Embedded Files
Reply
Reply All
Forward
Delete
More
Change View
philip jones 01454614420 at philip.jones88@btinternet.com
IN DOCUMENT BELOW IN MY WEBSITE WE HAVE HAD A REPLY FROM NEW PCC SHELFORD CONFIRMING POLICE STANCE. I WILL NOT BE MAKING ANY REFERAL TO THE IOPC
I
Can i refer him to IOPC statute,,,,
Most complaints about the police are dealt with by the relevant police force. Each force has a separate department that oversees complaints. These are called ‘professional standards departments’ (PSDs).
By law, forces must refer certain matters to us. These include:
certain complaints made to their force – such as those that include an allegation of serious corruption or serious assault
indications that police officers or staff have committed misconduct – for example, any suggestion that a criminal offence have been commited UNQUOTE,,,,,where this corrupt PCC has as statute,,,, suggestions [numerous] of corruption and criminal offences have taken place. You want Shelford to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process so be it, have instucted lawyers to resolve with you,,,,via statute you must refer. We know from third party evidence that computer records removed, from ref 8 enclosed scan 35from police records what was taken,,,,,computer parts and software,,,,where call from police did you know your toolbox gone, will never see again as your computer parts and software,,,,stealing my property is this not as statute,,,,,a criminal offence ect ect ect
Lets put on record as you frustrate and corrupt the judicial process,,,[your not corrupt sue me for libel from my website ] as you state complain to PSD but they are utterlycorrupt,,,,can i refer nothing to do with me a third party article on the internet,given to me by a barrister.
from COPWATCH
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
Consider scan 10475 10494 letter from corrupt Angus Krouwel......[not corrupt told corrupt in my website,long time ago,,why not sue for libel told again today in my website] ,,,police stated you have no evidence malfeasance in public office the civil courts ignoring applications and correspondence for many years,,,,,they have letter from the court ,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,,they have letter from a lawyer ,,,,,our application also ignored,,,,they have numerous documents date/stamped by the court ignored. Not withstanding this ask police 11 questions, 22.7.2017,,,eg have you talked to person at court who admits offence in letter, have you talked to lawyer,,,,ect,,,saying 22.7.2017 with no reply would do appeal anyway on the 28.7.2017,,,, WHERE THIS CORRUPT AND BENT KROUWEL SENDS LETTER 24.7.2017 SAYING REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL AS THIS CORRUPT PERSON ADMITS IN HIS LETTER.READ HIS LETTER
Instructions to lawyers over several aspects, one is ensure as statute you refer to IOPC ,if you confirm to lawyers you refuse to do this, i can inform IOPC as statute you refuse to refer to them. You have email address trying to make easy for lawyer,,lrowley@allenhoole.co.uk ,,,,and to save your time, could you please inform her you refuse to refer to IOPC which will stop her raising issue with you.
LETS TRY TO MAKE THINGS EASY FOR YOU ENOUGH PUBLIC MONEY HAS BEEN WASTED OVER THIS PIG CIRCUS. LET ME PRODUCE DOCUMENT WHICH YOU CAN USE VIA REFERENCE WHEN TALKING TO POLICE ,,,AND I CAN USE IN APPLICATION TO IOPC‘LET ME COPY PCC AND PSD INTO TODAYS EMAIL WHERE ASK PCC TO FORWARD TO CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH. THIS IS HISTORIC PATHWAY eg MURDER THREATS IN 2020 ,,,WHERE PSD AWARE.. CAN REFER TO JUDGES JUDGEMENT THAT CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH TOO HIGH UP, SHOULD HAVE CONVEYED CONCERNS OVER MURDER THREATS TO PSD AND LOCAL POLICE STATION WHICH I DID ,,,,,ISSUE FOR IOPC. . FROM MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE CASE LAW,,,,,,
Did the defendant [Marsh/Price/PSD] have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission? [aware i was in protest going to offend over murder threats, eg could have been arrested over threats]
Did the officer [Marsh/PSD .Price ,,,as judge said local police station ] realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur? [Price aware before oil in HER police station doorway, surely must be aware a possibility of oil in MP doorway ,in email told PCC also not to call my bluff],,,,,,as i said PSD also aware email Jan 2021 and 11.2.2021 they were PRIMARY people in email, cc then to PCC and MP my final begging email for help over murder threats. So MP aware oil in his doorway if he did nothing over murder threats, issue never presented by lawyers to the court .SEEK YOUR REPLY GROUNDS FOR APPEAL ?????IF NOT WHY NOT ,,,,HAVE POLICE COMMITED AN OFFENCE,,,,ASK LAWYERS FURTHER TO CONSIDER HAVE POLICE COMMITED AN OFFENCE,,,ISSUE ASKED AGAIN LATER TO IOPC,,,,
Were those consequences ‘likely’ as viewed subjectively by the defendant?
Did the officer realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk?
Suggest was likely was aware protest over non action in murder threats, oil in police doorway, why would they not expect oil in MP doorway.
Suggest was likely was aware protest over non action in murder threats, oil in police doorway, why would they not expect oil in MP doorway.
Recklessness: Price/Marsh/PSD foresees that particular consequences may occur and proceeds with the given conduct, not caring whether those consequences actually occur or not.
Criminal negligence: Marsh.Price/PSD did not actually foresee that the particular consequences would flow from actions, but a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen those consequences.
From inchoate case law
Mens Rea is the mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime; or knowledge that one's action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committe[MARSH PRICE PSD AWARE CRIME WOULD BE COMMITED BUT DID NOTHING]
QUESTION 2 FOR LAWYERS..As your instructions installed to view arrest, informs me installed correctly appears to back up however police stance non disclosure of documents as it now gives error code 4,,,,,this document not avaliable to this email address,,,NON DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS Can you resolve please and obtain bodycam of arrest, and bodycam seizure of property ,,,and CCTV of alleged offence, as my instructions in April 2021,,,and email 21.6.2021.Can i please quote your reply today ,,,
The information which you require BWV and CCTV should all be on the egress link provided.
QUESTION 5 FOR LAWYERS Can you ask police to confirm there stance in 2017 there was no correspondence from me to Sgt Price, if now change story so can we have it, can i refer to receipt ref 5 number 259327 scan 26 also another number 260861 can they confirm these are forgies as police alledge before, further to confirm why i went to Sgt Price day 1. [can i refer to todays bundle believe ref exhib 7908 as police pervert course of justice, have miscarriage of justice where officer said 20.2.2021,,,,,you know police will never answer question,,,i will just put document in file]
QUESTION 7 TO LAWYERS Could you please ask for reply to complaints made 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 over murder threats. Police sent letters over murder threats…..told in future we will just bin.
QUESTION 8 TO LAWYERS. Could you please inform police these murder threats still going on, need to put on record for IOPC.,lawyer /police informed,,,,identical to Ebrahimi case.Can you discuss with police best if Patchway police station not involved, anyway from Met police force who have been excellent that this station not involved, however there is correspodence wiith Bridewell Bristol,,,,,,however NOTHING over murder threats.????????????????????
QUESTION 11 FOR LAWYERS ….Again as question 10 need background before question asked. We have issue of complaint 1.6.2020 [SAY TO IOPC YES 1.6.2020 NOT 1.6.2021 waiting over a year for reply] which police refuse to answer. Arose from police letter defined ,,,,police june,,,,in my website. Police have removed from computer [again reason as statute for them to refer to IOPC,,criminal behaviour ] however in my website, actual letter they also removed, no problem its in my website, as was court order from Court of Appeal,[also removed by police] ,,,,in case against police, however as barrister AM stated for 10.00 can get replacement from the court. From police june scan in my website,,,,,retired District Judge who saw my website states ,,,,appaling as does not define what your accused of. In complaint 1.6.2020 asked police to confirm what allegations they were making. ASSUMED as at same time had call, from police, allegations you had stolen new Council pass, and damaged mail. Had letter from neighbour that i had stolen pass, complained to Council,,,,why have you contacted police with complaint, ,,,,THE DAY i obtained ,emailed you, you told me to send pass back to you, and recorded delivery confirms returned nearly 2 WEEKS AGO. Council were excellent in letter,,,,,we made no contact with police ,[issue for IOPC] we told you to return and in a few days obtained ,thank you. How did neighbour Bird know was delivered to me, if not planted on me. [many years ago Bird took caution ].So in complaint asked who complained., IF THIS IS ISSUE Asked further question ,now to IOPC , in miscarriage of justice issue, Sgt Price gave for investigation to PCBird,,,,,where asked if officer related to neighbour.Bird. Police in call also alledge as you can see will be arrested over damage to mail. In complaint and other documents state,,,,,,[did Bird plant] the letters came in Royal Mail bags ,titled MAIL found open and damaged, IF THEY WANT BAGS TO ORGANISE A TIME TO COLLECT,,EMAIL IGNORED.AGAIN ISSUE IOPC. Police are arresting from own documents,,,as poured oil through Letterbox , threats to cause arson, utterlywith no merit where for example forced to drop threats of arson. My problem today getting again string of correspondence for Bird, due to threats to arrest over damaged mail asked PSD to call Royal Mail at Derwert Close to collect to confirm not damaged. PSD ignored email, as will point out to IOPC ,the letters still here, would normally put back in post, however with threats of arrest over damaged mail can not take that chance, they will arrest inmaterial of facts, take corrupt Parhbga ,,,arrested as through oil through MP doorway,,,sorry did not occur,,,,read Jenkins statement.QUESTION CAN YOU ASK POLICE TO CONTACT ROYAL MAIL TO COLLECT MAIL
QUESTION 12 FOR LAWYERS. Reoffended 18.2.2021 over murder threats. Told by police we thought last time 4.1.2021 we had frightened you in custody,did not expect you back, we did not charge as did not want before an open court why you offended, the murder threats which were ignored, Therefore all fingerprints ect removed as statute, we will need to take again fingerprints ect...19.2.2021Can you ask police what action was taken,,,,as barrister AM stated at present the legal position you are on bail under investigation, need facts for IOPC.
QUESTION 13 TO LAWYERS. Could you ask police if MP ever contacted over todays issue.
THE MP LOPRESTI ELEMENT JUST FOR REFERENCE NOT ISSUE FOR IOPC
Need to appeal, much later have permission from the court, todays issue, could not get legal aid anywhere, NEVER rejected on facts , eg too busy ect,,,tried to get refund of court fee ,,,,,court states we did not send application.to HHJCotter So email to my MP Lopresti. Contacted Justice department of government told Rt Hon Buckland not your MP, get your MP to make application to Buckland. So email to MP to do this ignored, as request application to ombudsman for refund of court fee as application 6.12.2017 not read,,,,,,via statute i can not do,,,,,statute,,,complain to court,,,,complain then to Resolver,,,,[still before it after many years,,,last week can we close case as other party not responding ] ,,,,still not resolved ask your MP to refer to ombudsman ,refund of fee,,,,general public can not do only MP can refer,,,,MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE,,,,HE IS UTTERLY CORRUPT IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL,,,,from human rights case law,,,,, Legal aid
However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).
the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);
his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). YOU HAVE POLICE ADMITTING MY CLAIM
ASKED FOR HELP OVER THREATS TO MURDER ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED,
QUESTION 6 TO MARSH DID MP EVER CONTACT YOU OVER MURDER THREAT
NOTE UPDATE FOR WEBSITES,,,,,APPENDIX TO EMAIL OF 18.6.2021 TIMED 9.08 AM ,,,ISSUE TODAY NOW IOPC
Need to put on record, we must not ignore the ,,,,,,elephant in the room,,,,,for nearly 8 months threat to murder.,,,,,threatning letters forwarded 2020/2021 to police,,,,where told if you get anymore bin ?????? Police told Dec 2020 TWICE if nothing done then oil in their doorway in protest, goaded into offending, then police inform me will not take to court as we do not want why you offended ,[THREATS OF MURDER] before general public via a trial, we removed fingerprints ect will need to do again as reoffended 18.2.2021again over threats to murder. Told TWICE [Jan 2021 11.2.2021 ]as escalate oil in MP doorway.,,,,he also ignored cry for help, issue lawyers afraid to present in mitagation, now water under bridge,,,POLICE IGNORED EBRAHIMI CASE AGAIN OFFENDED 18.2.2021 MP TOLD IT WOULD OCCUR HOPED HE WOULD HAVE COMPLAINED TO POLICE BEFORE OFFENDING SO ARRESTED OVER THREATS ONLY ?????? Arrested as oil through MP letter box UTTER POLICE CORRUPTION NOT TRUE [see police own statement ,,,oil only on bottom left hand side bottom of door on seal,,,,,in own bundle showing utter police corruption,NOT TRUE,,,and threats of arson UTTER POLICE CORRUPTION Then drop threats of arson as would not stand up in court,,,,,police now say,,,we did not know what he was saying,,,,false arrest and imprisonment ????? would not want why offended before general public via a trial reason dropped case. POLICE UTTER COWARDS
Need to inform, as offers to pay court fine, please readers of my websites please do not make offers. Further will have my day in court over side issue going through red light at 1.2 secs in 2020 .Again are police afraid to take to trial. As i said as offered by police clean license, no police convictions, case will be dropped if you attend half day police course. Can not do this as need before general public via a trial to bring out threats of murder, AS TOLD THEM DAY 1, something has to be done over threats to murder,,,, hoping something done.over murder threats. Making as difficult as possible, put hearing down at Bath, ask for transfer to Bristol court ,email 12.5.2021 ,,,,court email a reply in 10 days, month later plus still no reply.Police then state may also charge over Covid breach, bring it on before the court….please see details below,,,,are police afraid what will come out at trial,.over alleged Covid breach.
Issues utterly unknown , we do not know if lawyers as promised will get evidence,for IOPC or just ignore me,,,,then will be a new issue for Law Society ,,, PCSnell saying after assaulting me ,,,,coming back to ransack house, which police did, and PC Collect,saying on arrest ,,,,found electrical, which was a computer to pervert course of justice ,,,,by removing evidence , this was arrest TO CAUSE ARSON. Going out of house through garage window is 5l can of petrol, you know no threats to cause arson, but want computer to remove evidence to pervert course of justice, and steal my property, and just leave petrol. . Further as explained to lawyers ,suggested by barrister AM did police come back again, official receipt of seizure incompatible for later document of what was seized, further not only my medical books thrown all over the floor, CCTV turned off, confirmed by their records, my stephoscope on floor, and opthalmascope box broken and on floor. The computer router wires ripped out, wanted to see from day 1 if on bobycam, if not then it proves police came back again to ransack or words to this effect,,,and take things as Snell said he would do.Lawyers stated had asked for this bobycam,of seizure ,,,,me saying knowing police we will never see ...not interested if police say ,,,,your lawyers never asked,,,,,clear instructions again to them, further refer IOPC to my request to police ignored, and reporting of such to lawyers, ,,,,,however we do not know if they will ask questions as promised in list given to them ,relating to various issues for the IOPC
BELOW IN WEBSITES WWW.CORRUPTIONAVONSOMERSETPOLICE.COM WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM
IS LETTER TO COURT PROBATION .THERE WAS A FURTHER LETTER SERVED ON MY LAWYERS PLANNED TO GIVE TO JUDGE BEFORE HEARING OF THE 11.6.2021 HOWEVER BARRISTTER SAID DO NOT SERVE ON JUDGE WE VIA Ms ROWLEY [ALLENHOOLE] WILL HELP YOU IN NEXT STAGE .TO THEIR CREDIT IN LATEST EMAIL Ms ROWLANDS ASKS WHAT HELP I NEED. WE NEED ANSWERS TO SERIES OF QUESTIONS ALSO COVERED TODAY NEW PCC AND PRO STANDARDS DEPT OF POLICE [PSD] IN THIS EMAIL. WHERE ASK AS BEFORE PCC FORWARDS A COPY TO CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH FOR FUTURE COURT USE.DIRECT RELEVANCE IN JUDGEMENT AS JUDGE SAID MARSH WAS TOO HIGH UP ,,,,,YOUR THREATS AS PROTEST TO OFFEND ,,,,DEPOSIT OF OIL IN EXTERNAL DOORWAY DUE TO MURDER THREATS ,,,,,SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE DIRECTED AT PEOPLE WHO DEAL WITH COMPLAINTS AND LOCAL LEGAL PEOPLE LIKE LOCAL POLICE STATION. BUT THEY WERE PSD AND CORRUPT SGT PRICE AT PATCHWAY POLICE STATION,,,,,GROUNDS FOR APPEAL ???????FROM MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE CASE LAW,,,,,,
Did the defendant [Marsh/Price/PSD] have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission? [aware i was in protest going to offend over murder threats, eg could have been arrested over threats]
Did the officer [Marsh/Price ,,,as judge said local police station ] realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur? [Price aware before oil in HER police station doorway, surely must be aware a possibility of oil in MP doorway ,in email told PCC also not to call my bluff],,,,,,as i said PSD also aware email Jan 2021 and 11.2.2021 they were PRIMARY people in email, cc then to PCC and MP my final begging email for help over murder threats. So MP aware oil in his doorway if he did nothing over murder threats, issue never presented by lawyers to the court .
QUESTION 1 FOR LAWYERS Can i please have name of barrister and her chambers and person of your firm that came to trial 11.6.2021
1/ In April 2021 asked police under diclosure of documents for evidence eg bodycam of arrest,and seizure of property and CCTV of actual alleged offence ,which was ignored ,,where lawyers in email inform me they had asked. NOT INTERESTED if police state lawyers never asked,,,,the bottom line for example IOPC my request of disclosure of documents ignored. Can i refer to email in March 2021 where i stated would never see seizure of property CCTV. Lawyers have sent me only this week CCTV of arrest.
QUESTION 2 FOR LAWYERS..As your instructions installed to view arrest, informs me installed correctly appears to back up however non disclosure of documents as it now gives error code 4,,,,,this document not avaliable to this email address. Can you resolve please and obtain CCTV of arrest, and seizure of property CCTV please as my instructions in April 2021.
2/ Via statute police must refer to IOPC allegations of assault, corruption and criminal activity, where my application to PSD to refer to them. Petra King at PSD perverting course of justice, last thing she would want is for complaint to go to them,,,,,,get email do again, maximum 2 pages, [IOPC inform no limit ]told i do not understand issue, told if i do not understand next time it will be binned and future correspondence relating to it will be ignored, issue for IOPC. As i said to King your corrupt and bent perverting the course of justice .SAY TO PCC THIS IS TYPE OF PEOPLE YOUR EMPLOYING. Asked King to inform me when sent to IOPC assume not done as she perverts course of justice, as she is utterly corrupt.
QUESTION 3 FOR LAWYERS. Can you ask please that police refer to IOPC, and confirmation from police sent to IOPC.
QUESTION 1 TO MARSH,,,,[asking please PCC refer this document to Marsh]Can you instruct King to refer to IOPC. Can i please seperate barrister acting in this case ,cited above asked lawyers before for name, and barrister who saw my website defined barrister AM. Barrister AM suggested if any aspect not clear that King calls me. Further she could refer stating issues not clear. If not corrupt and bent eg she has refered to IOPC i will issue an apology in my website, if she supplies evidence she has refered to IOPC. SAY TO KING IF FACTS UNTRUE SUE ME FOR LIBEL
3/ Can i please refer to judges judgement, that Marsh too high up your concerns over threats of murder and being set on fire, IDENTICAL TO EBRAHIMI CASE and your protest of this,,,deposit of oil, should have been made to people dealing with complaints and local police station BUT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I DID. In Dec 2020 police told twice of oil in their external doorway if threats to murder me not dealt with, so oil in doorway 4.1.2021. Told end of Jan 2021 would escalate ,,,,oil in MP office doorway, followed up with letter as above of the 11.2.2021. Will help IOPC have historic recording with front office staff Ms Jones [TJ] where problems over just giving receipt for a letter i wished to leave at Patchway police station,,,,,not in front of her ,we can hear on Voicecam recording on way home, traffic on the A38 with my comment after making sure recorded ,me saying she needs a dogcollar,,,,eg she is a bitch. From her statement from this historic event again although being dealt with by another member of staff, AGAIN can not help herself she admits she was involved as i left letter on the 11.2.2021., although other staff dealing with matter. So oil in MP doorway 18.2.2021. On the 19.2.2021 went to be arrested to stop being murdered, again being dealt with by a member of staff, however TJ can not help herself as wants to deal with issue. She is told this can not go on any more ,threats to murder, had taken up issue with police and specific Sgt Price in letter. Asked why wanted to be arrested, told her , where TJ states not on system ,not reported, go away wait for reply from Sgt Price. Said to her would not occur however if i had said thrown petrol in MP doorway would you say go away wait for reply from Sgt Price. Worried over murder threats asked TJ when we will get reply to murder threats, told you will not dictate to police when we deal with issue, asked if in today ,,,told no, asked if in in last week told YES. CAN I REFER TO JUDGES JUDGEMENT,,,,,REPORT TO LOCAL STATION SO SHE WAS AWARE OVER THREATS TO MURDER ASKED POLICE IN DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS IF PRICE IN WORK IN PERIOD 11 TO 19.2.2021 WHERE REQUEST IGNORED. AS THEY IGNORED CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS.
QUESTION 2 TO MARSH. Was Sgt Price in work in this time span. 11 to 19.2.2021
QUESTION 4 TO LAWYERS Can you please ask same question to police.
TJ as corrupt [if not corrupt sue me for libel this document in my websites]states never told me why he wanted to be arrested, yes you were as soon as went home emailed MP copy to police ,tauted MP as she informed me not reported ,alleged offence not on system, go away await reply from Price. Why would i not say why wanted to be arrested ,as wanted to stop murder threats, HOW DID I KNOW MP HAD NOT REPORTED IF NOT TOLD BY HER ,,,NOT ON SYSTEM. Why would i say throw oil in MP doorway ,,,,had done this to stop threats of murder, you informing me not reported,,,,,why do again if MP will not report. We know Price had letter , as judges judgement , should have been reported to local police station ,,,as TJ confirms letter was left 11.2.2021
4/ Price can not pervert course of justice this time saying never obtained letter,,,,TJ confirms letter was left. Can i please refer to document sent to probation ref 5 scan picture 26 .This relates to miscarriage of justice, please see also ref 1 in that document to probation, scan picture 29. Price states ,issue today for IOPC ,over miscarriage of justice, that i never wrote to her, and police make allegations that receipts ref 5 have been forged. Price your corrupt over allegations, if not corrupt sue me for libel. This is issue for IOPC not lawyers today, however need to ask question.
QUESTION 3 FOR MARSH. The receipt ref 5 number 259327 [letter to probation] also another number 260861 can you confirm these are forgies. Talked to medical department at the court, young lady said next time at Patchway station would try to look at ,,,,property receipt form ...to see in system if they give you master receipt which i now have ,,,however underneath we had identical copy what was given to you. We have in another form 2 receipts to corrupt Price confirming letters to her.
QUESTION 5 TO LAWYERS,,,Could you please ask police same question.
IOPC issue now can i please refer to ref 3 and 4 in probation letter scan 10475 10494 over miscarriage of justice, where corrupt Knowle makes statement, IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL the allegation for years in my website. YOUR CORRUPT MAKING MARSH AWARE. Picket at court ,barrister who i gave leaflet to told me to report to the police malfeasance [misconduct] in public office to the police, court ignoring applications and correspondence for years, where PSD state you have no evidence. We have letters from the court ,[for IOPC],,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,,they have letter from lawyer,,,,,our correspondence ignored. So wish to appeal,,,,asked police 22.7.2017 11 questions eg have you asked lawyer for confirmation that THEIR application also ignored, have you talked to person at court who admits allegation,,,,we ignored your applications and correspondence come and talk to us,,,you have numerous documents date/stamped by the court as taken by hand ,,where i state to polie unless i hear from you by the 28.7.2017 will assume you refuse to answer questions and WOULD DO APPEAL ON AFTER THE 28.7.2017.Where corrupt Knowsel perverting course of justice sends letter 24.7.2017 rejecting appeal, i have made no appeal, waiting for reply to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017. No dispute here for IOPC please see probation document ref 3 and 4,,,eg scans 10475 10494 where he admits facts. YOUR CORRUPT
5/ Can i again go back to letter to probation . In reference scan picture 6 and 7 is official police receipt of what was seized, can i please refer to scan picture 8 where other items seized eg software and computer parts.
QUESTION 4 TO MARSH Is scan picture 8 your document.
Computer parts were a TV monitor, while doing research at university ,supervisors consultant surgeon and consultant radiologist ,,,tv monitor in skip, where obtained permission to take, marked university property assumed taken as believed stolen property by police,,,,,however as statute seizure only on relation to crime charged with, arrested over arson.????? The software were 7 USB backup sticks , assumed police wanted to returned after removal of data. Remember arrested over threat to cause arson, where police aware false arrest false imprisonment where had to drop case. We have the utter shambles of TJ saying did not understand what he was saying,,,,,,,an elderly lady in her 60s ,as a medic of course never being able to examine, however is there a case of onset of senile dementia, she can remember,,,,,something has to be done,,,,[over murder threats] but not remember what issue was,,,,,however inform me offence not on system where i confirmed conversation to MP and police,,,taunted MP as not reported, as TJ had confirmed this alleged offence not on system,after informing her why offended... Again why was computer removed as arrested over threats to cause arson. Can be explained from arrest, in first second as PCCollett states,,,,,,found electrical,,,,,waiting for recording, done to remove data from my computer to pervert course of justice. Why take a brand new bottle of chainsaw oil ?????and leave behind as assume dirty other oil. Charged at 2.00 pm 20.2.2021 ,asked 5.00 pm if wanted food told no as told going home now. At about 8.00 asked for food told should have taken food at 6.00pm. Not released although knowing severe claustophobic until about 10.00pm. Barrister AM suggested could be back at house ,waiting for darkness, my medical books all over floor, stephoscope on floor , my opthalmascope on floor where lid of box ripped off after throwing on floor. Had call your toolbox you will never see again,,,,,had padlock why not break padlock lie through teeth say was broken when we came rather than steal my property. Lawyers had stated we have asked for return of computer parts and software which included installation disc ,again not interested if police state your lawyers never asked.
QUESTION 6 TO LAWYERS Can you please ask for return of software and computer parts., from correspondence inform asked before,,,, Further for return of chainsaw oil ect. Further can i refer to person representing the Crown, at court...can you please let me know name and position. Can i refer to hearing 11.6.2021 where he cites police report on seizure,,,,are you aware of report, and could you please obtain me a copy, all new evidence to me. Is this police tactics in complaints 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 say to third party mentally ill, as theme from start in court he tried to raise in proceedings.,mentally ill. This mentally ill theme for IOPC as excuse not to answer above complaints ,note now one over a year, where police believe if we ignore complaints i will go away. Issue for IOPC.
6/ Can i refer to judges judgement again, that I should inform police of murder threats however not Marsh to seek responce.. Well covered PSD from above ,,,,today as judges judgement will do again.. As i said to judge these threats to murder , being stalted will go on no longer. Police stole my VoiceCam,,,will buy another, a few weeks ago again followed by same woman,still going on ,,,,where would now after purchase of Voicecam have recording ,,,she will be told last time, next time i will put her in hospital.Unless lawyers believe a better way, do not think Patchway police station should be involved , further not attack on police, Met police have been excellent ,understand anyway no correspondence between this woman and Patchway, but correspondence with Bridewell. THE DISTURBING EVIDENCE HOWEVER FROM MET ,,,,IS THAT AVON AND SOMERSET HAVE NEVER CONTACTED US OVER MURDER THREATS. I HAVE TOLD YOU TODAY AS JUDGES JUDGEMENT INFORMED OF MURDER THREATS WAITING FOR POLICE ACTION.
QUESTION 7 TO LAWYERS. Could you please inform police these threats still going on, Can use in evidence to IOPC.
7/Barrister AM suggested before it goes to IOPC should clarify facts, so no misunderstanding .Take for example alleged damage, concerns as i said to barrister [not AM todays barrister] it shows damage down left and right side of door. Barrister stated sun reflection, as Jenkins statement,,,,,,although bottles on floor ,key on right hand side of door ,noticed no damage, then told of alleged offence and notice damage to just bottom seal of door onthe left hand side. As barrister stated they are only claiming for damage to bottom left hand corner of door, which you admit you caused so told by barrister to plead guilty.
QUESTION 8 TO LAWYERS. Could you confirm threats to cause arson removed by police. Could you write to police to confirm as arrested,,,,,poured oil through front door [PS Parhbga ] that this did not take place, no oil through letterbox. Can you write to police to confirm as their allegations, ref 1 today was not sent to Marsh on the 19.2.2021 as police alledge., admit they have dropped case however required for IOPC.
QUESTION 5 TO MARSH. Can you confirm no correspondence to you dated 19.2.2021 if you alledge you did can i please have copy. Further as arrested from above, can you confirm no oil was ever poured through letterbox,
8/ We have another issue over cost payment. In Dec 2020 go to Asda for reductions at night. Some people i know very well,,,,had relationship with some ,,,others do not even know name. Heard someones mother terminally ill, the woman herself had fractured patella [kneecap] was looking for transport to see her mother. Friends at Asda working however i said have MOT next day if pass could take her to see her mother. Went through redlight next day, going for MOT, at 1.2 secs, passed MOT. Due to Covid put plastic barrier between front and back seats ,sealed as stuck down with tape. Police in correspondence state no criminal record, clean driving license, as statute no fine, no points on license, just attend a afternoon police session to close case. Of course best way, however as explained to them can not do, as it gives me chance to go to court to expose murder threats where police will take no action,hope something will be done over murder threats and being set on fire. . Police make as difficult as possible, put down hearing in Bath, asked to be transfered to Brisol court, request ignored. Then told Covid restrictions should not be taking people in your car,we may ask for 200.00 fine,as pleading not guilty. . Great if police want to bring up already quoted code, will show how far they will go in vexatious chronic attacks on me. BRING IT UP WITH CODE YOU WILL NOT GET ANOTHER 200.00. Can not ask todays lawyers for advice assume will be found guilty ,did go through red light at 1.2 secs..
QUESTION 9 TO LAWYER In terms of cost say magistrate state fine 100.00 cost 150.00 ,reasonable to pay 10.00 a week, do i go back to Crown Court judge asking to reconsider his order eg say pay each 5.00 a week.
9/ We have issue of complaint 1.6.2020 [SAY TO IOPC YES 1.6.2020 NOT 1.6.2021 ] which police refuse to answer. Arose from police letter defined ,,,,police june,,,,in my website. Police have removed from computer however in my website, actual letter they also removed, no problem its in my website, as court order from Court of Appeal,[also removed by police] ,,,,in case against police, however as barrister AM stated for 10.00 can get replacement from the court. From police june scan in my website,,,,,retired District Judge who saw my website states ,,,,appaling as does not define what your accused of. In complaint 1.6.2020 asked police to confirm what allegations they were making. ASSUMED as at same time had call, from police, allegations you had stolen new Council pass, and damaged mail. Had letter from neighbour that i had stolen pass, complained to Council,,,,why have you contacted police with complaint, the DAY i obtained ,emailed you, you told me to send pass back to you, and recorded delivery confirms returned nearly 2 WEEKS AGO. Council were excellent in letter,,,,,we made no contact with police ,[issue for IOPC] we told you to return and in a few days you did ,thank you. How did neighbour Bird know was delivered to me, if not planted on me. [many years ago Bird took caution over threats of violence].So in complaint asked who complained. Asked further question ,now to IOPC , in miscarriage of justice issue, Sgt Price gave for investigation to PCBird,,,,,where asked if officer related to neighbour.Bird. Police in call also alledge as you can see will be arrested over damage to mail. In complaint and other documents state,,,,,,[did Bird plant] the letters came in Royal Mail bags ,titled found open and damaged, IF THEY WANT BAGS TO ORGANISE A TIME TO COLLECT,,EMAIL IGNORED.AGAIN ISSUE IOPC. Police are arresting from own documents,,,as poured oil through Letterbox , threats to cause arson, utterlywith no merit where for example forced to drop threats of arson. My problem today getting again string of correspondence for Bird, due to threats to arrest over damaged mail asked PSD to call Royal Mail at Derwert Close to collect to confirm not damaged. PSD ignored email, as will point out to IOPC ,the letters still here, would normally put back in post, however with threats of arrest over damaged mail can not take that chance, they will arrest inmaterial of facts, take corrupt Parhbga ,,,arrested as through oil through MP doorway,,,sorry did not occur,,,,read Jenkins statement.
10/ THE MP LOPRESTI ELEMENT JUST FOR REFERENCE NOT ISSUE FOR IOPC
Lopresti continue stance you never contacted me over miscarriage of justice issue,,,,at random email 26.9.2016, where police removed from computer,,,forgot to steal paperwork,,, have just hard copy in papers made at earlier date for some reason.. Police seizure computer remove evidence, of emails to/from Loprest but forget that also dealt with by his case worker Michael Cobb where emails clearly show dealing with the court,,,,,court were ignoring eg one example MP correspondence,,,,Cobb ,,,,Jack will write again,,,,CORRUPT ???????
Need to appeal, have permission from the court, todays issue, could not get legal aid anywhere, NEVER rejected on facts , eg too busy ect,,,tried to get refund of court fee ,,,,,court states we did not send application.to HHJCotter So email to my MP Lopresti. Contacted Justice department of government told Rt Hon Buckland not your MP, get your MP to make application to Buckland. So email to MP to do this ignored, as request application to ombudsman for refund of court fee as application 6.12.2017 not read,,,,,,via statute i can not do,,,,,statute,,,complain to court,,,,complain then to Resolver,,,,[still before it after many years,,,last week can we close case as other party not responding ] ,,,,still not resolved ask your MP to refer to ombudsman ,refund of fee,,,,general public can not do only MP can refer,,,,MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE,,,,HE IS UTTERLY CORRUPT IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL,,,,from human rights case law,,,,, Legal aid
1. Granting,,, of legal aid
However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).
However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:
the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);
his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). YOU HAVE POLICE ADMITTING MY CLAIM
WHERE MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE. CAN I REFER TO POLICE BUNDLE CPS EVIDENCE IN INTERVIEW WITH MP,,,,,,,I IGNORE IF I HAD ALREADY DEALT WITH ISSUE,,,,THIS IS UTTERLY NEW CASE JUST HAD JUDGEMENT PERMISSION TO APPEAL THIS CORRUPT MP HAS NO EXCUSE TO IGNORE MY EMAILS [LOPREST IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL] MADE AWARE OF MURDER THREATS WHICH HE IGNORED. MY LAWYERS RELUCTANT TO PLACE THIS HISTORY BEFORE THE COURT WHY OFFENDED. LOST A LOT OF MONEY AS WOULD NOT SEND TO OMBUDSMAN WHERE COURT ADMITTED THEY HAD NOT SENT APPLICATION TO HHJCOTTER
Well lets do website just 99p www.jacklopresticorrupt.com again if facts not correct sue me for libel. Ican not inform him of website, due to court order, sure someone will let him know from my website
ASKED FOR HELP OVER THREATS TO MURDER ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED,
QUESTION 6 TO MARSH DID MP EVER CONTACT YOU OVER MURDER THREATS
EMAIL TO Ms ROWLEY LAWYERS ALLENHOOLE ASKING HER TO CONTACT CPS TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE FOR Ms SLOCOMBE ………..PROBATION COURT INTERVIEW 27.5.2021 9.00 AM BY PHONE WITH Ms SLOCOMBE COURT MORE THAN HELPFUL TOLD ALL WE NEED TO SAY WHY OFFENDED EASY HAVE THREATS OF MURDER IN OCT 2020 COMPLAINT TO POLICE FOLLOW UP COMPLAINT 17.10.2020 TO POLICE IGNORED. BEGINNING AND END OF DEC 2020 INFORM CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH WOULD TAKE MATTER IN MY OWN HANDS BY PLACING OIL IN POLICE STATION DOORWAY AS WAY OF PROTEST. ALTHOUGH AWARE OF THREAT MARSH TOOK NO ACTION OVER THREAT. SO GOADED INTO OFFENDING ON THE 4.1.2021 HOWEVER MARSH REFUSES TO PROSECUTE DO NOT WANT AT A HEARING IDENTICAL TO EBRAHIMI CASE WHERE HE WAS MURDERED. SO STILL GETTING MURDER THREATS SO MARSH TOLD IN JAN 2021 AND 11.2.2021 WOULD LEAVE OIL IN MP DOORWAY,,,,AS PROTEST DID NOT WANT TO BE MURDERED WHERE MARSH AWARE OF THREAT HOWEVER GOADED ME INTO OFFENDING WHICH OCCURED 19.2.2021.MP WAS ASKED FOR HELP. POLICE ALLEDGE 19.2.2021 THAT FURTHER THREATS WERE MADE Ms ROWLANDS INFORM ME THIS CHARGE DROPPED HOWEVER COULD NOT UNDERSTAND AS COURT DOCUMENT STATES THAT Ms SLOCOMBE WILL CONSIDER THIS ELEMENT. Ms SLOCOMBE WOULD ALSO CONSIDER WILL IT OCCUR AGAIN, NO TODAY HAVE MY DAY IN COURT TO GET SOMETHING DONE OVER THREATS TO MURDER,,,,MARSH AFRAID OF EVIDENCE WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO A COURT AFTER 4.1.2021 OFFENCE AND EVEN BEFORE IN 2020,Ms SLOCOMBE WILL PRESENT EVIDENCE TO THE JUDGE. WILL TAKE BY HAND COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT EVIDENCE FOR Ms SLOCOMBE WHERE ASK PLEASE FOR RECEIPT. ,,,,,,SO GIVING HER NOTES BEFORE INTERVIEW...,RETURN TO COURT MIDDAY 11.6.2021 THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM THREAT TO MURDER.THE JUDGE STATES YOU MUST GIVE Ms SLOCOMBE 100 % COOPERATION WHICH I WILL DO TRUST I WILL GET CREDIT FOR THIS HOWEVER I TRUST Ms SLOCOMBE IN HER REPORT IF EVEN HANDED WILL EXPRESS HER VIEWS CONCERNING POLICE AND CIVIL COURTS IN THEIR COPERATION IN HER INVESTIGATION.eg THE HUMAN RIGHTS LEGAL CONTEXT OF EQUALITY OF ARMS WHICH INCLUDES ALSO,,,.ECHR CASE LAW ,,,,,,,REQUEST CPS REPLY BEFORE 25.5.2021.THIS IS IDENTICAL TO PROFUMA AFFAIR CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS WITH TORY MP INVOLVED. IN 1960s MY LETTERS TO CHRISTINE KEELER AND MEDIA,,,,FOR EXAMPLE NEWSPAPER REPLY SHE WAS NOT INNOCENT PARTY IN THIS SEE ADVERT OF DANISH MAGAZINE CONCERNING 8 MM FILM. ,,,HUMAN RIGHTS QUOTE LAW,,,
Witnesses for the prosecution and the defence must be treated equally; The Court has found that unrestricted access to the case file and unrestricted use of any notes, including, if necessary, the possibility of obtaining copies of relevant documents, are important guarantees of a fair trial. The failure to afford such access has weighed in favour of finding that the principle of equality of arms had been breached (Beraru v. Romania, § 70). In this context, importance is attached to appearances as well as to the increased sensitivity to the fair administration of justice. Respect for the rights of the defence requires that limitations on access by an accused or his lawyer to the court file must not prevent the evidence from being made available to the accused before the trial and the accused from being given an opportunity to comment on it through his lawyer in oral submissions (Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], § 140). Non-disclosure of evidence to the defence may breach equality of arms as well as the right to an adversarial hearing (Kuopila v. Finland, § 38, where the defence was not given an opportunity to comment on a supplementary police report). As a rule, Article 6 § 1 requires that the prosecution authorities disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 60). In this context, the relevant considerations can also be drawn from Article 6 § 3 (b), which guarantees to the applicant “adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence” (Leas v. Estonia, § 80).4 173. An issue with regard to access to evidence may arise under Article 6 insofar as the evidence at issue is relevant for the applicant’s case, specifically if it had an important bearing on the charges held against the applicant. This is the case if the evidence was used and relied upon for the determination of the applicant’s guilt or it contained such particulars which could have enabled the applicant to exonerate oneself or have the sentence reduced. The relevant evidence in this context is not only evidence directly relevant to the facts of the case, but also other evidence that might relate to the admissibility, reliability and completeness of the former (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 66; Mirilashvili v. Russia, § 200; b. Adversarial hearing As a rule, Article 6 § 1 requires that the prosecution authorities disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 60). In this context, the relevant considerations can also be drawn from Article 6 § 3 (b), which guarantees to the applicant “adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence” (Leas v. Estonia, § 80).4 173. An issue with regard to access to evidence may arise under Article 6 insofar as the evidence at issue is relevant for the applicant’s case, specifically if it had an important bearing on the charges held against the applicant. This is the case if the evidence was used and relied upon for the determination of the applicant’s guilt or it contained such particulars which could have enabled the applicant to exonerate oneself or have the sentence reduced. The relevant evidence in this context is not only evidence directly relevant to the facts of the case, but also other evidence that might relate to the admissibility, reliability and completeness of the former (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 66; Mirilashvili v. Russia, § 200; Leas v. Estonia, § 81; Matanović v. Croatia, § 161). 174. prosecuting authorities are obliged by law to take into consideration both the facts for and against the suspect, a procedure whereby the prosecuting authorities themselves attempt to assess what may or may not be relevant to the case, without any further procedural safeguards for the rights of the defence, cannot comply with the requirements of Article 6 § 1 (Natunen v. Finland, §§ 47-49; Matanović v. Croatia, §§ 158, 181- 182). 175. Belgium, § 85).
UNQUOTE FROM CRIMINAL LIMB ECHR CASE LAW
So ask Ms Rowland to ask questions please to police/court with reply by the 25.5.2021 with no reply to inform Ms Slocombe so she have evidence before interview of the 27.5.2021 and can make her views clear to the court. .Accept Ms Rowland will formulate questions as she feels fit ,under no circumstances will convey my format shown below at end. THE FORMAT HOWEVER FOR EVIDENCE REQUIRED IN MY QUESTIONS I WANT ANSWER TO QUESTIONS IN LIST BELOW AT END Further this document delivered to Ms Slocombe so she can advise before interview any further evidence she requires to do her report. Ms Slocombe looking why offended can i cite,,,
,Can i change CASE LAW text reference below to read,,,,defendant to Chief Constable Marsh as ask questions,today,,,,lawyer today said court would ask why offended ,,,,the offence misconduct in public life,,,,,QUOTE
In considering whether the neglect or misconduct was wilful, the following issues should be addressed:
Did the defendant have a subjective awareness of a duty to act or subjective recklessness as to the existence
of a duty?
Did the defendant have a subjective awareness that the action or omission might be unlawful?
Did the defendant have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission?
Did the officer realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur?
Were those consequences ‘likely’ as viewed subjectively by the defendant?
Did the officer realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk?
Recklessness: the defendant foresees that particular consequences may occur and proceeds with the given conduct, not caring whether those consequences actually occur or not.
Criminal negligence: the defendant did not actually foresee that the particular consequences would flow from his actions, but a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen those consequences.
From inchoate case law
Mens Rea is the mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime; or knowledge that one's action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committed.
Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,[,i am afraid the reader will need to consider issues as a whole if going to understand why offended,,,,eg why went to my MP in 2018 via statute why i had to go to him]
THE FACTS [chronological order court cases are all civil]
1/ Please see appendix final where party admits in letter perjury ,however now party states to police in defence ,,,,we will not take court award, eg will not take cost money awarded , so police say you have lost nothing [untrue lost case no free central heating]so will do nothing, complain to PCC,,,,,in reply will not get involved ,any future correspondence police will ignore. As i said to PCC so i can rob a bank, payback money, and you will take no action,,,,POLICE STANCE. Case HISTORIC NOT ISSUE TODAY terminated at earlier date at court of appeal, where Lord Golding was excellent, tried to help me get judgement, said can we show corruption, via statute very limited ways to grant an appeal, in judgement stated the county court got verdict very badly wrong, however could not appeal due to statute,,,,only special items,,,,,Strickson v Preston county court EWCA 1132 [2007] cost award however to court he could quash however could not quash award to the party in litagation. Although party admitting perjury police state anyway you have no evidence of perjuryplease see scan appendix final, ….repeated again ,,,no evidence in different case below in 2/,?????????????????????????
2/ Never forgiven by the courts over above judgement. We have court ignoring my applications and correspondence, where issue cited in my website, HHJDenyer then states remove website or consequences.,will not be BLACKMAILED. Relevant today, police removing evidence ,must have copy, as i have today, shows police criminal behaviour, today asking for referal to the IOPC ,,,,so asked Compuwave to find way to back up, emails, program given would not work, told was working when you left shop, so litagation started, the program given on invoice, where they now admit typing error in program given , case then settled, where ask court via email to remove from hearing list .eg email
CLAIM NUMBER B26YM042 HEARING 5.1.2016
Could you please put before a judge as soon as possible, to vacate hearing 5.1.2016. I accept as in AOIBS346 Jones v N Bristol NHS Trust , for medical records, DJBrittan would not accept settlement and told both parties to attend court. This again was a settlement request from defendants a few days before second hearing, and i informed hospital lawyer, that settlement was nonsense, however they now give me everything requested from day 1. [identical today]
In todays issue, from tab 4 these instructions to read emails are utterly different from instructions given 21.12.2015, from tab 6 my email to defendants, where asked if tab 4 correct, which obtained no reply, as defendants ignored email, proceedings issued. Again a few days before hearing defendants ask to settle, as court aware no papers 14 days before hearing by defendants. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UNQUOTE
Record call later to court told HHJDenyer removed from hearing list no need to attend court ,,,,matter settled, then get judgement ,,, hearing took place ,no parties turned up, case struck out where appeal, send copy of recording not to attend, where see what CONSEQUENCES MEAN AS RESTRAINING ORDER BECAUSE I APPEALED. Applications to remove order ignored, by court.....
3/ So as restraining order in place need to ask HHJCotter to issue any further proceedings., eg malfeasance in public office court ignoring applications and correspondence for years, take complaint to police ,becomes IPCC investigation where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations, in our investigation, and sent reply to your appeal where no appeal had been made. BACKGROUND,,,.As court ignoring applications and correspondence picket at the court, TWICE not as CPS state today on regular basis, barrister who i gave leaflet to on leaving court told to report malfeasance [misconduct] in public office to the police as court ignoring applications and correspondence for years, warned about police may try to brush off, please see cited document in appendix final from internet Copwatch. Seen by Sgt Price Patchway police station, told to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office ,and within it make my complaint, the barrister was correct, was being brushed off Price stated make claim to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] ,police too busy to deal with this, please look at Copwatch appendix final where Homeoffice state,,,,all crimes should be investigated. SHE STATED DID NOT KNOW WHAT MALFEASANCE STOOD FOR IF NOT CRIMINAL OFFENCE WOULD NOT GIVE TO OFFICER TO LOOK AT. SO PRICE AWARE LATER A CRIMINAL OFFENCE VIA STATUTE JCIO COULD NOT INVESTIGATE AS THEY CAN NOT LOOK AT CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS,,,,AS THEIR WEBSITE STATES,,,IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES YOU NEED TO COMPLAIN TO POLICE THATS WHAT I DID. PRICE GAVE TO PCBIRD TO INVESTIGATE.Correspondence with JCIO told via STATUTE from our website we can not investigate as criminal allegations we are not allowed to investigate, as our website states,VIA STATUTE ,,,,,,,,,,,,criminal allegations complaints should be made to the POLICE. SO PRICE AWARE ACCEPTS CRIMINAL SO GIVES TO PCBIRD AWARE COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO. SHE HAS LETTER FROM THEM There were 4 correspondence with Price , for example please see ref 5 scan picture 26 you can see police number 259327 [red ink on printer exhaused number however put in by hand] another 260861 .At this stage much later Price makes allegations of a criminal offence by me,eg ,,, forgery by me over these receipts ,saying ,,,,,,you never wrote to me., receipts forged. In CPS paper on malfeasance in public office is table of people who had been convicted , included are civil and criminal judges. We have letter from the court,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,,we have letter from lawyer,,,,,our correspondence also ignored, lawyer,,,,we have chased them via phone, can not get a reply .....numerous documents date/stamped by court, however PCBird states you have no evidence , as in perjury issue,above ?????,,,states now you should complain to JCIO and judges immune from prosecution. ???????Becomes IPCC investigation please see appendix final where police ADMIT we did not follow IPCC regu;ations ,please see ref 2 TODAY ,scan 10594 ,,,we never talked to you, and ref 3 scan 10475 10494 we sent reply to your appeal where no appeal had been made. ,,,,POLICE letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal I have made no appeal, waiting for reply to questions, the above history not in dispute can I refer to police letter scan 10475/10494,,,police admit,,,ref 3 and 4 today,,,
eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply to questions by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.
SO SAYING POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE I HAVE NOT LODGED ONE ,,,
November 2017 application to Cotter to issue proceedings malfeasance in public as for years the court ignoring applications and correspondence where now litagation in judicial review against police,,,,eg police did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to an appeal where one not made,,,,,,send court N244 form [please see ref 9 today for format] plus note to HHJCotter where he asks me to make official application and to pay fee, Visit court 5.12.2017 to obtain evidence to do application to the court, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,eg where lady was more than helpful went to get files, then Mr Blair comes running out saying, your not looking at files, we refuse WHO IS WE ,,HHJCOTTER ?????told ,,make application to Cotter who will also ignore , utter breach of Article 6.which Cotter did,,Blair making clear court will not allow
Demand old N244 form from file, deface ,,,,line through it,,,write on it not to be sent to Cotter until new N244 send with application next day, 6.12.207,,,made under ,,,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessarytime to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,PAID FEE ON THESE CONDITIONS ,,,,, application sent next day via email.,6.12.2017 the court has no N244 form what i am asking court to do, as defaced it. Now 6.12.2017 sent
Series of emails confirming agreement,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS for example email 7.12.2017
In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. ,,,,,IGNORED
Cotter in judgement states as he continues denying evidence in front of him ,,,,,police were correct should have complained to JCIO where he has letter from JCIO IN BUNDLE WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE. FURTHER STATE VEXATIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT AGAINST POLICE WHERE IN APPENDIX FINAL POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION. Eg we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your appeal where one not made. Retired District judge who saw my website suggested Cotter never looked at application made under Adorison,,, again in it on N244 form was application to remove restraining order,,,,in judgement ,never mentioned. Court state we did not send as court required another fee,,,,,untrue from Adorisio,,,allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,Again as several lawyers/barristers have stated,,,,if court believed in goodwill a fee was required, and consider… Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,
WHY DID COURT NOT ASK FOR A FEE. Or were they perverting course of justice not sending to Cotter,,so ,he read wrong papers.
4/ Need to appeal, could not get legal aid anywhere, NEVER rejected on facts , eg too busy ect,,,tried to get refund of court fee ,,,,,court states we did not send application.to Cotter So email to my MP Lopresti. Contacted Justice department of government told Rt Hon Buckland not your MP, get your MP to make application to Buckland. So email to MP to do this ignored, as request application to ombudsman for refund of court fee as application 6.12.2017 not read,,,,,,via statute i can not do,,,,,statute,,,complain tocourt,,,,complain then to Resolver,,,,[still before it after many years] ,,,,still not resolved ask your MP to refer to ombudsman ,refund of fee,,,,general public can not do only MP can refer,,,,MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE,,,,from human rights case law,,,,,C. Legal aid
1. Granting of legal aid
However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).
However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:
the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);
his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). YOU HAVE POLICE ADMITTING MY CLAIM
WHERE MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE. CAN I REFER TO POLICE BUNDLE CPS EVIDENCE IN INTERVIEW WITH MP,,,,,,,I IGNORE IF I HAD ALREADY DEALT WITH ISSUE,,,,THIS IS UTTERLY NEW CASE JUST HAD JUDGEMENT THIS CORRUPT MP HAS NO EXCUSE TO IGNORE MY EMAILS
Restaining order ended anyway Feb 2018 so no need to ask permission, however required evidence to do application,,,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,All correspondence ignored ,visit MP office told to contact Avon Law,,,,told too busy,,,,,contacted MP saying emailed court to look at file, to obtain evidence to do application, just ignored, copied Cotter into email, MP IGNORES AGAIN EMAIL HOWEVER AFTER 2 MONTHS COTTER REPLIES SAYING ASK BLAIR,,,,,KNOWING FROM ABOVE SAID NO,,,,,ASKED BLAIR SAID NO UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],
NEED CONFIRMATION OF EMAILS TO THE COURT WOULD PROVE MY CASE WOULD SHOW WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 WHEN SEEN BY SGT PRICE.
5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17
6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time
7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59
21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00.
29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,.
Visit court again asking same questions, talk to manager of PSU [known now support through court] who talks to courts Mr Hunt, where Hunt lies to PSU manager states will confirm in 10days if above LISTED EMAILS/ TIME in file, for example application of 6.12.2017 under ,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS IS IT IN FILE.
AGAIN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 MS PAWSLEY COURT MANAGER REFUSES EVEN TODAY TO ANSWER QUESTION HUNT STATED TO PSU HE WOULD ANSWER AS HUNT CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. JUST LIED TO PSU.TOOK WITNESS WITH ME TO CONFIRM AGREEMENT AT THE COURT. Court of appeal gives permission to appeal, however police/MP ignore all correspondence.
5/ In Feb 2018 restraining order ended so no need to ask permission, so ask court to look at file to obtain evidence, ignored, where matter comes before court of appeal. Police corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, ignore all correspondence,,,,CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE
Notice to admit facts
32.18
(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE EMAILS IGNORED by police,,,
,LETS TRY TODAY,,,At court of appeal in live case try to issue unrelated proceedings in county court,,,,,all money claims must go through Salford county court, where refused as ANOTHER restraining order in place, contact Salford where told judiciary at Administration court Cardiff instructed if i made any applications not to issue, There was never any order , this judge acting utterly corrupt,,,,where Justice department pays 150.00 compensation, case settled then by other party, no court hearing. In website cite corruption at Administration court, no restraining order ever made, print government list of people on restraining order list, in my website, of course my name not on it. Then get emails from someone on list, know nothing about her, know nothing about case , then emails of threating nature , not really worried until letters to murder. Complaint made to police where told to block her,emails and bin any further murder letters. It appears nothing to do with me Google do website on this woman, and cite my website,,,,,this site nothing to do with me.
6/ Get call from police as never home when police call, can we interview as alledge i had stolen council parking pass sent in post and damaged other mail. Told untrue the council pass did not recognise name on letter,had sent back to council weeks ago, which S Glos council later confirmed, and other mail was delivered in Royal Mail bag, bag titled found open and damaged where from email told if police wanted evidence as obtained as damaged,,,to organise a time to collect Royal Mail bag. Then get letter scan police june,,,,,[can not show police removed from my computer to pervert course of justice however they made mistake as it was in my website if required today]which retired District Judge called appaling ,,,,undated,,,,what are allegations ?????????????So complaint to police 1.6.2020 WHAT ARE ALLEGATIONS,,,. Asked police who complained to them, enquired to Council why did you contact police where told we never contacted police we did NOTHING,,,can i quote responce,,,you emailed, we told you to post back to us, and we obtained from you, can i again thank you. What are allegations anyway not defined COULD BE NOTHING TO DO WITH MAIL. POLICE WILL NOT INFORM ME PERHAPS IOPC CAN FIND OUT.WHAT ARE ALLEGATIONS OR MY LAWYER TODAYCAN ASK POLICE. Asked police did neighbour plant on me, years ago he took caution and then today complain to police, did he place letters in my letterbox ,then saying stolen,,,did he alledge to police i had stolen,,,,,how did he know i had pass ????COMPLAINT IGNORED,,,,OVER A YEAR NOW STILL SEEKING A REPLY TO COMPLAINT OF THE 1.6.2020
7/ Threats continue via post to murder, with email comment that she had contacted police and was told,,,,,i am delusionary mentally ill in allegations against police in judicial review, [not today paragraph to show evidence however put in appendix FINAL you have judicial revew application and police admitting application],,,,,mentally ill ?????? by definition police comments are libel or slander, further refer to recent court examination not mentally ill. Complaint made on the 17.10.2020 where police refuse to answer complaints, further letters sent threat to murder,,,, police where again told to bin,evidence sent to them over murder threat.
8/ From scan picture 29 REF 1 23.11.2019 througout 2020 the issue of perverting course of justice, a miscarriage of justice not urgent, now my life at risk, eg no reply to complaint 17.10.2020 ,,,,IPCC informed of problem 20.11.2020 aware of issue,,,,Marsh told 2.12. 2020 of oil in police doorway to get something done, ,,eg From a garage have obtained 5L cans of old oil to throw in police/court doorways,,,,will have my day in court before the end. …..he is aware of threat to cause criminal damage ,,,,no need to repeat here see start of document numerous quotes,,,knew threat took no action, goaded into offending. So oil in police doorway 4.1.2021 , request for lawyer refused while in custody, kept in police custody over 10 hours,,,no lawyer. Told later to staff severe claustophobic , seen by police nurse, where placed in exercise yard. We have group who shop for reductions at night at Asda, knew what Ms X did ,however only when talked about arrest was aware as part of her work visit Patchway station on regularly basis and special cells for claustophobics, complaint to police told duty sergeant was unaware but STAFF were as put in exercise yard, so issue appeal to police complaint ,,,, you can quess appeaIGNORED STILL TODAY WAITING FOR REPLY. Correspondence 19.12.2020 more letters sent to police, threats of murder, told to just bin, told police oil in their doorway if nothing done over threat to murder.Further asked would they talk to this woman was willing to put her comments in my website, underneath restraining order to show her point of view,,,,asked police again in 2021 do not know if ever contacted.
9/ Still getting letters to murder, so Marsh aware of threat,told in email 27.1.2021,,,oil in MP doorway,QUOTE ,,, Caused criminal damage at Patchway police station,[poured 5l can of oil in doorway] bet they have not informed media of offence, would not want why action taken, only way to get story out, [a court hearing] Tory MP Lopresti and police and local police PCC Mountstevens aware i would do this ,if correspondence ignored, they called my bluff knowing criminal series of offences will be made..... they will not want before a court, they will try to issue a caution, [will be refused] or as barrister stated,,,,will release without charge no public interest ,,,,will need to offend at another police station, or MP office [5L again of old oil] until sent to prison to die. Have one opening, at moment ,vindictive police have issued court summons as went through red light 1.2 seconds ,,,,yes 1.2 secs ,,,,max speed ,,,,wet road dangerous to brake ,,,,action taken due to complaints historic to police, given option no action if attend a day course,,,,easy way to conclude,,,,,however can defend via trial to bring out issues,not only above defence however just vindictive prosecution,,,police will take me to court over this,,,,,1.2 seconds,,,however historic evidence ,,,,,have lawyer in letter stating we commited perjury,,,,too late for you to do anything about it now, please see below.....we have court saying we commited offence malfeasance in public office however police refuse to deal with ADMITTED criminal offence. ,,,,,,,,,however take me to court over 1.2 seconds,,,,,WE HAVE AS IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES IGNORED,,,ask MP for help, however as corrupt and bent as he has done for years ignore correspondence in pocket of police and the courts, this document in my website ,will follow up with new website www.jackloprestimpcorrupt.com say if facts untrue sue me ....MP Jack Lopresti,for example in last 18 months 32 emails all ignored, recently confirmed he would ignore all correspondence any subject ….UNQUOTE .So Marsh aware of murder threats where quoted Erahimi case. Did not want to offend further email 11.2.2021 to Marsh ,in detail explaining murder threats.Took copy to Sgt Price to make sure as scan picture 29 did not want to offend, just wanted to be arrested over threats to stop being murdered, in document 11.2.2021 outlined being followed ect worried about murder.. Have historic recording with Ms Jones TJ front staff Patchway police station, where gets involved although nothing to do with her,, beng dealt with by another member of staff, from police papers today, when leaving letter 11.2.2021 being dealt with by another member of staff, TJ can not help herself ,,, gets involved,,,,police refuse to give receipt for letter. Told police/PCC not to call my bluff ,, pouring of oil,,,told would offend,,where concerned for my life poured oil in MP doorway, 18.2.2021. Presented at police station 19.2.2021 to be arrested, being dealt with by another member of staff where TJ gets involved again.,,,,can not help herself. Ask why i want to arrested, told threat to murder this can not go on no longer, where Marsh /PCC/Price involved ,,,asked where i had offended and what i had done,GIVEN she checks states not on system no record of any offence wait for reply from Sgt Price. She did not know initally where offence took place where person sat next toTJ both of us pointing along A38 to show her where Woodlands was situated. Lawyers Reeds state your entry, and leaving 19.2.2021 from recording and CCTV they have record of movements and what was said. Recording would show what was said, would show movements, told speaking too quite move closer as also with mask on can not hear you, and what your saying,was not ranting and raving,,,. Present barrister state police have destoyed evidence. Gave examples, TJ will get away with this, police have destroyed evidence, however she states,,,,,did not understand what he was saying,,,,she keeps saying not on system, wait for reply from Price ,,,,,where i state it would not happen, would you say not on system go away if i said i had thrown petrol in MP doorway,,, TJ does not want to admit theoretical issue,,,,told it would not occur so states ,,,,,he would not inform me why he wanted to be arrested,,,,,she was told of offence where she stated not on system,,,,reason for my reply,,,,would not occur would you say go away,if i said thrown petrol,,,,,,,,after all threats to murder would any jury believe i would not say why wanted to be arrested,,,,, further if not told not on system , not reported, why do i taunt MP in less than a hour as he had not reported as confirmed by TJ ,,,,,,,,in MP statement in todays papers, there was NEVER threats to us. In respect to letter to Marsh PCC Price 11.2.2021,,,to make sure gives detail of murder threats, further aware of offending 18.2.2021 to get something done,,,,,POLICE WOULD NOT DEAL WITH ISSUE OR MP [ALSO SENT 11.2.2021 LETTER VIA EMAIL] OR IPCC. So offended fear for my life as email 27.1.2021 police aware oil in MP doorway. So in desperation do you get criminal record,,,,end of your medical career or do you get murdered.
10/ Arrested at 11.45 pm threat to cause arson. Front door damaged, retired police officer suggested caused by police baton, Told on your arrest throwing oil in police doorway, 4.1.2021 we did not want background before the court,[murder threat] so dropped case, WE NEED THEREFORE TO TAKE FINGERPRINTS ECT AGAIN AS WE REMOVED AS NOT CHARGING. BUT THIS IS FORCE AWARE OFFENCE WOULD OCCUR TOOK NO ACTION,,,,GOADED ME INTO OFFENDING THEN DO NOT WANT TO PUT EVIDENCE TO A COURT AS THEY WOULD BE EXPOSED.Assaulted by PC Snell ripping handcuffs up and down, me screaming in pain, request for boby cam ignored, understand lawyer making new application. Lawyers Reeds state police have evidence which would prove my case what was said, my barrister informs me police have removed,,,,comes before interview no threat was made,,,,to prove my case did never want to be arrested, would always give police written notice so could be arrested over threat, please see scan picture 29.Asked when document sent to Marsh ,,,,,top of page in scan picture 029 ref 1 today was in bundle i bought with me yesterday , police statement nonsense suggest correspondence sent on the 19.2.2021 this was just misunderstanding. Further evidence as police asked for copy on the 20.2.2021 , first time presented to police was at interview. Interview at 2.00 pm charged, can i refer as above to facts where police admit to facts raised, eg murder issue complaint 17.10.2020 [error in todays police papers complaint 27.10.2020 no ,,,,,complaint 17.10.2020 which was ignored no complaint 27.10.2020]. Did not help as explaining facts where lawyers Reeds state,,,,,,heard enough have to go, in papers under exhibite7808 today while in cell produce above document where it states,,,,,INTERVIEW TERMINATED EARLY. Was told about 4.00 pm just about to be released, asked if wanted food told no as just about to go home. About 8.00 pm complain as not released ,hungary, where told should have eaten at 6.00pm. Not released for about another 4 hours.
a/Old Tower computer,,,20 years old
c/ From old age pensioner computer club was given laptop ,,,,,where organiser backed up b/ and put data on this computer…..now not working ,,,done as only 10 years old b/ much older...
Police were not interested in arson threat , TJ was told it would not occur, however from front door you can look into garage through window and see 5l can of petrol which was not taken.?????? Arrested assaulted by Snell, waiting for bobycam where within 20 secs PCCollett [came with Snell] reporting back to assume station states,,,,found electrical,,,,.thats what they came for to pervert course of justice to remove evidence from computer.Where computer from above a/ seized thats what they came for. Coming home 20.2.2021 computer a/ missing ,wires ripped out of computer router. Also lawyer asked for search video cam does it show wires being ripped out , if not as barrister who saw my website suggested did police come back again. MP utterly corrupt and dishonest in earlier emails state,,,,,,our office was never involved in your historic problems with the court ,so made note of emails as evidence, when following day went to print, they had gone, all emails with MP from mid 2014 and earlier removed, from FEH we have missing evidence with MP back to 2011 all of this removed, as far as MP is concerned and police are concerned alright remove evidence, however you forgot Michael Cobbs emails [MP SECRETARY] where we have his emails over historic legal case.,,,,say to MP your utterly dishonest YOU WERE INVOLVED.As barrister stated who saw my website police aware only very old documents on Tower, used mainley as other computers would not accept scanner, eg required if i need to scan. As he said looking for anything to convict ,,,fishing,,,need to go back to other computers, So c/ not working will not produce a picture,,,,while computer b/ due to virus when you switch on just get error message. New computer uses Windows 10, problems using computer shop will confirm asked them a few days before arrest to remove virus so i could use as problems with new laptop, told no charge will give tutorial on new system., no need to spend money on removal. Computers b/ and c/ on bed after arrest, computer b/ lid open, need to confirm with police videocam of first search, understand lawyer already requested evidence….THEY HAVE REMOVED VIRUS from computer. b/ Can i refer to above scan police june,,,this removed , All computers at home how can data be altered, this is IOPC expertise, i know i talked to a company, where told as hacked in could control computer,,,,gave example say i go to library,,,,,all you need is log in details, do not need actual computer.,,,,what else have they altered.Again lucky for evidence the old age pensioners computer club , expert, when putting data on computer 2 to computer 3 was asked to please keep record on hard drive for me, shows all documents,,,,[go to documents type in search police,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,all documents now gone,,,,,,however have record on backed up harddrive of computer club.
13/ So comes before court, probation issue today,,,,threat of arson,,,,where recorded evidence destroyed by police TJ shown as witness utterly dishonest,,,,,did not know why he offended at MP office ,,,yes you were you said after asking person sat next to you, where Woodlands was situated,,,,told thrown oil,,,,told not on system, offence not reported wait for reply over threats to murder from Sgt Price,,where i said to her would not occur however if i said i had thrown petrol in MP office ,would you say not on system go away,,,,,where i taunt MP within the hour as not reported,,,,,HOW DID I KNOW IF NOT TOLD BY THIS CORRUPT PERSON, CAN SEE WHY POLICE HAVE DROPPED CASE Police will not want her in the dock, crossexamined where they drop case, on record today is just criminal damage, where March aware would occur, took no action, can i refer to start of this document, offended due to threats to be murdered…...MARSH TOLD THESE OFFENCES WOULD OCCUR GOADED INTO OFFENDING DID NOTHING AWARE OFFENCE WOULD OCCUR
Did the officer realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk?
Recklessness: the defendant foresees that particular consequences may occur and proceeds with the given conduct, not caring whether those consequences actually occur or not.
Criminal negligence: the defendant did not actually foresee that the particular consequences would flow from his actions, but a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen those consequences.
14/ Due to statute police must report allegations of criminal activity, corruption, assault to the IOPC [independant office of police conduct] ,,,,,stealing my property compare scan picture 32 /33 and 35,,,,where my computer parts and software stolen,,,,look at computer evidence where from THIRD PARTY evidence can prove corruption, POLICE perverting course of justice removing computer records,,,,where police state ,,,,,do not understand with threat,,,,,do in 2 pages maximum if we do not unserstand ,will bin and as usual will ignore any future correspondence, in respect to statute referral to the IOPC.
PROPOSED LETTER FROM MS ROWLAND TO CPS ACCEPT SHE WILL WRITE AS SHE FEELS FIT HOWEVER PLEASE ASK SHE ADDRESS THESE ISSUES.CAN I PLEASE HAVE COPY OF LETTER SENT ,,,,can we ask for reply by the 25.5.2021 as required for interview 27.5.2021,,,,
My client due to talk to Ms Slocombe on the 27.5.2021 at probation service , over why commited damage, eg threats to him of murder, which police ignored. My client warned to cooperate with probation, and ask you also as even handed to do the same, producing evidence for probation,Can i cite Human Rights case law,,,,
An issue with regard to access to evidence may arise under Article 6 insofar as the evidence at issue is relevant for the applicant’s case, specifically if it had an important bearing on the charges held against the applicant. This is the case if the evidence was used and relied upon for the determination of the applicant’s guilt or it contained such particulars which could have enabled the applicant to exonerate oneself or have the sentence reduced. The relevant evidence in this context is not only evidence directly relevant to the facts of the case, but also other evidence that might relate to the admissibility, reliability and completeness of the former (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 66; Mirilashvili v. Russia, § 200; b. Adversarial hearing As a rule, Article 6 § 1 requires that the prosecution authorities disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 60).
1/ Can i refer to my client picketing at the court in 2017 , DIRECTLY RELATED TO ISSUE WITH MP ,,,where barrister he gave leaflet to told him to report to police malfeasance in public office, confirmed in letter from Insp O Mahony ref 2 today.,,,scan 10594 So abundantly clear to Ms Slocombe in ref 2 it states,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office ,,,,,,,,,,,,,judges and court officers,,,,,however does not state what judges and staff court accused of, can you please confirm, for Ms Slocombe. Need in own words accept in preaction protocol for judicial review, and actual judicial review application, its stated, however you may has statute disputed allegation,,,,as court advised you should if dispute facts. In your judgement stated report to JCIO , and judges immune from prosecution .Sgt Price asked my client to send evidence can i refer to police property receipts number 259327 ref 5 today and 260861 , we have others. Sgt Price stance she never obtained letters and allegations of forgery of receipts. Can you confirm stance that these receipts forged, if you did have correspondence could you please send me a copy.
2/ On the 1.6.2020 over a year now complaint made MACVFQVM to you, can i please have reply for Ms Slocombe. Again complaint related to murder threat made 17.10.2020 ref MAC-VZJDG again can we have a reply please to complaint for Ms Slocombe, still waiting for reply over 7 months.
3/ We have murder threats complaint 24.9.2020, where sent her letters to you , told to bin letters in future and block her from emailing, further evidence 19.12.2020 sent and in email to Marsh PCC Sgt Price 11.2.2021 gave you details. Confusing limited evidence, my client in discussion with Met police told she contacted US never issue to contact her, see correspondence with Bridewell station Bristol. Your aware of threat to murder, in TJ statement states my client told her this can not go on any longer these threats to murder, where told to await reply from Sgt Price of his letter 11.2.2021 as issue of murder in his document of the 11.2.2021. Could you please outline what action you took over threats to murder, for example over 3 months since his letter to Marsh/PCC /Sgt Price or is this a case of ,,,Did the officer Marsh realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk? We ask for reply to complaint of 17.10.2020 asdirecly related, this woman told by you, my client is delusionary .mentally ill in making judicial review application against us, could you please outline history of threat to murder,,,,for example was this woman ever questioned,,,,,or was this a case as in Ereahimi case ,where aware of threat to murder,in 2020,,,,,,eg email 11.2.2021 however police ignored.
4/ On the 2.12.2020 you were aware for example asking reply to complaint 17.10.2020 concerning murder threats, that if nothing done my client would pour oil in police doorway so he could be arrested to bring to a court to stop murder threats. You were aware of threat however ,,Did the officer Marsh realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk? Where my client goaded into offending. On the 19.12.2020 was Marsh aware if murder threats not dealt with, oil in police door way, offended 4.1.2021did not work out to get arrested,,,so email 17.1.2021 told oil in MP doorway, in letter 11.2.2021 desperate not to offend, police given second chance to act to arrest over oil in MP office,,,Did the officer Marsh realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk? ,,,,,eg no arrest over threats
5/ My client produced compelling evidence concerning police corruption and criminal activity, where as statute police must refer to the IOPC, in his rejected correspondence was threatened ,,,,,must be in 2 pages, untrue, if you did not make clear we will bin and ignore future correspondence . A new request to you to refer to IOPC , can you confirm so Ms Slocombe can report, that application has been sent to the IOPC , if refuse to refer can you please inform Ms Slocombe why you refuse to refer.
6/ In respect to murder threats, my client suggested to resolve, you ask her to conclude if she wished to put statement in my clients website under restraining order list,in my clients website ,,,[2020 and 2021] did you ever talk to her, or was my client emails ignored.
7/ Previosly i have requested [Ms Rowlands told me had requested ]on the ,,,,,,,,,,,for boby cam of arrest and seizure of property, can you please ensure i have 48 hours before my clients interview with probation.
8/ On arrest 19.2.2021 my client told did not expect you back, thought we had frightened you, 4.1.2021 while in custody, We did not want evidence before open court, [can do today] so dropped case , so need to do fingerprints ect again as statute we have removed as taking no action. My client never informed case was dropped, could you please supply paperwork that case was closed by you. So you were aware offence would occur,,2020 ,oil in policestation doorway took no action over threat,,,,goaded my client into offending over non action over murder issue,,,,my client offended,,,then you refuse to prosecute ?????????????????????
9/We have issue in CPS bundle, alledge correspondence sent to Marsh on the 19.2.2021 can you confirm not sent
10/ Lawyers Reeds state that you have evidence on recording CCTV of my clients entry and leaving station on the 19.2.2021, which would prove his case, as he maintained from day 1 , can you confirm evidence has been destroyed. To
11/ Can i refer to scan picture 32 33 and 35, Ms Slocombes reference 6 7 and 8. Can you confirm scan picture 35 is your document, further it states besides official seizure picture 32 33 you took computer parts and software. My client asked for details of these, knowing taken, before collection of his property however his email ignored, so took witness to station. We asked for return on the [lawyer informed me she had asked] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,however obtained no reply, can you please explain why. Further as picture 32 33 was other items,,,,,eg new bottle of chainsaw oil can we please ask for return.
NEWS STORY FOR MEDIA….This is repeat of Profuma sex affair case Have been forced into obtaining a criminal record to get this story out,end of therefore of my medical career,,,offered free of charge to vacinate Covid 19 6 days /week however informed via vetting now would not be accepted,,,Police and courts [civil not criminal] believe if we ignore correspondence we can get away with a miscarriage of justice, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,Todays issue over restraining order due to complaint against police, as vexatious ,you have below the actual allegations in judicial review pasted, and in police own words admitting allegations, is this first time this has occured,,,,NO,,,court as you will see already in another vexatious restraining order paid compensation to me. Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider above not first time,,,,Asked Tory MP Lopresti for help eg Legal Aid /ombudsman all correspondence as he confirms he will ignore,,,,knowing miscarriage of justice. Caused criminal damage at Patchway police station,[poured 5l can of oil in doorway] bet they have not informed media of offence, would not want why action taken, only way to get story out, [a court hearing] Tory MP Lopresti and police and local police PCC Mountstevens aware i would do this ,if correspondence ignored, they called my bluff knowing criminal series of offences will be made..... they will not want before a court, they will try to issue a caution, [will be refused] or as barrister stated,,,,will release without charge no public interest ,,,,will need to offend at another police station, or MP office [5L again of old oil] until sent to prison to die. Have one opening, at moment ,vindictive police have issued court summons as went through red light 1.2 seconds ,,,,yes 1.2 secs ,,,,max speed ,,,,wet road dangerous to brake ,,,,action taken due to complaints historic to police, given option no action if attend a day course,,,,easy way to conclude,,,,,however can defend via trial to bring out issues,not only above defence however just vindictive prosecution,,,police will take me to court over this,,,,,1.2 seconds,,,however historic evidence ,,,,,have lawyer in letter stating we commited perjury,,,,too late for you to do anything about it now, please see below.....we have court saying we commited offence malfeasance in public office however police refuse to deal with ADMITTED criminal offence. ,,,,,,,,,however take me to court over 1.2 seconds,,,,,WE HAVE AS IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES IGNORED,,,ask MP for help, however as corrupt and bent as he has done for years ignore correspondence in pocket of police and the courts, this document in my website ,will follow up with new website www.jackloprestimpcorrupt.com say if facts untrue sue me ....MP Jack Lopresti,for example in last 18 months 32 emails all ignored, recently confirmed he would ignore all correspondence any subject …...my email……………...[part quote]
NEWS STORY FOR MEDIA….This is repeat of Profuma sex affair case Have been forced into obtaining a criminal record to get this story out,end of therefore of my medical career,,,offered free of charge to vacinate Covid 19 6 days /week however informed via vetting now would not be accepted,,,Police and courts [civil not criminal] believe if we ignore correspondence we can get away with a miscarriage of justice, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,Todays issue over restraining order due to complaint against police, as vexatious ,you have below the actual allegations in judicial review pasted, and in police own words admitting allegations, is this first time this has occured,,,,NO,,,court as you will see already in another vexatious restraining order paid compensation to me. Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider above not first time,,,,Asked Tory MP Lopresti for help eg Legal Aid /ombudsman all correspondence as he confirms he will ignore,,,,knowing miscarriage of justice. Caused criminal damage at Patchway police station,[poured 5l can of oil in doorway] bet they have not informed media of offence, would not want why action taken, only way to get story out, [a court hearing] Tory MP Lopresti and police and local police PCC Mountstevens aware i would do this ,if correspondence ignored, they called my bluff knowing criminal series of offences will be made..... they will not want before a court, they will try to issue a caution, [will be refused] or as barrister stated,,,,will release without charge no public interest ,,,,will need to offend at another police station, or MP office [5L again of old oil] until sent to prison to die. Have one opening, at moment ,vindictive police have issued court summons as went through red light 1.2 seconds ,,,,yes 1.2 secs ,,,,max speed ,,,,wet road dangerous to brake ,,,,action taken due to complaints historic to police, given option no action if attend a day course,,,,easy way to conclude,,,,,however can defend via trial to bring out issues,not only above defence however just vindictive prosecution,,,police will take me to court over this,,,,,1.2 seconds,,,however historic evidence ,,,,,have lawyer in letter stating we commited perjury,,,,too late for you to do anything about it now, please see below.....we have court saying we commited offence malfeasance in public office however police refuse to deal with ADMITTED criminal offence. ,,,,,,,,,however take me to court over 1.2 seconds,,,,,WE HAVE AS IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES IGNORED,,,ask MP for help, however as corrupt and bent as he has done for years ignore correspondence in pocket of police and the courts, this document in my website ,will follow up with new website www.jackloprestimpcorrupt.com say if facts untrue sue me ....MP Jack Lopresti,for example in last 18 months 32 emails all ignored, recently confirmed he would ignore all correspondence any subject …...my email……………...[part quote]
My MP s office states you should have responce in 3 days to emails to us,,,,,after 2 weeks still no responce to emails. States woman dealing with this in Friday, will assume with no email on t,,he 18.12.2020 there will be no reply. State we do not know how to deal with matter. WE MAY ASK SIMPLE QUESTIONS IS THIS NOT CASE OF ....WE DO NOT KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH MATTER ,,,,,OR WE WILL NOT DEAL WITH MATTER.....SIMPLE QUESTION.
Well issue is
a/ Ask my MP to put papers to Hon Buckland as ask state to provide Legal Aid. The statute via Human Right Act in scan evidence 2. [in my website]
b/ In scan evidence one my MP can see in own words the police admit my claim to the court, eg this was a IPCC investigation and we did not follow IPCC regulations. Further admit by police we sent reply to your appeal,where one not lodged. Have one outstanding item ,,,,as Buckland would require merits of case, before State giving legal aid, ,,,,,why did i come to police day 1.
c/ We have further issue complaints 1.6.2020 17.10.2020 that police ignored, where asked MP to obtain replies .
d/ We ask MP to present related issue to ombudsman, where we do not know court stance, where ask him to ask court, as he would require merits to refer to ombudsman. ,details in scan evidence 4./6
P JONES
Lopresti,,,, knowing miscarriage of justice, as asked State for take one example ,,,to provide Legal Aid, ,,,,,,,,via statute i can not refer to ombudsman ONLY LOPRESTI can do this,refuses ,,,,GIVES NO REASON WHY REFUSED JUST IGNORES EMAILS
C. Legal aid
1. Granting of legal aid
However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26). civil courts, police involved , where tortued in police custody these trying to sweep matter under the carpet. Police aware i suffer from clauustraphobia, for example after cholecystectomy operation many years ago tearful as wanted to go home next day to recover, however 4.1.2021 held in cells for 10 hours no referal to lawyer, for records at end put in exercise yard, as clautraphobic, however only given 5 mins. Tuesday shopping day, specific day due to Covid 19,,,group of friends go for reductions done between 6.00 and 7,00 pm at supermarket,now group go different days. Others in group go other nights due to social distancing,to shop reductions as govenment instructions,,,, inform Ms X [in bubble] about arrest day before, knew what she did, however unaware until told due to her job visit Patchway police station on regular basis, where told special cells with windows, for people suffering from claustaphobia….however police felt fit to tortuer me. For years ,,courts /police ignore correspondence , Lopresti ignores as he has done for years, only option offending to bring matter out at court hearing. From proceddings [please see relevance later an issue relevant even today] had cited court restraining order list[i am not on list] list where woman on list sends violent threating emails...do not know woman. She contacts police where told i should have not cited her in list,police continue,,,my allegations against police are delusionary ,he is mentally ill, please see below ….will paste actual application [the allegations] in judicial review and you will see there are 2 elements, where POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT APPLICATION. SO APPLICATION AGAINST US DELUSIONARY HE IS MENTALLY ILL AS MADE ?????? YOU ADMIT IN OWN WORDS THIS WAS A IPCC [independent police complaint commision] INVESTIGATION AND WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE NO APPEAL MADE. SO THIS APPLICATION DELUSINARY MENTALLY ILL. ????????????Make official complaint about libel comments,female barrister and judge who saw my website stated ‚police no time limit to reply to complaint, however via statute should be done ….in reasonable time, made 17.10.2020,,,,[over 2 months ago] also other complaint 1.6.2020 which police believe if we ignore it will also go away, police they ignore complaints, South Glos Council confirm these libel comments now made to them,,, Corruption between above parties which is repeat of parties in Profuma affair. The Profuma affair a long time interest of mine at time for example my letters to Christine Keeler, and media, one reply from national newspaper Keeler was not innocent party in this see enclosed advert from magazine,,,,,see Christine Keeler take penis in rectum only homosexuals do this 18 dollars see 8mm film.
CORRUPTION PROFUMA,,,BETWEEN COURTS AND POLICE WITH TORY MP INVOLVED AS WE HAVE TODAY...ALL PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE KNOWING MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. ALREADY CRIMINAL DAMAGE AT POLICE STATIONS STARTED 4.1.2021 WILL CONTINUE EVERY WEEK in FEB AS ONLY WAY TO SHOW CORRUPTION MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE ALSO DAMAGE AT COURT AND OTHER PLACES [LOPRESTIS OFFICE ] LATER WHERE MP JACK LOPRESTI/ POLICE ,,COURTS,,, PCC OF POLICE MS MOUNTSTEVENS AWARE IN 2020 I WOULD TAKE MATTER INTO MY OWN HANDS IF CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED, WHERE ABOVE HAPPY FOR ME TO OBTAIN A CRIMINAL RECORD.. REPEAT OF HISTORIC CASE OF CHRISTINE KELLER WHERE HAD CONTACT WITH HER AND INVOLVED ANOTHER TORY MP JOHN PROFUMA WHICH BOUGHT DOWN GOVERNMENT AT TIME , BARRISTER DID WARN ME AT TIME
IN OWN WORDS POLICE ...WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION AND WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL,,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS ,,[,CORRUPT POLICE HAD LETTER FROM COURT,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,]WHERE NO APPEAL LODGED. IS THIS NOT AS WHEN STEVEN WARD PROSECUTED IN PROFUMA CASE ,,,AS CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS. WE HAVE TODAY JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] IN 2017,,,SAYING POLICE AND COURT WRONG, VIA STATUTE WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS IF INITIAL CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS,,,,JCIO,,,PASTE FROM THEIR WEBSITE,,,ALSO SENT TO ME
We cannot investigate
Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ),,,THE EAGA CASE IS THE PERJURY CASE SGT PRICE ON RECORDING STATES SHE WOULD NOT GIVE TO OFFICER TO INVESTIGATE IF NOT A CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,WHERE BRUSHED OFF BY POLICE,,AS WARNED BY BARRISTER WHO SAW ME PICKETING AT THE COURT from COPWATCH
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.” [TODAY ADMITTED PERJURY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE]
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
I try to be independant, due to claustophobia could never live in a care home,for example from GP records stated would die on tennis court not in a home,,, from any exercise have become a drug addict, as exercise releases neurotransmitters the endorphines which i need,,,,,ALL i need short input eack week,,,accept would be arrested, claustraphobic would have to get out of cell,,forced to take actions by police/courts/Lopresti. Assumed seen by lawyer in a few hours, did not sleep night before,,,could sleep in cell for a few hours,,to pass time before seen by lawyer,however now 10 hours can not sleep,,, no access to a lawyer,,,,,Accept by running into cell wall until unconscious however may get brain damage, may be then not independant,,,,where hope therefore to die in police custody. ,,,,,,,WE HAVE POLICE IN JUDGEMENT SAYING REASON WE DID NOT INVESTIGATE YOUR COMPLAINT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO HOWEVER UTTERLY AWARE FROM ABOVE JCIO COULD NOT INVESTIGATE,,,THE JCIO DOCUMENT SENT TO THEM ;;;WHERE JUDICIARY WRONGLY CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT STATING SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO,,,,,THEY HAVE LETTER FROM JCIO STATING WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE,,,AS IN PROFUMA CASE CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS.ARE THE JUDICIARY /POLICE ,,,,,,DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE IT ??????
