An Open Letter re Norman Scarth and Thursday’s hearing to Free him from Leeds Prison

From Peter Mon 22 August 11

An Open letter Regarding Norman

To Chris Jarvis and Norman’s supporters.

Dear all,

I can no longer stand by and see people hoodwinked over Normans case , when he could have and should have released a couple of weeks ago (by applying to purge his contempt).

Let me expand and explain; it is in reality irrelevant what a Judge sentences a person to as he has the power to sentence in Contempt of Court cases with immediate effect anything up to 2 years in prison.

Under the law it is illegal to record without permission of the Court and Norman is therefore technically guilty, the only question is quantum.

So for people to say the it was illegal and to say he has not had a trial , etc is nonsense.

Norman evidently apologised before being sentenced but people are now missing the point that was BEFORE being sentenced. .

What you do, is very simple . You write a letter to the Court for the attention of the Judge saying you wish to purge your contempt. The Court should then immediately list a hearing and the person is brought before the Judge and if the person apologises the person is released.

The idea being that the prison shocks some sense into you and you now apologise. If a Judge did then refuse to release you, you would have a very good appeal point.

If you did not want to be released straight away and did not want to apologise then you have to appeal and apply for bail, but this takes longer and forms have to be filled in as opposed to a simple letter.

Another point that some people have misunderstood is the Queen has no power of pardon. The Government took that right away from her years ago. Any petition to the Queen might look good for PR but in reality has no legal effect.

If my memory serves me correctly , on contempt of court cases there is no time off for good behaviour, etc, so 6 Months means 6 Months not out in say 3 months.

Habeas Corpus can only be used when you have exhausted all other rights of appeal/ purge contempt and as such a Habeous Corpus application that is premature runs the risk of being dismissed.

If the Governor does not comply with a Habeas corpus application, you can ask for him to be fined. This is still on the statute books , though the amount has remained the same, from memory £500.

A Hapeas Corpus application that is premature and dismissed runs the risk of a whacking great cost order against the applicant.

So let’s start at the beginning. I received an email out of the blue telling me of Norman’s plight giving sparse details other than the where to send a card to at the prison. I immediately emailed other prominent litigants to spread the word . I then tried to find out more details and was met with a wall of cloak and dagger.

I was then put in touch with Chris Jarvis who is supposed to be Norman’s friend and lives a couple of miles away from the prison. Rather than too many cooks spoil the broth, it seemed sensible to coordinate any action through Chris Jarvis , and he could arrange a visit or drop anything in by hand to the prison as he is on the spot.

Instead of being able to help Norman I then ran into problems. The Judge name was a secret, the Court name was a secret and these people were supposed to be helping Norman. For anyone to be able a try and help Norman we needed further details. It was then divulged it was not Normans case and he witnessed someone else s case, and to this day whose ever case it was is still for some reason top secret.

Then I was told that it was a County Court Judge at the Bradford Combined courts giving the impression this was a civil contempt. I introduce Terry To Chris. Terry is one of the most experienced and best person you could have regarding forms, case law, skeletons , etc.

Terry sent to Norman in Prison the civil contempt appeal forms.

I emailed Chris Jarvis a template letter to hand/ send Norman to write to the County Court to purge his contempt. All Norman would have to do is sign it and send it off. He would then be allocated a hearing and supporters could have come to his hearing.

A demo was then organised with the bus outside the prison, when if the purge contempt letter had in fact been sent, this bus could have gone to a hearing for Norman’s release.

Chris Jarvis made a Habeas Corpus application despite this is only supposed to be used when you have exhausted all your other remedies first. It was only then that we were told out that Norman’s case was at a Criminal court, not a county court at all. So the draft purge letter I had sent would have needed to be amended. Terry then resent Norman to the prison , Criminal appeals forms and bail form.

I asked Chris Jarvis to send us a copy of his application and who he had made it out to, so we could suggest / help. But no, it was top secret again. I would have suggested he served the Secretary of state for good measure, and as I suspected he had not, and this turned out to be true.

It is all very well saying Norman has not received something or is denied something, but proving it is another matter. But again all this “evidence “ was top secret.

As we all know, the hearing in the High Court was adjourned and I was told by someone at the hearing that the Judge mentioned the proper course was to appeal, but this fact is surprisingly absent from the round robin emails since!

So having discovered that this was a criminal case in the crown court and not a country court case at all, I asked Chris Jarvis to confirm that he had in fact sent my draft purge of contempt letter to Norman. Instead of receiving a yes or a no, I received a slagging off email which makes me think he hasn’t.

So I then tried posting a copy of my email on the website for Norman and Chris Jarvis as presumable moderator refused to allow it be published and emailed me back . So the very notion that Norman fought for this country for freedom and free speech is being denied and hypocritical by censoring messages on Norman’s own site!

Chris Jarvis has now emailed “come along to Thursdays hearing and watch history in the making”.

I could quite easily sit back and say nothing, and watch history in the making in the form I believe will see Chris Jarvis stuffed .

The reason for this is as follows . The Judge has been very clever by adjourning the case .

The Governor has been ordered to assist with the appeal . The Secretary of State has been ordered to be served. No doubt he will employ the Treasury Solicitors to represent him and they in turn will employ Counsel , with fees running in to thousands of pounds.

So Chris Jarvis’ argument that Norman has been denied forms, legal representation, whatever has now been shot out of the water.

