hold all the cards. They have the money, publicity, media control and legal access denied to all complainants. Those who get noticed are quickly recruited into their ranks in order to fool the public into thinking they’re listening and changes are imminent. They’re not.

I think it’s possible to turn up the volume if we unite all the groups and protest in one voice. Individuals seldom make an impact. I met Caul Grant of Campaign for Truth and Justice at Speakers corner. He stays within the law. I joined them on the last 2 Empowerment Mondays outside the RCJ when they stopped the traffic for 10 minutes at a time by forming a moving chain across Fleet Street. The disruption was effective, it got us noticed. Passers by were shocked to hear the stories of protestors.

Michael Mansfied, currently representing Mark Duggan‘s family listened, so did Keith Vaz MP, currently chairman of Home Affairs Committee, a Parliamentary committee that scrutinises the work of the Home Office and a strong advocate of Human Rights. Given that Cameron has vowed to limit access to the European Court we cannot afford to be complacent.”

Caul responds: More

SUICIDE or Murder? When victimisation becomes too much…

7 Comments

A very effective video about a ‘case’ that is representative for many victims of unscrupulous organisations such as Grant Thornton… One just wonders what it’s like working there… And what it feels like when one prefers to be cruel and commit crimes than quitting one’s job to ‘make a living’…

 

With thanks from Jeff Lampert of Help4Lips [Litigants in Person]

THE PAEDOPHILES FRIEND? A most extra-ordinary 22-page Open Letter to David Cameron MP

8 Comments

13 03 03 Savile Heath This letter by Michael H. Murrin, entitled “A Paedophiles Friend?”, is a labour of love and passion.

It is based on the possession of the membership list of the Paedophile Information Exchange from a reliable and proven source. The result are two online petitions:

and 22 pages of care-ful research, choice of images, links, media references and care-ful formatting to follow up a previous letter around these 4 requests:

  1. The Paedophile Information Exchange and its founders were finally subject to criminal prosecution during the mid 1980’s, however the full extent of its influence has never been properly, openly, examined. I now ask you to authorise the release of ALL archived records concerning the police investigation of, and subsequent prosecution of, P.I.E. This to include a complete transcript of the court case, the publication of the membership list and publication of the mailing list. I also request that you authorise the release into the public domain of any memoranda and/or other communications related to P.I.E, between the Metropolitan Police, the Home Office and 10 Downing Street during the time of the police investigation into P.I.E.
  2. At this point I make my second request to you; I ask that you intervene to release Colin Smart from the legal injunctions inflicted upon him by Sunderland City Council. In effect I am asking you to restore to Mr. Smart his liberty and his right to freedom of speech. More

ROYAL COMMISSION into Child Abuse: when Online Petitioning becomes a Threat of Imprisonment

24 Comments

The email below is a serious cry for help from a brave Englishman who is threatened with prison – as the Thank You for using HMG’s e-petition site to save more children from ‘care’, wrongful adoptions and paedophiles. Please note the Australian precedent of 12 Nov 2012: to set up a Royal Commission into child abuse!

Hi from Michael Murrin,

Following the sending of my letters to the Queen, The Prime Minister, Lord Justice Mummery and Bernard Hogan-Howe, things are now stirring in the swamp! On December 24th a letter was typed up in No: 10, it reads:-

Dear Mr Murrin,

I am writing on behalf of the Prime Minister to thank you for your letter of 15th December. I am sorry to learn that you were unhappy with the reply you received from the Home Office.

Your correspondence is currently under consideration,

Your sincerely,

It will be interesting to see what response I receive next.  The main thrust of this campaign is to:-

13 01 05 e-petition PIE1. Secure the release of the documents related to The Paedophile Information Exchange which are held in government archives.

13 01 05 e-petition Commission

2. To have established a Royal Commission into child care and child abuse in the UK.

The above letter was received by me on Friday January 4th.  Today, Saturday 5th January, I received another letter via Special Delivery.  This is a solicitors letter and, in effect, I am being threatened with committal to prison. Forgive me but I cannot go into the detail of who is making this move but be assured it is a serious move and it may well be that I will be incarcerated in due course.

More

Government Child ‘Protection’ Exposed in AUS, UK, US & CAN – to revisit Operation Ore?

7 Comments

Image representing Facebook as depicted in Cru...

Image representing YouTube as depicted in Crun...

Child ‘protection’ or ‘snatching‘ is not a single issue campaign, nor is it a national phenomenon. But most ‘activism’ is based on the suffering of personal experience.

Nick Clegg said in Parliament that victims of abuse should speak out and that perpetrators would be brought to justice. Will he listen to parents who lost their children to Social Services as procurers for paedophiles, too?

Meanwhile, readers are invited to remember Operation Ore, the UK’s biggest ever police investigation which remains surrounded by controversies rather than justice for perpetrators and compensation for victims.

Some relevant links from the Mainstream Media:

  1. April 1998: The sheer scale of child sexual abuse in Britain – The Guardian
  2. April 2007: Operation Ore flawed by Fraud – The Guardian
  3. May 2007: Credit card fraud fears cloud Operation Ore – The Register
  4. June 2009: Has Operation Ore left a scar on British justice? – The Telegraph More

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,729 other followers