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ..…
ASKED POLICE IN 2017 SAME QUESTION TODAY WHY DID I COME TO SGT PRICE
WE ASK POLICE TODAY FOR ,,,RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ASKING FOR YEARS AGO ..Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Media will need to see issue ,,,details in my website.,synopsis below. Female QC barrister and judge who saw my website stated in cases there is cornerstone issue,,,,take theoretical case i am sitting as a judge man accused as robbing a bank, however case fails,,,,,,,,,,,,,on day in closed prison, your issue why you went to police day 1. There is no dispute here as from recording with Sgt Price told to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office and within submit my complaint, called FEDJCAB document, [title describes issue,,fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent ]this document in statute document pre action protocol document for judicial review , further document had to be produced via statute Annex A paragraphs scan annex a in my website eg,,
paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS]
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
The police have courts admitting facts,,,,,,,,,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,they have numerous applications [taken by hand to the court ]date/stamped by court ignored, even lawyer saying his application ignored. In my website you have scan 10594 from Insp O Mahony confirming went over criminal offence malfeasance in public office, from statute of JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office ]they confirm via statute as criminal offence can not investigate any complaints, as criminal allegations as JCIO state should be investigated by the police, which they refuse to do. So becomes a IPCC [independant police commision complaint] .Where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations in your IPCC case and sent reply to your appeal,WHERE ONE NOT MADE,,,police,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,,,. HOWEVER JUDICIARY STATE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO AND VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE,,,,,,THEY ADMIT ALLEGATIONS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW. We have further the initial judgement of HHJCotter, where HHJBigger at Admin court Cardiff states the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement, later at court of appeal Legatt LJ states facts of case in HHJCotters judgement. However from several lawyers and barristers who saw my website,,,,cited the fairtale,,,Hans Christane Andersan THE KINGS NEW CLOTHES to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515
Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants,day 1 as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER
WE HAVE FURTHER COURT STATING HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,,as female judge stated serious legal issue now,,,,read wrong papers,,,so ask for refund of fee. Legatt judgement in tatters,,,,facts of case in Cotters judgement,,,but Cotter did not read application,,,statute,,,complain to court,,,,take to Resolver,,,then refer to Lopresti,,,,,who will collate evidence to refer to ombudsman,,,where LOPRESTI CONFIRMS HE WILL IGNORE MY CORRESPONDENCE,,LOPRESTI YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT IN POCKET OF POLICE AND COURTS YOU KNOW MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.WILL NOT COLLATE EVIDENCE FOR OMBUDSMAN,,,, ASK LOPRESTI FOR STATE TO PROVIDE LEGAL AID HOWEVER 32 EMAILS IN LAST 2 YEARS ALL IGNORED
SYNOPSIS FOR MEDIA TO SEE WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON
SYNOPSIS,,,CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS AND TORY MP REPEAT OF PROFUMA CASE IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER ,,note court is civil court not criminal
PLEASE SEE MY WEBSITE WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM WHERE YOU HAVE AT START RECENT LATEST IGNORED EMAIL TO LOPRESTI IN LETTER YOU HAVE SCAN EVIDENCE 1 THE POLICE ISSUE AND SCAN EVIDENCE 4 AND 6 THE COURT ISSUE BOTH IGNORED REQUEST FOR DATA REASON FOR CRIMINAL ACTIONS FORCED INTO,,,,COURT ISSUES OVER 20YEARS
Court case at Bristol county court, comes before Administration court Cardiff in judicial review where Bristol court awarded 500.00 costs. Take to court of appeal where comes before Lord Goldring, where asks if i can argue corruption at the court, TRYING TO HELP,,where he states via Strickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132 although as today ,,,,,the court getting judgement very badly wrong ...its not a reason to appeal a High court judgement in judicial review, will return to later asked for return of file, if i paid postal cost,,,inside WHEN papers returned was Lord Goldrings note,,,,,,,,,,,circumstances when a High Court judge can judicially review a County Court judge's decision were exceptional and limited to instances where the judicial process itself had been frustrated or corrupted…..can see why asked if i could argue corruption.
Lord Goldring said he was sorry although the courts getting judgements very badly wrong he could do nothing, however he could look at cost awarded against you, and this 500.00 would be quashed
NEVER FORGIVEN BY BRISTOL COUNTY COURT AND ADMIN COURT CARDIFF FOR JUDGEMENT REASON TODAY ISSUES
Court case ,,,,contract with government contractor reason Lopresti does not want to get involved,,,between Ms Suggett and myself,,,have the court transcript of hearing…LAWYER,,.transcript..my client does not know Ms Suggett or where these emails [the contract ]come from….as judge who saw my website stated,,,did judge believe you forged evidence,,,judge who heard case in note stated later,,,on reflection something very odd with this case,,as asked for his notes,,,,[from barrister told heard by DDJGisby told has a law firm in Bristol hoping to become a full time judge] accuse LATER defence lawyer of perjury with letter reply….Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application too late for you to do anything about it now,,,report perjury to police told by Sgt Bell as corruption between police and the courts,,,as in Profuma affair ,,,,we will not take on the courts ,anyway they have informed MP they will not take cost awarded to them, no need for us to act,,,so i can rob a bank repay money and therefore police will take no action,,,even many years later money taken every month and then repaid SAME DAY from my bank account,,,,still done 2021.
Try to obtain evidence from the court,to do appeal applications ,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,where court Mr Fowler states however your correspondence will not be read not answered just filed utter breach of Article 6 as Fowler corrupts and frustrates judicial process...utter breach of Article 6
Courts ignoring correspondence contact Lopresti MP he ignores correspondence ,then obtain letter will write again to the court never obtained reply from Lopresti
Courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence ,issue website... www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com Have my website NOW where blackmailed ,,,,told by HHJDenyer ...remove website or consequences. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED Have claim v Compuwave where they asked to settle ,settlement sent to the court, ask for removal from court hearing list...[please see my website at start recent email to Lopresti under scan evidence 4 where you have email to the court plus court receipt] record conversation with court, no need to attend hearing as case settled ,told on recording HHJDenyer had removed from hearing list, matter settled,no need to attend. Then see what CONSEQUENCES means as this corrupt and bent judge Denyer issues restraining, order ,,,,collusion with judge who now hears case, order as i now appealed., of course no party turned up for hearing.,appealed as case dismissed,we had settled matter.,sent court copy of tape ,,recorded delivery told not to turn up for hearing. [sole issue over computer program defendants admit error they had now supplied revised computer program
case settled] Quotes in restaining order, further case NBT [North Bristol NHS Trust] as i again appealed,,,]CAN SEE WHAT CONSEQUENCES MEAN] initial case for medical records/put statement in medical records/travel expenses. Case struck out in papers, no hearing ,,where i appealed,,,,NBT THEN ASKED TO SETTLE JUST BEFORE HEARING DATE SUPPLIED MEDICAL RECORDS PAID TRAVEL EXPENSES AND PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL.MONTHS BEFORE WOULD NEVER HAVE OBTAINED IF NOT MADE APPEAL.AS STRUCK OUT . IN RECENT EMAIL TO LOPRESTI HE IS AWARE THAT ABOVE PARTIES COVERED IN EMAIL IF FACTS NOT CORRECT ABOVE TO CONTACT HIM ,,,COPY TO ME. PERHAPS CORRUPT LOPRESTI CAN INFORM ME AND MEDIA IF HE HAD ANY REPLIES HE REFUSES TO ANSWER MY CORRESPONDENCE AS BENT COLLUSION BETWEEN LOPRESTI COURT POLICE. MEDIA CAN ASK ABOVE IF FACTS CORRECT at hearing with NBT their lawyer asks that judgement reads i acted unreasonably,,,,rejected by DJWatson, applications by myself and lawyer for transcript of hearing ignored by corrupt court,,,DJWatson however stated i had not acted unreasonably ,,,,,therefore ,Denyer never any reason to issue restaining order, i would never of obtained medical records, put statement in medical records, get travel expences if i did not appeal,,,,again bent and corrupt HHJDenyer utter breach of Article 6 [see later NBT again drag me through court REFUSE to release further medical records years later]
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective NBT asked that judgement reads i acted unreasonably ,,,rejected by DJWatson stated i had not acted unreasonably ,,,,Denyer now saying DJWatson wrong,,,media ask NBT just before hearing did you ask to settle ????? supply outstanding medical records and put statement in medical records,,,did you ask judgement states i acted unreasonably rejected by judge.Did you then ask Denyer to make order, ....ask court to look at files rejected utter breach of Article 6…..Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,
DID NBT ASK DENYER TO MAKE ORDER
Another case comes before the courts, applications date/stamped by the courts, however missing at hearing, it appears someone at court or judges removing papers, as DJWatson stated,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,,,a case i won not issue today,,,earlier further documents date/stamped by the court missing from another case file
Picket at court as applications to them and correspondence as above ignored,OVER MANY YEARS. [20 years ] Barrister who i gave scan picket to, please see my website for document, told me to report malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years to police, seen by Sgt Price where she asks for CPS document on malfeasance in public office and insert my complaint,
CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red this is direct paste to Sgt Price ,eg why I went to police,,, this is subsection of FEDJCAB complete, court document defined just FEDJCAB as subsection of full document,,,,eg,,,,, why I went to police
SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appication are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.[CAN I ADD SEE APPENDIX 2,,,,,used today same document title Appendix 2 for reference] DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,,,
Please see Copwatch above was brushed off by Sgt Price,,,,told to complain to JCIO, where told of statute malfeasance in public office a criminal offence,,,,SHE KNOWS THIS HER OWN OFFICERS CONVICTED AND JAILED IN IBTAHIMI CASE via statute JCIO could not investigate ,,,,,,PCBird states i talked to court was told we could not investigate.. judges immune [in CPS document have long list of people convicted ,,,includes judges,,,]and to complain to JCIO. The police as in Sgt Bell case try to call black is white,,,,,again court say,have letter from the court,,,,,,,,,,,,,we ignored your applications malfeasance in public office,,,come and talk to us,,,however police state you have no evidence,,,,PCBird asked third party who confirmed, asked for years who was this person. Becomes IPCC investigation please see below where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your later appeal when no appeal lodged.IPCC advise a judicial review.
THE FEDJCAB IN PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW SERVED ON COURT AND POLICE.
FROM MY WEBSITE THE PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT VIA STATUTE HAVE TO BE SERVED VIA FURTHER ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS PLEASE SEE SCAN ANNEX A IN MY WEBSITE,,,,,,,,,,,
paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS]
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
8/ THE DETAILS OF ACTION THAT DEFENDANTS ARE EXPECTED TO TAKE
We expect criminal offence to be investigated, the Home Office state all crimes should be investigated
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ASKED POLICE WAS THIS AS STATED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT WHERE DEFENDANTS IGNORE ,,,,,,,IN 2018 POLICE DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION. THE QUESTION ASKED UNDER ,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,
Can i please refer to my website scan 10594 letter from Insp O Mahoney,,,,malfeasance in public office ignoring applications and correspondence for years,,,however from my letter,,,,did not know if Denyer doing criminal act or court staff not sending documents to him.As blackmail restraining order in place have to ask HHJCotter to issue the judicial review.
HHJCotter asks for fee to hear this case, visit court 5.12.2017 ,told by Mr Blair ,,your not looking at files of us ignoring your applications ,make application to HHJCotter told who will also ignore,clear tactics between them to pervert the course of justice, breach of Article 6 The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,
THE PRESENT COURT ISSUE
SGT PRICE ALSO SENT THE LETTER SCAN 13.4.2017 DOCUMENT PLEASE SEE MY WEBSITE FOR DOCUMENT ,,THESE PLUS FEDJCAB IN LATER STATUTE DOCUMENT PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW HOWEVER SGT PRICE STATES ,,,DO NOT REMEMBER SEEING THEM. IS THIS NOT IDENTICAL IN CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND JUDICIARY IN PROFUMA CASE WHERE MANDY RICE DAVIES STATED IN COURT ,,,,HE WOULD SAY THAT WOUL*D HE [TODAY SHE PRICE WOULD SAY THAT] WE HAVE STATUTE CAN NOT MAKE APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW UNLESS FIRST TRIED TO SETTLE, VIA PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT ,,,ASK POLICE FOR YEARS WAS FEDJCAB IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW SERVED ON POLICE AND COURTS VIA EMAIL 17.10.2017,,,,SGT PRICE STATES UNAWARE OF EVIDENCE ???????PERHAPS POLICE CAN SUPPLY EVIDENCE SUPPLIED TAKE ONE EXAMPLE SEE PROPERTY RECEIPT 259327 ,,,,RECEIPT STATES LETTER FOR PS SUE PRICE TEAM 3 ,,,THIS DOCUMENT TODAY SERVED ON POLICE WHERE ASK CAN I PLEASE HAVE ALL DOCUMENTS SERVED ON SGT PRICE HOWEVER POLICE CONFIRM THEY WILL IGNORE ALL CORRESPONDENCE THIS DOCUMENT SENT TO POLICE MS JENNISON WHERE ASK FOR COPIES OF ALL DOCUMENTS SERVED ON SGT PRICE IN 7 DAYS,,,FURTHER THIS DOCUMENT SENT TO PCC MOUNTSTEVENS,,,CAN SHE ENSURE IN 7 DAYS ALL CORRESPONDENCE SERVED ON PRICE IS SUPPLIED TO ME ,,,WE KNOW SHE WILL IGNORE FURTHER ASK MOUNTSTEVENS TO FORWARD THIS DOCUMENT TO CHIEF CONSTABLE LATER WHEN IN magistrates COURT CAN REFER TO POLICE IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE WHY NOW IN COURT BEFORE MAGISTRATE BEFORE SENT TO PRISON
Accuse initally court of malfeasance in public office where in court reply admit ,,,,,we ignored appliations and correspondence,,,,,,come and talk to us. Is this not as with Sgt Bell police corruption with judiciary as in Profuma case ,their reply you have no evidence of offence where court admit we ignored. Police judgement comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. Eg you have no evidence,,,consider earlier Sgt Bell stance you have no evidence of perjury,,,he has transcript what was said in court and lawyer admitting offence. We have issues with the police Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider these 2 cases no isolated incident. On the 22.7.2017 ask police 11 questions to do appeal ,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE,,, application,,,under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,to be able to make appeal, saying with no reply would do appeal on the 28.7.2017, where police send letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal, i have made no appeal waiting for reply to 22.7.2017 email. No dispute of facts please see from my website scan 10475 scan 10494 where police state ,,,,, eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you. +
Can i address IPCC investigation and regulations Regulations IPCC [independent police complaint commission] in a police investigation.,,,,sent to me ALSO ON INTERNET....[in present 2021 NEW issue have email from police,,,CI Debarah Palmer-Lawrence will contact to discuss your complaint ,,,,never any contact in historic complaints breach of IPCC regulations]
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
PLEASE SEE SCAN 10594 IN MY WEBSITE WHERE INSP O MAHONY ADMIT WE NEVER TALKED TO YOU ,,,SO IS IT NOT TRUE WE IGNORED IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT MADE,,SO I AM DELUSINARY MENTALLY ILL ???????YOU HAD NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE FOR YEARS COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE WHERE HAVE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,SENT REPLY TO THIS PROPOSED APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT MADE,,LODGED,,,JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION ,,,DIRECT PASTE
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial review]
THE DETAIL IN MY WEBSITE AT START EG EMAIL TO LOPRESTI ,,,FOR POLICE ISSUE SCAN EVIDENCE 1 AND COURT SCAN EVIDENCE 4.AND 6
Police have letter from court ADMITTING OFFENCE ,,,,[AS SGT BELL HAD ,,,]we ignored your applications come and talk to us..please see below also aware again please see above that via statute JCIO [JUDICIAL CONDUCT INVESTIGATION OFFICE] could not investigate AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE …..ONLY SHORT TIME BEFORE IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL THEIR OFFICERS JAILED UNDER IDENTICAL OFFENCE EG IGNORING CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS . HOWEVER POLICE JUDGEMENT YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS,,,IS THIS NOT SAME CORRUPTION AS WITH SGT BELL ABOVE ,,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE BOTH PARTIES ADMIT OFFENCE POLICE STATE FURTHER JUDGES IMMUNE HOWEVER IN CPS DOCUMENT AWARE JUDGES CONVICTED
Becomes IPCC investigation, where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit we sent reply to your appeal,,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ,,,,,where you had made no appeal, PLEASE SEE MY WEBSITE
You have evidence why restraining order made, by bent HHJDenyer i can not get replies from bent court/police/MP can i please ask media to ask Compuwave /NBT if facts correct. As restraining order in place have to ask court permission to issue the judicial review. Ask police and court for evidence,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,, In litagation eg again later at Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE
Notice to admit facts
32.18
(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
ASKED POLICE WAS THIS AS STATED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT WHERE DEFENDANTS IGNORE ,,,,,,,IN 2018 POLICE DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION. THE QUESTION ASKED UNDER ,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,
HHJCotter asks for fee to hear this case, visit court 5.12.2017 ,told by Mr Blair ,,your not looking at files of us ignoring your applications ,make application to HHJCotter told who will also ignore,clear tactics between them to pervert the course of justice, breach of Article 6 The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,????????????????????
As evidence withheld ask 5.12.2017 for court N244 form please see my website for example of form,,,write on it application not to be sent to HHJCotter until new N244 plus application sent next day, pay court fee on this understanding, made under
Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,
No need to repeat here, can i refer to detail evidence in letter to Lopresti,,,in start of my website ,,scan evidence 1,4 and 6,,,HHJCotter aware there is new N244 form,,what i want court to do, aware application against police malfeasance in public office, aware also application to remove blackmail of restraining order, aware of application made 6.12.2017 ,aware why i went to police day 1. Already 2 applications to remove restraining blackmail order ignored. Can i digress start of 2019 use library computers to do work, young woman crying working on computer, where as medic try to help, SHE,,,,severe depression . She has bus pass much later suggested going to court to obtain evidence , as third party ,would buy her a coffee afterwards. Not required her evidence at court have PSU unit [now known support through court] where manager said he would help.Discuss with court Mr Hunt where court inform PSU manager he would reply to question in 10 days, lied to manager, as court frustrate the judicial process ,where today court manager Ms Pawsey knowing miscarriage of justice now confirms courts refuses to answer questions,Hunt told PSU he would answer,,,asked Lopresti to ask for reply,,,he knows miscarriage of justice, however ignores correspondence collusion between Tory MP/police /courts. What was question...
Series of emails confirming agreement,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS for example 7.12.2017 email stated
In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. COURT IGNORED emails,,
ASKED HUNT AND PAWSEY ARE THESE EMAILS IN FILE MADE UNDER ADORISIO
5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17
6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time THE APPLICATION UNDER ADORISIO
7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59 PLEASE SEE ABOVE
21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00. AWARE APPLICATION TO ALSO REMOVE BLACKMAIL RESTRAINING ORDER ALSO IN SKELETAL ARGUMENT AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE AS BARRISTERS ADVICE DAY 1 Nn.You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this was in email of the 21.12.2017 so Cotter aware of application under ADORISIO 6.12.2017
i29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,,quote from email aware also of 6.12.2017 application as asked if obtainednawwaseem,aeFor example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, -UNQUOTEa,,,
,,,,,itCs a criminal offence THIS B
,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example police Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application ,,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staffWe then get HHJCotter judgement with retired District judge stating not judicial language however they are utter bastards,,,saying vexatious to make allegations against police, and should have made complaint to JCIO, [is this not as Profuma case collusion between police and court with Tory MP involved] however he states in judgement i went to police malfeasance in public office, its a criminal offence THIS BENT JUDGE AWARE VIA STATUTE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE CAN NOT REFER TO JCIO ,POLICE ALSO AWARE FROM DAY 1 COULD NOT REFER TO JCIO. ,,COTTER HAS JCIO SAYING THEY CAN NOT INVESTIGATE. COTTER HAS PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT,,,MADE UNDER STATUTE ANNEX A PARAGRAPHS HOWEVER STATE ISSUE AS I WAS SOLELY UNHAPPY WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ????
paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS]
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
HE HAS THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IN PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT,,,
SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/application are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.,,,,nothing to do with judgements...
W here get contradictory evidence in visit to the court,,,,we did not get email application of 6.12.2012 ,,THEN ,we had it under Adorision,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS told not sent to Cotter where ask for refund of court fee, where told later please see scanredgrave ,,,,only looked in fee section no record of EXTRA fee, no fee extra required under statute Adorisio ,,,,Again as several lawyers/barristers have stated,,,,if court believed in goodwill a fee was required, and consider… Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,
WHY DID COURT NOT ASK FOR A FEE. Statute make complaint to court [for refund of court fee ],,,next step take to Resolver,,,,still not resolved ,via statute general public can not refer to ombudsman ,only MP can refer to ombudsman ,he/she would have to collate evidence to see if MP will refer to ombudsman so asked corrupt MP to write to court, he would need facts before referring case to ombudsman,,,,THIS CORRUPT AND BENT MP AWARE VIA STATUTE ONLY HE CAN REFER TO OMDUDSMAN IN POCKET OF POLICE,/COURTS IGNORES MY CORRESPONDENCE AS HE CONFIRMS ,,, THEREFORE CAN NOT REFER TO OMBUDMAN ,,,did you get application 6.12.2017,,,was it sent to Cotter ...did Cotter read application,,,ect ect...how can he refer HE does not know facts,,,,,and refuses to obtain ….important document asked Lopresti to ask for defaced N244 form,,,,and N244 form sent to Lopresti,,,,was it one made 6.12.2017 or ONE COTTER MADE AND FORGED MY SIGNATURE,,,,IN MY N244 IS AGAIN APPLICATION TO REMOVE BLACKMAIL RESTRAINING ORDER,,,,,ISSUE NOT RAISED IN JUDGEMENT,,,,.collusion of corrupt and bent Lopresti with court and police.
1/ Restaining order ended.2018 Need further medical records at LATER date when previous summons issued. Again NBT refuse to supply where summons issued, struck out in papers where again appeal, given court hearing date. Then have correspondence not from Cotter but his CLERK ,,,told we had discussion with NBT where agreed case removed from hearing date you will be given new date for hearing later. Remember struck out in papers never served on NBT ,no defence therefore what did Cotter via his clerk organise with NBT. So application under
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,
on the 22.2.2018 where Cotter ignores application to look at files WHAT WAS AGREED WITH NBT,,,,,APPLICATION IGNORED AS THIS COURT HAS DONE FOR YEARS. Comes before HHJRalton, who states ….reason struck out as application utterly incomprehensible,,,, in my website ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, QUOTE FROM POC ,,,,,APPLICATION FOR MEDICAL RECORDS OF [DATE] AND TO PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS,,, INCOMPREHENSIBLE ??????????????????..Agreed at hearing NBT would supply medical records and put statement in medical records as the POC [particular of claim].Never obtained medical records taken on day, only their understanding summmary of facts. Ask as NHS statute to look at files, recorded, where from recording NBT admit in visit my statement not in file, further the actual records as the POC removed from file. Contact court where talk to PSU ,,,they talk to court must admit court helpful,,,suggested letter appliation to HHJRalton saying his order ignored, where Ralton stated to court,,,i have no comment to make, knowing order ignored.
2/ Then get medical records of third party not mine, NBT utter shambles, ask for sae to return ignored,,,,,inform Lopresti i have third party medical records, ask for help, where corrspondence ignored. NBT/LOPRESTI UTTER BREACH OF DATA PROTECTION STATUTE.STILL HAVE HIS PERSONAL MEDICAL RECORDS WHAT DO I DO
3/ Blackmail restraining order out of time so could make application for judicial review,NO NEED TO ASK PERMISSION. . Need evidence so application to HHJCotter to look at files, made under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,???????????????????? ignored. Make complain to Lopresti ,for help, covered Cotter in email, where Cotter aware of above replies 2 months later please see scan Cotterlate in my website. Cotter as you can see corrupts and frustrates the judicial process asks me to ask court staff,,,knowing said no,,,they confirm again no,,,,,clearly court is ,,,DENYING ,,, ,,,,opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,????????????????????.In proceedings asked Admin court to make order,,,,to obtain evidence, the court and police in proceedings asked questions to admit facts under ,
Notice to admit facts
32.18
(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
As previous problems with also Admin court Cardiff ask for judicial review to be heard in Birmingham, under APPLICATION PRACTICE DIRECTIVES 54D 5.2
Pro Bono Unit let me down as had to do application on my own, therefore later evidence under ,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS
For example Birmingham Admin court SENT recording with Sgt Price, has the FEDJCAB document, has scan 14.4.2017, has pre action protocol for judicial review document, has correspondence from JCIO ect,,,,,have asked Birmingham court did you get correspondence, have Royal Mail proof of posting slip.asked Cardiff court did Birmingham send to you, where in utter breach of Article 6 both courts ignore my emails.
The initial application in judicial review,,,,QUOTE
The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. UNQUOTE
Very clear what issue is ,,,,malfeasance in public office, ,,,,,even today applications ignored,,,
GET JUDGEMENT FROM HHJBIGGER IDENTICAL AS COTTER WENT SOLELY AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,,,,BIGGER AWARE FROM ABOVE ..The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, DID HE READ APPLICATION. FROM APPLICATION STATE STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,,,,AS FEMALE JUDGE STATED COTTER/BIGGER NEVER GOING TO GRANT THIS APPLICATION ,,,TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS,,,,INVITING POLICE INTO THE COURT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS. SENIOR BARRISTER ANDREW MARSDEN STATED DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 REASON COTTER HEARD APPLICATION 6.12.2017 SO ISSUE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW CAN NOT BE ,ISSUE WITH DENYER,,,RETIRED IN 2017 ,,,Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
Something odd here Denyer in same chambers as Andrew Marsden,,,,,one week after seeing me observed Andrew moved to another chambers.
4/ So Bigger confirms vexatious to make allegations against police ,and i should have complained to JCIO , from above you have allegations in judicial review where in own words police admit allegations , further did not go to police as unhappy over many years with judgements of Denyer,,,,malfeasance in public office criminal offence from JCIO statute could not make claim to JCIO.
5/For media need to explain all money claims must go through Salford county court. New defendants ,new case,where Salford court refuse to issue proceedings as phantom restraining order in force. At time no order in place ,where told judiciary HHJ Bigger ????at Ad ministration court told court not to issue ANY more proceedings, by me , told to get letter from judiciary fromAdmin court Cardiff if facts not correct, where they ignore all emails, take up issue with PSU Bristol court,,,,they talk to court staff,,,no OFFICIAL LEGAL ORDER EVER MADE where court NOW pays compensation.Further state today we will issue your claim,,,informed defendants claim on way, apology for delay,,,they then pay claim, inform court settled to remove from file. Consider the blackmail restraining order it appears the judiciary determined to keep me out of the courts. Offered 50.00 compensation, where inform court money not issue, how did court get this, looks like corruption at the judiciary. Where told by manager my staff offering 50.00 utterly unacceptable,,,i have paid 150.00 compensation to you.
Goodafternoon REF BELOW
Barclays
P D JONES
30884960 O2
20 1334
P JONES
Thank you for your email of 3 March accepting our offer of £150.
In order for us to make the payment of £150 by bank transfer, please email me at customerinvestigations@justice.gov.uk including your:
• bank name
• account name
• account number
• sort code.
We will then arrange payment for you. It can take up to 20 working days for the money to reach you from the date we hear from you.
You can also write if you prefer at: HM Courts & Tribunals Service Customer Investigations Team Post Point 5.13 5th Floor 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ
If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely
LAST CONTACT 16.12.2020 YES A FEW WEEKS AGO THEY HAVE NO RECORD WHY PAID DO ADMIT CHEQUE ISSUED AND PAID ASKING ONE QUESTION WHAT WAS ON FILE THAT THE COURT WOULD NOT ISSUE MY PROCEEDINGS FROM ADMIN COURT CARDIFF. STILL WAITING FOR REPLY ,THIS DOCUMENT SENT TO THEM TODAY CAN WE HAVE RECORDS WHY COURT COULD NOT ISSUE MY CLAIM
6/ Now comes before court of appeal, restraining order,as i solely appealed HHJBiggers wrong judgement. So we have restraining blackmail order history,,,,made over a settled case ,please see in my website the settlement Compuwave wanted scan 10246 and in my website emails sent to court, and court receipt received,,,,where from recording told not to turn up for hearing as removed from hearing list ,,,settled case blackmailed by HHJDenyer,,,now phantom order the courts admit never made,,,now this one. HHJBiggers corruption failed ,,ordering Salford court to not issue my claims, courts already paid compensation for his corruption. Did he now ask court of appeal to issue a restraining order,,,,remember collusion between police and courts in Profuma affair. no one would take on my new case under legal aid NO ONE WOULD LOOK AT FACTS OF CASE new restaining order as i appealed HHJBiggers judgement.IN OWN WORDS POLICE ADMIT MY APPLICATION.No one would consider facts of case, over new restraining order. Police /courts had to be informed by court order if they object to removal of this restraining order ,they had no objection to removal of order. Court said issue with you and police we do not want to be involved.
C. Legal aid
1. Granting of legal aid
However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).
ASK LOPRESTI WHERE THIS CORRUPT AND BENT MP REFUSES TO PASS PAPERS TO RT HON BUCKLAND,,,,IN POCKET OF POLICE AND COURTS
IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE APPLICATIONS AGAINST POLICE PLEASE SEE ABOVE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT ALLEGATIONS CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial review]
From my website you can see application to obtain data, scan 10547 on court form, ignored by corrupt Legatt LJ as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process.
WE GET SAME STANCE WITH COURT AND POLICE SEEN IN LITAGATION BEFORE COTTER AND BIGGER NOW LEGATT WITH AGAIN APPLICATIONS UNDER The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,
Notice to admit facts
32.18
(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO COURT OF APPEAL IGNORED AS COURT AND POLICE FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.•
For example asking police question why did i come to you day 1, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications and correspondence over many years ,,,malfeasance in public office you are utterly aware of your officers a short time before jailed over same offence ignoring criminal allegations, via statute of JCIO can not investigate complaints if criminal offence allegations. SO YOU WERE WRONG ,,,,ISSUE NOW BEFORE THE COURT I SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO,,,Asked under
Notice to admit facts
32.18
(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS COURT AND POLICE FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.•
To courts HHJCotter did not read application of 6.12.2017. eg in application back to court,,,,,read wrong papers.
Application to court of appeal had to do myself at end, Pro Bono Unit taken on case, they asked for numerous extensions of time, at end court of appeal stated final extension,,,heard nothing last day had to do on my own,,,,Via (Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,via emails Legatt has the FEDJCAB knows why i went to police, has letter of JCIO knows i could not complain to them, has letters from police admitting my application eg in the IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your appeal,,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications correspondence for years where police /Legatt have court letter we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,they have email from Fowler,,,,,,your correspondence under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,will not be read not answered just filed. Legatt has correspondence from LAWYER application ignored made by them
Application to court of appeal, ,,,,Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.
Eg to vary, amend order to remove restaining order where Master [level of judge ] demands 528.00 to remove. Where ask corrupt and bent Lopresti to send papers to Rt Hon Buckland for State to provide Legal aid He has all evidence that claim must be succesful,,,police in own words admit we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your appeal, where no appeal made, need one more bit of information why did i come to police day 1,,,and court therefore wrong could not refer to JCIO. For court to confirm that application 6.12.2017 was not read by Cotter. Lopresti has evidence of miscarriage of justice however however refuses to refer to Justice minister. From above historic application to court of appeal to return application,,,,before done after paying postage/packing charges, now computer crash ,,,part of application missing email court for return of application after hearing,,,,however court bins application
7/ So police over many years know miscarriage of justice,,,,chief constable,,,PCC Mountstevens know this however ignore my correspondence,,,eg from above application to admit facts and under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,
8/ From my website get police letter scan police june which retired district judge stated was appaling, undated ,what are allegations ???
The requirements related to the burden of proof from the perspective of the principle of the presumption of innocence provide inter alia, that it is for the prosecution to inform the accused of the case that will be made against him or her, so that he or she may prepare and present his or her defence accordingly, and to adduce evidence sufficient to convict him or her (Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, § 77; Janosevic v. Sweden, § 97).
Article 6 § 3 of the Convention “3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: (a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him; (b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence; (c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; (d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
Complaint 1.6.2020 to police what are allegations ,please see in my website scanevidence 6 for details in email to Lopresti ,where complaint ignored by police as with over the years ,,,,,why did i come to you day 1.
9/ In application to court of appeal, cite history of restraining orders, the blackmail one, and the phantom one where judiciary at Admin court Carfiff inform Salford county court never to issue my proceedings, supply evidence of restraining order list at time, of course not on list. On list is unknown woman. It appears Google MAKES WEBSITE cites this woman and cites confirmed in my website, do not know woman, know nothing about her case. Then get series of violent threating emails, from her, contact police you know answer will take no action, then get correspondence from her, she has contacted police, told i am delusionary in allegations against police, and mentally ill, so complaint to police 17.10.2020 over these libel comments. The female QC barrister and judge asked for reply from police to be sent to her for consideration over libel allegations. You know next bit application complaint ignored ,contact Lopresti as complaints police ignoring where he is happy police can ignore complaints. WE STATE TO MEDIA POLICE CAN MAKE ALLEGATIONS UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT MAKE COMPLAINT WHERE MP HAPPY POLICE CAN IGNORE COMPLAINT.Ask police for replies ,cover bent PCC Mountstevens into email, can we have reply to complaints 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 which police ignore. Chance to obtain evidence,so i am delusionary ,mentally ill,,,,in allegations against police, where what were allegations, which from above you admit,,,,in IPCC investigation, we did not follow IPCC regulations, and we sent reply to your appeal where we admit no appeal made, ,,,,had just one outstanding issue.....DELUSIONARY....why did i come to you day,1,,was it malfeasance in public office ignoring applications /correspondence for years,,now is it a criminal offence, and therefore you and court wrong to state should have taken to JCIO ,via statute as they told you they could not investigate complaint,,,email again to Ms Jennison LAST ONE 7.1.2021 asking for replies to complaints of the 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 and why did i come to you day 1.
10/ After Lopresti confirming refusal to help, no where else to go, only option media, offending every week ,,,,court hearing,,,until sent to prison. Already released under investigation,,,,need court case,,,now or reoffending until sent to prison. My websites speak for themselves if facts wrong why have police not sued for libel.Galloway your bent your utterly aware could not refer to JCIO,,,,YOU STATE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS THEY TOLD YOU COULD NOT REFER TO THEM AND YOU SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED,,,YOU SAID IF DOING APPEAL,,,NEED TO ENCLOSE OUR APPEAL FORM ,,,,NEVER SERVED.YOU THEN CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS KNOWING MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE REFUSE TO CONFIRM EVIDENCE UNDER ,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,, In litagation eg again later at Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE
Notice to admit facts
32.18
(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
P JONES
RE: co/1737/20
philip.jones88@btinternet.com
07/01/2021 15:39
1
CAN I ISSUE APOLOGY AS EARLIER EMAIL INCOMPLETE LAP TOP ERROR
From advice from retired District judge have enclosed this email.Complaints nothing to do with corrupt and bent Galloway,will put this email in www.corruptionavonsomersetpolice.com in website later today if facts untrue sue me.However Insp O Mahony states Galloway admits i went to police over malfeasance in public office, however never obtained actual allegations eg malfeasance in public ,office as,,,,,,,,,,,,,ignoring applications for. years ??????????as again today ASK why i came to Sgt Price. Via statute malfeasance in public office a criminal offence,from CPS paper on malfeasance in public office gives list of people who have been convicted includes judges and other, FROM JCIO statute they can not investigate complaints if criminal allegations. ,,,,HAVE LETTER FROM COURT ADMITTING OFFENCE,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,THEREFORE GALLOWAY WRONG,,,,,I SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO,,,,JUDGES IMMUNE,,,NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
NOTHING TO DO WITH BENT GALLOWAY
COMPLAINT 1.6.2020,,,,AGAINST DOMALOWSKA PCSO,,,,HER LETTER RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED APPALING ,,,,UNDATED,,,WHAT ARE ALLEGATIONS OF UNSOCIABLE BEHAVIOUR
COMPLAINT 17.10.2020 ARISES FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION WITH LIST OF PEOPLE ON RESTRAINING ORDER WHERE ONE CITED SEND ME VIOLENT /THREATING EMAILS WHICH YOU FAILED TO CONTACT HER. SHE HOWEVER CONTACTED YOU,,,,,ALLEGATIONS BY YOU MY JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION DISLUSIONARY ,,,MENTALLY ILL,,,
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial reriew]WHERE YOU ADMIT IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION YOU DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT FILED,,,,YOUR ALLEGATIONS DILUSIONARY ????????????????????/
COMPLAINT WHO MADE THESE ALLEGATIONS MENTALLY ILL ,,,DELUSOINARY,,,,STATE AGAIN NOTHING TO DO WITH GALLOWAY,,,
FURTHER AGAIN CAN YOU CONFIRM WHY I WENT TO SGT PRICE DAY 1 AND CAN WE HAVE REPLIES TO COMPLAINTS,,,,IN MY PAPERS TO YOU SCAN EVIDENCE 4 ALSO IN WEBSITE HAVE FULL QUESTIONS ASKED OVER THESE 2 COMPLAINTS
P JONES
Goodafternoon,
CAN WE PLEASE DEFINE THIS DOCUMENT AS DOCUMENT DEC 2019
INTRODUCTION , Police ask what questions do you want answered. Sections in attachments relate to ombudsman issue, then overview of the whole, required by lawyers when in court. We have issue as events have taken over where now my MP involved, he requests my address in each contact 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL,Bristol Evening Post involved, , HMCS [HM court system] involved ,ombudsman involved , CASE NUMBER C2097203 as we seek further extended answers from you . Further via general election know actual MP, therefore can do this document as we know MP, to send correspondence to. From my website
www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com document this named DOCUMENT DEC 2019 posted if facts untrue we await litagation. I make no apology for name dropping , retired district judge, QC a female barrister and judge, and even High court judge ect who contacted,,,,,after seeing my web site. Can I please refer to previous complaint to you, which was removed with apology, as turned out to be complaint against contractor you appointed not police, where settled later positive outcome via litagation. can I refer to email to your Insp O Mahony,,,,,,,,,,,,not only removal and apology, but I stated you did not give me good service, it was EXCELLENT service thank you In that complaint required information relating to historic issue. Where Insp O Mahony kindly supplied information, today we seek more information. So we have todays issue plus historic issue.
1/ Todays present issue complaint , before we return to historic issue,,, left home and about 30 mins later at library realised I had not locked back door. Coming home as going out that evening from library, to lock door, a boy about 12 years old stopped me and stated as soon as you went out, your neighbour came in and vandalised your property, neighbour a few doors away when I came home laughing talking to someone. . Reported matter to police, where officers came after 2 weeks delay . So as no misunderstanding have for say,, Bristol Evening Post recording at Patchway police station, where police told rarely home, gave email address told to email when they wished to contact, today suggest no excuse 2 week delay. . We are told by police, your neighbours property also being vandalised by travellers , on this day, he warned them off, where he reported issue to police. This does not ring true, good relationship with travellers as male officer aware,,,,,,seen him at library, on Fridays travellers for years are at Patchway library on course, where I am every Friday, no conflict.
Question 9 to police summary…. from officers statement allegations ,,,,can you confirm neighbour reported alleged crime to you, travellers vandalising property, can you please confirm when he reported. . Can I ask ,,,,you were aware from allegations of neighbour, of my property being vandalised, when was incident recorded by you, and why did it take 2 weeks to contact me. Further why did it take 2 officers to attend, further considering time sending 2 officers, did you enquire from neighbours if they saw anything. Further will try after your reply to trace boy as witness, neighbour wasting police time, eg place card in shop, with 100.00 award taken from my state pension, if fails could use say Evening Post ,local TV channels leave 100.00 with them from my pension, so they can pay boy after publicity for conviction,,,,waste of police time. Further with your reply can display allegations of neighbour with travellers at library on Fridays. Further can I refer to people in greenhouses should not throw stones, could well be one night travellers may throw brick throw vehicles windows in neighbours forecourt if matter not resolved.
2/ Accept paper can not name anyone, however ask paper to consider running story allegations of travellers vandalising property ,did any see anything ,100.00 award, which I could leave in cash with newspaper
3/ Need to cite historic document of 2017,can I please paste,,,,,,that,,, I had sympathy with police, they did investigate, malfeasance in public office courts ignoring applications for years, perjury issue where contacted Bristol county court, where told judges/ staff immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue was via JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office], told we can not help you. However as they state, JCIO ,via statute as criminal offences could not investigate,
Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,
from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )
further from CPS [crown prosecution service ] document on malfeasance in public office,,,, HMCS were corrupting and frustrating the judicial process, misleading the police, as we ask police today,in one of questions, ,,as judges convicted,,,eg police mislead by HMCS, ,,,,,one of questions asked today,,,
QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PASTED FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU AGAIN CITED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE]
· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]
bent.com
, Entitled to legal aid ,however no one would take on as it involved corruption in the court,,eg ,,,,,,we deal with judiciary every day do not want to take on,had to do judicial review application on my own. We obtain judgement where need advice…….. to show point long lists of legal firms in email ,copied my MP into email , saying if someone could advise to please contact and copy my MP into reply, no replies as before. Position now court has confirmed they would look at new application ,have given reference number , however due to fee required can not even do application myself. Can I refer to human right act under Article 6
126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:
§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);
§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:……..
We have watertight case from below , from Insp O Mahonys letter where you will see police admit my claim, .All I have is my state pension, can not afford 528.00.We have moral issue of lawyers, we have barrister who said he would consider papers if a lawyer sent papers to him. We do however need further information, before I take matter into my own hands, as with damage to my property, with further help from paper,,,,, as coming to end of my life, no one now left to give home to where ask paper to give to deserving people. The police are aware historically as taking matters in to my own hands with cardiac arrest while in police custody where moved to hospital Planned cardiac surgery declined, hope to die in police custody, over historic issue, to expose and obtain removal of judges. This is not issue of allegations the whole issue is of FACTS ADMIITTED BY POLICE/HMCS [HM court service] . You may say ,which raises other issues for paper, why not ask lawyer ,via Legal Aid, to act, in 2017 tried told numerous times , NO MORAL FIBER this is issue of corruption at the court we deal with these people every week we do not want to take them on ,,,,went outside area where no help. We have emailed same people again, copied MP asking if someone could please help,with present issue before court of appeal, as we had reply from court of appeal, where Master confirmed he would accept application ,,,,DO WE HAVE A WATERTIGHT CASE TO GO BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL CAN NOT DO MYSELF DUE TO COURT FEE 528.00 breach of Article 6,,,,,,,,,With legal aid could return to court.
So ask questions do I have watertight case, where have most of evidence today, however seeking final nail for Legal aid board. With legal aid they would pay court fees. So will show I have watertight case,will ask MP to send papers to Legal aid board, for granting of legal aid.
If need be at end will take matters into my own hands, eg arrested every week ,before sent to prison. We have friend who is terminally ill, agreed to drive me to police station/court where have 5l tins of paint given to me when she moved by Ms Bowyer please see scan 10573 to throw in doorways to show injustice,,,, in prison,,,,3 ,websites for each judge,,,startes for 99p/year ,,,,, can name judges in websites eg www.HHJCottercorruptand bent.com . Contacted graffiti artist , he has 4 friends on same night different parts of Bristol can paint on public buildings www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com,,,,,shoplifting every week to get to prison ,,,,.
4/ As ombudsman and MP stated they can not get involved in court judgements, as you can see already ombudsman issued a reference, In historic case element already had compensation of 150.00 over another element.
THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE. . The ombudsman process in Appendix 4 Tactically HMCS [HM court service] have made a big mistake, statute ,,,,complain to court,,,,,not satisfied go to Resolver, not satisfied escalate, not satisfied send evidence to your MP to look at merits of case to see if he will refer to ombudsman,,,,,,,,,,,,,,coming up to 2 years, still at Resolver stage, where HMCS wanted to go direct to ombudsman , now inform ombudsman we want to go to escalate stage first. Well you want to go to escalate stage , then I require information to do escalate application. If direct to ombudsman then I would not have input into questions asked, eg can not dictate questions put to HMCS ,the ombudsman would have been conducting his/her investigations as they feel fit. Further seek answers under ,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Application to Bristol county court 6.12.2017 via email, HMCS stance we did not get and in 2017 HMCS were utterly unaware of possible application. OMBUDSMAN ISSUE eg as not read not considered ask for refund of fee.
FACTS Note sent to HHJCotter with N244 form, eg what I want court to do, please see sample of form in scan N244, where asked to pay fee. Retired district judge advised a new N244 form and application, under
Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,
Advised to seek information to do application at the court where visit recorded, 5.12.2017, Mr Blair refused to supply evidence needed for my claim to succeed, utter breach of Article 6 eg refused to let me obtain evidence from file
,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Further had printer problem so would do after 5.12.2017, so evidence withheld, from recording just let me see N244 form for record need to leave message on it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,application, not to be sent to HHJCotter, until amendment sent.
On way home visited library sent email, for years saying to HMCS did you get email.
FOR MR BLAIR
At library BT site has been down , will email tonight at home.
Required as you will see to change a few dates in new revised application eg if sent now third party could say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,we were not aware until 4.00 pm could not be expected to say today if we wish to add a comment for HHJCotter,
P JONES
Playing Devils Advocate have asked over 10 times to HMCS did you get email,,,court receipt below WHERE WE ASK AGAIN TODAY
Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>
05/12/2017 16:17
1
To:
E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>
To:
E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>
Sent
Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court
Please retain this email as confirmation that your document has been received.
We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days.
If your email is regarding a complaint, please allow 10 working days for your concerns to be investigated and a response provided. For further guidance please refer to the EX343 on the Justice Website.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Application emailed 6.12.2017,,,retired judge advised as no reply to 5.12.2017 email to email 7.12.2017,,eg
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.
AGAIN COURT RECEIPT
Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>
07/12/2017 09:59
1
To:
E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>
To:
E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>
Sent
Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court
Please retain this email as confirmation that your document has been received.
We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days.
If your email is regarding a complaint, please allow 10 working days for your concerns to be investigated and a response provided. For further guidance please refer to the EX343 on the Justice Website.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Still no reply, as email 21.12.2017 and 29.12.2017,,,CONSIDER MR FOWLERS LETTER YOUR ENQUIRES WILL NOT BE ANSWERED JUST FILED. Consider email of 29.12.2017
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,
DID ANYONE READ THIS EMAIL IF THEY DID AWARE OF NEW APPLICATION AFTER 5.12.2017 YES HHJCOTTER READ EMAIL
Can I refer to Lord Goldring judgement many years ago,,,,utterly legally flawed hearing your appeal without transcript, although getting verdict very badly wrong not reason to grant judicial review,,Srickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132, and award to Bristol court of 500.00 would be quashed, [never forgiven for judgement] why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork] As every date wrong in judgement of 9.1.2018, we may ask what drugs/intoxication was Cotter on. , need evidence to do application to Administration court, can I refer to scan Cotter late where Cotter confirms he read email 29.12.2017 so aware of amendment of 6.12.2017 sent.
HOW CAN HMCS STATE WE WERE NOT AWARE OF APLICATIONS THEY HAVE FROM ABOVE COURT RECEIPTS COTTER AWARE OF AMENDED APPLICATION. OR ARE HMCS SAYING RECEIPTS ARE FORGED WE SEEK THEIR REPLIES. OMBUDSMAN ISSUE NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS. SIMPLE QUESTION WERE HMCS AWARE OF APPLICATION. COTTER READ EMAIL 29.12.2017 SO AWARE OF AMENDED APPLICATION.
HMCS WANT TO CALL BLACK IS WHITE I ACCEPT CAN NOT ANSWER MY CORRESPONDENCE,AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS,,,,,,IS EMAIL 7.12.2017 ON SYSTEM WE HAVE COURT RECEIPT,,,????????????????? IF THEY ADMIT COMPELLING EVIDENCE AND REPAY FEE THEN AWARE LEGATTS JUDGEMENT AT COURT OF APPEAL IN TATTERS eg IN JUDGEMENT FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION. WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS BARRISTERS WHO CONTACTED ME ALL OVER THE COUNTRY CITING,,
,,,,,who saw my website,, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,REASON TO GRANT APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT.We have had High court judge asking question,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing an appeal –REJECTED ON JUDGEMENT OF COTTER BUT COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION ,,,WHAT DID HE READ A DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED,,,FURTHER COTTERS JUDGEMENT ON FACTS WRONG eg WHY I WENT TO POLICE.
5/ Can I cite female QC barrister and judge who saw my website, who stated there is cornerstone issue in cases [Cotters is that I went to police malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, one of questions asked to police do you have any evidence to show this,,,NO ] barrister stated say I am sitting as a judge, [of course would never come to hearing] defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, at hearing Counsel for defendant states not my client on this day, my client in closed prison, in your case why you went to police, cornerstone issue, If it was malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, and Eaga perjury issue, both criminal offences, so police advice we can not investigate, take to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] was wrong, and Cotters judgement in TATTERS.,,,,NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE JCIO via statute state can not investigate they are criminal allegations as they confirmed, via statute can not investigate, .
Barrister told me to report matter to police malfeasance in public office HMCS ignoring applications for years, plus Eaga perjury issue, Sgt Price asks for CPS [crown prosecution service ] document on malfeasance in public office and to explain my complaint, later defined the FEDJCAB complete document, a subsection defined FEDJCAB document [fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent] eg
CPS DOCUMENT IN BLACK PASTE,,,, MY COMMENTS WERE IN RED as FORMAT sent to Sgt Price WHY I WENT TO POLICE
SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AlSO SENT TO POLICE LETTER SCAN APPENDIX 9 enclosed
Pre action protocol document for judicial review had to be produced via statute please see scan Annex A. [my application paragraphs]
5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, scan 10389, [SAME REFERENCE TODAY] to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants,[eg police] warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
ALSO FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL STATUTE ANNEX A TITLE
11/ THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY ,,,
BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.
SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED 1 AND 13.2.2013 RELATE TO SCAN APPENDIX 2.
.In questions asked today we say to police/HMCS was FEDJCABcomplete in pre action protocol for judicial review , was via statute pre action protocol document paragraphs titles denoted by CPR was par 5 and 7 and 11 citings above in pre action protocol document. We then ask was Cotter denying evidence in front of him, utter breach of Article 6 . ,,,,,,,,,, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....
Can I refer to actual judicial review application,,,,
The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
THIS IS NOT APPLICATON AGAINST COURT
You will see simple question to police did I come to you malfeasance in public office as courts for years ignoring applications, we ask police/HMCS are above in file for pre action protocol document, we ask police do you have any evidence I came to you as malfeasance n public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer. Look at police letter scan 10594 where Insp O Mahony confirms recorded call with police we did not know offender, was it HMCS staff who did not send applications to Denyer, or Denyer. Consider above application in judicial review,,,, . ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
BUT DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 SO MY APPLICATION CAN NOT RELATE TO DISSATISFACTION OF DENYER,,,,IT STATES ,,,,even today applications ignored.
6/ Application in judicial review..
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote]
Can I refer to IPCC [independent police complaints commission] regulations
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Can I refer to scan 10594 where police admit IPCC regulations not followed,in this IPCC investigation, eg Galloway never talked to me. Can I refer to scan 10475 10494 where police admit on the 22.7.2017 I state in email ,, with no replies to 11 questions, eg have you contacted lawyer whose application ignored, , have you talked to my MP, .look at scan Appendix 2 ect , whose application to court also ignored, would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017, ,,what did police state in above letter,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
,so email 24.7.2017 can not be an appeal, WAITING FOR REPLY TO 11 QUESTIONS
Can I refer as barrister cited to me,,,case law,,,
JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed
Can I refer as cited further also in judicial review application ,,,, to local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office,
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017
SO APPICATION JUDICIARY STATE IS VEXATIOUS ??????????????
POLICE ADMIT FACTS . OR ISSUE FOR EVENING POST ,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.can I refer to citing IN TEXT ,,,,,is this High court judges protecting their own.
WE MAY ASK CONSIDER WWW.CORRUPTIONAVONSOMERSETPOLICE.COM IF JUDGEMENT OF COTTER BIGGER LEGATT CORRECT WHY HAVE POLICE NOT STARTED LITAGATION FOR LIBEL.
HMCS … ANSWER QUESTION WE HAVE ASKED IN THIS DOCUMENT BELOW ,,,ASKED FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
FURTHER ASK POLICE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS
From questions with already obtained evidence from police/HMCS can show Biggers judgement wrong in every aspect. We have restraining order because you appealed these facts. We have further questions in respect to police email also. Look at Biggers judgement,,,the facts of case not in Cotters judgement, did not read application, did not go to police malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, and you had legal basis of claim.
7/ a/ The references will be sent in further email, we ask for reply to questions by the 14.1.2018. With no replies ask my MP to ask for reply, as would need evidence on merits of claim before he sends papers to the Legal Aid board.
b/ The questions tabulated under questions to HMCS /POLICE in references email can parties please reply as this tabulated document.
c// With replies can do escalate stage to HMCS , before it goes to ombudsman .Today under no circumstances will I be involved in correspondence, just need replies to do escalate stage.
d/ Could parties if reply do via email, if need to do via letter could you please email to confirm letter on its way.
e/ We ask final question to HMCS number 21 We had no reply to question is fee 528.00. Can I refer to HMCS document
Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.
Eg to vary, amend order, Master stated HMCS would consider new application.
Can I request CPS that document today is forwarded to a judge. We have in utterly cowardly way Legatt quoting restraining order of 2016, where in 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 applications to remove. We know why ignored, as at hearing DEFENDANTS ASKED THAT JUDGEMENT STATED THIS. THIS REJECTED BY DJWATSON MY 3 APPLICATIONS UNDER
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]
HMCS RECENTLY VIA COMPENSATION PAID 150.00 IF I LODGED AT COURT WOULD THE COURT OBTAIN TRANSCRIPT,,,,IF IT SHOWED APPLICATION REJECTED BY DJWATSON WOULD COURT REPAY THE 150.00
eg GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today,]
IS IT ALRIGHT TO JUDGES TO MAKE COWARDLY ATTACKS
We have issue of court of appeal application, as computer crash emailed court to obtain application at conclusion of hearing, again emails ignored. Court states binned after hearing as regulations. Judge advised from a theoretical point of view true, however this was just a warning to back up, if you required offered to pay cost of return there was no reason why your request not made, further if not doing court had duty to inform you, so you could ask for sections you require to be photocopied, with you paying court copy fees. DO YOU HAVE OWN COPY OF APPLICATION IF SO FREE OF CHARGE CAN YOU COPY FILE ACCEPT POSTAGE /PACKING CHARGE
CAN WE PLEASE DEFINE THIS DOCUMENT AS DOCUMENT DEC 2019
INTRODUCTION , Police ask what questions do you want answered. We have issue as events have taken over where now my MP involved, he request address in each contact 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL, , HMCS [HM court system] involved ,ombudsman involved , CASE NUMBER C2097203 as we seek further extended answers from you . Further via election know MP, can do this document as we know MP, From my website
www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com I make no apology for name dropping , retired district judge, QC a female barrister and judge, and even High court judge ect who contacted,,,,,after seeing my web site. Can I please refer to previous complaint to you, which was removed with apology, can I refer to email to your Insp O Mahony,,,,,,,,,,,,not only removal and apology, but I stated you did not give me good service, it was EXCELLENT service thank you. This was a issue where as I could not move ambulance staff had to break in to remove me to hospital, in hospital for 4 days, coming home just small piece of wood over broken glass, where water entered my home. As Insp O Mahony stated ,ambulance staff contacted us as security issue, we arranged for WHOLE window to be boarded up, however contractors are not police staff, they are independent of police. Of course complaint against police utterly without merit , removed, where matter settled via litagation with contractor. Via regulations Insp O Mahony stated to close case, via regulations need to talk to you , NOTE THIS IN RESPECT TO HISTORIC ISSUE LATER, where I stated due to historic issue would not talk until I obtained reply to questions. In text have questions in respect to your email above, ,however further questions answers required by my MP ombudsman and me. . In terms of this different historic case, we ask questions please see below, plus again asking questions not only to you, but HMCS concerning historic case. The reply in ambulance case in scan 10594 from Insp O Mahony over historic issue, eg reply to my questions. From start must be made clear under no circumstances will there be any discussion, WITH ANY PARTY just require replies please to questions so I can do escalate stage , then we can go to ombudsman, and my MP, over this issue ,,,,ISSUE with ombudsman has NOTHING TO DO WITH COURT JUDGEMENTS, as MP /ombudsman stated if it did they could not help, please note ombudsman have issued reference number already above. The ombudsman process in Appendix 4 Tactically HMCS have made a big mistake, statute proceedure ,,,,complain to court,,,,,not satisfied go to Resolver, not satisfied escalate, not satisfied send evidence to your MP to look at merits of case to see if he will refer to ombudsman,,,,,,,,,,,,,,coming up to 2 years, still at Resolver stage, where HMCS wanted to go direct to ombudsman , now inform ombudsman we want to go to escalate stage first. Well you want to go to escalate stage , then I require information to do escalate application. If direct to ombudsman then I would not have input into questions asked, eg can not dictate questions put to HMCS ,the ombudsman would have been conducting his/her investigations as they feel fit. Further seek answers under ,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
2/ Bristol Evening Post covered in this reply. The present complaint to police relates to vandalisation of my property. Coming home a boy of about 12 stopped me saying, your next door neighbour vandalising your property. Accept paper can not name anyone, however offering 100.00 award if people come forward as witness, eg did anyone see vandalisation taking place. . . Would leave 100.00 cash from my pension with paper. We seek further help from Bristol Evening Post as coming to end of my life, no one now left to give home to where ask paper to give to deserving people. The police are aware historically as taking matters in to my own hands with cardiac arrest while in police custody where moved to hospital Planned cardiac surgery declined, hope to die in police custody, over historic issue, to expose and obtain removal of judges. This is not issue of allegations the whole issue is of FACTS ADMIITTED BY POLICE/HMCS [HM court service] . You may say ,which raises other issues for paper, why not ask lawyer ,via Legal Aid, to act, in 2017 tried told numerous times , NO MORAL FIBER this is issue of corruption at the court we deal with these people every week we do not want to take them on ,,,,went outside area where no help. We have emailed same people again, copied MP asking if someone could please help,with present issue before court of appeal, as we had reply from court of appeal, where Master confirmed he would accept application ,,,,DO WE HAVE A WATERTIGHT CASE TO GO BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL CAN NOT DO MYSELF DUE TO COURT FEE 528.00 breach of Article 6,,,,,,,,,With legal aid could return to court.
Granting of legal aid
123. However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).
124. The question whether or not Article 6 requires the provision of legal representation to an individual litigant will depend upon the specific circumstances of the case (ibid.; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 61; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, § 48). What has to be ascertained is whether, in the light of all the circumstances, the lack of legal aid would deprive the applicant of a fair hearing (ibid., § 51). [ note ,,,can not get hearing without legal aid due to ,,financial situation of litigant,,,please see 126]
126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:
§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);
§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
So ask questions do I have watertight case, where have most of evidence today, however seeking final nail for Legal aid board. With legal aid they would pay court fees. So will show I have watertight case,will ask MP to send papers to Legal aid board, for granting of legal aid.
If need be at end will take matters into my own hands, eg arrested every week ,before sent to prison. We have friend who is terminally ill, agreed to drive me to police station/court where have 5l tins of paint given to me when she moved by Ms Bowyer by Ms Bowyer please see scan 10573 to throw in doorways to show injustice,,,, in prison,,,,3 ,websites for each judge,,,startes for 99p/year ,,,,, can name judges in websites eg www.HHJCottercorruptand bent.com . Contacted graffiti artist , he has 4 friends on same night different parts of Bristol can paint on public buildings www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com,,,,,shoplifting every week to get to prison ,,,,.
3/ Need to cite historic document of 2017,,,,that,,, I had sympathy with police, they did investigate, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, perjury issue where contacted Bristol county court, where told judges/ staff immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue was via JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office], we will not help you. However as they state, JCIO ,via statute as criminal offences could not investigate,
Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,
from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )
further from CPS [crown prosecution service ] document on malfeasance in public office,,,, HMCS were corrupting and frustrating the judicial process, misleading the police, as we ask police today,in one of questions, ,,as judges convicted,,,eg police mislead by HMCS, ,,,,,one of questions asked today,,,
QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PASTED FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU AGAIN CITED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE]
Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]
bent.com
4/ May help in historic issue if we consider a possible skeletal argument to judgement of Legatt LJ , to tease out issues,then to supply more detail. THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE AS IT WERE ,,JUST A BRICK IN THE WALL………..HOWEVER UTTERLY NOT INVOLVED IN JUDGEMENTS. FATAL TO HMCS. Eg Legatts judgement states facts of case in Cotters judgement , but Cotter did not read application, read wrong papers, .as numerous barristers cited Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legaatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants,. Lets clear up an issue of possible HMCS defence , we did not get email of 6.12.2017 application and in 2017 utterly unaware of possible application, sole issue for ombudsman . CITED BY COTTER NOTE SENT IN NOV 2017 HOWEVER ALSO IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IT CONTAINED THE ISSUE TODAY
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
NEXT STEP THE ECHR [eur court of human rights]
So was never an issue over JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.
MERITS OF APPLICATION BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL
4. 1/ COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 ,READ WRONG PAPERS WHAT DID HE READ. LEGATTS LJ JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION. MANY BARRISTERS HAVE CITED, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legaatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants,. We have application via email to HHJCotter, on the 6.12.2017. with replacement N244 form, recording at court 5.12.2017,,,,,N244 old form to be removed, write on N244 form, amendments to follow, where pay court fee,,,,,,Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court , HMCS stance we never obtained application and HMCS in 2017 were utterly unaware of possible application, of 6.12.2017?????????OMBUDSMAN ISSUE as seek refund of fee as application removed. I ACCEPT HMCS CAN NOT ACCEPT OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE AS LEGATT LJ STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION.,, EVIDENCE LATER TO OMBUDSMAN ,,,,SO HMCS,defence ,,,WE WERE UNAWARE OF APPLICATION ??????NONSENCE
Email 7.12.2017 STATED
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.
DID HMCS OBTAIN EMAIL OF 5.12.2017 6.12.2017 and 7.12.2017 SO AWARE OF NEW AMENDED APPLICATION UNDER GOC,,,,,OF 6.12.2017 AND NEW N244 FORM,,,,HMCS STANCE WE DID NOT GET APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 AND IN 2017 HMCS WERE UTTERLY UNAWARE OF APPLICATIONOF 6.12.2017 YES YOU WERE AWARE AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE SAID NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER THE BASTARDS HAVE REMOVED APPLICATION ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN eg SEE court receipt
Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>
07/12/2017 09:59
1
Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court
Please retain this email as confirmation that your document has been received.
We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,END OF COURT RECEIPT EVIDENCE
We have recording at court of 5.12.2017 that N244 removed not to send to Cotter, replacement to follow, with amended application.
We have problems with Cotters judgement ,what drugs /intoxication was he on, [reference judgement of Lord Goldring many years ago why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork] as every date wrong in judgement of 9.1.2018, need evidence to do application to Administration court, can I refer to scan Cotter late
[THIS AS OBTAINED DAMAGED BY ROYAL MAIL CAN I REFER TO RECORDING WITH HMCS DEMANDING FEE IF REPLACED] where Cotter in judgement confirms correct ONE date should have been 29.12.2017 for email, WHICH HE READ ,,,what did it state,,,
Email 29.12.2017 , under ECHR [European court of human rights, ] concept of Equality of arms , where long running issue with concept, with HMCS in cases defendants can get replies same day, my questions just ignored,,,,where for example in AOIBS346 /746 defendants ask questions, where we have replies for example ,,,, Ms Smith,,,,asked court this morning, [same day] ,,Smith court have replied, they state,,,,,,,,,,,where my enquires ignored for years can I quote HMCS Mr Fowler old reply for information to do judicual review ,,,,,,will just be filed this court will not reply just file, as they did 5 7 12 29 dec 2017….utter breach of Article 6 ,,,
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
EMAIL 29.12.2017 STATED
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,
Eg was asking did you get emails of 5, 6, 21, 29 of Dec,2017,,
BUT CORRUPT AND BENT COTTER ADMIT HE READ EMAIL OF 29.12.2017 ,,,eg NEW N244 FORM WITH AMENDMENT,,,WE HAVE BEEN ASKING CAN WE SEE N244 CONSIDERED CAN WE SEE AMENDMENT CONDIDERED .HMCS CAN NOT REPLY AS WOULD ADMIT APPLICATION 6.12.2017 OBTAINED. FURTHER IF DID NOT OBTAIN THEN COTTER DID NOT HAVE A N244 FORM eg WHAT I AM ASKING COURT TO DO ,,,DID NOT CONSIDER APPLICATION WHERE I REQUIRE REFUND OF FEE. HMCS CAN NOT REFUND FEE AS LEGATT LJ IN JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT. All I would need to do in application Cotter did not read application of 6.12.2017 , Legatt mind already made up states facts of case in Cotters judgement. IN APPLICATION TO LEGATT AWARE OF THIS WHERE ASK FOR ORDER TO LOOK AT FILE TO DO MY APPLICATION,,after my investigations ,,,EG IS EMAILS 7.12.2017 IN FILE ,,,,SCAN 10547 WHICH LEGATT IGNORED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS, AS HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED ,,,,GENERAL PUBLIC MAY ASK IS THIS PUBLIC SCHOLBOY JUDGES PROTECTING THEIR OWN
THR WHOLE CASE FALLS HERE DID NOT READ APPLICATION HOWEVER TO CONCLUDE LEGATT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT…IS THIS A DOCUMENT COTTER PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS…
4. 2/ ISSUE DID NOT GO TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,WE HAVE ROYAL MAIL PROFF OF POSTING WHERE TAPE RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE SENT TO BIGGER WITH FEDJCABCOMPLETE DOCUMENT,,,, ,Can I cite female QC barrister and judge who saw my website, who stated there is cornerstone issue in cases [Cotters is that I went to police malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, one of questions asked to police do you have any evidence to show this,,,no] barrister stated say I am sitting as a judge, [of course would never come to hearing] defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, at hearing Counsel for defendant states not my client on this day, my client in closed prison, in your case why you went to police, cornerstone issue, If it was malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, and Eaga perjury issue, both criminal offences, so police advice we can not investigate, take to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] was wrong, and Cotters judgement in TATTERS.,,,,NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE JCIO via statute state can not investigate they are criminal allegations as they confirmed, via statute can not investigate, . Not withstanding this did not go to police as ,,,malfeasance in public office dissatisfaction with judgement of HHJDenyer, can I refer to FEDJCAB document below this in pre action protocol document for judicial review document also the pre action protocol document had to be produced via CPR statute Annex A please see scan annex A paragraphs scan eg par 5 and 7 eg statute define 7/ the issue YES THE ISSUE
AlSO SENT TO POLICE LETTER SCAN 13.4,2017 enclosed APPENDIX 9 THIS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT BEFORE COTTER WHERE HE STATES YOU WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER BEFORE COTTER/BIGGER HOW DO YOU COME TO JUDGEMENT I WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER from pre action protocol paragraphs,,,COTTER YOUR CALLING BLACK IS WHITE YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT FROM SCAN ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS
5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, scan 10389, [SAME REFERENCE TODAY] to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants,[eg police] warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
ALSO FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL STATUTE ANNEX A TITLE
11/ THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY ,,,
BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.
SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED 1 AND 13.2.2013 RELATE TO SCAN APPENDIX 2.
.In questions asked we say to police/HMCS was FEDJCABcomplete in pre action protocol for judicial review , was via statute pre action protocol document paragraphs titles denoted by CPR was par 5 and 7 and 11 citings above in pre action protocol document. We then ask was Cotter denying evidence in front of him, utter breach of Article 6 .
The judgement of Cotter is utter breach of Article 6 to deny evidence before him,,,
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....
We ask police do you have any evidence I came to you malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer.
4 3/ IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE WHERE THEY ADMIT MY COMPLAINT PLEASE SEE SCANS 10594 10475 10494 ,
Can I refer to IPCC [independent police complaints commission] regulations
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
4 4/ Cotter /Bigger wrong to say legal basis of claim not indicted , can I refer to advice from retired judge, make issue clear to judiciary as soon as possible, line one page one of judicial review application, . Can I refer to local barrister and judge paper on malfeasance in public office,,,,
Can I refer as cited this further also was in judicial review application ,,,, from local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office,
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, admitted in scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017
WHAT DID POLICE STATE IN LETTER SCAN 10494/75
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
SO APPICATION JUDICIARY STATE IS VEXATIOUS ??????????????
POLICE ADMIT FACTS . OR ISSUE FOR EVENING POST ,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.
MORE DETAIL
a/ Application today that application is not heard by Legatt LJ please, [we have High court judge stating making no allegations, however ,,,,general public may ask with compelling evidence,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own, of course we do not know judiciary education] ,although from Legatts order he would solely judge the further application, , the Master at court of appeal ,,,,no promises stated ,,,would be read by another judge or Legatt. as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of Legatt from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,I went to police as malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer however in email 13.7.2018 Legatt sent the FEDJCAB document,
DID NOT GO TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AS NUMEROUS BARRISTERS CITED ,,, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legaatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,starting point,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS NOT ONLY DID COTTER NOT READ APPLICATION CASE FALLS HERE ON FACTS,,, eg why I went to defendants,.please see b/
b/ , lets consider Legatts judgement. THE FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WHICH STATES I WENT TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER UTTER NONSENCE EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL UNTRUE
Can I refer to email of the 13.7.2018 under Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court , where FEDJCAB document sent to Legatt,,,,
Can I please refer to initial recorded conversation with Sgt Price where asked to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office, [NOT MISFEASANCE AS STATED IN JUDGEMENT] which I dissected eg FEDJCABcomplete document BEFORE ALL JUDGES eg
eg CPS DOCUMENT IN BLACK PASTE,,,, MY COMMENTS WERE IN RED as FORMAT sent to Sgt Price WHY I WENT TO POLICE
SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AlSO SENT TO POLICE LETTER SCAN APPENDIX 9 enclosed
Can I cite female QC barrister and judge who saw my website, who stated there is cornerstone issue in cases cited above .
For years Bristol/Cardiff courts ignoring applications, where had enough picket at court, leaflet handed out scan picket mainly over case 2YJ03757. Barrister told me to stop and report matter to police, seen by Sgt Price, where she asks for me to paste CPS [crown prosecution service] paper on malfeasance in public office and insert in text my complaint to police, later defined the FEDJCABcomplete document, subsection defined FEDJCAB, which shows issue FEDJCAB,,[,fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent]. Cited above
The FEDJCAB in pre action protocol document for judicial review, further via statute this document had to be produced via CPR paragraphs under Annex A, please see scan ANNEX A eg MY ACTUAL APPLICATION ABOVE eg PARAGRAPHS 5 AND 7 ,,,
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
ALSO FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL STATUTE ANNEX A
11/ THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY
BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.
SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED 1 AND 13.2.2013 RELATE TO SCAN APPENDIX 2.
THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SERVED BY EMAIL 16.9.2017 TO HMCS AND POLICE.
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).So ask in questions to police/HMCS today was FEDJCAB PAR 5 AND 7 IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW.
Where Cotter states in judgement ,,you went malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer. What he is doing is denying evidence in front of him utter breach of Article 6.
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....
Application to HHJBigger ,,in judicial review , quotes,below in judicial review application to Bigger…………….,,eg
The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
THIS IS NOT APPLICATON AGAINST COURT,,,,end of quote]
[can I refer before next quote to above,,,,,[malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
So issue why I went to police malfeasance in public office, where ,HMCS state Denyer retired in 2017, so malfeasance in public office allegation CAN NOT RELATE TO JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,STATE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 ????????????NEXT QUOTE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION.
THE ISSUE
1/ With facts you will see where events relate to this application against police,. You will see advised by barrister to contact police over criminal activity, picketing at court over 2YJ03757, ongoing new issues,,,. . We have reply no evidence of criminal activity, ,,,,, Wednesbury unreasonableness. Statute regulations in any investigations not followed, never contacted by investigation officer. Appeal allowed,,,, so ask questions [11 questions ] plus others ,,,,when did investigation officer contact me, all calls in/out recorded no mobile phone., emails ignored Required as in appeal form had to tick boxes statutory regulations were followed, ask when, all correspondence ignored. So email to defendants if you do not answer questions by 28.7.2017 would do appeal to you.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
[further list these 11 questions in judicial review application, ]eg ,,,,questions asked ,,
QUESTION 2 Have you interviewed Mr Till. ? [suggest in all these questions , no, no investigations undertaken. ] Had call assume from a district judge, as he talks about my court and other applications to the court. He states ,,,,,,,,,,,,do not approve of some of your applications to my court however will not stand by while corruption is going on, HHJDenyer/court out to get you, they have made a mistake, and forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing, 2YJ03757 From transcript of previous claim, which I won, 7 documents date/stamped by court as received removed from file, from transcript, DJWatson,,,,,,,,,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,,,,,,,,. As aware of corruption, court out to get me recorded conversation with Mr Blair at court. From recording he states yes only one now on computer records, Mr Till was told to send to Administration court Cardiff. We have judicial review judgement I had not asked for oral hearing to correct earlier judgement, this recording proves I did make application, although only proff required these date/stamped by court as received . So ask Bristol/Cardiff court for statement, it proves my case for the court of appeal.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,How does Mr Till make records of things he sends, how does Cardiff court make records of documents received. From file is there any record of this application, for example although all correspondence ignored, it would be fatal to court of appeal judgement, confirming a miscarriage of justice if any record of these applications. For example we ask why note on file in Cardiff not to discuss and to refer enquires to court manager Ms Weaver . We have string of emails to Ms Weaver ignored. Suggested to Sg Price a member of police staff in Cardiff obtain file, and look at records of obtaining documents, From recording not sure in malfeasance claim, did Mr Till ignore court order to ask HHJDenyer again for oral hearing, The court would never accept an application [date/stamped by court] if it did not have the court order . The court order clearly states to make application to HHJDenyer. Mr Till deals with appeals did he ignore court order by not sending to HHJDenyer, eg offence of malfeasance in public office, he is in charge of appeals, he has duty to send application to HHJDenyer, or did he send, and HHJDenyer ignored and told him to send to Cardiff court. Suggest if HHJDenyer did this then malfeasance in public office, from above definition of offence ,,,,,,,,,,,,failure to perform his duty,,,,. The issue with Mr Till taken up AT THIS TIME WITH COURT MANAGER MR FOWLER UNDER COMPLAINT HOWEVER COMPLAINT IGNORED numerous follow up emails ignored. Complaint as enquire what did Mr Till do, however did not know about malfeasance at this time. Did Sg Price make this investigation. ,,,,END OF QUOTE
Can I refer to confirmation from police/ HMCS these quotes in judicial review application, [the question asked in document DEC2019 today, under Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,]
Can I refer to police letter scan 10594 where police confirm the issue from tape recording of meeting with Sgt Price , eg is the malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, a Denyer or staff issue, eg in this case in 2013
The female QC stated Cotter/Bigger was never going to grant application as turkeys voting for Xmas, ,,,,inviting police in to investigate their courts criminal behaviour.
From court of appeal state, Biggers judgement the facts of case , no you just copied Cotters wrong judgement ,,,did you read application, judge stated recently my clerk prepares application,,,did clerk cite that issue is dissatisfaction with judgement of Denyer.
c/ Best way to combine next issues in one paragraph eg it was vexatious to make allegations against police, [which they admit] and nowhere was it shown legal basis of claim. Retired district judge stated, retired, will not do application ,however make issue clear to judiciary asap, eg the actual application pasted,,,
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote]
Can I refer to IPCC [independent police complaints commission] regulations
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Can I refer to scan 10594 where police admit IPCC regulations not followed,in this IPCC investigation, eg Galloway never talked to me. Can I refer to scan 10475 10494 where police admit on the 22.7.2017 I state in email ,, with no replies to 11 questions, eg have you contacted lawyer .look at scan Appendix 2 ect , whose application to court also ignored, would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017, ,,what did police state in above letter,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
,so email 24.7.2017 can not be an appeal.
Can I refer as barrister cited to me,,,case law,,,
JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed
Can I refer as cited further also in judicial review application ,,,, to local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office,
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017
SO APPICATION JUDICIARY STATE IS VEXATIOUS ??????????????
POLICE ADMIT FACTS . OR ISSUE FOR EVENING POST ,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.can I refer to citing above ,,,,,is this High court judges protecting their own.
WE MAY ASK CONSIDER WWW.CORRUPTIONAVONSOMERSETPOLICE.COM IF JUDGEMENT OF COTTER BIGGER LEGATT CORRECT WHY HAVE POLICE NOT STARTED LITAGATION FOR LIBEL.
HMCS … ANSWER QUESTION WE HAVE ASKED IN THIS DOCUMENT BELOW ,,,ASKED FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
FURTHER ASK POLICE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS
From questions with already obtained evidence from police/HMCS can show Biggers judgement wrong in every aspect. We have restraining order because you appealed these facts. We have further questions in respect to police email also.
MAIN TEXT
INTRODUCTION
Litagation issue against police , not court just interested third party, can I please refer to internet site Copwatch, cited to me by barrister, and ask to correlate with todays application.
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
PARAGRAPH a/ In previous police complaint b/ [please see paragraph e / below ] required information over complaint a/ ,also today in paragraph e/ ,,,,, in respect to todays new complaint denoted c/ in again paragraph e/ ,,,,,also require again also further information from complaint a/. Its evidence required by ombudsman, and my MP,,,, we have set questions. . MP would require answers as asked him to refer on merits of case to ombudsman and the Legal Aid Board, eg these are facts where Mr Jones seeks legal aid, judgement from ombudsman. . You will see also asking HMCS [HM court service ] questions again answers required by my MP and ombudsman, and myself as related to future litigation. Master at court of appeal confirmed I could make application,to remove order, however seek data to do application, , HMCS have ignored emails as I seek data, so todays application. . You will see HMCS have withheld this evidence for 2 YEARS NOW WHERE WE TRY AGAIN TODAY.REMIND PARTIES OF
,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
HMCS IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6
Further delay as HMCS [court of appeal ]has ignored my recent emails, utter breach of Article 6 ,withholding evidence, , however enough is enough as time has come to address issue.
We ask for reply to questions by 14,.1.2020 , with no reply could I please ask my MP to write to parties, as MP would need merit evidence before he refers to various agencies, eg ombudsman,,,,legal aid board ect,,,,
We require for my present MP Jack Lopresti, answers from police, to questions before he refers matter to the Legal Aid board. CAN NOT GET LEGAL AID WHERE ASK MP FOR HELP ...FOR EXAMPLE WILL SEE BARRISTER STATED QUALIFIED TO DO DIRECT ACCESS THIS CASE NOT SUITABLE FOR DIRECT ACCESS ,,,,WOULD CONSIDER PAPERS TO ACT IF A LAWYER SENT PAPERS TO HIM The Legal Aid board and barrister would require,,,,,for example , § his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). ,,eg ECHR [europeaon court of human rights ] case law eg …[Can I please refer to scan Annex C in pre action protocol for judicial review where could not obtain representation ]
Granting of legal aid
123. However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).
124. The question whether or not Article 6 requires the provision of legal representation to an individual litigant will depend upon the specific circumstances of the case (ibid.; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 61; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, § 48). What has to be ascertained is whether, in the light of all the circumstances, the lack of legal aid would deprive the applicant of a fair hearing (ibid., § 51).
126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:
§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);
§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid).
a/ ,,,,Right and access to a court 81. The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76 et seq.). 82. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 83. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim
b/ A right that is practical and effective . The right of access to a court must be “practical and effective” (Bellet v. France, § 38; Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76-79). For the right of access to be effective, an individual must “have a clear, practical opportunity to challenge an act that is an interference with his rights” (Bellet v. France, § 36; Nunes Dias v. Portugal (dec.)
c/ In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:…….. : the excessive amount of security for costs in the context of an application to join criminal proceedings as a civil party (Aït-Mouhoub v. France, §§ 57-58; García Manibardo v. Spain, §§ 38-45); excessive court fees (Kreuz v. Poland, §§ 60-67; Podbielski and PPU Polpure v. Poland, §§ 65-66; Weissman and Others v. Romania, § 42; Georgel and Georgeta Stoicescu v. Romania, §§ 69-70, and conversely, Reuther v. Germany (dec.)). In these cases the Court considered the question of court fees that had been imposed prior to the institution of civil proceedings and had had the effect of hindering access to a court at first instance or at a subsequent stage of the proceedings for applicants who were unable to pay. In Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings [by Legatt LJ] could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court. In cases concerning court fees, the litigant’s conduct should also be taken into accout (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 120);
The state may state we have 3 judges who came to same conclusion that plaintiffs application was vexatious. We have however a High court judge who saw my website asking a question,,,,,,,,,,,[DO NOT KNOW EDUCATION] ,,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own. Consider judgement in scan 10551 with police/HMCS evidence today. ,,,WILL SHOW JUDICIARY JUDGEMENTS WRONG ADMITTED BY PARTIES. POLICE ALREADY ADMIT CLAIM,,,WILL SHOW I WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ]IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS, PERJURY ISSUE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES VIA STATUTE CAN NOT TAKE AS THEY CONFIRM TO JCIO.
1/ Yet another female QC judge and barrister states cornerstone issue why you went to police. As she expands gives theoretical example, say defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, however sitting as a judge Counsel for defendant states not my client was in closed prison on this date. In your case why you went to police. For years HMCS ignoring my applications, picket at court, handing out in and outside court scan picket, where barrister told me to report this issue malfeasance [misconduct ] in public office to police, barrister stated also report Eaga perjury issue, . Recording at police station, why I went to police., from recording,,,,,,,,,,,,ignoring applications for years. Sgt Price requests CPS document on malfeasance in public office and requests via this to explain my complaint , the FEDJCABcomplete document. This FEDJCABcomplete in pre action protocol document for judicial review, further the pre action protocol document had to be produced via CPR template Annex A paragraphs, see scan Annex A , where paragraph 5 called details of matter,,,,,paragraph 7 is called the issue,,,,,section,,,THE DETAILS OF …THESE IN the pre action protocol for judicial review served on police/HMCS ON THE 16.9.2017 by email.
5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to HMCS , particularly Bristol county court [ BCC ], ignored, although enclosed in one case [scan 10389 today] order to make application to the court, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore request to obtain evidence to do applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants, warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY
BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy. ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;END OF QUOTE
SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED
Did not go to police as malfeasance in public office, as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, further as JCIO state as criminal offences could not take to JCIO. Police utterly aware of this with a earlier identical Ebrahimi case, where their officers jailed, eg ignoring allegations of criminal behaviour. Simple issue as we ask questions, are the above facts correct , from pre action protocol document, did I come to you malfeasance [misconduct] in public office as HMCS ignoring applications for years, further we ask police do you have any evidence I came to you as malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer. SIMPLE QUESTION ABOVE YES OR NO
The FEDJCABcomplete sent to HHJBigger, plus recording with Sgt Price, you can not deal with a corrupt and bent judge . EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT OF A BENT JUDGE ,,STATES WENT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. SO WE HAVE IF WE ACCEPT THIS CORRUPTION I GO TO SGT PRICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SHE WASTES POLICE TIME ASKING PC BIRD TO INVESTIGATE. I AM SURE IF THIS WAS TRUE SHE WOULD HAVE SAID,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NOTHING TO DO WITH POLICE NOT EVEN CRIMINAL CASE
Can I refer to judicial review application to Bigger,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored…..end of quote
THIS IS ISSUE OF APPLICATIONS IGNORED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
In terms of issue why I went to police could not be more clear , further as High court judge recently stated, you stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored…..end of quote
Bigger states scan 10551,,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer ,,,,
BUT FROM APPLICATION BIGGER AWARE ISSUE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 .HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED ,,,,,BUT DENYER RETIRED IN MID 2017 ,,,,,SO APPLICATION ISSUE WHAT EVER IT IS DOES NOT RELATE TO DENYER AS RETIRED WELL BEFORE 2018 WHERE YOU CORRELATE MALFEASANCE ISSUE STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,,CAN NOT RELATE TO DENYER ,,,RETIRED IN 2018
2/ Bigger states vexatious to make claim against police, well we may ask look at www.corruptionavonsomersetpolice.com consider judiciary 3 judgements , why have police not started litigation for libel. What was claim before judiciary,,,,
APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, [ I TODAY ADD IN BLUE,,, police, stated you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office of court ignoring applications,,,,,calling black is white,,,,where they have EVIDENCE scan appendix 2 lawyers correspondence that even their applications ignored, my MPs correspondence ignored,,,and court correspondence, ADMITTING eg,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US, COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS ] you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Bigger look at police statement scan 10594 ,,,we did not follow IPCC regulations. Look at police letter of 5.12.2017 scan 10475 10494 its in my judicial review application,,,,YOUR UTTERLY AWARE police state
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
So police send letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,I have made no appeal eg POLICE,,,,,,,,,,, we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, where police have court letter ,,,,we ignored your applications for years come and talk to us,,,so we have question in above application,,Cotter/Bigger come to identical judgement that it was vindictive and vexatious to make application. So I ask Bigger [accept no answer here] in a IPCC investigation, its perfectly acceptable for police to ignore IPCC regulations, further police admit we sent reply to your appeal where you have made no appeal. SO IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED. NO BIGGER I WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR ANSWER I WILL NOT ACCEPT JUDGEMENT FROM YOU WHO IS CORRUPT AND BENT.,,,,DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU. I SENT YOU RECORDING OF INITIAL MEETING WITH SGT PRICE ,,,your in ,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,eg or to falsely deny [evidence] their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....BIGGER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT AS JUDGE/BARRISTER STATED YOU WOULD NEVER GRANT APPLICATION TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS INVITING POLICE IN TO INVESTIGATE YOUR COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR.
3/ Bigger you state legal basis of claim never stated,,,,,?????????????????
SO TO SUMMARIZE FOR MEDIA ,,,HISTORIC COMPLAINT TO POLICE THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE INSP O MAHONY CONFIRMS POLICE IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS SCAN 10594 . SECONDLY MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL,,,,I STATE WOULD DO ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. PLEASE SEE SCAN 10475 10494
JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed,
Can I quote another local judge and barrister , her article on malfeasance in public office,
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Have i been wronged by police we ask media,,, in a IPCC investigation admit did not follow IPCC regulations and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged.