So let’s go through the options available for the judge on Thursday :

a) He is a very nice man, and believed the Prison are still denying Norman and releases him.

b) If Norman has now lodged an appeal, the Judge dismisses the Habeas Corpus application, as the other remedies have to be tried first.

c) If Norman has not yet lodged an appeal, the Judge says: well, the Governor is now assisting Norman, and he should get on with his appeal, Habeas Corpus dismissed.

d) Having dismissed the Habeas Corpus , the Judge then orders Chris Jarvis to personally pay all the costs of the other side forthwith, which he hearby assesses  as X amount of thousands of pounds.

So, where does that leave us. We have no evidence Chris Jarvis has authority to act for Norman. If he has, then it would be very easy for him to fax or email today the Crown Court with a copy of his authority to act on behalf of Norman today to purge his contempt.

Then having rung for an immediate hearing date, ask the other side to consent to adjourn Thursday’s High Court hearing until after the purge application is heard.

Chris has nothing to lose by sending this letter, but everything to gain. If he does not believe me, then send it and prove me wrong. If the appeal is lodged, then it may be possible to substitute the Thursday hearing for the bail application.

Whatever happens: if Thursday hearing is just left for Habeas Corpus, then I can foresee Chris Jarvis being stuffed.

I would add that today in the news a looter who stole from a shop in Ealing has been given a caution by the Police , this looter is the oldest so far, at 70 years old. So there are plenty of arguments in support that Norman should be released, the easiest is to purge your contempt.

So people know here is the suggested letter that could have had Norman released weeks ago that I have been referring to amended to Crown Court address and date:

Bradford Law Courts                  Date   22nd August 2011
Exchange Square .
Drake Street . Bradford … West Yorksire
By Email / Fax To :

Attention  His Honour Judge Rose,


Further to hearing  ?? July 11 at Bradford  Combined Court Centre  where His Honour Judge Rose sentenced  myself Norman Scarth to 6 Months  in prison   and banned from entering court premises
for a year.

I confirm I wish to purge my contempt and apologise to the Court  and / or the Judge  and request an urgent hearing before  His Honour  Judge Rose or if he is not available an urgent hearing before another Judge.

As I am 85 years old, I give Bradford  Combined Court centre  permission under the data protection act to also  divulge details of my case and  discuss my case and hearing date  with my friend  Chris Jarvis of ….  address …..

Yours faithfully,

Norman Scarth  Ref A1903CF
Leeds Prison
2 Gloucester Terrace
Stanningly Road

cc John Hemming MP
House of Commons
( Look up address … post code,etc)

cc Chris Jarvis
( address .. )


About Sabine Kurjo McNeill

I'm a mathematician and system analyst formerly at CERN in Geneva and became an event organiser, software designer, independent web publisher and online promoter of Open Justice. My most significant scientific contribution is
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to An Open Letter re Norman Scarth and Thursday’s hearing to Free him from Leeds Prison

  1. Martyn says:

    This is a very interesting response by someone who appears to know what he is talking about. My impression of this case is that, although the sentence seemed extremely harsh, a crime was nevertheless committed. The best way to deal with a bad law is surely to have it changed in an appropriate manner rather than break it!

    Nevertheless, I truly hope that something can be done to have this man released as soon as possible.

  2. Debra says:

    Reality check:-

    Elizabeth Mountbatten is not “usurped”. In Britain every Act of Parliament
    has to be signed by her to give it the effect of law. Judge serves Monarch.

    The Judge’s authority is the authority people allow him to get away with.
    Due process of the Common law is often used against people, not for them.

    Norman Scarth of clear-mind should defend himself instead of his “friend”.

  3. Chris Jarvis says:

    Please remove this article. This man is trying to jeopordise the case. I have proof he has already attempted to do so, this is working against Norman Scarth, despite how ‘helpful’ the email looks, it is a personal attack on myself.

  4. I can see that this article questions Chris Jarvis, but I wonder why the writer is “trying to jeopardise the case.”

    Any chance you can throw some light on this Chris? I really have no idea of the rights and wrongs of the case, but am interested to know more.

  5. JM says:

    well after reading that always difficlut to know what to ‘think’….but I guess that is the point….why would you do what and in a way that your enemies tell you to? if you did, that IS evidence of being a crazy person….and knowing how those ‘who reuse to ocnfirm or deny if they know who they are’ operate they’re undoubtedly refusing him contact with people he needs to be in contact with, denying all necessary info/ telling lies/ withholdinginfo and the like….whoever this Peter it’s my instinct that he’s not on Norman’s side, quite the contrary….

  6. Pingback: Let the Court of Public Opinion Decide! « Vicky Haigh: requesting her daughter to return

  7. Pingback: A New Collation of 700 Comments by 1700 Free Norman Scarth Petition Signers « Victims Unite!

  8. Pingback: As 2,100 Petition Signers have Expressed their Support, Norman was refused the Habeas Corpus « Victims Unite!

  9. Pingback: Treasury Solicitor defending The Secretary of State for Justice « Victims Unite!

  10. Pingback: Abraham Lincoln’s Presidency: Emergency Measures « Jeinrev

  11. Pingback: Leeds Prison & Governing Bodies are Risking Corporate Homicide Prosecution « Victims Unite!

  12. Pingback: Abolish the ban on recording court proceedings – picked up from last year’s campaign « Victims Unite!

  13. Pingback: Norman Scarth Freed by Appeal: Exact Account of Hearing and Outcome « Victims Unite!

  14. Pingback: Better a bad system, run by good people, than a good system run by bad people – Norman Scarth’s first report « Victims Unite!

  15. Pingback: To be declared innocent in a country where the Rule of Law means nothing, where we have undergone a corporate coup… « We Who Oppose Deception

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s