BIGGER I WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR ANSWER AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS WHAT YOU ARE DOING AS CORRUPT AND BENT AS TO DENY EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF YOU
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....
d/ . In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings [WE CITE PROCEDURE ERRORS OF LEGATT LJ UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE ECT IF HE DID NOT IGNORE APPLICATION SCAN 10547 WOULD NEVER COME TO HIS JUDGEMENT AS WE SEEK EVIDENCE TODAY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN 2017 HOWEVER HMCS MR BLAIR,,,,,,,,,YOUR NOT LOOKING AT FILES TO GAIN EVIDENCE OF US IGNORING YOUR APPLICATIONS,,,,BEFORE EMAIL REQUEST FOR DATA WHERE HMCS MR FOWLER IN LETTER,,,,,,,,,,,YOUR REQUEST WILL NOT BE ANSWERED JUST FILED,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,from ECHR ,, which prevented the applicant from enjoying such access, and determines whether the applicant was made to bear an excessive burden on account of such errors. Reference criteria have been laid down for assessing whether it is the applicant or the competent authorities who should bear the consequences of any errors (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 90-95, § 119). Where errors were made before
e/ Content: civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge (Fayed v. the United Kingdom, § 65; Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], § 46).
f/ Principles of interpretation: The principle whereby a civil claim must be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised fundamental principles of law; the same is true of the principle of international law which forbids the denial of justice. Article 6 § 1 must be read in the light of these principles (ibid., § 35).
The issue for ombudsman HMCS state we did not get EMAIL application of 6.12.2017 and in period 5.12.2017 to 1.1.2018 we were utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017 ,and therefore will not repay court fee. THIS DOES NOT RELATE TO COURT JUDGEMENTS AS HMCS STATE WE NEVER OBTAINED AND LATER UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017
We get utter frustration and corruption of the judicial process as for nearly 2 years HMCS ignore request to obtain evidence , which followed from HMCS Mr Fowler,,,,,,,,,,your enquires for data to do applications, will not be answered just filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6.
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
So in application to Legatt LJ at court of appeal, state application as at 1.7.2018 , AS SEEK EVIDENCE WITHHELD BY HMCS (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
where make application to obtain data, via inspection of files, to complete application, please see scan 10547 from court application to Legatt eg on court form N161. Which Legatt LJ ignored to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. . In application stated as at 1.7.2018 , as try to get evidence to do application,,,,,TODAY STILL TRYING TO GET THIS EVIDENCE,,,,stated that application of 6.12.2017 not considered by Cotter, court maintain they did not get, so what was application HHJCotter considered , ONE HE PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.WE TRY TODAY TO FIND EVIDENCE Legatt LJ in judgement states facts of case in HHJCotter judgement , however Legatt AWARE, Cotter did not read application, we have had 2 independent barristers from Birmingham and Manchester who saw my website, cited Sharing v Preston CC
Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to police , [WE SAY TO POLICE TODAY ,,,WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE I CAME TO SEE SGT PRICE AS MAFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. ]as CPS FEDJCAPcomplete document shows fatal evidence. FEDJCABcomplete its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 LEGATT AT THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,HE KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER WAS OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS AND PERJURY ISSUE CRIMINAL OFFENCES VIA STATUTE COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO. FURTHER HAS SCAN 10475 10494 AND 10594 WHERE POLICE ADMIT MY CLAIM
QUESTION 5 TO HMCS AGAIN COURT RECEIPT HOWEVER IS THE EMAIL 13.7.2018 and 19.7.2018 IN FILE OR HAS COURT OF APPEAL STARTED TO REMOVE EVIDENCE . (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,I ASKED IN APPLICATION TO LOOK AT FILES,,,,,IGNORED BY COURT OF APPEAL SO PRESENTED EVIDENCE UNDER GOC ,,, FOR CONSIDERATION
Legatt LJ has application to obtain evidence, please see scan 10547 . Only recently a High court judge who saw my website,,,,MAKING VERY CLEAR TO SAY BRISTOL EVENING POST,,,not making any allegations, however suggesting could the general public think public school boy judges protecting there own,when in prison could be headlines in the Bristol Evening Post. , Was there a procedure error, as Legatt ignored application to obtain data, IF HE DID NOT JUST IGNORE MY APPLICATION COULD HAVE SHOWN COTTER READ THE WRONG PAPERS ,,,THE READER WILL ASK QUESTION PLEASE SEE BELOW WHAT DID HE READ,,,so I could do application to the court of appeal. Eg,,,,,,in respect to obtaining legal aid,, . From Article 6,,,In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings ,,,you will see Cotters judgement utter nonsence with just one of questions today to police,,,did i come to you malfeasance in public office,court for years ignoring applications and perjury issue,,,,these are criminal offences and via statute can not take to JCIO IS THIS CORRECT,,,,,SEE QUESTION TODAY 2 AND 3 TO POLICE
HMCS stance will be to ombudsman,,,we did not get application of 6,12.2017 and in period up to 1.1.2018 HMCS were utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017 , however HHJCotter from judgement letter ,scan cotterlate aware of application as cites my email of the 29.12.2017 , aware therefore new N244 form and amended application 6.12.2017 under Goc . With evidence withheld could show HMCS stance [issue for ombudsman] we did not get application of 6.12.2017 however was aware of it, Legatt aware trying to get information via court order to get evidence, however via procedural errors committed during the proceedings to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ignored application.
QUESTION 4 TO POLICE THE ISSUE TO POLICE COVERED IN QUESTIONS BELOW,,,THESE IN DETAIL WILL BE CITED LATER, CAN I PLEASE ASK POLICE HOWEVER TO ANSWER AS TABULATED TABLE BELOW SIMPLE ANSWERS ,,,YES/NO eg
DID I COME TO YOU MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
AS FOR YEARS COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND PERJURY ISSUE YES NO
ARE THESE CRIMINAL OFFENCES AND THEREFORE VIA STATUTE YES NO
COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO
IN INVESTIGATION CAN YOU CONFIRM YOU DID NOT YES NO
FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS
CAN YOU CONFIRM IF MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS A FINAL APPEAL YES NO
QUESTIONS TO POLICE 5 RELATES TO QUESTION 4
,
1/ Early 2017 as barristers advice did I come to you, malfeasance in public office, as for years courts ignoring applications, where Sgt Price asked me to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office ,,[FEDJCAB complete] and show how it related to my complaint to police, we did not know OFFENDERS eg HMCS staff not sending applications to HHJDenyer or HHJDenyer ignoring applications malfeasance in public office ignoring applications as explained by your Insp O Mahony please see scan 10594.
2/ Do you have any evidence I came to you as ,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied over judgements of HHJDenyer, if so can you please disclose.
3/ PCBird in letter confirms went over offence malfeasance in public office, further perjury issue, can you please confirm criminal offence, and therefore via statute could not complain to JCIO.
4/ Can I refer to IPCC summary regulations , and Insp O Mahonys letter, scan 10594 , can you confirm you did not follow IPCC regulations. Eg Mr Galloway never contacted me.
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
5/ From police letter 5.12.2017 ,,,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
Further you sent correspondence,,,,,, if doing appeal had to enclose a police appeal form. Can you confirm on the 24.7.2017 you had no police appeal form, however you maintain email of the 22.7.2017 was final appeal, although you admit from letter 5.12.2017 I would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017 if you ignored email of the 22.7.2017 .
PARAGRAPH b/ Ombudsman and my MP can not get involved in court judgements,. The ombudsman issue does not relate to any judgements. We have already had compensation from HMCS from a much later event ,[customer investigations investigation ] however a related later issue today. .Can I quote my response to police complaint investigation paragraph e,,,,b/ complaint….you did not give me good service it was excellent service, thank you. . WE ACCEPT ALTHOUGH COMPELING EVIDENCE TODAY HMCS CAN NOT CONCEDE TODAYS COMPLAINT . HOWEVER ASK OMBUDSMAN IF HMCS CONTINUE THEN ISSUE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN RESPECT TO COSTS. A BARRISTER STATED HMCS HOWEVER MAY TAKE STANCE LESS OF 2 EVILS WE WILL REFUND FEE CLOSE OMBUDSMAN CASE AND REFUSE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TOAY HOWEVER CASE AT COURT OF APPEAL POSSIBLE ECHR WE NEED ANSWERS PLEASE,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I CITE
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
You will see require to do application to ombudsman ,scan appendix 4 stages, complain,,,Resolver stage,,,escalate stage,,,,, ombudsman. only today at Resolver stage, need evidence to do ESCALATE STAGE APPLICATION , eg today just cite for example parts of email of 7.12.2017 if HMCS state we never obtained, need in escalate stage ,to enclose full email. , court receipt, will then go to ombudsman, HMCS can not concede today, Application by email to Bristol county court 6.12.2017, as problem with printer, could not do in papers, done therefore by email, (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,recording at court 5.12.2017 with Mr Blair that previous correspondence note to be removed , confirmed as I wrote on the N244 form,not to send to HHJCoter,application removed, please see sample N244 form attached scan N244 eg what I want court to do, and new application would be emailed on the 6.12.2017, with new N244 form,,,,eg what I want court to do, , Court fee paid 5.12.2017, emailed court 5.12.2017 when I came home confirming agreement, application emailed 6.12.2017, A retired district judge suggested I email next day 7.12.2017,,,,,,,after application emailed to HMCS on the 6.12.2017. to ensure HMCS had application of 6.12.2017 and the 6.12.2017 application would be one considered by HHJCotter. , eg one paid for. …
, E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>
07/12/2017 09:58
1
To:
e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk]
title URGENT FOR MR BLAIR
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
HMCS Question 6 ,,,, is email address correct 7.12.2017 …DID YOU GET THIS EMAIL SO YOU WERE AWARE OF NEW N244 AND APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 .HAVE ASKED HMCS NOW FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS,,,,DID YOU GET EMAIL,,,ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES WHERE THEY JUST IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE… The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. ,,,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,,OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT,,,,CAN NOT ANSWER AS TODAY AS FATAL FOR HMCS AS LEGATTS STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,, eg ,HMCS to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....,,HMCS ,,,,WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THIS APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017
No reply , so email again 21.12.2017 and 29.12.2017, we know HMCS obtained the 29.12.2017 email as cited in judgement of 9.1.2018. What was in
email 29.12.2017,,,,,,,,,,
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
As soon as retired district judge saw judgement stated not judicial language however,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the bastards have removed application from file of the 6.12.2017. Record at court……………we did not send to HHJCoter,[NOT WE DID NOT GET] not an issue please see Ms Bowyers sworn statement scan 10573, and later court stance we never obtained application, by email, and HMCS were utterly unaware in period 6.12.2017 -31.12.2017 of possible application of 6.12.2017. QUESTION 7 TO HMCAS did you get email of 6.12.2017 application , email 5.12.2017 ,,,,7.12.2017 21.12.2017 we know you obtained email of 29.12.2017 ,,,eg
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[from judgement therefore HMCS and HHJCotter aware of amendment application on/after the 6.12.2017]
So we ask HMCS QUESTION 7 did you obtain above emails, DEC 2017 7, 21.29 OF DEC can we have copy of N244 that HHJCotter considered, eg what I wanted HHJCotter to do, and paid for, all correspondence ignored since Jan 2018,will try again today, ombudsman would need evidence in his/her consideration ,,,,,,,,,,,,,did HMCS obtain application of 6.12.2017 , or were they aware of possible application of 6.12.2017, eg did you obtain email, 5.12.2017 7.12.2017,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Email 7.12.2017 eg……………
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
We know N244 I wrote on application,,,[,,recorded],,,, removed, not to send to HHJCotter, What did Cotter read,,,A N244 AND DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. [WHERE WE ASK FOR REPAYMENT OF COURT FEE AS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 PAID FOR NOT CONSIDERED. EG court stance,,,, WE WERE UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. PLAYING DEVILS ADVOCATE AS WE AWAIT REPLY IS COURTS PAWSLAY/HUNT GOING TO SAY WE REPLIED BY LETTER TO EMAIL 7.12.2017 SAYING WE DID NOT OBTAIN ,email application of 6.12.2017 ,,, … CAN YOU PLEASE EMAIL APPLICATION AGAIN,,,,,,,,,,,HOWEVER DOING THIS ADMITTING WE WERE AWARE OF APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017 from 7.12.2017 email OR ARE YOU SAYING ASKING FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS IS EMAIL IN FILE. SUGGEST IS EMAIL ADDRESS CORRECT HOWEVER DO YOU MAINTAIN WE DID NOT OBTAIN. ANSWER QUESTION WE HAVE ASKED YOU FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
This was issue to ombudsman where I require my MP to refer matter to the ombudsman, regulations of ombudsman. APPENDIX 4
By law, we can only look at complaints about UK government departments and other UK public organisations if a Member of Parliament (MP) refers the complaint to us.
MPs will consider all complaints, no matter how big or small - from problems with a benefit or tax office to concerns you have about the DVLA or an immigration issue.
We have ombudsman regulations,, complain to defendants in todays issue HMCS ,,,,,not satisfied take up issue with Resolver ,,,,,,not satisfied ask to escalate,,,,,not satisfied ask MP to look at merits of case and ask him/her to refer to us, can not refer your self.. We get after many months at Resolver stage, MY correspondence ignored , eg is email 7.12.2017 in file,,,where copy ombudsman/MP into correspondence via email, saying to HMCS with no reply in 14 days, will assume HMCS do not want to go to escalate stage and wish to refer to ombudsman directly. Email ignored, so ask my MP to please refer to ombudsman. We get reply from ombudsman that HMCS contacted them saying we want to go NOW to escalate stage, the ombudsman in letter of 9.9.2019 request I take escalate stage,. I need evidence to do this application, eg my application in escalate stage , however do not have evidence to do . WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO OBTAIN SINCE BEGINNING OF 2018 NEARLY 2 YEARS AGO IN COURT MATTER TO OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION. The OMBUDSMAN issue today relates to period 5.12.2017 to 1.1.2018. We have simple question, HMCS state we will not refund court fee , we never obtained application of 6.12.2017 and in period 6.12.2017 to 1.1.2018 we were utterly unaware of a possible application of 6.12.2017, sole issue for ombudsman.
PARAGRAPH C/ As you can see the refund of fee not related to any court judgement, court stance we never obtained, and utterly unaware of a possible application of the 6.12.2017 in 2017………….. ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN.
PARAGRAPH d/ We accept my MP can not get involved in court judgements, however the court of appeal state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement, however BRISTOL COURT ADMITS HE DID NOT READ AND DID NOT CONSIDER ALTHOUGH AWARE OF APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 ……TODAY WE ASK WHAT DID HE READ ,,,,A DOCUMENT COTTER PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.IN JUDGEMENT ADMITS HE OBTAINED EMAIL 29.12.2017 SO AWARE OF NEW N244 FORM AND NEW DOCUMENT APPLICATION
PARAGRAPH e/ Need to clarify so no confusion we had 3 complaints to police,,,a/ b/ c/ [c/ relevant today to Evening Post as we seek witness]
a/ complaint The issue here
1/ Barristers advice after picketing at court, to go to police malfeasance in public office as HMCS for years ignoring application and Eaga perjury issue. Recorded visit,,,, Patchway police station meeting with Sgt Price from recording,,,,,,never heard of malfeasance in public office, [no complaint here against Sgt Price] , asked to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office with reason correlated now why i come to police, the FEDJCABcomplete document sent, Sgt Price states ,,,would not give to officer to investigate, if not a criminal offence from recording . . From recoding of visit as explained do not know if HMCS staff reason for malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, for years, as did not send applications to HHJDenyer just binned , or HHJDenyer ignored. From scan 10594 Insp O Mahony confirms conversation issue malfeasance in public office, why I went to police.,,,eg problem Denyer or court staff. The FEDJCABcomplete enclosed in pre action protocol for judicial review sent via email of the 16.9.2017 to police and HMCS, eg so no doubt the pre action protocol document contained the FEDJCAB document why I went to police, . . Sgt Price from recording had asked if court could investigate, where told no, a criminal offence
QUESTION ASKED BEFORE IN TEXT TO POLICE,NOT ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN JUST FOR MP AS HE COLLATES EVIDENCE FOR LEGAL AID BOARD ON MERITS OF CASE.,,NOT ASKING MP TO JUDGE MERITS OF CASE JUST SAYING TO LEGAL AID THESE ARE FACTS OF CASE. DID I COME TO POLICE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS COURTS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS???? COULD YOU PLEASE CONFIRM ,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE I CAME TO YOU AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS I WAS JUST DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE I DID JUST COME OVER THIS ISSUE,,DISSATISFIED,,,,, COULD YOU DISCLOSE IN 14 DAYS TO ME AND COVER MY MP IN EMAIL PLEASE. CAN I QUOTE FEMALE BARRISTER AND JUDGE WHO SAW MY WEBSITE WE HAVE CORNERSTONE ISSUE IN CASES. ,,
,,,,we have cornerstone issues,as she stated take a theoretical case defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, case comes before me as judge,,,however Council produces evidence ,,,,on this day defendant in closed prison,,,in your case CORNERSTONE why you went to defendants, if it was criminal offences ,perjury,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, [FEDJCAB] ,,,then could not take TO JCIO as JCIO stated . Follows police advice was wrong to take to JCIO. . This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit my email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,
Further police state told from HMCS [Bristol county court ] judges immune from prosecution, however ask police in the FEDJCABcomplete document as I went through complete CPS document, was this pasted to you, question 6 to police.
QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED]
Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]
MAKE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR TODAY NOT ASKING FOR OFFICERS TO BE JAILED,,,,THEY WERE TOLD FROM PCBIRDS STATEMENT,,,,CONTACTED COURT OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHERE HMCS INFORM US NOT ISSUE FOR YOU TO INVESTIGATE ALL COMPLAINTS SHOULD BE MADE TO JCIO. SURE POLICE DEFENCE TOLD WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE WHERE TOLD MR JONES TO COMPLAIN TO JCIO,,,,,WHERE THEY JCIO STATE NO WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE.
QUESTION 7 TO POLICE WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 DO YOU WISH TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER CONFIRMING IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.
QUESTION 8 TO POLICE CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM MY EMAIL OF 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL TO YOUR DEFENCE ,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHICH CAME UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS eg EVEN IN DOCUMENT SENT TO YOU COURT STATED WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US. FROM YOUR LETTER 5.12.2017 CAN I QUOTE,,,
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
DO YOU MAINTAIN EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL ?????????????
Case B26YMO2 told remove your web site www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com or consequences, which consequence was to issue in vexatious and vindictive way restraining order. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY CORRUPT AND BENT HHJDENYER. We ask HMCS ,[ also Bristol Evening Post can ring Compuwave Bristol ] was this a case where i required to back up my emails, for protection of possible libel as today. Can i cite just one example as i sought evidence for judicial review, with email from Bristol courts Mr Fowler,,,,,your emails to obtain evidence to do court applications, will just be filed, not answered ,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,
,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
STILL GOING ON THIS PRACTICE TODAY AT COURT OF APPEAL
You can not just copy and paste emails . Program given which did not work, Compuwave state was working when you left.As soon as proceedings issued ,from email,,,,state we gave wrong program, from email further ask me to now please conclude with court, correct program supplied. . Emailed settlement with request that matter removed from hearing. Next thing i know struck out, it did go to hearing. We have been asking for years as trying to get restraining order removed did you get settlement emailed, the issue cited AGAIN in that email of 7.12.2017,THAT I ASSUME YOU WILL STATE WE DID GET…or did you get settlement email, which Cotter was aware of, [part application of 6.12.2017 was to remove restraining order] .What did i say in email of 7.12.2017 besides
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
4/ We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please
HMCS may say today, ,,,,Denyer in order told parties to attend hearing, but this does not make sense as Compuwave complain to me as issue went to hearing ,so they ALSO utterly unaware of hearing. Is this another email that HMCS state we did not get, reason it did go to hearing, no one turned up, left judge no option but to strike out, where you appealed ,where Denyer issued restraining order as you appealed. . So application 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 and now 6.12.2017 to remove order ignored. So need Denyers permission to issue any proceedings reason B26YMO42 number used in application
QUESTION 8 TO HMCS IN B26YMO42 AGAIN WE HAVE COURT RECEIPT WAS THE APPLICATION TO REMOVE CASE FROM HEARING OBTAINED WITH SIGNED STATEMENT FROM COMPUWAVE ,,,,,CASE SETTLED,,,,,IF YES WHY WAS IT NOT REMOVED FROM HEARING LIST. . What was TODAYS issue, i went to police,,,, barristers advice, as for years the courts ignoring applications, malfeasance in public office ,and perjury issue. Sgt Price asks me to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office and insert why I came to police,, defined the FEDJCABcomplete document eg [fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent].The FEDJCAB in pre action protocol for judicial review document, why I went to police, .EMAILED TO POLICE AND COURT ON THE 16.9.2017 ,,,,SO CORRUPT AND BENT COTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE , quotes from pre action protocol document backing up FEDJCAB document ..pre action document further via statute had to be produced under Annex A template paragraphs eg paragraph 7 what did CPR statute state under paragraph 7 title.,,,.the issue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
.
QUOTE 1 / from pre action protocol document ,,,,,,,,,,,,7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
2/ , QUOTE 2 FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court,scan 10389 again today, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see scan appendix 2 [this document today November 2019, referenced again as appendix 2] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore request as I sought data, , to do application, malfeasance in public office. [eg from above Fowlers email]
QUESTION 9 TO HMCS REFERENCE SCAN APPENDIX 2 HAVE YOU ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THE COURT STAMP AND DATE ARE FORGIES.
WORTH NOTING HERE,,,,,,,,,,,,,, make application 2YJ03757 for oral hearing, have Royal Mail proof of posting slip to prove made, , Bristol court state we did not get, lawyers state to court we have proof made, we will ask to do out of time, no dispute made, you had also sent application copy to defendants, where lawyer states our correspondence to court just ignored,,,you need judicial review,,,, from application get court order scan 10389 to make application back to the court, 2 applications made, note date/stamped by court, scan appendix 2, to then forward to a judge.
You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see scan appendix 2 with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal,
WE HAVE SAME ISSUE TODAY WITH COURT OF APPEAL JUDGES DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THEM UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6
While waiting for court of appeal, ,had call ,,,,,...do not approve of a few isolated applications you made to my court, however will not stand by while corruption is going on HHJDenyer /court out to get you if you check at court, they have made a mistake and forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing. Record at court office true, Mr Till who deals with appeals told, sent to Administration court Cardiff. IT PROVES MY CASE I HAD ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING. So ask Bristol/Cardiff court to confirm, all correspondence ignored, where i made complaint, eg we have order from higher court to ask Denyer again, for oral hearing, date/stamped by court as taken by hand. Complaint did Mr Till send this application to HHJDenyer, or was there Mr Till ignoring court order, eg breaching court order, many follow up emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ALL IGNORED WHERE WE HAVE COURT OF APPEAL SAYING I HAD NOT ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING TO CORRECT. Read my website if facts not correct why have court not sued for contempt of court.
,SO WE HAVE ROYAL MAIL PROOF OF POSTING WE HAVE 2 APPLICATIONS [REASON FOR THIS SECOND ONE RECORDED CONVERSATION WITH CARDIFF COURT LAWYER MR GARDINER WHERE EXPLAINED NO REPLY TOLD TO DO APPLICATION AGAIN DATE AND STAMPED BY COURT, appendix 2 scan ,,,,HOWEVER COURT STANCE WE DID NOT GET ANY OF THESE 3 applications , although proof sent, or are HMCS saying appendix 2 scan a forgery.
WE HAVE IDENTICAL SITUATION TODAY WHERE THIS TIME RECEIPT NOT COURT STAMP BUT EMAIL REPLY FROM THIS CORRUPT COURT STATING YOUR EMAIL RECEIVED
OMBUDSMAN HAS IDENTICAL PROBLEM TODAY WE HAVE THIS TIME EMAIL OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 AND LATER RELATED EMAILS WHERE THIS COURT STATES WE DID NOT OBTAIN 6.12.2017 APPLICATION AND UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 in 2017 ….WHERE WE HAD APPLICATIONS BEFORE DATE/STAMPED BY THE COURT appendix 2 ,,,in court file or removed by corrupt HMCS/judges. Now saying utterly unaware of numerous emails.
QUOTE 3 from pre action protocol document, in application the FEDJCAB document as requested by Sgt Price to confirm why I went to police,,,
Letter also sent 13.4.2017, please see scan appendix 9 attachment, why I went to police.
Court maintain via Cotter ,,, utter nonsense you went to police malfeasance in public office... as ,,,,unhappy with judgements of HHJDenyer ????? ,,,READ THE FEDJCAB,,,,READ PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT ABOVE ONLY A CORRUPT JUDGE WOULD COME TO THIS VERDICT. AS HIGH COURT JUDGE SAID COTTER WAS NEVER GOING TO GRANT THIS APPLICATION IT WAS TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS INVITING POLICE IN TO INVESTIGATE HIS COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In Insp O Mahonys enclosed letter scan 10594 she admits my judicial review application , police never contacted me. IPCC regulations not followed
The second element is covered in police letter of the 5.12.2017
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
Clearly no appeal made 22.7.2017 however on the 24.7.2017 police send letter in reply to my email 22.7.2017 saying our reply to your appeal, I had made no appeal.
SO TO SUMMARIZE FOR MEDIA ,,,HISTORIC COMPLAINT TO POLICE THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE INSP O MAHONY CONFIRMS POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS. SECONDLY MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL,,,,I STATE WOULD DO ON/AFTER 28.7.2017.
Can i cite local barrister and judge article on malfeasance in public office,,
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Have i been wronged by police we ask media,,, in a IPCC investigation admit did not follow IPCC regulations and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged.
b/ complaint to police b / Had fall at home, ambulance staff had to break in ,they contact police to make house secure. Hospital 4 days, coming home small piece of wood over hole in window , water entered home, complaint to police. Insp O Mahony excellent service, confirms contractor they contacted was told to board up whole window, complaint removed, apology to InspO Mahony where she states I need to talk before case closed.[see IPCC regulations above] I refused to talk until questions were answered,,,,over historic a/ complaint, eg did police follow IPCC regulations, in their investigation of historic case where she sent enclosed statement, confirming IPCC regulations were not followed, scan 10594 .
c/ the third complaint to police,,, Clearly from Insp O Mahony letter and police records there was utterly no grounds of complaint against police , in b/… the complaint related to contractors police appointed, where issue settled in the courts in my favour against contractor.. We have from police complaint form today , little space to make complaint today, , as they state what are questions you require replies to,,, Via todays complaint again need further answers to par e a/ complaint, above the historic issue. Police were withholding evidence where as today, used tactically to ask questions, where Insp O Mahony requested to answer questions. My MP would require historic evidence on merits of case before he refers to ombudsman , and his enquiry to legal aid board as he sends evidence from police and HMCS as i seek legal aid.
Todays present issue complaint , before we return to historic issue,,, left home and about 30 mins later at library realised I had not locked back door. Coming home as going out that evening from library, to lock door, a boy about 12 years old stopped me and stated as soon as you went out, your neighbour came in and vandalised your property, neighbour a few doors away when I came home laughing. Reported matter to police, where officers came after 2 weeks delay . So as no misunderstanding have for say,, for Evening Post recording at Patchway police station, where police told rarely home, gave email address told to email when they wished to contact, today suggest no excuse 2 week delay. . We are told by police, your neighbours property also being vandalised by travellers , on this day, he warned them off, where he reported issue to police. This does not ring true, good relationship with travellers as male officer aware,,,,,,seen him at library, on Fridays travellers for years are at Patchway library, where I am every Friday, no conflict.
Question 9 to police summary…. from officers statement allegations ,,,,can you confirm neighbour reported alleged crime to you, travellers vandalising property, can you please confirm when he reported. . Can I ask ,,,,you were aware from allegations of neighbour, of my property being vandalised, when was incident recorded by you, and why did it take 2 weeks to contact me. Further why did it take 2 officers to attend, further considering time sending 2 officers, did you enquire from neighbours if they saw anything. Further will try after your reply to trace boy as witness, neighbour wasting police time, eg place card in shop, with 100.00 award taken from my state pension, if fails could use say Evening Post ,local TV channels leave 100.00 with them from my pension, so they can pay boy after publicity for conviction,,,,waste of police time. Further with your reply can display allegations of neighbour with travellers at library on Fridays. Further can I refer to people in greenhouses should not throw stones, could well be one night travellers may throw brick throw vehicles in neighbours forecourt.
PARAGRAPH f/ We need to give just skeletal argument here, evidence required by my MP before he contacts the legal aid board. Evening Post also can see issues, when we get replies,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ombudsman would also require evidence up till January 2018.
Can I refer to correspondence from the start with police,where I stated I had sympathy ,,,,,,,,,,we investigated your complaint malfeasance in public office,ignoring applications for years, Eaga perjury issue, . We contacted Bristol county court staff where told incorrect investigation route ,police can not investigate, complain to JCIO, although can I cite CPS document, in pre action protocol document, part of FEDJCABcomplete document cited, quote from CPS ,,,,where judges convicted, and as JCIO state we can not investigate via statute.
Need only events as relevant,,,,minimal evidence,,,,.
1/ Case comes before court of appeal in Eaga case, comes before Lord Golding, ,,why can Bristol county court, not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without a transcript , although getting verdict very badly wrong not reason to grant judicial review, ,,Strickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA 1132 , however the award to HMCS OF 500.00 quashed never forgiven for judgement.
2/ Case 2YJ03757. where refer reader for detail to my website,www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com . Issue comes before corrupt DJBritton. Same judge in Eaga case who asked me to leave so he could discuss case with Eagas lawyer,,,,,Eaga later,correspondence,,,,,,we refused made excuse had to catch a plane, would not be discussing with Brittan for you to exploit later,,,,Brittan stated ,,,,,,so very nice of you to come from Newcastle to see us,,,love in between them. From website see judgement utterly without merit, Brittan states claim incomprehensible,,,[note same allegations in 2018 claim below] where Brittan in judgement states way claim should have been made, look at POC [particulars of claim in my website ] where judgement is IDENTICAL TO WAY CLAIM WAS MADE. This was identical claim as others v Royal Mail for lost recorded delivery correspondence, now enough was enough as stated abuse of process, 2YJ03757 V Royal Mail , same POC as in 9BS 08798,,,,OBS08441 ,CLAIMS 2 AND 3, . So i state abuse of process, This is abuse of process, identical to claims even BEFORE 9BS08798 , 9BS08798 and claims 2 and 3 in OBS08441, ask DJBrittan to strike out , abuse of process, told not interested,will not consider, force issue with barristers internet site document in bundle ,on abuse of process which contained from internet,,as I stated in application , extension of Henderson v Henderson
eg GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today,]
Where told have you full transcript ,of GoreWood, no, then i will just ignore application evidence, and application today your making to me,Brittan going to any length to corrupt and frustrate judicial process. NOTE BRITTAN IS SAME JUDGE IN EAGA CASE where asked me to leave so he could discuss case with defendants.
WORTH NOTING AT THIS POINT I MADE APPLICATION FOR TRANSCRIPT OF THIS CASE LAWYERS MADE APPLICATION I MADE APPLICATION AGAIN TO COURT OF APPEAL IN THIS 2013 CASE AS TODAYS APPLICATION YEARS LATER TO LEGATT WHICH WAS IGNORED, IT APPEARS THE COURTS DO NOT WANT EVIDENCE BEFORE ANY COURT,,,, THIS COURTS CORRUPTION .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WE HAVE SAME ISSUE TODAY
CAN I SITE SCAN FATAL EVIDENCE TO STOP ANY ALLEGATIONS FROM HMCS. IN 2003 CASE COMES BEFORE DJSTEWART BROWN SHE ASKS ABOUT CONTRADICTION IN ROYAL MAIL REGULATIONS eg WE ARE IMMUNE AND WE CAN ALTER REGULATIONS AS WE FEEL FIT, WHERE I DISCUSSED IN 2003 WITH ROYAL MAIL WHERE AGREED I CXOULD RECOVER LOST IN PROCEEDINGS. THIS SCAN FATAL EVIDENCE IN PAPERS FOR 2YJ03757, WAS NEVER RAISED AT HEARING HOWEVER BRITTAN STATES THEY ARE IMMUNE. KNOWING UNTRUE FROM SCAN FATALEVIDENCE. WHAT IS TODAYS ISSUE ABOUT IGNORING APPLICATIONS WHERE APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSCRIPT IGNORED
[FOR YEARS THE COURT CORRUPTING AND FRUSTATING THE JUDICIAL PROCESS AS LAWYERS/BARRISTERS STATE ALL YOU HAD TO SAY UNDER HENDERSON v HENDERSON …AN ABUSE OF PROCESS] ,,,,,,,,,,,, where application to HHJDenyer for oral hearing, ignored, contact lawyer out of my depth where ask for 30..00 said not sourced to give legal aid, would try to get oral hearing for you. Later told by lawyer our request also ignored,no paperwork issued from Bristol , you need judicial review, becomes co/1/2013. The Administration court confirms facts scan 10389 where from this order, told to make from order application date/stamped by HMCS made for oral hearing, please see scan appendix 2.[this was second one from recorded conversation with Cardiff courts lawyer,Mr Gardiner told to ask again previous application ignored] Had call court out to get you,do not approve of a few of your applications, however will not stand by when corruption is going on, they have made mistake still one application on system. Record at court , talk to Mr Blair ,,,,,,nothing to do with me I take your applications, check in order, place our copy in basket and stamp your copy. Mr Blair from recording, confirms our Mr Till sent to Admin court Cardiff. We have asked Cardiff court for many years is this document, [other 2 removed] in file,although date stamped by court, just ignored, recently from Cardiff court,,,THERE IS NOTE on file,,,,not to discuss contents with you to contact Ms Weaver for information, who ignored emails,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 3
).
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
A party to the proceedings must have the possibility to familiarise itself with the
evidence before the court, as well as the possibility to comment on its existence, contents and authenticity in an appropriate form and within an appropriate time (Krčmář andOthers v. the Czech Republic, § 42; Immeubles Groupe Kosser v. France, § 26),
YOU WILL SEE COMMON STANCE APPLICATION TO COURT TO LOOK AT FILES or REQUESTING DATA FROM FILE JUST IGNORED
Take up issue with Mr Gardiner , please see his reply, in scan Gardiner.
APPENDIX 2 scan IN COURT DOCUMENTS BUNDLE . WE GET AS YOU WILL SEE TODAY JUDGE DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,IN JUDGEMENT YOU NEVER MADE APPLICATION FOR ORAL HEARING YOUR CORRUPT DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU APPENDIX 2 PLUS OTHER 2 APPLICATIONS DATE/STAMPED BY COURT and ROYAL MAIL proof of posting
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION
QUESTION 10 TO HMCS.see 14th time asked over the years, . From recording Mr Blair states our Mr Till sent your application for oral hearing to Cardiff court. Is this application in file, or has court removed. How do Bristol court record that documents transferred to another court, how does Cardiff court record delivery from a different court. Does Bristol court have any record of applications made With respect to my emails did Ms Weaver every supply replies, if so can we please have replies.
3/ We are asked to remove my website, or consequences, which was in vindictive act to issue restraining order, This corrupt court if facts untrue sue for libel , if you maintain allegations utterly without merit. Have restraining order citing B26YM042 and AOIBS346/746. Again detail in website, the issue with B26YM042 cited above. The other case to obtain medical records, put statement in medical records, and travel expenses. Defendants asked me to settle, supplied medical records, agreed to put statement in medical records, paid travel expenses, asked to settle where DJBrittan rejected defendants settlement. I SUGGEST BRISTOL EVENING POST IN BOTH CASES ASK DEFENDANTS DID YOU ASK TO SETTLE,,, CONCEDE MY CLAIM AS I HAVE ASKED COURT WHAT DID I DO WRONG .FOR YEARS
Applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 ignored by HMCS. You can see why as in all applications cited,,,
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]
FROM HEARING DEFENDANTS ASKED THAT JUDGEMENT READS I ACTED UNREASONABLY REJECTED BY DJWATSON AS HE STATED WAVING IN FRONT OF MS SMITH THEIR LAWYER MY SKELETAL ARGUMENT,,.WE HAVE ASKED FOR TRANSCRIPT,,,,APPLICATION IGNORED BY HMCS. SUGGEST EVENING POST ASK MS SMITH,,DEFENDANTS LAWYER ,,AS MY SKELETAL ARGUMENT,,,AT FIRST HEARING BEFORE DJWATSON DID HE STATE RESOLVE OUTSIDE. I OPENED DOOR FOR MS SMITH WHERE SHE LATER CONFIRMS IN EMAIL YOU DID I DID NOT WANT TO TALK TO YOU TO SETTLE TOLD YOU TO GO AWAY,,,MUST BE ON TRANSCRIPT AS INSIDE COURT.,,,,,, EMAILED,,,,, STUPID YOU MUST SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS,,,,,,,WHERE TOLD NO IN EMAIL,,,,,THEN 6MONTHS LATER ASKED TO SETTLE,,,THERE WAS ONLY ONE PARTY ACTING UNREASONABLY. ,
DENYER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT
QUESTION 11 TO HMCS ,,,,,THERE WERE APPLICATIONS TO REMOVE THIS ORDER ON THE 26.2.2016 AND 26.10.2016 ARE THESE IN FILE OR HAVE THEY BEEN REMOVED,,,,WHERE THERE FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE ASKING YOU IF YOU REQUIRE ANYTHING FURTHER,,,
4/ For years court ignoring applications ,malfeasance in public office, date/stamped by court for example appendix 2 ect. Picket at court still going on, hand out leaflet citing 2YJ03757 evidence,scan picket ,barrister told me to report malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years issue, plus perjury issue to police, seen by Sgt Price .Requested to paste CPS paper on malfeasance on public office and insert in text how it relates to my complaint, eg why I went to police, the FEDJCABcomplete document above . From recording of visit to Sgt Price states would not give to officer to investigate if not a criminal offence,,by definition I could not refer to JCIO. In Insp O Mahonys letter scan 10594 confirms conversation, eg went over malfeasance in public office, from recording we had problem,[cited by Insp O Mahony] as quoted in recorded conversation with Sgt Price,,,as we do not know if court staff problem, or HHJDenyer….from recording will HHJDenyer say I never saw applications, or court staff saying we did send, Denyer ignored. . Malfeasance in public office a criminal offence, as Sgt Price states on recording would not give to PCBird if not a criminal offence. So police aware could not refer to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office], via statute. FURTHER BEFORE OWN OFFICERS JAILED FOR SAME OFFENCE SO KNOW CRIMINAL OFFENCE
QUESTION 4 AND 5 TO POLICE JUST RECAP TO POLICE ASK POLICE DID I COME TO YOU MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS HMCS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE AGREE COULD NOT REFER TO JCIO. REMEMBER ONLY A SHORT TIME BEFORE IDENTICAL ISSUE OF OWN OFFICERS IN BIJAN EBRAHIMI CASE WHERE AVON SOMERSET POLICE OFFICERS DUFFY/PASSMORE JAILED MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE FOR IGNORING REPORTS OF CRIMINAL OFFENCES.
5/ Police state you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, and perjury issue, state to them JUDGEMENT comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,eg no sensible person would come to that judgement, issue taken up years before with my MP, COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS where court ignored even MPs correspondence,,,,[,Mr Cobb in MPs office] letter,,,,I will write to Bristol court again, can not force them to reply,,,,appendix 2 case 2YJ03757 arose as HHJDenyer ignored application, lawyer said he could help, where told by lawyer our correspondence ALSO ignored, you need a judicial review. The Administration court reply in scan 10389 where 2 applications made for oral hearing ignored, see appendix 2 or are HMCS today saying court stamps forged ??????.
QUESTION 12 to HMCS do you have any reason to believe that HMCS did not stamp this document, appendix 2 eg court stamp is forgery. So we have my applications ignored, lawyers application ignored, my MPs correspondence on issue ignored. WE HAVE COURT CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE COME AND TALK TO US.HOW CAN POLICE STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.
6/ Pre action protocol for judicial review , contained the FEDJCABcomplete document,,,, the pre action protocol document had to be produced via statute Annex A paragraphs ,see scan annex a , under paragraph 7 THE ISSUE I stated as explained above,
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE ALSO COTTER IN EMAIL 17.11.2017 TOLD ,,, POLICE HAD NO COMMENT ON PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT. COTTER AWARE OF THIS PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENTS POLICE ACCEPT FACTS
QUESTION 13 TO HMCS ,,Can I refer to paragraph f 1/ where court of appeal in judgement stated ,,,why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork, again see TODAYS question asked over 20 times. In judgement Cotter cites email of the 14.11.2018,,,,,[can not be 2018 what drugs/intoxication was he on] assume 17.11.2017. No emails of 14.11.2017, if HMCS maintain these 2 emails are ones of 14.11.2017 can I please have copy. Can you please confirm should be 17.11.2017 emails were recited on the 17.11.2017 from evidence ALREADY COPIED from pre action protocol document, eg why I went to police,eg,,,,
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
THIS CITING IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOLLOWED BY NEXT STEP THE ECHR
7/ Application to HHJCotter to issue judicial review, police defendant,,,
a/ From above police admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, see text and scan 10594 10475 10494
b/ As police state you can appeal our judgement you have no evidence of malfeasance [misconduct ] in public office ignoring applications for years, and perjury issue. If appealing need to submit our appeal form,with application .So ask questions in email 22.7.2017 ,,,have you talked to my MP,,,,,have you talked to lawyer whose application was ignored,,,,,saying in 22.7.2017 email with no reply would do appeal,,,,on/after the 28.7.2017,,,,[the 11 questions in judicial review document] . Police send letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,,I have made no appeal,,,,no appeal form submitted, I said would do on/after the 28.7.2017.
WE ASKED QUESTION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION THE POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT ISSUED WHERE THEY ADMIT BOTH ISSUES. THE ISSUE YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS,,,WE HAVE COURT DOCUMENTS SAYING,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS
c/ HHJCotter asks me to pay fee to consider application, recorded visit at court with Mr Blair on the 5.12.2017, as printer problem inform him final application would be sent next day via email, (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
visited court to pay fee, and obtain information to do amended application ,,,Mr Blair states you not looking at file, where from recording state compromise just want N244 form,,, wish to put on record a message on N244 form, not to send application to HHJCotter, application would follow from Goc above reference, call in library on way home eg 5.12.2017…. .email when at library that afternoon,
05/12/2017 16:17
1
To:
e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk
FOR MR BLAIR
At library BT site has been down , will email tonight at home.
Required as you will see to change a few dates in new revised application eg if sent now third party could say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,we were not aware until 4.00 pm could not be expected to say today if we wish to add a comment for HHJCotter,
P JONES
. Application sent via email 6.12.2017, On visit 5.12.2017 to protect myself recorded, ask for N244 FORM write on it not to be sent to HHJCotter application to follow. Retired district judge who saw my website advised to email FURTHER next day after application sent by email, 6.12.2017 so on the 7.12.2017 to ensure application paid for is one emailed on the 6.12.2017 and one sent to HHJCotter eg email 7.12.2017
Email 7.12.2017 title URGENT FOR MR BLAIR
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Follow up emails 21.12.2017 and 29.12.2017 ignored, we know HMCS obtained the one of 29.12.2017 as cited in judgement of Cotter… eg what did email say,,,29.12.2017
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,
.You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December. End of quote from email
SO HHJCOTTER AWARE OF NEW N244 AND NEW APPLICATION.ON/AFTER THE 5.12.2017 .THE SOLE ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN COTTER AWARE FROM ABOVE 2 EMAILS OF 6.12.2017 application
QUESTION 4 TO HMCS, again asked over 20 times,,,, Are the emails 5.12.2017 7.12.2017 and 21.12.2017 in file, can you confirm also email of 29.12.2017 in file. AWARE OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 Cotter accepts HMCS had email 29.12.2017,,,,scan cotterlate however you state application of 6.12.2017 we did not get, and in 2017 utterly unaware of possible application of the 6.12.2017. ,,,,are you saying we did not get ones of the 7.12.2017 ect , although Cotter aware of them from 29.12.2017 email,,,,,,,,that email existed,,6.12.2017, ,,Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer
For a long time, can refer to correspondence with HMCS , for example reply from Mr Fowler your enquires to obtain evidence will be ignored, just filed, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,,
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Can I refer to correspondence with HMCS where I cited the ECHR concept of Equality of Arms, medical records case above where again applications ignored, where defendants lawyer from emails [several] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,my application this morning to court , just had reply from court ,where judge agreed,,,,,,,,,,,,so they can get replies same day, from above 5.12.2017 6.12.2017 21.12.2017 applications ask confirmation that email in file, so raise issue in email of 29.12.2017 which we know Cotter read,,,
Goodevening
This enquiry via .................... ECHR case law.
EQUALITY OF ARMS
Equality of arms 277. The principle of “equality of arms” is inherent in the broader concept of a fair trial. The requirement of “equality of arms”, in the sense of a “fair balance” between the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
As you can see HMCS would not reply to enquire where other people could get a reply same day, for example we know court obtained email 7.12.2017, asked for confirmation, just ignored,.
d/ As soon as retired district judge saw judgement said not judicial language however the bastards have removed application 6.12.2017 from file. Go to court,,,,, record again ,,,,,,,,,,,,we did not send to HHJCotter,con firmed in Ms Bowyers statement scan 10573.This is issue for ombudsman HMCS stance ,,,,we never obtained application of 6.12 2017 and utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017 in 2017, where HHJCotter cites evidence in judgement, where he cites email of the 29.12.2017 WHICH CITES APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. We have tried from January 2018 to obtain from HMCS did you get for example email of the 5.12.2017 and 7.12.2017. This is sole issue for ombudsman,,,,HMCS stance we never obtained application of 6.12.2017 and in 2017 were utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017….we did not get application by email 6.12.2017 ,,,assume will say,,,we did not get email of 7.12.2017,,,we did not get email 21.12.2017 .Lets say 1 in 100 emails go missing, are HMCS saying we did not obtain any,,,,,probability 100 x 100 x 100 A MILLION TO ONE AS WE PRESENT EVIDENCE TO OMBUDSMAN,,5.12.2017 EMAIL ALSO
e/ Remember the FEDCABcomplete in pre action protocol document, consider the pre action protocol document had to be produced via statute Annex A paragraphs , under paragraph 7 THE ISSUE ECT I stated
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
Further under paragraph 5/ details of matter,,,,of Annex A statute ,,in pre action protocol before Cotter,,on way application must be made,,,,see scan annex a
5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants, warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
You can see retired judge called them bastards, again not judicial language however the CORRUPT AND BENT HHJCOTTER STATES I WENT TO POLICE AS UNHAPPY WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER HOW CAN HE SAY THIS FROM ABOVE . As barrister and judge said only recently who saw my website, Cotter was never going to grant this application ,turkeys voting for Xmas, as would be inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour eg malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, as he makes up fairy story.,,I went to police dissatisfaction over judgements of HHJDenyer Judgement repeated by administration court and court of appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,many lawyers/barristers cite the fairy story as in Hans Christian Andersons The Kings new Clothes where UTTER ILLOGICAL JUDGEMENT JUST TAKEN AS FACT THEN REPEATED. .I SENT BIGGER RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE PLUS FEDJCAB complete DOCUMENT. As barrister stated , why is Sgt Price giving to PCBird to investigate, she states from recording,,,,,if not criminal offence would not give case to officer to investigate, CAN NOT TAKE TO JCIO . IF WE ACCEPT COTTERS CORRUPT JUDGEMENT I WENT TO POLICE AS UNHAPPY WITH DENYERS JUDGEMENTS,,,,IF TRUE Sgt Price may i suggest should have said,,,,,I can do nothing about court judgements, not issue for police,
QUESTION 14 TO HMCS,,,,again asked over 20 times,,,,. We know HMCS obtained,,email 7.12.2017 , see above HMCS receipt,,,,email 7.12.2017,,,,STATED
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.
,
We know Cotter read email 29.12.2017 as facts repeated again,,,eg
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,
So aware after 5.12.2017 amendment would be sent , not to send to Cotter until new application sent, aware of 7.12.2017 email as quoted in 29.7.2017 , aware application not complete. , a line was put through old N244 form. Can we please have the N244 considered by HHJCotter, and can we please have copy of application considered by HHJCotter, we know old N244 removed, what was N244 considered, and can we have copy of application . LETS SEE DOCUMENT AFTER 5.12.2017 WHERE COTTER COMES TO JUDGEMENT YOU WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.A GREAT WORRY AS RECENTLY HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED MAY NEVER GET WITH HMCS FOR EXAMPLE,,,,WE CAN NOT FIND FILE
PARAGRAPH g/ Application 27.2.2018 again to Bristol court after proceedings cited below issued,, Note again asking for new medical records at a date after settlement of AOIBS346/746 ,where same defendants refuse again to supply, where restraining order issued by corrupt Denyer. ,,,what have I done wrong just asking for medical records,,,WE MAY ASK WHICH PARTY IS ACTING UNREASONABLY THE CORRUPT AND BENT HOSPITAL TRUST LAWYER FORCEING ME AGAIN TO GO FOR LITAGATION TO GET MEDICAL RECORDS.
IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER
PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES
DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST
CLAIM ,,,eg asking court
For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records………………………END OF QUOTE
Within hours struck out by HHJCotter. Assume Cotter instructed staff, never issue his claims, send to me to see if I can strike out, I make application for oral hearing, where in days call from Cotters clerk, saying long discussion with defendants lawyer, agreement made, we will issue court hearing date in due course. What was discussed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do not have a defence,,,,
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,
Cotter ignores application, WHAT WAS DECIDED WITH DEFENDANTS again we have court receipt that HMCS obtained application , IGNORED eg malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years. Comes before HHJRalton,states ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I,,had long talk with HHJCotter, reason he struck out as claim utterly incomprehensible . INCOMPREHENSIBLE LIKE YOU HAVE EVIDENCE IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL HOWEVER YOU COME TO JUDGEMENT I WENT TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENT OF DENYER,,,,WE MAY ASK WHAT STAGE OF DEMENTIA ARE YOU AT ????????? stricking out ,,, Eg INCOMPREHENSIBLE OR JUST VINDICTIVE/VEXATIOUS ,,IS THIS UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE ???????????????????????????
IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER
PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES
DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST
CLAIM ,,,eg asking court
For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records………………………
Defendants at hearing state we will send medical records taken as at 24.7.2015 , never obtained, talk to PSU [personal support unit] at Bristol court, They talk to HMCS staff agree that I email HHJRalton, email ignored.
QUESTION 15 TO HMCS DID COTTER REPLY TO COURT APPLICATION, FEB 2018 IF SO CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF REPLY. IN TERMS OF HHJRALTON AGAIN WE HAVE RECEIPT FOR EMAIL DID YOU GET AND DID HHJRALTON ISSUE ANY REPLY AS INFORMED HIM MEDICAL RECIRDS NOT SUPPLIED.
Contact Mr Blair to obtain evidence from file to do the judicial review, Mr Blair states no ,,,,,your not looking at files to obtain evidence of us ignoring your applications, over the years, make application to HHJCotter who will ignore. Utter breach of Article 6 by Blair/Cotter.
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
Application to Bristol court 15.3.2018 to obtain data to do my judicial review, eg..i stated
3/ For court to allow under supervision for me to read files OBS08441 /2YJ03757/ B26YM042 at the court. For court staff to supply information, as requested. [eg malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years]
Utter breach of Article 6 HHJCotter ignores application as Mr Blair said he would. Contact my MP where we get reply after nearly 2 MONTHS , EG SCAN Cotterlate.. Where to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process asks me to ask Mr Blair, knowing he had said no.
BETWEEN COTTER/BLAIR HMCS CONFIRMING ,, the appellant WOULD NOT have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,,,,,,,,,,,,,, would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ..... Make new application to court where told no, seeking evidence already had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, as no lawyer to help. . Practice continued withholding evidence please look at scan 10573
UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6
,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Do we have reason to believe Cotter is corrupt and bent,
Objective approach
242. It must be determined whether, quite apart from the judge’s conduct, there are ascertainable facts which may raise doubts as to his impartiality. When applied to a body sitting as a bench, it means determining whether, quite apart from the personal conduct of any of the members of that body, there are ascertainable facts which may raise doubts as to the impartiality of the body itself. This implies that, in deciding whether in a given case there is a legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge (Morel v. France, §§ 45-50; Pescador Valero v. Spain, § 23) or a body sitting as a bench (Luka v. Romania, § 40) lacks impartiality, the standpoint of the person concerned is important but not decisive. What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (Wettstein v. Switzerland, § 44; Pabla Ky v. Finland, § 30; Micallef v. Malta [GC], § 96).
Consider pre action protocol document, eg the FEDJCAB document, consider also in pre action protocol document, had to be done under CPR Annex A template paragraphs the issue under paragraph 7 title the issue, ,,,,,,,COTTER WHAT IS ISSUE
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.,,,,,,
CONSIDER SAME DOCUMENT PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT,,ABOVE PAR 5 CITED and THE DETAILS OF,,,see scan annex a..
Consider emails, he is aware from email of 29.12.2017 , which he read , so aware of amended application 6.12.2017. where HMCS stance we did not get and in 2017 utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017,,,,Consider email 21.12.2017
APPEAL AGAINST MR KROUWEL LETTER OF 5.12.2017
SKELETAL ARGUMENT
1/ Picketing at Bristol county court barrister told me to make complaint to police, malfeasance in public office, plus AGAIN perjury issue, warned police may try to brush you off.
2/ Clearly being brushed off by Sgt Price,, visit recorded,,,,,,,,,,,,,civil issues, make complaint to court, where I inform her I could not make a complaint.;;;;;;tpld malfeasance not a criminal offence.stated on tape ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where I state are you saying you refuse to investigate, where Sgt Price backs down, requests documents sent to her, eg CPS document, ,,,,,,,criminal offence, judges/police/courts convicted. [recently own police convicted Ibramahimi case]
3/Get reply from PCBird, ,,,,,I am investigating your allegations of malfeasance in public office, make complaint to HMCS, from 2/ aware I could not make a complaint. Accept i have been betrayed by Sgt Price, as wished to sweep under carpet as warned by barrister. .
4/ So complain to police, get reply from Mr Galloway,,,,,,advice was correct to complain to HMCS. Further states no evidence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed also by our third party.
5/ Statutory route to appeal. Asking police questions for appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application [10389 ],,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staff, admit applications made, which were ignored by the court. Have email from police saying if doing appeal need to enclose also our appeal claim form. Further asking police why statutory regulations of IPCC not followed in investigations, reference leaflet sent to me.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
WHERE COTTER STATES YOU WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,NO I DID NOT PROVED FURTHER IN RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE,,,MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. From above what did it state,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, ,
Carry on quote…from ECHR
This implies that, in deciding whether in a given case there is a legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge (Morel v. France, §§ 45-50; Pescador Valero v. Spain, § 23) or a body sitting as a bench (Luka v. Romania, § 40) lacks impartiality, the standpoint of the person concerned is important but not decisive. What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (Wettstein v. Switzerland, § 44; Pabla Ky v. Finland, § 30; Micallef v. Malta [GC], § 96).
Can I show Cotter is corrupt and bent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (Wettstein v. Switzerland, § 44; Pabla Ky v. Finland, § 30; Micallef v. Malta [GC], § 96
Consider striking out MEDICAL RECORDS CLAIM ,,STATES … claim utterly incomprehensible, ????????????????????????????
PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES
DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST
CLAIM ,,,eg asking court
For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records………………………
IS IT UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLR
Consider application to obtain evidence to do judicial review application, only obtained as my MP involved. COTTER YOUR NOT ONLY CORRUPT AND BENT BUT YOUR IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6
Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
As barrister and judge stated Cotter never going to grant application, turkeys voting for Xmas as would be inviting police in to investigate his COURTS criminal behaviour.Your utterly corrupt and bent, you are to deny evidence before you, why I went to police,,,,,,,,,,,,I told you to consider with pre action protocol document. ,,,,,,, to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
PARAGRAPH h/…Had to do judicial review application, with evidence withheld, utter breach of article 6, as Cotter with held evidence in files to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. .
,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Please see in scan Appendix 8, in page 2 of judicial review application, as historic problems with Bristol/Cardiff court ignoring applications, made judicial review application to Birmingham court ,practice directive 54.D 5.2 note application to Birmingham eg citing 2YJ03757 with HHJBrittans judgement that claim ,,,,,,utterly incomprehensible,,,HAVE WE HEARD THIS BEFORE FROM ABOVE,,,,as I stated a judiciary error as retired district judge said, Brittan states in N460 way claim should be made, from my website you have my claim and Brittans N460,,,,THEY ARE IDENTICAL,THIS IS SAME JUDGE IN EAGA CASE ASKED ME TO LEAVE SO HE COULD DISCUSS CASE WITH EAGA. EAGA,,later,,,,WE STATED WE HAD TO CATCH A PLANE WE DID HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO DISCUSS WITH BRITTAN HOWEVER WOULD NOT BE SEEN DISCUUSING CASE BEHIND YOUR BACK FOR YOU TO EXPLOIT. .Retired district judge stated I have retired, will not do application, however asap let judiciary know issues,eg
Page 1 APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Page 2 judicial review application stated ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
THIS IS NOT APPLICATON AGAINST COURT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,end of quote
WHY I WENT TO POLICE
Birmingham court reject my application, , they send to Cardiff Administration court. Under further evidence sent to court, ;; Under (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57).; the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
add further data, as in N461 form application,,,,ask to consult court files via court order in application to Birmingham court
We asked Birmingham court for confirmation that this data sent to you, under Goc v Turkey ….., we asked Cardiff was it sent to you, you know response emails ignored.
So in application to Administration court , state,,on N461 form ,,,, ask for order to obtain evidence, via looking at files, ,,,, for example is email 7.12.2017 in file, eg Cotter aware of application 6.12.2017, has Cotter to frustrate and corrupt the judicial process removed from file. In judicial review application, consider evidence above, consider citing,,,in judicial review application,,,WHY I WENT TO POLICE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,eg
The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment ……………….[remainderabove]
END OF QUOTE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION.
THIS IS ISSUE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER .WE CITE ISSUE FROM ABOVE JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION EG . ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even .today applications ignored [NOTHING TO DO WITH COURT JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER]
Pre action protocol of 2017 sent to HHJBigger, IT HAS FEDJCAB IN DOCUMENT FURTHER IN THIS DOCUMENT
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
From judicial review application,,,…………
Also sent tape of recording with Sgt Price.
WE GET CORRUPT AND BENT BIGGER ,,,,I WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURT SOLELY AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.
HHJBigger to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ignores application, to look at file, utter breach of Article 6,,,
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
as again as barrister and judge stated was never to be granting this application ,,,turkeys voting for Xmas as inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour….and issues judgement scan 10551.
QUESTION 16 TO HMCS CAN YOU SUPPLY DATA UNDER Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). ,,,,,,,,,,,,,SENT TO BIRMINGHAM COURT .CAN YOU CONFIRM SENT TO HHJBIGGER eg ,,,,WHAT WAS BEFORE BIGGER . APPLICATION TO BIGGER TO LOOK AT FILES. .CAN YOU CONFIRM IGNORED IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.
a/ Showing corruption and collusion between Cotter /Bigger We have IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT scan 10551 , HHJBigger stated he will not take no for answer, no I will not ALSO as retired judge stated above not judicial language however the bastards have removed application 6.12.2017 from file, and from later emails as my advice HMCS later aware of application of 6.12.2017 , Cotter aware as quotes email of the 29.12,2917, BUT HMCS STATE COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION 6.12.2017 what did he read ??????????????????????????????????????? I will not use bad language, however again not judicial language, I will not take no for answer ,,BIGGER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT AS COTTER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I SENT YOU COPY OF TAPE WITH SGT PRICE SENT YOU PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 2017 SO AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE ALL YOU ARE DOING AS CORRUPT AND BENT IS TO DENY EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF YOU. FURTHER YOUR SO BENT YOU HAVE EVIDENCE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, falsely deny their existence,[EVIDENCE] this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....,
b/ From pre action protocol document, which includes the FEDJCAB document, as police stated send FEDJCAB to show why you come to us, and further in that pre action protocol document as CPR regulations
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
Your corrupt and bent, Did not go to police as unhappy with judgements of HHJDenyer,,,numerous citing before Bigger including the FEDJCAB document.
Look at Cotters judgement,,,,malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence,,,so could not complain to JCIO, as they stated, ,,,,,,,,,again in JUDICIAL REVIEW application cited WHAT BIGGER READ WE SAY READ OR DID HE TALK TO COTTER AND COPY COTTERS WRONG JUDGEMENT,,,,,what did I say in judicial review application ,,,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of……………….
WE ASK IF NOT CORRUPT AND BENT HOW YOU COME TO judgement I WENT TO POLICE ,,,,MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,,YOUR BENT CAN I REFER TO APPLICATION TO YOU,,,eg
,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,
from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate
Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )
Bigger your corrupt and bent remember application as retired judge stated ,,,make issue clear to court as soon as possible, what was application, can I paste,,,REMIND BIGGER AGAIN
APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, [ I TODAY ADD IN BLUE,,, police, stated you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office of court ignoring applications,,,,,calling black is white,,,,where they have EVIDENCE scan appendix 2 lawyers correspondence that even their applications ignored, my MPs correspondence ignored,,,and court correspondence, ADMITTING eg,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US, COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS ] you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]
Bigger look at police statement scan 10594 ,,,we did not follow IPCC regulations. Look at police letter of 5.12.2017 its in my judicial review application
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
So police send letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,I have made no appeal eg we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, where police have court letter ,,,,we ignored your applications for years come and talk to us,,,so we have question in above application,,Cotter/Bigger come to identical judgement that it was vindictive and vexatious to make application. So I ask Bigger [accept no answer here] in a IPCC investigation, its perfectly acceptable for police to ignore IPCC regulations, further police admit we sent reply to your appeal where you have made no appeal. NO I WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR ANSWER I WILL NOT ACCEPT JUDGEMENT FROM YOU WHO IS CORRUPT AND BENT. .
PARAGRAPH I ,,,So application to court of appeal. Again Bristol court refused FURTHER application to look at files, again utter breach of article 6, eg what application did Cotter read when he made judgement January 2018,,,,ect. Please see scan 10547 application in N161 form which Legatt LJ ignored, to protect corrupt judiciary, again utter breach of Article 6. Please see application to Legatt as I state as at 1.7.2018. Application to look at files ignored, so as ,,,,
(Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
So need to expand argument in email 19.7.2018,,,,stating leave document in file, what was in email of 19.7.2018 [FULL EMAIL IN APPENDIX3 MP where Legatt LJ aware waiting for reply to application to obtain evidence to do application to court of appeal, as stated initially,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this was just appeal at 1.7.2018.
QUESTION 17 TO HMCS IS THE EMAIL OF 19.7.2018 IN FILE. FURTHER WAS EVIDENCE BELOW IN EMAIL OF THE 19.7.2018
3/ We went to police after picketing at court over again as applications ignored, still going on from above, barrister told me to report to police malfeasance in public office as ignoring applications, from first correspondence to police,FEDJCAB,,EG
.,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications , reason went to police as courts ignoring applications. so no doubt in judicial review application , can i please quoted page 2 of judicial review application.,,,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,
4/ Numerous applications ignored over time and as JCIO stated complaint malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, criminal offence, and we can not investigate, further as cases over long period of time if an issue we could investigate it would be out of time, which makes nonsense of judgement you complained over HHJDenyer judgements, [no ignoring applications for years]and should have talked to JCIO, [no they could not investigate as JR application ]please put email eclosed from JCIO , also please put on file enclosed email .HHJBidder states police acted correctly , so they can ignore statutory regulations in their investigations, and send reply to an appeal, where THEY ADMIT NOT LODGED TAB21.
Note Legatt LJ has the FEDJCAB document why I went to police in that email, so this corrupt judge knows I did not go to police as ,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer. ..end of quote
Legaatt states
a/ Facts of case in Cotters judgement, we have had NUMEROUS lawyers/barristers quoting ,,,,,who saw my website,, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,REASON TO GRANT APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT.We have had High court judge asking question,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing an appeal –Legatt in application has FEDJCAB document, has the 7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.
Another judge/barrister from above stated cornerstone issue why you went to police,PLUS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,JCIO can not investigate criminal allegations.
The judgement of Bigger utterly wrong in every aspect, will prove with replies today, if not bad enough Legatt issues restraining order because I appealed .
All money claims as explained in synopsis must go through Salford county court. In November 2018 try to issue a claim, [not related to todays issues] please see synopsis. Court refuse to issue saying restraining order in place from ADMINISTRATION COURT CARDIFF. NO ORDER MADE TOLD TO CONTACT THIS COURT ,,,EMAILS IGNORED. THERE AROSE NO ORDER WHERE HMCS PAY 150.00 COMPENSATION,,,THEY ISSUE CLAIM,,,,,DEFENDANTS SETTLE WHEN CLAIM ISSUED. In Biggers judgement states restraining order in place, we may ask did Bigger call Legatt,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I forgot to do restraining order quoted in my judgement can you please do for me,,,the issue in
QUESTION 18 to HMCS what evidence was in file in November 2018 for you to believe a restraining order was in place, CAN I REFER TO RECORDED CALL TO YOU IT DOES NOT RELATE TO ORDER OF 2016.
PARAGRAPH J Wish to get restraining order removed, contact MP , with copy of email, where large number of lawyers emailed to see if could help under Legal Aid, NO, the day obtained judgement, 24.1.2019 had emailed HMCS and police to confirm application would be made to remove, as Legatts order, further as Legatts order asked in 7 days if any objection to application by police/HMCS. And to inform me by email. , no reply. As order after 7 days, no reply, hard copy application sent to HMCS 1.2.2019, proff of posting obtained. . From internet 2 entries one in lower case, one in upper case type ,,,,,,,,,,,fee to change/amend order…..50.00 sent with application 1.2.2018. eg from further HMCS document
•Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.
Eg to vary, amend order
Via (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,further evidence sent where HMCS demands 528.00 to remove restraining order. In Legatts LJ order states he would hear application, where issue challenged 1.2.2019 day 1 under ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
………………..2/ CONSEQUENCES
a/ We ask Legatt LJ that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of Legatt LJ from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAPcomplete document , plus scan 13.4.2017 [same reference today] letter,in Appendix 1 , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAPcomplete in pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
further
b / Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt LJ had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ,……………………
The court of appeal Master replies no promises,however states application to remove restraining order would be done by Legatt OR another judge , demands 528.00 to remove. Email to HMCS to obtain evidence to do application…
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 3
asking for information, did you get email of the 13.7.2018 and 19.7.2018 , in it has FEDJCAB document,,,,,,,,,,,,in that email cite tab 21 which is scan 10475 and 10594 so Legatt LJ aware of claim in judicial review eg police send reply to appeal where from police letter accept no appeal made . Indicate contradictions in court fee ask for confirmation,,,,,,,,,,,,EMAIL IGNORED.
QUESTION 10 TO POLICE. YOU WERE INFORMED DO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBIITY FOR LOST MAIL PLEASE DO REPLIES VIA EMAIL. IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL , IN ADMINISTRATION COURT IN COURT OF APPEAL YOU HAD CHANCE TO DISPUTE FACTS eg from court of appeal,,, The court via order asked me to serve numerous documents, eg court letter 26.7.2018 order to serve, eg,,,,,,,respondents [police/HMCS] are not required to take any action at the permission stage, unless directed by the court .In all cases however the respondents is permitted and encouraged to file brief written statement setting out any reasons why permission should be refused in whole or in part.,,,,,,, The parties made no statement, as in judicial review application and in pre action protocol document, they accept facts., Can you confirm you issued no correspondence with the courts, if you did can we please have copy,,,,,you accepted facts. From High court judge who saw my website, advised if you had at any stage then Legatt would have awarded costs. Can you further confirm you made no objection to removal of restraining order.
QUESTION 19 TO HMCS. DID POLICE OR HMCS EVER MAKE ANY APPLICATIONS TO ANY COURT DISPUTING ANY OF MY APPLICATIONS. . WE DID GET FROM YOU,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SORRY VERY LATE OUT OF TIME IN COURT OF APPEAL STAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE WE WILL NOT ISSUE ANY DOCUMENTS UNLESS ORDER FROM JUDGE ,ITS AN ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE WE DO NOT WISH TO BE INVOLVED. CAN YOU CONFIRM EMAIL SEEKING INFORMATION TO DO REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER WAS ALSO IGNORED, AGAIN YOU HAD NO COMMENT TO MAKE. IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.
Issue to get refund of fee as application 6.12.2017 not considered, at Resolver stage , police wanted to go direct to ombudsman , now change mind want to go to escalate stage first. Stance we did not get application 6.12.2017 and in 2017 utterly unaware of it.
PARAGRAPH K We can draw threads together,,,FOR ,removal of restraining order,,. Issue for ombudsman, and Legal Aid board, HOWEVER issue to ombudsman does not relate to judgements of the court, eg merits of case. Need further information,,
QUESTION 11 TO POLICE ,,PCBird states I contacted HMCS and was told judges/staff at HMCS immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue, malfeasance [misconduct] in public office ignoring applications for years, was via JCIO , who told you this , can we have date and person who supplied information, see asked 14 times
QUESTION 20 TO HMCS ,,Can you confirm police allegation in question 11 to police ,and who was person who supplied information to police. In terms of co/1/2018 why was I not allowed to do application, can I refer to my complaint, after you stated,,,,,,,,,court lawyer prepared papers.
From another legal source sent under a loophole
Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".
The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers
QUESTIONS TO HMCS [HM court service]
QUESTION 1 WHAT EVIDENCE WAS ON FILE WHERE SALFORD CC WOULD NOT ISSUE MY CLAIM DUE TO ALLEGATIONS OF RESTRAINING ORDER IN PLACE
QUESTION 2 TO HMCS WAS THE FEDJCABcomplete AND ABOVE 5/ 7/THE ISSUE...IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT 2017 . FURTHER POLICE COULD DISPUTE FACTS WE DID DEFEND FACTS , CAN YOU COMFIRM POLICE MADE NO DEFENCE AS INFORMED YOU IN EMAIL OF 17.11.2017.DID YOU GET EMAIL OF 17.11.2017. COTTER KNOWS FACTS POLICE ADMIT FACTS , CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM WHEN HHJDENYER RETIRED ,,,,EXACT DATE PLEASE
QUESTION 3 TO HMCS YOU STATE WE DID NOT GET APPLICATION 6.12.2017 AND IN 2017 WE WERE UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017. MADE UNDER Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,. CAN YOU CONFIRM STANCE AND WILL NOT PAY REFUND OF FEE. WE ACCEPT YOU CAN NOT PAY AS LEGATT LJ STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT YOUR SAYING WE DID NOT GET AND THEREFORE COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017
QUESTION 4 TO HMCS DID YOU GET EMAILS OF 5 ,,, 7,,,21 AND 29.12.2017. OR ARE YOU MAKING ALLEGATIONS THAT MY COURT RECEIPTS ARE FORGERIES. WE ASK ALTHOUGH IN JUDGEMENT COTTER CITES EMAIL OF 29.12.2017 eg what did I say ,,,29.12.2017
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,
SO COTTER AWARE I DEFACED N244 FORM AND AMENDMENT SENT ,,,, Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,. WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS FURTHER .
a/ Cotter aware defaced N244 form, can we have copy of form defaced, in email 7.12.207 aware of new N244 form and new amended application. ,,,,can we have copies of these, eg what did Cotter consider in judgement . Further aware of application 6.12.2017 as admits read email of 29.12.2017...where I state in email,,, ARE THESE IN FILE You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.,,FROM EMAIL
You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.LEGGATT LJ STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HMCS STATE HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 WHAT DID HE READ AN APPLICATION HE PRODUCED FORGED MY SIGNATURE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
COTTER STATES EMAILS AFTER 5.12.2017 WHICH HE READ CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPIES OF THESE,,,,KNOWS AMENDMENT SENT LETS SEE WHAT WAS BEFORE HIM IN AMENDMENT TO COME TO CONCLUSION I WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.
AS QC JUDGE AND BARRISTER STATED COTTER AND LATER HHJBIGGER WAS NEVER GOING TO GRANT YOUR APPLICATION,,,,TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS WOULD BE INVITING POLICE IN TO THEIR COURTS TO EXPOSE THEIR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR. ....]
QUESTION 5 TO HMCS AGAIN COURT RECEIPT HOWEVER IS THE EMAIL 13.7.2018 AND 19.7.2018 IN FILE OR HAS COURT OF APPEAL REMOVED. (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,I ASKED IN APPLICATION TO LOOK AT FILES,,,,,IGNORED BY COURT OF APPEAL SO PRESENTED EVIDENCE FOR CONSIDERATION
HMCS Question 6 ,,,, is email address correct…7.12.2017 DID YOU GET EMAIL .HAVE ASKED HMCS NOW FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS,,,,DID YOU GET EMAIL,,,ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES WHERE THEY JUST IGNORE…UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,,OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT,,,,CAN NOT ANSWER AS TODAY AS FATAL FOR HMCS eg ,,,HMCS WERE AWARE OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 BINNED ,CAN NOT ANSWER AS WOULD SHOW COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 AND LEGATT STATING THE FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,,WHAT DID COTTER READ A DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED.
So we ask court QUESTION 7 did you obtain above emails, DEC 2017 7, 21.29 OF DEC can we have copy of N244 that HHJCotter considered, eg what I wanted HHJCotter to do, and paid for, all correspondence ignored since Jan 2018,will try again today, ombudsman would need evidence in his/her consideration ,,,,,,,,,,,,,did HMCS obtain application of 6.12.2017 , or were they aware of possible application of 6.12.2017, eg did you obtain email,7.12.2017,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Email 7.12.2017 eg……………
1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
We know N244 I wrote on application,,,[,,recorded],,,, removed, not to send to HHJCotter, What did Cotter read,,,A N244 AND DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.CAN WE HAVE COPY OF APPLICATION PAID FOR PLUS N244FORM IN AMENDED APPLICATION
QUESTION 8 TO HMCS IN B26YMO42 AGAIN WE HAVE COURT RECEIPT FOR SETTLEMENT AS DEFENDANTS ASKED TO SETTLE ,,,EMAIL TOMLIN ORDER AS THEY REQUESTED SENT. WAS THE APPLICATION TO REMOVE CASE FROM HEARING OBTAINED WITH SIGNED STATEMENT FROM COMPUWAVE ,,,,,CASE SETTLED,,,,,IF YES WHY WAS IT NOT REMOVED FROM HEARING LIST. .FURTHER IS APPLICATIONS 26.2.2017 26.10.2017 TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER ARE THESE IN FILE.
QUESTION 9 to HMCS do you have any reason to believe scan appendix 2 that HMCS did not stamp this document, eg is court stamp forgery. So we have my applications ignored, lawyers application ignored, my MPs correspondence on issue ignored. WE HAVE COURT CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE COME AND TALK TO US.HOW CAN POLICE STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.
QUESTION 10 TO HMCS.see 14th time asked. From recording Mr Blair states our Mr Till sent your application for oral hearing to Cardiff court, co/1/2013. Is this application in file, or has court removed. How do Bristol court record that documents transferred to another court, how does Cardiff court record delivery from a different court. Does Bristol court have any record of applications made With respect to my emails did Ms Weaver every supply replies, if so can we please have replies.
QUESTION 11 TO HMCS ,,,,,THERE WERE APPLICATIONS TO REMOVE THIS ORDER ON THE 26.2.2016 AND 26.10.2016 6.12.2017 ARE THESE IN FILE OR HAVE THEY BEEN REMOVED,,,,WHERE THERE FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE ASKING YOU IF YOU REQUIRE ANYTHING FURTHER IN 2 EARLIER APPLICATIONS AS I FOLLOWED UP AS APPLICATIONS IGNORED.
QUESTION 12 to HMCS do you have any reason to believe that HMCS did not stamp this document, SCAN APPENDIX2 eg court stamp is forgery. So we have my applications ignored, lawyers application ignored, my MPs correspondence on issue ignored. WE HAVE COURT CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE COME AND TALK TO US.HOW CAN POLICE STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.
QUESTION 13 TO HMCS ,,Can I refer to paragraph f 1/ where court of appeal in judgement stated ,,,why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork, again see TODAYS question asked over 20 times. In judgement Cotter cites email of the 14.11.2018,,,,,[can not be 2018 what drugs/intoxication was he on] assume 17.11.2017. No emails of 14.11.2017, if HMCS maintain these 2 emails are ones of 14.11.2017 can I please have copy. Can you please confirm should be 17.11.2017 emails were recited on the 17.11.2017 from evidence ALREADY COPIED from pre action protocol document, eg WHY I went to police,eg,,,,
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
THIS CITING IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOLLOWED BY NEXT STEP THE ECHR
QUESTION 14 TO HMCS,,,,again asked over 20 times,,,,. We know Cotter obtained,,email 7.12.2017 , see above HMCS receipt,,,,email 7.12.2017,,,,
For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,
So aware after 5.12.2017 amendment would be sent , not to send to Cotter until new application sent, aware of 7.12.2017 email as quoted in 29.7.2017 , so aware application not complete. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, a line was put through old N244 form. Can we please have the N244 considered by HHJCotter, and can we please have copy of application considered by HHJCotter, we know old N244 removed, what was N244 considered, and can we have copy of application amendment which Cotter knows existed, Cotter states emails after 5.12.2017 sent,,,,,,can we have copies of these please
LETS SEE DOCUMENT AFTER 5.12.2017 WHERE COTTER COMES TO JUDGEMENT YOU WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.A GREAT WORRY AS RECENTLY HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED MAY NEVER GET WITH HMCS FOR EXAMPLE,,,,WE CAN NOT FIND FILE
QUESTION 15 TO HMCS DID COTTER REPLY TO COURT APPLICATION, FEB 2018 IF SO CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF REPLY. IN TERMS OF HHJRALTON AGAIN WE HAVE RECEIPT FOR EMAIL DID YOU GET AND DID HHJRALTON ISSUE ANY REPLY AS INFORMED HIM MEDICAL RECIRDS NOT SUPPLIED.
QUESTION 16 TO HMCS CAN YOU SUPPLY DATA UNDER Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). ,,,,,,,,,,,,,SENT TO BIRMINGHAM COURT .CAN YOU CONFIRM SENT TO HHJBIGGER eg ,,,,WHAT WAS BEFORE BIGGER . APPLICATION TO BIGGER TO LOOK AT FILES. .CAN YOU CONFIRM IGNORED IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.
QUESTION 17 TO HMCS IS THE EMAIL OF 13.7.2018 AND 19.7.2018 IN FILE. FURTHER WAS EVIDENCE BELOW IN EMAIL OF THE 19.7.2018 eg you had scan 10594 where police admit in their IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations
3/ We went to police after picketing at court over again as applications ignored, still going on from above, barrister told me to report to police malfeasance in public office as ignoring applications, from first correspondence to police,FEDJCAB,,EG
.,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications , reason went to police as courts ignoring applications. so no doubt in judicial review application , can i please quoted page 2 of judicial review application.,,,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,
4/ Numerous applications ignored over time and as JCIO stated complaint malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, criminal offence, and we can not investigate, further as cases over long period of time if an issue we could investigate it would be out of time, which makes nonsense of judgement you complained over HHJDenyer judgements, [no ignoring applications]and should have taken to JCIO, [no they could not investigate as JR application ]please put email eclosed from JCIO , also please put on file enclosed email .HHJBidder states police acted correctly , so they can ignore statutory regulations in their investigations, and send reply to an appeal, where THEY ADMIT NOT LODGED
TAB21.
QUESTION 18 to HMCS what evidence was in file in November 2018 for you to believe a restraining order was in place, CAN I REFER TO RECORDED CALL TO YOU IT DOES NOT RELATE TO ORDER OF 2016.
QUESTION 19 TO HMCS. DID POLICE OR HMCS EVER MAKE ANY APPLICATIONS TO ANY COURT DISPUTING ANY OF MY APPLICATIONS. . WE DID GET FROM YOU,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SORRY VERY LATE OUT OF TIME IN COURT OF APPEAL STAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE WE WILL NOT ISSUE ANY DOCUMENTS UNLESS ORDER FROM JUDGE ,ITS AN ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE WE DO NOT WISH TO BE INVOLVED. CAN YOU CONFIRM EMAIL SEEKING INFORMATION TO DO REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER WAS ALSO IGNORED, AGAIN YOU HAD NO COMMENT TO MAKE. IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.
QUESTION 20 TO HMCS ,,Can you confirm police allegation in question 11 to police ,and who was person who supplied information to police. In terms of co/1/2018 why was I not allowed to do application, can I refer to my complaint, after you stated,,,,,,,,,court lawyer prepared papers.
e/ We ask final question to HMCS number 21 We had no reply to question is fee 528.00. Can I refer to HMCS document
Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.
Eg to vary, amend order, Master stated HMCS would consider new application.
Can I request CPS that document today is forwarded to a judge. We have in utterly cowardly way Legatt quoting restraining order of 2016, where in 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 applications to remove. We know why ignored, as at hearing DEFENDANTS ASKED THAT JUDGEMENT STATED THIS. THIS REJECTED BY DJWATSON MY 3 APPLICATIONS UNDER
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]
HMCS RECENTLY VIA COMPENSATION PAID 150.00 IF I LODGED AT COURT WOULD THE COURT OBTAIN TRANSCRIPT,,,,IF IT SHOWED APPLICATION REJECTED BY DJWATSON WOULD COURT REPAY THE 150.00
eg GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today,]
IS IT ALRIGHT TO JUDGES TO MAKE COWARDLY ATTACKS
We have issue of court of appeal application, as computer crash emailed court to obtain application at conclusion of hearing, again emails ignored. Court states binned after hearing as regulations. Judge advised from a theoretical point of view true, however this was just a warning to back up, if you required offered to pay cost of return there was no reason why your request not made, further if not doing court had duty to inform you, so you could ask for sections you require to be photocopied, with you paying court copy fees. DO YOU HAVE OWN COPY OF APPLICATION IF SO FREE OF CHARGE CAN YOU COPY FILE ACCEPT POSTAGE /PACKING CHARGE
QUESTIONS TO POLICE
QUESTION ONE TO POLICE WAS THE ABOVE FEDJCABcomplete AND SCAN 13.4.2017 DOCUMENT SENT TO SGT PRICE. We have receipt from Patchway police station WAS THE FEDJCABcomplete AND ABOVE 5/ DETAILS OF MATTER 7/THE ISSUE...IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW. DID YOU ISSUE ANY DEFENCE TO HMCS.
QUESTION 2 TO POLICE MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS, IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE AS YOU ARE AWARE IN EBRAHIMI CASE WHERE YOUR OFFICERS JAILED, IS IT TRUE VIA STATUTE JCIO ]judicial conduct investigation office ] could not investigate as a criminal offence,
from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate
Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) ……………………
JCIO STATE from website,,,,,,,,,,,, …
Can I complain to you because I believe a judge is involved in corruption or has committed fraud?
No. Such allegations would be a matter for the police.
You were utterly aware of this from barristers citing as recently before your offices jailed Duffy/Passmore in the Ebrahimi case, with identical issue as today, as criminal allegations ignored.
QUESTION 3 TO POLICE DID I COME TO YOU AS FEDJCABcomplete AND PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT AS HMCS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. CAN I REFER TO RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE WHERE ISSUE CITED BY INSP O MAHONY ,,,EG WILL WE GET COURT STAFF SAY ,,,WE SENT APPLICATIONS TO HHJDENYER,,,,,,AND DENYER SAYING,,,NEVER SEEN APPLICATIONS. JUDICIARY STATE I WENT SOLELY MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE,,,AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AWARE RECORDING/PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SHOWS OTHERWISE ,,,,,COTTER CORRUPT AND BENT DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM,,,to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .... HOWEVER ASKING YOU DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE I CAME TO YOU AS MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIFC OFFICE,,,,,,,,,,,AS SOLELY DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.
QUESTION 4 TO POLICE THE ISSUE TO POLICE COVERED IN QUESTIONS BELOW,,,THESE IN DETAIL WILL BE CITED LATER, CAN I PLEASE ASK POLICE HOWEVER TO ANSWER AS TABLE BELOW SIMPLE ANSWER ,,,YES/NO eg
DID I COME TO YOU MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
AS FOR YEARS COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND PERJURY ISSUE YES NO
ARE THESE CRIMINAL OFFENCES AND THEREFORE VIA STATUTE YES NO
COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO
IN INVESTIGATION CAN YOU CONFIRM YOU DID NOT YES NO
FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS
CAN YOU CONFIRM IF MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS FINAL APPEAL YES NO
CAN YOU CONFIRM I CAME TO YOU MALFEASANCE NOT MISFEASANCE YES NO
QUESTIONS TO POLICE 5 RELATES TO QUESTION 4
,
1/ Early 2017 as barristers advice did I come to you, malfeasance in public office, as for years courts ignoring applications, where Sgt Price asked me to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it related to my complaint to police, we did not know OFFENDERS HMCS staff not sending applications to HHJDenyer or HHJDenyer ignoring applications malfeasance in public office ignoring applications as explained by your Insp O Mahony please see scan 10594.
2/ Do you have any evidence I came to you as ,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied over judgements of HHJDenyer, if so can you please disclose.
3/ PCBird in letter confirms went over offence malfeasance in public office, further perjury issue, can you please confirm criminal offence, and therefore via statute could not complain to JCIO.
4/ Can I refer to IPCC summary regulations , and Insp O Mahonys letter, scan 10594 , can you confirm you did not follow IPCC regulations. Eg Mr Galloway never contacted me.
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
5/ From your letter 5.12.2017 ,,,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
Further you sent correspondence if doing appeal had to enclose a police appeal form. Can you confirm on the 24.7.2017 you had no police appeal form, however you maintain email of the 22.7.2017 was final appeal, although you admit from letter 5.12.2017 I would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017 if you ignored email of the 22.7.2017 .
Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
oduces evidence ,,,,on this day defendant in closed prison,,,in your case CORNERSTONE why you went to defendants, if it was criminal offences ,perjury,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, [FEDJCAB] ,,,then could not take TO JCIO as JCIO stated . Follows police advice was wrong to take to JCIO. . This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit my email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,
Further police state told from HMCS [Bristol county court ] judges immune from prosecution, however ask police in the FEDJCABcomplete document as I went through complete document, was this pasted to you
t take TO JCIO as JCIO stated . Follows police advice was wrong to take to JCIO. . This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit my email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,
Further police state told from HMCS [Bristol county court ] judges immune from prosecution, however ask police in the FEDJCABcomplete document as I went through complete document, was this pasted to you
QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED]
Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]
QUESTION 7 TO POLICE WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 DO YOU WISH TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER CONFIRMING IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.
QUESTION 8 TO POLICE CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM MY EMAIL OF 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL TO YOUR DEFENCE ,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHICH CAME UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS eg EVEN IN DOCUMENT SENT TO YOU COURT STATED WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US. FROM YOUR LETTER 5.12.2017 CAN I QUOTE,,,
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.
DO YOU MAINTAIN EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL ?????????????
Question 9 to police summary…. from officers statement allegations ,,,,can you confirm neighbour reported alleged crime to you, travellers vandalising property, can you please confirm when he reported. . Can I ask ,,,,you were aware from allegations of neighbour, of my property being vandalised, when was incident recorded by you, and why did it take 2 weeks to contact me. Further why did it take 2 officers to attend, further considering time sending 2 officers, did you enquire from neighbours if they saw anything. Further will try after your reply to trace boy as witness, neighbour wasting police time, eg place card in shop, with 100.00 award taken from my state pension, if fails could use say Evening Post ,local TV channels leave 100.00 with them from my pension, so they can pay boy after publicity for conviction,,,,waste of police time. Further with your reply can display allegations of neighbour with travellers at library.
QUESTION 10 TO POLICE. YOU WERE INFORMED DO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBIITY FOR LOST MAIL PLEASE DO VIA EMAIL. IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL , IN ADMINISTRATION COURT IN COURT OF APPEAL YOU HAD CHANCE TO DISPUTE FACTS eg from court of appeal,,, The court via order asked me to serve numerous documents, eg court letter 26.7.2018 order to serve, eg,,,,,,,respondents [police/HMCS] are not required to take any action at the permission stage, unless directed by the court .In all cases however the respondents is permitted and encouraged to file brief written statement setting out any reasons why permission should be refused in whole or in part.,,,,,,, The parties made no statement, as in judicial review application and in pre action protocol document, they accept facts., Can you confirm you issued no correspondence with the courts, if you did can we please have copy,,,,,you accepted facts. From High court judge who saw my website, advised if you had at any stage then Legatt would have awarded costs. Can you further confirm you made no objection to removal of restraining order.
QUESTION 11 TO POLICE ,,PCBird states I contacted HMCS and was told judges/staff at HMCS immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue, malfeasance [misconduct] in public office ignoring applications for years, was via JCIO , who told you this , can we have date and person who supplied information, see asked 14 times
WE HAVE SITUATION WHERE CHIEF CONSTABLE AND PCC MS MOUNTSTEVENS KNOW THEY HAVE OFFICERS THAT ARE CORRUPT AND BENT ,MR GALLOWAY IN IPCC INVESTIGATION JUST IGNORES IPCC REGULATIONS. WE HAVE MR CROUCH KNOWING POLICE STANCE WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS ,,,,NOT TRUE THEY HAVE COURT EMAIL ,,,WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS,,,,,THESE ARE CRIMINAL OFFENCES TOLD TO CONTACT JCIO,,,I TOLD THEM AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES THEY COULD NOT INVESTIGATE. AND WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS SO AS UTTER CORRUPT AND BENT SENDS REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE I HAD MADE NO APPEAL.
THIS IS ISSUE THAT HAS GONE ON FOR YEARS WHERE RHLJLEGGATT [RL] JUDGEMENT BRINGS THINGS ALL TOGETHER AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE WHO SAW THIS WEBSITE YEARS AGO SAID A JUDGEMENT WE CAN EXPLOIT.
WHAT IS JUDGEMENT OF RL,,,,,,,I ISSUED RESTRAINING ORDER AS YOU APPEALED HHJBIDDERS JUDGEMENT. IN DIRECTLY RELATED ISSUE TO THIS RESTRAINING ORDER HMCS HAVE JUST PAID 150.00 COMPENSATION. EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL DID NOT GO TO POLICE[ DEFENDANTS] OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. WE HAVE FATAL EVIDENCE THAT WAS BEFORE THE COURTS THAT I WENT OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS FOR YEARS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS .AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES COULD NOT GO TO JCIO. DAY 1 DEFENDANTS SGT PRICE ASKED FOR DISSECTION OF CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, THE FEDJCAB PLUS DETAILS OF PERJURY ISSUE THE FEDJCAB ,,,,,,WHICH EXPLAINS EVERYTHING VIA TITLE FEDJCAB,,,eg ITS FATAL AND JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT [CAB] TODAY FATAL TO RL JUDGEMENT AND JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT .THE FEDJCAB [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT] THIS WAS BEFORE HHJCOTTER AND BIGGER AS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SENT TO COURT VIA EMAIL 16.9.2017. LATER A FURTHER SIDE ISSUE WITH DEFENDANTS OVER THIS PLEASE SEE DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONYS LETTER AND HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT. FURTHER PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT VIA STATUTE HAD TO BE VIA STATUTE CPR REGULATION PARAGRAPHS ANNEX A eg
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
WHERE HHJCOTTER/BIGGER AS CORRUPT AND BENT [CAB] STATE I WENT OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AS ANOTHER BARRISTER STATED THEY WERE NEVER GOING TO GRANT YOUR APPLICATION,,,,TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS WOULD BE INVITING DEFENDANTS TO INVESTIGATE THEIR COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR.FURTHER UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,TO DENY EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THEM, eg THE FEDJCAB, FURTHER HHJBIGGER STATES,,,,,IT WAS VEXIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS PAGE ONE LINE ONE IN MY JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION eg IN IPCC INVESTIGATION THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS, AND THEY SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL, [eg WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS ] WHEN ONE NOT LODGED,,,,BELOW DEFENDANTS INSP M O MAHONY ADMIT ALLEGATIONS,
EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL AGAINST JUDGEMENT HHJBIGGER CAB
WORTH NOTING THE FEDJCAB BEFORE RL SENT BY EMAIL IN APPLICATION OF 13.7.2018 IRONIC WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS HE IGNORED APPLICATION.
FURTHER OF NOTE RL STATES FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 HE WAS AWARE OF APPLICATION HOWEVER FELT FIT TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE TO REMOVE IT FROM FILE
AS I STATED YEARS AGO CORRUPTION FROM TOP TO BOTTOM CORRUPT AND BENT [CAB] .WE HAVE BRISTOL COURTS MR HUNT IN EMAIL SAYING YOUR APPLICATION 6.12.2017 NOT ON COURT SYSTEM .....HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM SYSTEM ,,,BY HHJCOTTER OR COURT STAFF,,,,,,, MR HUNT ????.WE HAVE HHJCOTTER IN JUDGEMENT CITING EMAIL 29.7.2017 WHERE IN EMAIL AWARE OF APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 .IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION MR HUNT NOT ONLY HAVE PART OF THAT APPLICATION 6.12.2017 BUT HAS CONFIRMATION OF EMAIL APPLICATION 6.12.2017 GIVING TIME SET FROM EMAIL SCAN . AS THE CAB MR HUNT STATES WE DID NOT CONSIDER APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 WHERE I ASKED FOR REPAYMENT OF FEE WHERE HE FEELS FIT AS CAB TO NOT REPAY AS HE CONFIRMS IN EMAIL REMOVED FROM SYSTEM. NOW BEFORE RESOLVER
EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL ;;;;;;DETAILS BELOW,,,,, SIMPLE QUESTION PARTIES INFORMED OF CONTENT IN WEBSITE IF UNTRUE SUE ME FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT OR LIBEL,,,,AS ANOTHER BARRISTER SAID LETS SEE WHAT TACTICS COURT OF APPEAL USE TO STRIKE OUT THIS NEW APPLICATION
NOTE THIS SECTION THE REMOVAL OF WICKED RESTRAINING ORDER OF RL ,,,,,,THE REFERENCES CITED IN TEXT WHERE LAST ITEMS AT BOTTOM OF PAGE,,,,,,,YOU HAVE APPENDICES CITED DIRECTLY BELOW FOLLOWED BY TEXT WE AWAIT COURT OF APPEAL AGAIN ON EVIDENCE SUPPLIED TO STRIKE OUT AGAIN UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT
APPENDIX 1;;;;;;;; REASON PLAINTIFF WENT TO DEFENDANTS NOT CORRUPTED FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJCOTTER/HHJBIGGER TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS EG ALLEGATION AS WENT OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ???????????????????????????????????????
WENT TO DEFENDANTS DAY 1 PICKET AT COURT ,,, TOLD BY BARRISTER TO REPORT 2 ISSUES TO DEFENDANTS. EAGA PERJURY ISSUE AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. . SEEN BY SGT PRICE SHE ASKS ME TO DISSECT CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE,,, IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS AND TO SEND DETAILS OF EAGA PERJURY ISSUE. TO SHOW WHERE IT RELATES TO MY ALLEGATIONS , RECORDING OF VISIT WHERE RELEVANT LATER SHE STATES,,,,,IF NOT CRIMINAL OFFENCES WOULD NOT GIVE TO A MEMBER OF STAFF TO INVESTIGATE,,,WHERE PCBIRD INVESTIGATED SAYING WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS HE ASKED FOR SECOND JUDGEMENT WHICH CONFIRMED. HIS JUDGEMENT PLEASE SEE REF 1,,,LAWYERS APPLICATION IGNORED,,,. COURT ADMITS WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS WE DEFINE THIS DOCUMENT REQUESTED DAY 1 FEDJCAB [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIAL CORRUPT AND BENT] THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT
THIS DISSECTED CPS DOCUMENT FATAL TO JUDICIARY JUDGEMENTS ,THE DENOTED FEDJCAP DOCUMENT [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT] eg TODAY JUST START OF DOCUMENT THE FULL CPS DOCUMENT WAS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION SENT TO PARTIES 16.9.2017 SO HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS
CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red eg,,,,,
SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Could not find transcript of Eaga case, misfiled, so sent a few days later, eg
31 Bibury Ave
Bristol BS346DF
13.4.2017
Good morning Sgt Price,
Can I issue apology for delay, in terms of Eaga perjury issue please find evidence, misfiled the transcript , have scanned just relevant pages, as you can see,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,my client does not know Ms Suggett or where these emails in his bundle come from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did district judge conclude,,,,a lawyer would not come all the way from Newcatle and lie to me, THESE EMAILS MUST BE FORGIES ,,,,,,when accused of perjury you can see letter where taunted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application, too late for you to do anything about it now. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
You have been supplied with CPS document on malfeasance in public office , where you asked to explain how it relates to my complaint. If you need more information please contact me, When picketing at court, as you know barrister told me to report to you malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications over many YEARS , ,plus above perjury issue. You were unaware of term malfeasance in public office, as you stated would not be given to anyone to investigate if not a criminal offence, lawyer informs me a legal name its ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,misconduct in public office , where he informs me your officers jailed recently over this criminal offence.
We have court ignoring correspondence,,,,,,openly saying we will ignore emails, as utterly bent and corrupt stopping me obtaining evidence, will be of interest in Cardiff Admin. court issue if one of your officers in Cardiff can obtain file ,do not expect you to travel to Cardiff, further as we discussed, is this a case against HHJDenyer /judges ignoring ,,,,,,,,,binning applications, or court staff malfeasance in public office ignoring not sending to a judge, or both working together .However we know in OBS08441 from my website, we have recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court where he confirms DJDaniels had ignored application, STATES THERE WILL BE NO REPLY TO APPLICATION ,as all he sent was just a note,,,,,Mr Jones should take up issue with judge at hearing,just igmored my application. We have no evidence not sent, you may have issue where staff say was sent and judges saying we did not see, the court utterly corrupt will not let me consult files, breach of Article 6.
P JONES
WE HAVE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SENT EMAIL TO HHJCOTTER 16.9.2017 AND PARTIES. THE FEDJCAB IN FULL WAS ENCLOSED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT. .FURTHER WHAT OTHER EVIDENCE WAS BEFORE THE JUDICIARY. THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT HAD TO BE DONE VIA CPR PARAGRAPHS ANNEX A TEMPLATE eg CAN I CITE THEREFORE THIS ALSO BEFORE HHJCOTTER/HHJBIGGER ,,STATED FURTHER LATER STATED ,,,,, APPLICATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT [the pre action protocol paragraphs CPR template before HHJCOTTER/BIGGER]
6/ INTERESTED PARTIES
IPCC PO BOX 473 SALE M33 OBW 2017/086838 [IPCC]
NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST BRISTOL BS105NB [NBT]
BRISTOLCIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE 2 REDCLIFE ST BRISTOL BS16GR [BCC]
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
8/ THE DETAILS OF ACTION THAT DEFENDANTS ARE EXPECTED TO TAKE
We expect criminal offence to be investigated, the Home Office state all crimes should be investigated
THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT WE KNOW WAS BEFORE HHJCOTTER/HHJBIGGER BUT WAS ALSO BEFORE COURT OF APPEAL
So application 13.7.2018 to court of appeal
[[ CONTAINED FEDJCAB SO RL UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS FURTHER IN HIS JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HHJCOTTER READ WRONG APPLICATION BINNED APPLICATION 6.12.2017 PLEASE SEE REF 5. FURTHER HE IS AWARE FROM APPLICATION 13.7.2018 HHJCOTTER COMES UNDER BANNER CAB AS HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT . THE JUDICIARY ARE DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF IT TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ]]
to obtain ,,,,,,,,,,,, relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
,,,APPLICATION ,IGNORED BY COURT OF APPEAL. IF LOOKING AT CONSPIRACY THEORY COULD SUGGEST COURT OF APPEAL IGNORING APPLICATION TO HIDE CORRUPTION OF HHJBIGGER/COTTER ……MY APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL BECAUSE OF THIS RESTRAINING ORDER MADE eg WHAT DID IT SAY
SKELETAL ARGUMENT [as at 1.7.2018] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Lets look at this judgement paragraphs
PAR 1 /A ,,,,SO ISSUE AS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,page 2 ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence ignored,,,,,APPLICATIONS IGNORED ,,,,IN APPLICATION ALSO SAY STILL GOING ON IN 2018 GIVE EVIDENCE STILL NO REPLY TO APPLICATION 26.2.2018. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENT OFHHJDENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ITS ABOUT WE COULD NOT GET A JUDGEMENT . FAILURE TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION PAGE 22 TO 26 HHJBIDDER HAS QUESTIONS I ASK DEFENDANTS AFTER THEY SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE .,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO MY LAWYER WHO ALSO COULD NOT GET A REPLY, HAVE YOU TALKED TO PRO BONO UNIT,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT MANAGER,,EG 5 MONTHS LATER,,,;;WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE AS WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WANTED COURT TO DO,,,,MAY I SUGGEST DAY ONE ,,,,,EMAIL DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR APPLICATION,,,
PAR1 B ,,,,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,
from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate
Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) Further these cases over a long period of time, so out of time to make complaint, defendants aware……………………………………….end of quote
CONCLUSION
DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER WENT OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES OF PERJURY, AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS OVER A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME AS JCIO STATED WE CAN NOT CONSIDER CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS, AND IF WE COULD YOUR OUT OF TIME AS WE HAVE 3 MONTH TIME LIMIT. ISSUE COVERED IN MY APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL WHERE I DISSECT HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT AS AT 1.7.2018. NOTE AS I STATED AS AT 1.7.2018,AS COURTS IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE TRYING TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE TO DO THIS APPEAL UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6. Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL, AS JCIO STATE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE,,,,,AND EVEN IF WE COULD OUT OF TIME.
EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL AND BECAUSE I APPEALED RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED WHICH IS JUST VEXIOUS UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT ON THE FACTS
APPENDIX 2 IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS,DEFENDANTS ADMIT MY ALLEGATIONS therefore EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE APPEAL AGAINST HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT .IT FOLLOWS WITH APPENDIX 1 RESTRAINING ORDER MADE UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT ON THE FACTS BEFORE THE COURT
Retired district judge advised making issue clear to judiciary in any claim, asap, , therefore from page one line one of judicial application to HHJBigger ,,,,,,,,,,
APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]
SO ABOVE VEXATIOUS UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT,,,,,this is judiciary stance ,because you appealed we issued restraining order, challenged in todays application OR QUESTION TODAY ARE FACTS TRUE .I AM NOT ON TRIAL TODAY SIMPLE QUESTION FOR LATER USE,,,,DEFENDANTS IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL[ PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS ] WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.
FACTS Picket at court as court for years ignoring applications. Barrister told me to report to defendants malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, for years, still going on, plus Eaga perjury issue. PCBird states no evidence,I contact IPCC where complaint against defendants, so IPCC COMPLAINT,,,,,….Defendants Mr Galloway ,,,,,,state we have no evidence, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. Contact IPCC now one of their complaints, where supplied with IPCC regulations , these in judicial review application and court of appeal application. . Defendants state if doing an appeal need to complete our appeal form with your appeal. On appeal form, in judicial review /court of appeal applications, court aware have to tick boxes that IPCC regulations followed before defendants can consider any appeal .
Regulations of IPCC [summary]
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
IN LETTER BELOW LETTER FROM DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY
With regard to the letter which you left in Patchway front office for the attention of Sgt Price, I can confirm I have spoken directly with Sergeant Price. She said that she does recall speaking to you in the front office and tasking one of her officers to investigate a crime Malfeasance in a Public Office. However she cannot recall whether she ever received your letter. [THIS WAS ANOTHER COMPLAINT MUCH LATER OVER BOARDING UP OF WINDOW NOT RELATED TO TODAYS ISSUE,,,DUE TO FALL COULD NOT MOVE WHERE FIRESERVICE HAD TO BREAK IN AS I STATE NOT ISSUE TODAY,,,DO HAVE DEFENDANTS RECEIPT THAT THIS LATER LETTER WAS LEFT] She accepts that this will have been frustrating for you and as the Investigating Officer for your complaint, I offer my full and sincere apologies on behalf of the organisation that your letter was left unanswered.
Secondly, as requested I sent an e-mail to Hamish Galloway asking whether he had ever had cause to speak to you. Mr Galloway provided a response stating that;
1) He had no recollection of ever personally speaking to you
2) As a member of the Professional Standards office he had assessed a complaint from you (HC/CO/369/17) which was that an officer failed to investigate an allegation of malfeasance in public office by a Judge and officers from Bristol County Court.
3) Mr Galloway states that he recorded the complaint and then sent you a 'disapplication' letter on the basis that it was an abuse of the complaints process in that complaints/allegations against Judges and Court Officers are dealt with by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.
I understand that you then made a complaint against Mr Galloway (HC/CO/812/17) alleging corruption and malfeasance in public office. This complaint was also subject to disapplication on the grounds of being an abuse of the complaints process.
I hope this clears up your query with regard to Mr Hamish Galloway.
With regard to the boarding up of your window, I can confirm that I have listened to the audio for the call from Fire to Police in relation to the boarding up request and also the call from Police to Boing Rapid Secure in relation to the same.
I have ascertained that the Fire Service make the call to Police on behalf of the Ambulance Service. This is in line with the Joint Protocol agreement for persons collapsed behind closed doors. A request for boarding up is made for a wooden framed window 1200 by 400mm. Police then in turn call Boing Rapid Secure and request the same. I have listened to both calls and at no time is any mention made of when you may be returning from hospital. The duration of your stay in hospital is not mentioned at all. I can confirm that no police officers were dispatched to your property and that the only role of police in this matter was to request boarding up as requested by the Fire Service.
I hope that this investigation helps to resolve your queries and I hope you accept our apology with regard to your letter.,,,,,END OF LETTER
ADMIT IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.MR GALLOWAY NEVER TALKED TO ME ACCORDING TO HHJBIGGER VEXIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT . WE GIVE DEFENDANTS FINAL CHANCE DID YOU FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS ABOVE IF SO CAN I VIA EMAIL IN 7 DAYS HAVE DETAILS OF ALLEGED CONTACT,,,,,ALL CALLS IN OUT RECORDED COULD DEFENDANTS SEND COPY OF EMAIL IF ANY REPLY TO COURT OF APPEAL. WITH NO REPLY THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS EVIDENCE REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED WHERE DEFENDANTS DO NOT CHALLENGE FACTS. WHERE UTTER RIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT OF HHJBIGGER, AND EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE APPLICATION TODAY AS RESTRAINING ORDER AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT.
b/ From appendix 1 this was application over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years and Eaga perjury issue. Where Mr Galloway states we have no evidence, which comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness ,we ask 11 questions, these in judicial review application,,,,,have you talked to my MP,,,,,have you talked to lawyer where correspondence ignored,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT STAFF WHERE IN EMAIL STATE WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS,,,,asked TODAY to consider ref 1 enclosed today. Coming to be out of time, so email defendants 22.7.2017 saying with no reply to 11 questions, would have to do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017. There is no dispute about letter and contents,,,,
IN DEFENDANTS LETTER 5.12.2017 again in judicial review and court of appeal application, ADMIT CONTENTS MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL TO DEFENDANTS, CAN I QUOTE DEFENDANTS LETTER 24.7.2017 ,,,,
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....
DEFENDANTS SENDS LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 SAYING REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL OF 22.7.2017 ,,,,I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL EMAIL STATED WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU ISSUE BEFORE HHJBIGGER WHO STATES VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATION ,,,
SO IT WAS VEXIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS I AM NOT ON TRIAL,,,,,HOWEVER SIMPLE ISSUE IN DEALING WITH A IPCC COMPLAINT DEFENDANTS CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND DEFENDANTS MR CROUCH CAN SEND A REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHEN I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL.
SIMPLE QUESTION TO JUDICIARY YES MY APPLICATION WAS VEXIOUS,,,,,, DEFENDANTS CAN IF THEY WISH NOT ADHERE IN IPCC REGULATIONS IN AN IPCC INVESTIGATION AND CAN SEND A REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE DEFENDANTS ADMIT ONE NOT LODGED. SIMPLE QUESTIONS
WE HAVE FURTHER ISSUE AS DEFENDANTS COULD NEVER CONSIDER AN APPEAL ANYWAY AS IN DEFENDANTS APPEAL FORM NEED CONFIRMATION FROM PLAINTIFF THAT IPCC REGULATIONS WERE FOLLOWED,,,,,,,,,,,THEY DO NOT EVEN HAVE APPEAL FORM ITS LIKE TODAYS APPLICATION WITH NO N244 FORM. FURTHER IN ,,,,,DEFENDANTS INSP O MOH ONY LETTER APPENDIX 1 ADMIT IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED
APPENDIX 3
CO/1731/2018 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS RELATING TO TODAYS APPLICATION IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER
1/ Eaga case comes before Lord Goldring. Judgement,,,although getting judgement very badly WRONG not a reason to grant a judicial review, Srickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA 1132, WHY CAN BRISTOL COUNTY COURT NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK, utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without a transcript , and award of 500.00 to Bristol court would be quashed,,,,,,,ISSUE EVEN IN 2018 UNABLE TO ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK WILL RETURN TO LATER
NEVER FORGIVEN FOR THIS JUDGEMENT.
2/ We have court ignoring applications. still going on in 2012. For example now have no defence in 0BS08441, as we have now a utterly different claim from the POC issued. . The defendants Royal Mail defence was by statute we need the ORIGINAL recorded delivery slip of lost item, before we can pay compensation , I had photocopy of recorded delivery slip , plus Royal Mail proof of posting that claim made,[original recorded delivery slip sent with claim] which defendants would now not accept in their defence. They then find claim, filed in wrong place, so now have different claim, just for lost mail, ask to amend the POC and seek new defence. Usual claim for lost recorded delivery. IMPORTANT AS YOU WILL SEE LATER ABUSE OF PROCESS AS ROYAL MAIL ON SAME FACTS KEEP DEFENDING, 2 CLAIMS BEFORE OBS08441 FOR LOST MAIL. Mr Blair at court office [recorded] states application ignored, not answered , APPLICATION IGNORED , he states on recording, had a note from file,,,,,DJDaniels if I visit ,,,,advised me to take up issue at hearing. You could see why ignored as in judiciary trap, would/could be struck out at hearing, court knows I may not have evidence, that I answered order, my copy date/stamped by court, only thing to save me. . . Defendants remember lost claim, now asked for order for me to supply claim number ect as application found by defendants, , done,,,,,,, my copy stamped /dated by court. WHERE CORRUPT COURT WRITES TO DEFENDANTS SAYING I HAD IGNORED COURT ORDER.[would i have evidence at hearing] Defendants barrister asks therefore at hearing to be struck out, as I ignored court order, I had proof I answered court order ,date/stamped by court, where DJWatson states ,,,something
Very very odd here, as he said …DJO Neil in order said she would strike out if you did not answer order in 14 days, must have seen your reply as she put down later for hearing, ALL PAPERWORK RELATING TO THIS ORDER SOMEONE HAD REMOVED FROM FILE. DID THIS OCCUR IN APPLICATION 6.12.2017 ???????
3/ OBS08441 was not first case for lost recorded delivery mail, where 2YJ03757 was another later claim, after OBS08441 , , comes before DJBrittan
NOTE in previous Eaga case DJBrittan asked me to leave so he could talk to defendants, defendants refused, saying I have to catch a plane, my investigations showed many hours , where I confront defendants, after hearing, in email, with reply,,,,,,true we would not be discussing case behind your back with DJBrittan for you to exploit later,,,SHOWS CORRUPTION OF THIS COURT AND DJBRITTAN
This is abuse of process in bundle I had barristers internet article on abuse of process. At hearing told will not consider,DJBrittan going to any length to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, , in bundle for hearing had copy of barristers internet article on abuse of process, skeletal argument for hearing cases cited,,in barristers article,,eg
,GoreWood v Johnson [2000] ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts, when issue determined by the court,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have ,different verdicts to same facts
,,,DJBrittan states have you full transcript of GoreWood,,not just few lines,,IN BARRISTERS ARTICLE,,,no,,,then i will ignore your evidence . From later legal advice all you required to inform Brittan it was an abuse of process, IDENTICAL CLAIM ,,,,Brittan utterly corrupt IF NOT CAB SUE ME
Full detail in judicial review application, where court had documents,DJBrittan striked out as claim INCOMPREHENSIBLE, YOU WILL SEE SAME DEFENCE ON THE 27.2.2018 APPLICATION,,,, where DJBrittan makes fatal mistake where he gives in judgement way claim should be made WHICH IS IDENTICAL TO THE POC .CAN I SUGGEST HHJDENYER SAYING TO DJBRITTAN STRIKE OUT CLAIM IF HE APPEALS I WILL IGNORE AND BACK YOU . Appeal to HHJDenyer ignored, follow up emails ignored so seek legal advice, where LAWYER also could not get a reply from court,for a oral hearing [ QUOTED AS EVIDENCE IN TODAYS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION EG IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,,,,as I stated even my lawyer could not get a reply , as I said to defendants today .. you state we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications,,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO THIS LAWYER ] my MP could not get a reply,over ignoring applications,,,,i will write to them again can not force them to reply, MP contacted Eaga where award of court they agree to not take. Lawyer suggested a judicial review under Strickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132,where judicial process is frustrated and corrupted.
NOTE REQUIRED HERE,,,,,,, THIS WAS EVIDENCE ABOVE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION HOWEVER AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED THE COURT OF APPEAL WILL BRING UP NOT STRICTLY TRUE, WHAT ELSE ARE YOU NOT SURE OF eg,,,,A MIISING STEP WHICH TODAY I PUT BEFORE COURT
Lawyer HAD stated , i do not deal with court of appeal, where you need your next application, as we can not get a oral hearing for you, our correspondence was also ignored. . . From email correspondence i question advice, as believed next step only via judicial review. Application made to court of appeal, where from their file, [sure court of appeal will confirm ] ,,,,,,,,,,your application presented to Master,,,,,, who asked court to inform you,,,,,,,,,,,,he had sympathy with application, however court of appeal could not hear case,you need a judicial review, I WAS CORRECT , now out of time, Master advised need to do asap application for judicial review . Application made under Srickson v Preston cc ,,,,as above to Admin court Cardiff
The Administration court makes order to ask HHJDenyer again for oral hearing, made 1.2.2013 and 13.2.2013, please see ref 1 both date/stamped by court,APPLICATIONS IGNORED THE ISSUE OF TODAYS APPLICATION . Struck out as I had not made applications,for oral hearing, comes before court of appeal, CO/1/2013 , all applications date stamped by the court, eg ref 1 . THE COURT OF APPEAL DOES NOT WANT CORRUPTION EXPOSED WHERE WE GET JUDGEMENT CASE DISMISSED YOU NEVER MADE APPLICATION FOR ORAL HEARING AND COULD NOT TAKE TO SUPREME COURT. WHAT IS REFERENCE 1 PRESENTED AGAIN TODAY. THE COURT WANTS TO CALL BLACK IS WHITE AS THEY [RL] REPEAT TODAY TO HIDE THE CORRUPTION .WE WILL ASK COURT TODAY ARE THEY STATING REF 1 IS A FORGERY,,,???????????????????
4/ We had also at this time a call,,,,,,, I do not approve of some of your applications to my court, however will not stand by when corruption is going on HHJDenyer/court out to get you, they have made a mistake they have removed applications [CONSIDER OBS08441 APPLICATION,,,CONSIDER LATER APPLICATION 6.12.2017] except one still ONE on our system, was this a district judge. . ON OUR SYSTEM ,,,Record at court yes just ONE [2YJ03757] WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE 3 DATE/STAMPED BY COURT ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,on recording Mr Blair states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,our Mr Till sent application Ref 1 [could be one 1 Feb NOT REF 1 ] to Admin court Cardiff.
5/ Tried to get evidence from Bristol court and Cardiff Admin court to do judicial review application , eg asking Cardiff we have recording with Mr Blair application made, sent to you,did you get it, where we get reply from Cardiff staff, NOTE ON FILE NOT TO DISCUSS CONTENTS WITH YOU [UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90).withholding evidence] told to contact for answer to questions Ms Weaver via email, even all follow up emails ignored, as she ignores question to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, utter breach of Article 6, ..
6/ Lawyer advised to talk direct access to barrister Mr Andrew Marsden with view to taking to the ECHR. Agreed to do, at last minute pulled out, leaving me out of time. Then heard rumours from another lawyer who saw my website, of trouble at his chambers, DID NOT REALISE HHJDENYER AND ANDREW MARSDEN AT SAME CHAMBERS AND MR MARSDEN HAD BEEN MOVED ON TO ANOTHER CHAMBERS IN DAYS OF HIS WITHDRAWAL FROM MY CLAIM . ?????????[was pressure applied]
7/ Issues above in social media/website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com where court states remove above allegations or consequences. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY A CORRUPT COURT HOWEVER CONSEQUENCE WERE RESTRAINING ORDER
8/ THE RESTAINING ORDER FEB 2016,,
The citing in RL judgement was a cowardly act, as applications to remove 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 were ignored by the courts. Lets consider cases why order issued.
a/ AOIBS346/746 . This was case to obtain medical records from ,North Bristol NHS Trust [NBT] travel expenses, and to put statement in my medical records. On 13.7.2014 inform NBT if not supplied proceedings issued. Comes before DJWatson, where lawyer for NBT Ms Smith states should never be before a court the trust were UTTERLY UNAWARE OF ANY POSSIBLE PROCEEDINGS NO TIME TO RESPOND. DJWatson suggested talking outside to settle, so move to door to open door for her where told to go, must be on court tape. Ms Smith later email ANYWAY ,,, TRUE I DID NOT WANT TO TALK TO YOU. Court later strikes out in papers, as Ms Smith states we have supplied all data, have recording for example radiology where data withheld,still refuse to put statement in medical records, so await further ORAL hearing. Feb 13 2015 email Ms Smith ,,, this is stupid supply medical records as my POC, put statement in medical records, where she states no ,your case struck out so we await hearing . Then 5 months later she ask to settle, expenses paid, outstanding medical records supplied, and she puts statement in medical records. She sends settlement to court, rejected by DJBrittan , comes before again DJWatson. Ms Smith asks that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, REJECTED BY DJWATSON.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ........[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over above issue, eg I had appealed as medical records ect still outstanding ]
Could not get into discussion ,sat on judges right hand side, with his right hand raised towards me, NOT A COMPLAINT CLEARLY MATTER CLOSED AS HE RAISED SKELTAL ARGUMENT PARTIES HAD TO PRODUCE TOWARDS MS SMITH .We emailed court ,,,,,,new court ,do they video hearing, just ignored, application for transcript ignored. IN APPLICATIONS 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 AND 6.12.2017 TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER COURT JUST IGNORES , WHAT DID I DO WRONG THE PROBLEM WAS CORRUPT AND BENT MS SMITH AS DJWATSON COMPREHENDED FROM SKELTAL ARGUMENT,,,,SHE WAS AWARE OF POSSIBLE PROCEDINGS LIED TO JUDGE,WOULD NOT TALK OUTSIDE TO SETTLE, AS JUDGES SUGGESTION AND AT END ASKED TO SETTLE AND SUPPLIED EVERYTHING AS POC. WHAT DID I DO WRONG
b/ Case B26YM042 CITED This relates to todays issue,as restraining order made under this number so need to cite in any application to the court to remove/issue new proceedings. Emails were stored via Outlook Express not a server, required backup for possible libel or contempt of court proceedings, for example courts Mr Fowler,,,,,,,,,,,we will ignore your correspondence, as I seek evidence to do judicial review, utter breach of Article 6, withholding evidence that would help my defence. . Can not just press button ,,,,,save all emails , and copy,onto USB stick, for example Compuwave required a viewer and program to make copy of emails. Would not work where Compuwave stated was when you left will not enter into further correspondence, as soon as proceedings issued, defendants stated sorry we gave wrong program, and matter settled, with later email to court to remove from hearing, MATTER SETTLED. Next thing I know as defendants ask what is going on [case struck out] as we agreed it would not go to hearing, MATTER SETTLED . I appealed as matter settled, have asked court numerous times is settlement email in file, ask again today, please see Appendix 5 [NOTE ABOVE OBS08441 SEE LATER APPLICATION 6.12.2017 IS JUDICIARY REMOVING APPLICATIONS FROM FILE] all correspondence ignored over the years. You can understand case comes before court where no one turns up,at hearing, and no complaint case struck out therefore. . RESTAINING ORDER BECAUSE I APPEALED. We may ask did HHJDenyer remove settlement , and then picked wrong extra case AOIBS346/746 AS DJWATSON STATED I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY.
AGAIN WE ASK WHAT DID I DO WRONG
9/ Application to remove order 26.2.2016 ignored, where picket at court over ignoring applications for years, consider leaflet handed out primary over historic 2YJ03757, applications ignored, where barrister asks me to report malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, over long period of time, plus perjury Eaga issue to defendants.The evidence does not need to be repeated here , it is in main text of todays application.
a/ Defendants ask for dissection of CPS document, the FEDJCAB document, THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT PLEASE SEE APPRENDIX 1 on malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, plus evidence on perjury issue, in Appendix 1 and 2 Defendants state we have no evidence of perjury/ malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. THESE DOCUMENTS eg FEDJCAB IN INITIAL PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS eg FEDJCAB
b/ Contact IPCC in initial phase of complaint, DEFENDANTS ADMIT IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION APENDIX 2 THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS.
Asking defendants questions to do appeal to defendants where I state in 22.7.2017 email with no reply would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017, to them, where defendants send letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal, I have made no appeal.
IPCC STATE DEFENDANTS INFORM US YOU LODGED AN APPEAL AND VIA STATUTE MATTER CLOSED.YOU NEED A JUDICIAL REVIEW
c/ Contact IPCC in phase 2 of complaint to defendants, over defendants staff, where told only route a judicial review.
DEFENDANTS ADMIT IN LETTER DATED 5.12.2017 TAB 21 IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION I HAD NOT LODGED AN APPEAL eg as facts above ,what did they say....
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.
10/ So application to HHJCotter on the 17.11.2017 as he states against defendants, however made under B26YM042, had to be made, as number cited in restraining order, which is lodged with application. AGAIN WE RETURN,,, WHY CAN THIS COURT NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK AS JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER STATES 14.11.2018 ?????We have asked is this email 17.11.2017 ref 2 eg
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
P JONES
WE HAVE ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES FOR CONFIRMATION ON DATES ALL EMAILS IGNORED IF SO HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS .....FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS,,
Where HHJCotter asks for fee to consider an application .
11/ Retired district judge stated the court will always throw at you, the restraining order, , AS WE HAVE IN COWARDLY ATTACK TODAY the restraining order you need to include as part application to remove on the 6.12.2017. APPLICATIONS 26.2.2016 AND 26.10,2016 TO REMOVE ORDER HAD BEEN IGNORED.
12/ Visit court 5.12.2017 recorded, PAY FEE, ask Mr Blair for file, ask for N244, write on it not to be sent to HHJCotter , INFORM MR BLAIR NOT TO BE SENT TO HHJCOTTER , until application tomorrow dated 6.12.2017, this part of application , EMAIL 6.12.2017 in judicial review application.. Retired judge stated they before have removed documents, do application 6.12.2017, and email NEXT day , 7.12.2017 ref 3 to make sure application 6.12.2017 is one sent AND CONSIDERED BY HHJCOTTER,,,,, . THIS IS PRIMARY NOW TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER FROM N244 IN EMAIL APPLICATION 6.12.2017. WE NEED NOTE HERE THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT /EVIDENCE APPENDIX 1 AND 2 BEFORE HHJCOTTER UTTERLY CORRUPT HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM,,,,,,HE KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,, .STORY MADE UP TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. HE KNOWS I DID NOTHING WRONG IN RESTRAINING ORDER HE IS AWARE FROM APPLICATION HE HAS NO LEG TO STAND ON AS HE CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATES THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]
13/ As soon as retired judge saw judgement stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,THE BAST,,,,,,,,,,,,,HAVE REMOVED APPLICATION SENT VIA EMAIL ON THE 6.12.2017 CONFIRMED IN LATER RECORDING AT COURT. RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED YOU SHOULD NOT BE RECORDING INSIDE THE COURT, NEED STATEMENT THAT APPLICATION 6.12.2017 NOT READ eg HHJCOTTER READ WRONG PAPERS, CONFIRMED IN REF 5 AND FROM COURTS MR HUNT eg,,,,WE HAVE NO RECORD OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 ,,,,,REMOVED FROM FILE AGAIN ?????????
14/ The actual final correspondence with defendants was only concluded in 2018, then judicial review served. .
15/ We have further applications at later date AFTER CONCLUSION of AOIBS346/746 again for medical records and to put statement in medical records, THESE EVENTS AT LATER DATE WHEN AOIBS346/746 CLOSED. . Again Ms Smith, NBT lawyer, refuses to release medical records, drags me through courts again. Application 27.2.2018 , where in days struck out by HHJCotter,,,,, abuse of process, SITTING AS A DISTRICT JUDGE. MAY I SUGGEST COLLUSION WITH STAFF eg SUGGEST NEVER ISSUE HIS CLAIMS SEND APPLICATIONS TO ME TO SEE IF I CAN STRIKE OUT . Ask for oral hearing, date given in days, where I make application, to include,,,,, for a NBT defence. Email correspondence with HHJCotters clerk, where it arises, they have been discussing case behind my back with NBT,and will later give new hearing date. . Make application to look at file before hearing
So as cited in judicial review application, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this ,application... still applications being ignored in 2018 ,,,,as application to HHJCotter WHICH WAS IGNORED was under
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,
WHAT SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BETWEEN HHJCOTTER AND NBT BEHIND MY BACK
HHJCotter then loses interest in case and no hearing for over 5 months. Case comes before HHJRalton, where we get a Watergate moment,,,,,I TALKED TO HHJCOTTER STRUCK OUT AS YOUR CLAIM UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE.,,,,,I NEVER RAISED ISSUE ,,,, Will not get involved here , not an issue today, ISSUE TODAY AGAIN IGNORING APPLICATIONS, all I can do is present evidence for media. As retired district judge advice make issue clear to court asap, what did I state in that application,,,,,,,,where HHJCotter states to HHJRalton UTTER uncomprensible
IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER
PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES
DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST
CLAIM ,,,eg asking court
For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records.
LEGAL BASIS ,,,,,1/ ,No evidence required in terms of obtaining medical records, in terms of putting statement in medical records, please see statutory regulations of NHS ,,,,,,the defendants must allow if requested for plaintiff to add statement to his medical records.
2/ If defendants should defend an abuse of process, eg issues determined in AOIBS346 eg medical records , and AOIBS746 to put statement in medical records, now . ABUSE OF PROCESS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
NOT AN ISSUE TODAY ISSUE MUCH LATER FOR MEDIA WAS IT UNCOMPRENSIBLE AN EXCUSE THE CORRUPT JUDICIARY USE. MATTER SETTLED AGAIN AT HEARING NEVER OBTAINED MEDICAL RECORDS,,,,,,, LATER APPLICATION TO HHJRALTON IGNORED AS RECORDS NOT SUPPLIED
16/ Need evidence to do judicial review application,
From McGinley and Egan v UK Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
Where Mr Blair at Bristol court states your not obtaining evidence of us ignoring applications, make application which will be refused anyway to HHJCotter, where again application IGNORED MADE 16.3.2018 . UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 WHERE HAD TO DO JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION WITH EVIDENCE WITHHELD. TAKE UP ISSUE WITH MY MP . JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION MADE . WHERE WE DO GET A REPLY REF 4 DATED 10.5.2018 ,,,,AS MP INVOLVED 2 MONTHS AFTER APPLICATION, HE IS UTTERLY AWARE REQUIRED FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND AS URGENT REQUIRED REPLY IN DAYS. NOT WITHSTANDING CONFIRMS COURT STANCE UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE
A party to the proceedings must have the possibility to familiarise itself with the
evidence before the court, as well as the possibility to comment on its existence, contents and authenticity in an appropriate form and within an appropriate time (Krčmář andOthers v. the Czech Republic, § 42; Immeubles Groupe Kosser v. France, § 26),
THIS IS NO APPROPRIATE TIME ONLY REPLY AS MY MP INVOLVED.
WE ALSO GET CONCEPT OF EQUALITY OF ARMS IN ARTICLE 6 WHERE IN NBT URGENT APPLICATIONS HHJCOTTER CAN REPLY IN LESS THAN 24 HOURS ,,,,BIAS??????
NOTE FURTHER IN REF 4 HHJCOTTER ADMITTING HE CAN NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK AS AGAIN CORRECTS DATES
17/ Application to Birmingham Admin court due to Cardiff corruption in previous case above , refused, .
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
In application to HHJCotter he ignored request for evidence for my claim to succeed.So judicial review application had to be made or out of time, so need to add extra evidence for Cardiff court, further arguments sent to Birmingham via email, from above
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
Can I refer to email correspondence to Birmingham to ensure all this evidence was before HHJBigger. Can I refer to part email of 26.4.2018 ….eg .
,,,,We have question for them, can I please refer to ECHR concept ,,,equality of arms, where from todays text application , North Bristol NHS Trust make applications as urgent,to Bristol court, ask to be put to a judge today, and get reply from judge same day, where we have court order, tab 12 ,applications tab 13 14 15 as urgent where court just ignores my applications. . From Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. Today NOT application against HMCS
This was part of issue to police as picketing at the court where barrister told me to stop, and report criminal issues, eg perjury ,Eaga case , plus other issue to defendants. End of quote EMAIL 26.4.2017
So we ask did Birmingham put in bin, or did they send to Cardiff Admin court, further correspondence to Cardiff, was this binned, or was it before HHJBigger.
From ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,what evidence was before HHJBigger , or did court remove to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. With full evidence can do final application today, eg what was before HHJBigger.
Can I refer to
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Cardiff in utter breach of Article 6 refuses to answer questions, eg did defendants serve any papers on the Cardiff court, if so can we please have copy. They state defendants made no acknowledgement of service.
18/ HHJBiggers judgement utterly without merit, from appendix 1 and 2, did not go to defendants over HHJDenyers judgements, and claim against defendants not vexious THEY ADMIT MY CLAIM APPENDIX 1 AND 2.
19/ Not only struck out by court of appeal, but because I appealed restraining order issued. I APPEALED AS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER AND IT WAS NOT VEXIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINSTDEFENDANTS THEY ADMIT MY CLAIM
20/ CONSEQUENCES
a/ We ask RL that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of RL from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, REF 1 and 2 ,,,FED document above , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, perjury Eaga issue, from pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
further
b / Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAB document ect REF 1 AND 2 FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal –
c/ HHJCotter read wrong papers, did not read application of 6.12.2017 ,which HHJBigger just copies judgement, please see ref 5 he did not read application 6.12.2017 with consequences as application to re open appeal .The judgement of HHJCotter via corruption as he is denying evidence before him in pre action protocol document for judicial review. THE LITAGATION PROCESS CORRUPTED.
Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".
The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers
APPENDIX 4 WHAT ORDER ARE YOU ASKING FOR AND WHY
JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed, where in Appendix 1 and 2 defendants admit procedure in IPCC complaint not followed. Not issue today, todays issue to change/vary restraining order made as I appealed HHJBiggers judgement. , where every right to appeal ON THE FACTS .
1/ Removal of restraining order [and court to undertake legal consequences of corruption that follow from removal ] made utterly without merit on the facts above ,as RL states I made order as you appealed HHJBiggers judgement,,,,, judgement utterly incompatable with evidence before the court take one of 2 main example,the FEDJCAB EVIDENCE IN APPENDIX1 ,,,,, FEDJCAB ITS IN evidence in pre action protocol for judicial review document , they know why I went to defendants, which is breach of Article 6, eg court denying evidence in front of it .FEDJCAB ITS IN COURT OF APPEAL FILE EMAIL 13.7.2018 SO RL UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS, EAGA PERJURY ISSUE AND FOR YEARS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS [ IRONIC AS ISSUE COURT FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS WHERE COURT OF APPEAL IGNORED APPLICATION 13.7.2918 ,,,]
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
RL states sole issue he issued restraining order as I appealed HHJBiggers judgement which is utterly wrong on facts, every right to appeal, as explained in Appendix 1 and 2.
DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER
b/ IT WAS NOT VEXIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANTS This complaint was line one page one , please see Appendix 2, in judicial review application WHERE DEFENDANTS ADMIT ALLEGATIONS EG IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND WE SENT YOU REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE WE ADMIT YOU DID NOT LODGE AN APPEAL.PLEASE SEE END OF APPENDIX 2,,,, DEFENDANTS COULD NOT CONSIDER AN APPEAL AS IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED IN MY COMPLAINT.
EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL
2/ CONSEQUENCES
a/ We ask RL that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of RL from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAP document , plus 13.4.2017 letter,in Appendix 1 , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAP in pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
further
b / Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER
c/ HHJCotter EVEN read wrong papers, did not read application of 6.12.2017 ,which HHJBigger just copies HHJCotters judgement, please see ref 5 [[SHOWS NOT ONLY CORRUPTION BUT COLLUSION AS BOTH GIVE IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENTS.]] HHJCOTTER did not read application 6.12.2017 with consequences as application to re open appeal .The judgement of HHJCotter via corruption as he is denying evidence before him in pre action protocol document for judicial review, HE HAS THE FEDJCAP IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL IN CORRESPONDENCE I STATE ,,,,CONSIDER APPLICATION WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 16.9.2017 WHERE IN THAT DOCUMENT THE DOCUMENT HAD TO BE PRODUCED VIA CPR TEMPLATE PARAGRAPHS eg ANNEX A.
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
. THE LITAGATION PROCESS CORRUPTED JUDICIARY UTTERLY CORRUPT MAKING UP STORY
Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".
The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers
THIS IS NOT APPLICATION TO REOPEN,,,ITS APPLICATION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER.
3/ FOR PARTIES TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IN 7 DAYS IN APPENDIX 5 [ WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME ] COPY TO THE COURT OF APPEAL .WITH NO REPLY COURT ORDER TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE FROM PARTIES . From McGinley and Egan v UK case above Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
CAN I GIVE ONE EXAMPLE
Application email 17.11.2017 Ref 2 HHJCotter states in judgement 9.1.2018 ,,alleges was email of , 14.11.2018 [can I refer to Lord Goldrings judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork can not be November 2018] From Ref,2 ,,,[part] of email 17.11.2017
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS] ,,,
Have asked court numerous times, email, ,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37)., as over years all emails ignored.
WITH CONFIRMATION WHAT HE CONSIDERED IN JUDGEMENT WAS THIS DOCUMENT 17.11.2017. HHJCOTTER THEREFORE UTTERLY AWARE ISSUE NOT OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER AS HE CITED THIS EMAIL OF 17.11.2017
4/ SEEKING GUIDANCE FROM COURT IF THEY REQUIRE FURTHER STAY UNTIL REFUND OF FEE ISSUE SETTLED FOR APPLICATION 6.12.2017
HHJCotter asked for fee to consider an application. Went to court 5.12.2017 ,recorded, where asked for file, asked for N244 wrote on it not to be sent to HHJCotter new application would follow, next day 6.12.2017,,, emailed application I had paid for, day before,ON THE 6.12.2017 . . Retired judge stated primary issue is restraining order removal, which was in application in N244 ,,,,eg what order are you asking court to make,,,,,,,,,,,,, sent 6.12.2017 by email. . In OBS08441 documents had been removed from file, please see details in judicial review application. So retired judge said email next day to make sure application I had paid for 6.12.2017 was sent to HHJCotter. Emailed therefore 7.12.2017 to make sure application 6.12.l2017 ,obtained and sent to HHJCotter. As soon as retired judge saw HHJCotters judgement said the bas,,,,,,,,,,,have binned application. Went to court again recorded where on recording,,,,,,,,,,,we did not send to HHJCotter.HE THEREFORE READ WRONG PAPERS Retired judge stated you should not be recording in court, get a sworn statement, ref 5 , TOOK THIRD PARTY TO COURT RECORDED AGAIN to confirm not sent, SO HHJCOTTER READ WRONG PAPERS. DID NOT READ APPLICATION I HAD PAID FOR 6.12.2017
Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".
The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers
Courts Mr Hunt confirm not sent. We have asked 5 TIMES FOR REFUND ALL EMAILS IGNORED. MP pointed me towards Resolver. Mr Hunt asked for copy, of application, to reconsider REPAYMENT , its in judicial review application,,,,informed him. . We have asked is email of 7.12.2017 on file, all correspondence ignored, where we ask Mr Hunt again, reply 7 days, with no reply, request court order for NUMEROUS REPLIES TO QUESTIONS ,Resolver state all correspondence should be included in their site. The court asks me to write to Ms Andrews at the court, will not be dealing outside of Resolver ,,,,if Ms Andrews wants to comment she can do on Resolver platform, ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO DEAL OUTSIDE RESOLVER WILL BE IGNORED
APPENDIX 5 QUESTIONS TO PARTIES REPLY REQUIRED IN 7 DAYS TO COURT OF APPEAL WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME IF ANY REPLIES
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,
FOR COURT OF APPEAL
1/ Is the application email of 13.7.2018 on the courts file, timed 12.48 which contained the FEDJCAP document eg why I went to defendants .THEREFORE RL UTTERLY AWARE OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJCOTTER/BIGGER WERE WRONG AND THEREFORE HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WAS NOT A COMPELLING SUMMARY OF FACTS OF CASE,,,Further if in file know i had every right to appeal, which follows restraining order issued utterly without merit. ,Was there a reply to application.
2/ Did parties serve any documents with you, if so can we please have copy The only communication I had was from court saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,accept acknowledgement of service well out of time, however we will not get involved unless court instruct us to, this is issue between you and defendants. .If no replies parties had no objection to applications on the facts.
3/ The judgement of RL was a cowardly act considering reference to restraining order Feb 2016, as applications to remove were made 26.2.2016, 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 where judiciary just ignored applications. We know why binned/ignored as NBT asked at hearing AOIBS346/746 that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, this was rejected by DJWatson.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive
We have asked court for transcript where again applications ignored. We have just been paid compensation by HMCS of 150..00 , we ask court of appeal to confirm, I will pay for transcript, if it shows NBT asked that judgement that reads I acted unreasonably ,and was rejected by DJWatson then court of appeal will refund fee to obtain transcript, we have asked below for NBT to confirm facts in separate question for court of appeal/
FOR BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION COURT
4/ Can you please confirm emails I sent to you by date, and confirm if sent to Cardiff Admin Court as my instructions. Eg did HHJBigger read full application.,eg from ECHR case law,,,i had , time to submit further arguments ,,,,,,,,,,,
5/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copies.
FOR CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT
6/ What documents,,,,/emails by date were forwarded to you by Birmingham court.
7/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copy.
8/ In CO/1/2013 Mr Blair in Bristol court office, [recorded conversation at court] states ,,,,our Mr Till sent your application to the Cardiff court , is this application in Feb 2013 on court file, further can we please have copy of any documents in court file in period 1.1.2013 till 1.4.2013. eg documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, ,,,,
FOR BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.
9/ Are the applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 in court file
10/ In B26YM042 defendants asked to settle, wanted settlement done by Tomlin order, this was emailed to you, 23.12.2015 with request as settled to remove from court listings, where numerous requests over years to confirm email in court file, where we ask again. For example Ref 3 today email of 7.12.2017 ,where all requests over years ignored….part of email Ref 3 of email 7.12.2017
We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please
Was this email removed from file, or is IT IN COURT FILE.This was struck out at hearing, B26YM042 either to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process someone removed email from file, or court gave judgement knowing matter settled,. AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT RESTRAINING ORDER BY HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, THIS WAS CASE SETTLED.
11/ The judgement of HHJCotter is utterly incomprehensible with respect to application, eg FEDJCAP document in pre action protocol document please see Appendix 1 today
In judgement 9.1.2018 [Lord Goldring,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork] admit alleged email of 3.1.2018 is email of 29.12.2017.
Further in that judgement you state email of 14.11.2018 can you confirm this should be email of 17.11.2017, where aware as I stated[ ISSUE TODAY IN COURT OF APPEAL NOT CORRUPT FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJDENYER,TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ] issue before court of ignoring applications for years, next step the ECHR. If you have a email of 14.11.2017 [can not be 2018 as you state ]then can we please have copy. If in file 17.11.2017 HHJCotter again utterly aware why I went to defendants, not some fairy story he made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.
12/ Pre action protocol document emailed . 16.9.2017 is it on system.
13/ Visit court 5.12.2017 ask for file , ask for N244 , from recording inform today I had written on it not to be sent to HHJCotter, new application next day. Can we please have copy of N244 form presented to HHJCotter with application, WHICH WAS SENT EMAIL 6.12.2017 OR A DIFFERENT N244 ???????????????????
14/ On the 6.12.2017 final application email forwarded to you, as retired district judge stated, before they have removed evidence from file,[we will see with answers to above if others court had removed to corrupt the judicial process] so advised next day to email you, 7.12.2017 Ref 3 is this document on file. Further Mr Hunt has confirmed application 6.12.2017 not in file, as someone again removed, can you confirm these facts, admit have recording, as retired judge stated,after seeing HHJCotters judgement ,,,,,,the bast,,,,,,have again removed from file. Came to court on recording told HHJCotter did not consider, , retired judge stated, should not be recording inside the court, take third party to court for statement for applications , please see Ref 5 . Can you confirm 6.12.2017 application not considered by HHJCotter, eg he read wrong papers not in file.
15/ Do not know what he read can you confirm again you will not allow inspection of files,, Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,
16/ We had applications in 2018, as I stated in judicial review application this criminal practice, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications still going on in 2018. We had application 27.2.2018 EOOBS236 ,was there a reply to application if so can we please have copy.
17/ Application 15.3.2018 to obtain evidence to do my judicial review, Mr Blair states your not looking at files over the years to show us ignoring your applications, make application to HHJCotter who will IGNORE your application, had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, utter breach of Article 6. Follow up emails ignored, can you confirm HHJCotters reply Ref 4 dated 10.5.2018 was his reply to application of 15.3.2018. .Again utter breach of Article 6, to get a reply to applications in reasonable time, only obtained this as my MP involved. We have further ECHR concept of equalties of arms, for example when NBT made urgent applications, THEY GET REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS SHOWING BIAS. .
FOR NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT]
17/ In hearing before DJWatson defendants Ms Smith [NBT] asked that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson is this correct.
APPENDIX 5 QUESTIONS TO PARTIES REPLY REQUIRED IN 7 DAYS TO COURT OF APPEAL WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME IF ANY REPLIES
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,
FOR COURT OF APPEAL
1/ Is the application email of 13.7.2018 on the courts file, timed 12.48 which contained the FEDJCAP document eg why I went to defendants .THEREFORE RL UTTERLY AWARE OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJCOTTER/BIGGER WERE WRONG AND THEREFORE HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WAS NOT A COMPELLING SUMMARY OF FACTS OF CASE,,,Further if in file know i had every right to appeal, which follows restraining order issued utterly without merit. ,Was there a reply to application.
2/ Did parties serve any documents with you, if so can we please have copy The only communication I had was from court saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,accept acknowledgement of service well out of time, however we will not get involved unless court instruct us to, this is issue between you and defendants. .If no replies parties had no objection to applications on the facts.
3/ The judgement of RL was a cowardly act considering reference to restraining order Feb 2016, as applications to remove were made 26.2.2016, 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 where judiciary just ignored applications. We know why binned/ignored as NBT asked at hearing AOIBS346/746 that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, this was rejected by DJWatson.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive
We have asked court for transcript where again applications ignored. We have just been paid compensation by HMCS of 150..00 , we ask court of appeal to confirm, I will pay for transcript, if it shows NBT asked that judgement that reads I acted unreasonably ,and was rejected by DJWatson then court of appeal will refund fee to obtain transcript, we have asked below for NBT to confirm facts in separate question for court of appeal/
FOR BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION COURT
4/ Can you please confirm emails I sent to you by date, and confirm if sent to Cardiff Admin Court as my instructions. Eg did HHJBigger read full application.,eg from ECHR case law,,,i had , time to submit further arguments ,,,,,,,,,,,
5/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copies.
FOR CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT
6/ What documents,,,,/emails by date were forwarded to you by Birmingham court.
7/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copy.
8/ In CO/1/2013 Mr Blair in Bristol court office, [recorded conversation at court] states ,,,,our Mr Till sent your application to the Cardiff court , is this application in Feb 2013 on court file, further can we please have copy of any documents in court file in period 1.1.2013 till 1.4.2013. eg documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, ,,,,
FOR BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.
9/ Are the applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 in court file
10/ In B26YM042 defendants asked to settle, wanted settlement done by Tomlin order, this was emailed to you, 23.12.2015 with request as settled to remove from court listings, where numerous requests over years to confirm email in court file, where we ask again. For example Ref 3 today email of 7.12.2017 ,where all requests over years ignored….part of email Ref 3 of email 7.12.2017
We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please
Was this email removed from file, or is IT IN COURT FILE.This was struck out at hearing, B26YM042 either to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process someone removed email from file, or court gave judgement knowing matter settled,. AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT RESTRAINING ORDER BY HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, THIS WAS CASE SETTLED.
11/ The judgement of HHJCotter is utterly incomprehensible with respect to application, eg FEDJCAP document in pre action protocol document please see Appendix 1 today
In judgement 9.1.2018 [Lord Goldring,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork] admit alleged email of 3.1.2018 is email of 29.12.2017.
Further in that judgement you state email of 14.11.2018 can you confirm this should be email of 17.11.2017, where aware as I stated[ ISSUE TODAY IN COURT OF APPEAL NOT CORRUPT FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJDENYER,TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ] issue before court of ignoring applications for years, next step the ECHR. If you have a email of 14.11.2017 [can not be 2018 as you state ]then can we please have copy. If in file 17.11.2017 HHJCotter again utterly aware why I went to defendants, not some fairy story he made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.
12/ Pre action protocol document emailed . 16.9.2017 is it on system.
13/ Visit court 5.12.2017 ask for file , ask for N244 , from recording inform today I had written on it not to be sent to HHJCotter, new application next day. Can we please have copy of N244 form presented to HHJCotter with application, WHICH WAS SENT EMAIL 6.12.2017 OR A DIFFERENT N244 ???????????????????
14/ On the 6.12.2017 final application email forwarded to you, as retired district judge stated, before they have removed evidence from file,[we will see with answers to above if others court had removed to corrupt the judicial process] so advised next day to email you, 7.12.2017 Ref 3 is this document on file. Further Mr Hunt has confirmed application 6.12.2017 not in file, as someone again removed, can you confirm these facts, admit have recording, as retired judge stated,after seeing HHJCotters judgement ,,,,,,the bast,,,,,,have again removed from file. Came to court on recording told HHJCotter did not consider, , retired judge stated, should not be recording inside the court, take third party to court for statement for applications , please see Ref 5 . Can you confirm 6.12.2017 application not considered by HHJCotter, eg he read wrong papers not in file.
15/ Do not know what he read can you confirm again you will not allow inspection of files,, Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,
16/ We had applications in 2018, as I stated in judicial review application this criminal practice, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications still going on in 2018. We had application 27.2.2018 EOOBS236 ,was there a reply to application if so can we please have copy.
17/ Application 15.3.2018 to obtain evidence to do my judicial review, Mr Blair states your not looking at files over the years to show us ignoring your applications, make application to HHJCotter who will IGNORE your application, had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, utter breach of Article 6. Follow up emails ignored, can you confirm HHJCotters reply Ref 4 dated 10.5.2018 was his reply to application of 15.3.2018. .Again utter breach of Article 6, to get a reply to applications in reasonable time, only obtained this as my MP involved. We have further ECHR concept of equalties of arms, for example when NBT made urgent applications, THEY GET REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS SHOWING BIAS. .
FOR NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT]
17/ In hearing before DJWatson defendants Ms Smith [NBT] asked that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson is this correct.
CASE CO/1731/2018 APPLICATION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER OF RHLJLEGATT [RL]
1/ Restraining order as I appealed HHJBiggers judgement. Parties and court informed via email of application to remove, 24.1.2019 , with full application to court of appeal 1,2,2019 , proof of posting obtained. We had side issue with background to this corrupt issued restraining order, where recently HMCS have paid 150.00 compensation, so can today return to application. . What did restraining order state,, RL,,,,,the background to case is compelling in HHJCotters judgement.. However HHJCotter comes under banner corrupt and bent [ CAB] He is utterly aware application to him was one made 6.12.2017 that he removed from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.He quotes in letter correction of dates his judgement where cites email 29.12.2017 ,in that email 29.12.2017 aware of application of 6.12.2017. [see below statement of Ms Bowyer]
SIMPLE QUESTION TO COURT OF APPEAL BELOW UNDER REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FOR ECHR
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AS BARRISTER STATED YOUR APPLICATIONS TO BRISTOL AND CARDIFF COURTS WERE BOUND TO FAIL AS COTTER/BIGGER WOULD BE TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS,,,INVITING POLICE TO LOOK AT THEIR COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR.
QUESTION ,,,THERE WAS AN APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL SEE TIMED 12.48 DATED 13.7.2018 IS IT ON FILE OR HAS COURT REMOVED .IF ON FILE WAS THERE A REPLY. IF A REPLY TO APPLICATION CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF RL RESPONCE. [eg state to magistrate court removing email from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, or RL utterly aware from FEDJCAB that I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, RL just denying evidence in front of him to protect his fellow judges]
SIMPLE DEDUCTIONS FOR ECHR COURTS FOR YEARS REMOVING APPLICATIONAS FROM FILES OR FROM APPLICATION RL AWARE OF FEDJCAB DOCUMENT THEREFORE . KNOWS HHJCOTTER IS CAB,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AND THEREFORE HIS JUDGEMENT THAT HHJCOTTER COMPPELING EVIDENCE IN JUDGEMENT IS UTTER NONSENSE ,,FROM McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM.
Further aware HHJCotter read wrong papers, did not read application of 6.12.2017 where RL judgement is based on.
Further shows corruption of courts Mr Hunt from above, utter breach of Article 6, withholding evidence to help my claim. further point out to magistrate we have asked numerous times for repayment of court fee as application 6.12.2017 binned, Mr Hunt states Ms Pawsey dealing with issue, now a Resolver complaint however she is CAB as ignore all correspondence on Resolver.
MS PAWSEY WAS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 SENT TO HHJCOTTER YES/NO in emails 7.12.2017 29.12.2017 emailed to make sure application 6.12.2017 was one presented to judge.
Details in my website. .WE HAVE NOT ONLY CORRUPTION HHJCOTTER READ WRONG PAPERS [not my application of 6.12,2017 ] what did he read Mr Hunt CAB refuses to allow me to look at file, withholding evidence utter breach of Article 6....BUT VIA COLLUSION HHJBIGGER COMES TO WRONG IDENTICAL JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER BOTH CAB [SEE 3/ THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL OF 16.9.2017 DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.
RL KNOWS HHJBIGGER/COTTER [CAB] IN APPLICATION WHICH HE IGNORED 13..72018 WAS THE FEDJCAB,,,,,,,,,,,,HOW DEEP DOES THIS CORRUPTION GO ,,HE KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER, HOW CAN HE SAY IN JUDGEMENT THAT JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER IS COMPELLING EVIDENCE ABOUT CASE
2/ THIS IS EMAIL PRIMARY TO COURT OF APPEAL UNDER The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed ,,,,[LATER ECHR ect] (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37)., and evidence in later magistrates hearing, over shoplifting. ,, WE ASK PARTIES TO CONSIDER LATEST UPDATE IN WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM. THIS today IS EMAIL CONNECTING PARTS TOGETHER WHERE WE HAVE IN EVIDENCE FOR LATER MAGISTRATES COURT HEARINGS …HAVE SEVERE HEART CONDITION HOPE TO DIE THIS YEAR IN DEFENDANTS CUSTODY VIA SHOPLIFTING CAN SHOW my PROTEST IN COURT OF BENT DEFENDANTS AND COURTS,,,,,eg PARTIES NOW WERE AWARE OF ALLEGATIONS IN MY WEBSITES INCLUDING , IN DEFENDANTS AND NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT ]CORRESPONDING SITES WHY DID NO ONE ISSUE PROCEEDINGS FOR LIBEL OR CONTEMPT OF COURT.I DIRECT PARTIES TODAY TO MY WEBSITE ABOVE IF NOT CAB SUE ME
3/ A female barrister and judge who saw my website stated there are cornerstones to cases, take an example 3 people saw X leave premises after bank robbery, However sitting as a judge, Counsel bring evidence, not my client, as at time in closed prison, where I have to dismiss proceedings. In your case,
HHJBigger in judgement states you went to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, should have reported to JCIO ,[IF CLAIM HAD MERIT NO] . Picket at court over for years court ignoring applications, told by barrister to report issue malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, and Eaga perjury issue, to defendants , seen by defendants Sgt Price who asks for dissection of CPS document on malfeasance in public office, which we define FEDJCAB, [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT]. The document in my website, a sample of my dissection ,,,
SAY TO COURT OF APPEAL WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS NOT COTTER/BIGGER FAIRY STORY
a/ THE FEDJCAB
CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document ,into Word document which allowed me to edit, my comments were inserted in red eg,,,,, letter to DEFENDANTS Sgt Price WHICH I STATE TO COURT OF APPEAL ,,REASON I WENT TO DEFENDANTS
SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications ;;;;[WHERE I GO THROUGH CPS PAPER ]
b/ The FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT, SENT TO PARTIES and COURT 16.9.2017 , THIS PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT HAD TO BE DONE VIA CPR REGULATION TEMPLATE PARAGRAPHS ANNEX A ,eg
SAY TO COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMATION SECOND TIME WITH FEDJCAB WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
Court told to consider application with pre action protocol document of 16.9.2017.
So this case fails did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, went over criminal offences, perjury and malfeasance in public office . HHJBigger states should have reported to JCIO, but perjury and malfeasance in public office are criminal offences, via statute therefore JCIO can not consider criminal offences. Vexious to make allegations against defendants, line 0ne page 1 in judicial review application however please see MY application in judicial review .There are 2 allegations in judicial review application ,in page 1 .line one.
i/ This was a IPCC investigation, where defendants did not follow IPCC regulations, in my website defendants Insp O Mahony letter confirms they did not follow IPCC regulations .To consider an appeal defendants state must be on our appeal form …. appeal form have to tick boxes that IPCC regulations followed,,,,,so could never do an appeal
ii/ I am allowed to appeal defendants judgement, that we had no evidence of perjury, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, defendants judgement comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness ,evidence provided,,,WE HAD EMAIL FROM COURT SAYING WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS,,,MY LAWYERS APPLICATIONS IGNORED,,,MY DOCUMENTS DATE STAMPED BY COURT.IGNORED.....so email defendants 22.7.2017 asking 11 questions these in judicial review application ,[eg have you talked to lawyer,,,,] stating with no reply by the 28.7.2017 would do appeal on/after 28.7.2017 . Defendants sends letter dated 24,7,2017 saying our reply to your appeal, I have made no appeal, can I quote defendants letter of 24.7.2017 where they admit my claim.
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....]
Well lets pull this all together did I have grounds to appeal HHJBiggers judgement, ,,,did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, see FEDJCAB document. Went from FEDJCAB and letter in my website of 13.4.2017 over perjury issue, and malfeasance in public office courts for years ignoring applications, as CRIMINAL offences JCIO could not investigate. Further my allegations were not vexatious defendants admit we had IPCC complaint and we did not follow IPCC regulations, and as my complaint I had not appealed on the 22.7.2017 the defendants stance that we had no evidence of perjury and malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications .IPCC ask i contact PCC Ms Mountstevens permission to issue an appeal, where defendants state you have appealed.
WELL LETS PUT THIS AFTER ARREST TO MAGISTRATES COURT AS MY PROTEST. DEFENDANTS IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION COURT OF APPEAL STATE THERE IS NO NEED TO ADHERE TO IPCC REGULATIONS AND DEFENDANTS CAN SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.
4/ Can i cite local judge and barristers paper on malfeasance in public office
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Well simple question in magistrayes court after arrest,,reason before court making my protest,,,,have i been wronged by defendants, who are taking me to court, who in IPCC investigation ,ignored IPCC regulations, and where i can appeal utter nonsence we had no evidence of perjury,,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years sent reply to an appeal where one not lodged.
Need to conclude HHJCotter read wrong papers did not read application 6.12.2017,,,,further made judgement where HHJCotter read wrong papers, and clearly made up his mind about case,,,,,the background in HHJCotters judgement, but he did not read application, we have corruption and collusion as BIGGER /COTTER COME TO IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENTS .. This is utter breach of Article 6 ,,,denying evidence in front of him.
Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".
The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers
Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER
P JONES
CASE CO/1731/2018 ,WE HAVE ,ORDER OF RHLJLEGATT [RL] WHICH HAS NO MERIT ON THE FACTS FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY JUDICIARY unambigious FROM FEDJCAB AND LETTER 13.4.2017 BELOW ,,,did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer went over Eaga perjury issue and malfeasance in public office court for years ignoring applications which they admit, these are criminal offences as JCIO state therefore we can not investigate, as barrister who saw my website stated all judgements in this case follow from wrong fairy story made up by HHJCotter that you went over,,,, you were unhappy with judgement of HHJDenyer .why i went in FEDJCAB DOCUMENT BELOW,,,IRONIC APPLICATION 13.7.2018 TO RL IGNORED CONTAINED FEDJCAB SO HE KNOWS FACTS OF CASE WRONG IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT ?????? HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE6,,,,its further legally flawed eg RL ,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement however HHJCotter is corrupt and bent he did not consider application of 6.12.2017 as he removed it from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. What did he read the corruption of courts Mr Hunt , which is also utter breach of Article 6 refuses to let me see file,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).WHAT DID HE READ,APPLICATION MADE FOR REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER [ BRINGING READERS UP TO DATE ]
1/ Reader in website had judgement of HHJBigger , UTTER NONSENSE IN RESPECT TO EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM PLEASE SEE BELOW FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IT WAS ALSO IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SENT TO COURT AND PARTIES 16.9.2017, where appeal made to court of appeal, where we have restraining order issued 24.1.2019 because I made appeal against HHJBiggers judgement. . Parties and court via email on the 24.1.2019 informed of application to remove restraining order, parties had 7 days to dispute facts, no replies, so parties accept facts, Application which also contained the email 24.1.2019 via hard copy sent to court, 1.2.2019 , proof of posting obtained. In application 1.2.2019 asked for stay as direct related issue over related judiciary corruption in this restraining order, where HMCS have just paid compensation of 150.00 so now in position to add to application 1.2.2019, which had been served on court of appeal. ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,ECHR case law
THIS IS ISSUE WHERE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT. WE ASK WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA. HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT UTTER NONSENCE ,,,, DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENT OF HHJDENYER, WAS OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES, PERJURY ,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURT FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS. PLEASE SEE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT BELOW . AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES AS JCIO STATE WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE VIA STATUTE. HHJBIGGER STATES VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS LINE ONE PAGE ONE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION WHICH WE HAVE THE TWO. IN THE IPCC INVESTIGATION THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS WHERE DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY BELOW CONFIRMS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS. FINAL ISSUE ALLOWED TO APPEAL DEFENDANTS JUDGEMENT THAT WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND ,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS .WHERE I SEND EMAIL 22.7.2017 ASKING QUESTIONS TO DO APPEAL, SAYING WITH NO REPLY WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017 AS NEAR OUT OF TIME.WHERE DEFENDANTS SEND LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 SAYING REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL ,,,I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL,,,DEFENDANTS IN LETTER 24.7.2017
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE THESE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....
THEY STOPPED ME APPEALING AS IPCC STATED DEFENDANTS INFORM US YOU LODGED AN APPEAL 22.7.2017 YOUR ONLY ROUTE JUDICIAL REVIEW. THE DEFENDANTS ARE CAB HOW CAN THEY STATE TO IPCC,,,,HE LODGED AN APPEAL
2/ Judiciary want to call black is white so be it , have severe heart condition, hope to die this year in defendants custody ,to expose corruption of judiciary and defendants and North Bristol NHS Trust [ NBT ], leaving me in constant pain, in shoulder, repair in inguinal hernia broke down in days, due to mesh issue, 4 chances to diagnose gallbladder problem ,where another trust diagnosed in minutes, stated should have been diagnosed months before. .Have had near miss while in defendants custody in NBT case. Retired district judge who saw my website suggested picket at court of appeal, inform media before. Not doing that, will deal with this,, shoplifting, my protest against defendants/judiciary then in magistrates court,,,, can take this document with me so when lawyer visits in cells , he knows why i am there. Have discussed with graffti artist our theme when they paint www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com with CAB [corrupt and bent] our theme.This document in my website www.corruptioninbristlcountycourt.com if facts below untrue sue me for libel, contempt of court , do it now as now have no one to leave property to, looking for suitable person to give home to.
3/a/ HHJBiggers judgement , lets quote exactly what he said,,,,stems from dissatisfaction by applicant against a decision of HHJDenyer,,,, Well all i can say lets do this legally as my lawyer will present in magistrates court,,why i am there, in protest ,,,,what HHJBigger is doing is denying evidence in front of him, utter breach of Article 6 to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, what i would say your CAB CORRUPT AND BENT denying evidence
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....
What was before him, picket at court for years ignoring applications, barrister told me to stop ,report matter to defendants malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications, plus Eaga perjury issue. Seen by defendants Sgt Price ,she asks for dissection of CPS document on malfeasance in public office , which we define FEDJCAB [fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent],as best description of issue today . plus details of perjury issue.
Simple question as in only last month a female barrister who saw my website stated, this whole case depends on why you went to defendants,,,,simple question was this evidence before court for years.
THE FEDJCAB [sent to Sgt Price also in pre action protocol emailed 16.9,2017 to all parties.also before RL application ignored by him of 13.7.2018]
CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document ,into Word document which allowed me to edit, my comments were inserted in red eg,,,,,
SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Could not find transcript of Eaga case, misfiled, so sent a few days later, eg
31 Bibury Ave
Bristol BS346DF
13.4.2017
Good morning Sgt Price,
Can I issue apology for delay, in terms of Eaga perjury issue please find evidence, misfiled the transcript , have scanned just relevant pages, as you can see,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,my client does not know Ms Suggett or where these emails in his bundle come from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did district judge conclude,,,,a lawyer would not come all the way from Newcatle and lie to me, THESE EMAILS MUST BE FORGIES ,,,,,,when accused of perjury you can see letter where taunted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application, too late for you to do anything about it now. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
You have been supplied with CPS document on malfeasance in public office , where you asked to explain how it relates to my complaint. If you need more information please contact me, When picketing at court, as you know barrister told me to report to you malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications over many YEARS , ,plus above perjury issue. You were unaware of term malfeasance in public office, as you stated would not be given to anyone to investigate if not a criminal offence, lawyer informs me a legal name its ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,misconduct in public office , where he informs me your officers jailed recently over this criminal offence.
We have court ignoring correspondence,,,,,,openly saying we will ignore emails, as utterly bent and corrupt stopping me obtaining evidence, will be of interest in Cardiff Admin. court issue if one of your officers in Cardiff can obtain file ,do not expect you to travel to Cardiff, further as we discussed, is this a case against HHJDenyer /judges ignoring ,,,,,,,,,binning applications, or court staff malfeasance in public office ignoring not sending to a judge, or both working together .However we know in OBS08441 from my website, we have recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court where he confirms DJDaniels had ignored application, STATES THERE WILL BE NO REPLY TO APPLICATION ,as all he sent was just a note,,,,,Mr Jones should take up issue with judge at hearing,just igmored my application. We have no evidence not sent, you may have issue where staff say was sent and judges saying we did not see, the court utterly corrupt will not let me consult files, breach of Article 6.
P JONES
The FEDJCAB document later in PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW SENT TO COURT AND PARTIES 16.9.2017
Further pre action protocol document had to be done via CPR template paragraphs Annex A , what did i state in Annex A in pre action protocol document,,,COURT LATER TOLD TO READ APPLICATION WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 16.9.2017...................................5/ ,,,,,,,
6/ INTERESTED PARTIES
IPCC PO BOX 473 SALE M33 OBW 2017/086838 [IPCC]
NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST BRISTOL BS105NB [NBT]
BRISTOLCIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE 2 REDCLIFE ST BRISTOL BS16GR [BCC]
7/ THE ISSUE
BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
What did i state in judicial review application,,,,
The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.
END OF QUOTE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION NOTE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE RELATED TO APPLICATIONS IGNORED
WHERE HHJBIGGER STATES AS CAB ,,CONSIDER ABOVE INCLUDING FEDJCAB ,YOU WENT TO DEFENDANTS IN FEB 2017 OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS YOU WERE UNHAPPY WITH HHJDENYERS JUDGEMENT,,???????,YOUR UTTERLY CORRUPT FROM DOCUMENTS ABOVE BEFORE YOU,,,,I STATED YOU SHOULD CONSIDER APPLICATION WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 16.9.2017,,,,. CLEARLY YOU KNOW UNTRUE DID NOT GO MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS UNHAPPY OVER JUDGEMENTS,,, . SHOWS NOT ONLY CORRUPT AND BENT BUT COLLUSION WITH HHJCOTTER,,,eg IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT NOT WITHSTANDING THIS APPLICATION TO HHJCOTTER OF 6.12.2017 TO CORRUPT AND FRUSRTATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS WAS REMOVED FROM FILE,,,,HE DID NOT READ MY APPLICATION 6.12.2017,,,BELOW YOU HAVE STATEMENT FROM MS BOWYER WHERE WE TRY TO SEE WHAT WAS READ WHERE COURT AS UTTERLY CAB REFUSES ME TO SEE EVIDENCE,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,,WAS IT APPLICATION HHJCOTTER MADE TO HIMSELF. ,THEREFORE AS I PAID FOR APPLICATION WHICH WAS BINNED ASKED FOR REFUND OF FEE WHERE UNDER BANNER CAB COURTS MR HUNT REFUSES TO PAY,,,BEING DEALT WITH BY RESOLVER. AS SOON AS RETIRED JUDGE SAW JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER STATED,,,,THE BASTARDS AGAIN HAS REMOVED APPLICATION, IN JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER CITES EMAIL 29.7.2017 , below, so aware of application 6.12.2017 as cited in email of the 29.2.2017. [the document citing of 29.12.2017 damaged by Royal Mail, courts refuse to issue complete copy] WHERE I CITED APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. THEREFORE AWARE OF APPLICATION HOWEVER AS CAB REMOVES FROM FILE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE JUDICIAL PROCESS ,,,,, present application solely to remove restaining order however,,,,,,,,,,,DO WE HAVE CORRUPTION AND CLEARLY DID NOT READ MY APPLICATION,,,THE APPLICATION 6.12.2017 CONTAINED SECTION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER OF Feb 2016 ,,,,,
Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".
The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers
b/ HHJBigger states should have complained to JCIO, UTTERLY AWARE FROM ABOVE PERJURY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS ARE CRIMINAL OFFENCE AND THEREFORE COULD NOT COMPLAIN TO JCIO.
c/ The corruption continues, HHJBigger ,,,,defendants were right to advise to go to JCIO, NO they were not ,could not investigate, criminal offences,,, [as they stated, if they could anyway out of time as events in this corrupt court over years still going on today] FROM b/ was it vexatious to make claim against defendants , or is court of appeal saying JCIO can investigate criminal offences ??????????????. As retired judge stated make issue clear to judiciary as soon as possible, therefore what were allegation in judicial review that were vexatious, AGAIN WE HAVE IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT AS WITH HHJCOTTER,,,HHJBIGGER CORRUPTION AND COLLIUSION WITH HHJCOTTER,,identical wrong judgements
,
APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]
Regulations of IPCC [ their summary]
Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
IN LETTER BELOW LETTER FROM DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY [can I clarify, fall at home where could not move fire service had to break in ,DEFENDANTS ASK CONTRACTOR TO BOARD UP WHOLE WINDOW,,,however just small piece of wood to cover hole, where as in hospital 4 days, water entered home, complain to contractor who stated this is what police asked us to do, so complaint to defendants. You have Insp O Mahony comprehensive reply,WHICH I THANKED HER FOR, where she states AS IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS NEW COMPLAINT I HAVE TO TALK TO YOU,,,,WHERE I RAISE ISSUE OF TODAYS ISSUE WHERE SHE GAVE FIRST CLASS SERVICE AND TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY,,,,eg my complaint today where he admits I did not follow IPCC regulations, THIS WAS ALLEGATIONS WHICH HHJBIGGER STATES WAS VEXATIOUS BECAUSE I APPEALED WAS NOT VEXATIOUS THEY ADMIT CLAIM ,,,,RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED,,,,,,,,so my appeal to court of appeal, because I appealed restraining order issued, WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA] LETTER OF INSP O MAHONY
With regard to the letter which you left in Patchway front office for the attention of Sgt Price, I can confirm I have spoken directly with Sergeant Price. She said that she does recall speaking to you in the front office and tasking one of her officers to investigate a crime Malfeasance in a Public Office. However she cannot recall whether she ever received your letter. [THIS WAS ANOTHER COMPLAINT MUCH LATER OVER BOARDING UP OF WINDOW NOT RELATED TO TODAYS ISSUE,,,DUE TO FALL COULD NOT MOVE WHERE FIRESERVICE HAD TO BREAK IN AS I STATE NOT ISSUE TODAY,,,DO HAVE DEFENDANTS RECEIPT THAT THIS LATER LETTER WAS LEFT] She accepts that this will have been frustrating for you and as the Investigating Officer for your complaint, I offer my full and sincere apologies on behalf of the organisation that your letter was left unanswered.
Secondly, as requested I sent an e-mail to Hamish Galloway asking whether he had ever had cause to speak to you. Mr Galloway provided a response stating that;
1) He had no recollection of ever personally speaking to you
2) As a member of the Professional Standards office he had assessed a complaint from you (HC/CO/369/17) which was that an officer failed to investigate an allegation of malfeasance in public office by a Judge and officers from Bristol County Court.
3) Mr Galloway states that he recorded the complaint and then sent you a 'disapplication' letter on the basis that it was an abuse of the complaints process in that complaints/allegations against Judges and Court Officers are dealt with by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.
I understand that you then made a complaint against Mr Galloway (HC/CO/812/17) alleging corruption and malfeasance in public office. This complaint was also subject to disapplication on the grounds of being an abuse of the complaints process.
I hope this clears up your query with regard to Mr Hamish Galloway.
With regard to the boarding up of your window, I can confirm that I have listened to the audio for the call from Fire to Police in relation to the boarding up request and also the call from Police to Boing Rapid Secure in relation to the same.
I have ascertained that the Fire Service make the call to Police on behalf of the Ambulance Service. This is in line with the Joint Protocol agreement for persons collapsed behind closed doors. A request for boarding up is made for a wooden framed window 1200 by 400mm. Police then in turn call Boing Rapid Secure and request the same. I have listened to both calls and at no time is any mention made of when you may be returning from hospital. The duration of your stay in hospital is not mentioned at all. I can confirm that no police officers were dispatched to your property and that the only role of police in this matter was to request boarding up as requested by the Fire Service.
I hope that this investigation helps to resolve your queries and I hope you accept our apology with regard to your letter.,,,,,END OF LETTER
ADMIT IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.MR GALLOWAY NEVER TALKED TO ME ACCORDING TO HHJBIGGER VEXIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT . DEFENDANTS DO NOT CHALLENGE FACTS. WHERE UTTER RIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT OF HHJBIGGER, AND EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE APPLICATION AS RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT.
Further from judicial review application,,,,all I need to quote is defendants letter of 5.12.2017 where they admit second part of claim, eg I had said in email 22.7.2017 with no replies to questions, over perjury, and malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017,,,,DEFENDANTS LETTER CONFIRMING 5.12.2017
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE THESE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....
So VEXIOUS LETS MAKE THIS CLEAR FOR LATER USE,,,,DEFENDANTS IN IPCC INVESTIGATION CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL [eg we have no evidence of,,,perjury issue, malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years,] where defendants admit no appeal lodged. What i state in judicial review application are allegations true or vexatious
c/ The corruption concludes the Public Law issue never cited,,,what is this,,
APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER
The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES
Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA
JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed, where defendants admit above procedure in a IPCC complaint ,,,IPCC regulations not followed. I am allowed to appeal judgements of defendants eg we have no evidence of perjury, malfeasance in public office,ignoring applications however defendants admit sending reply to an appeal where one not lodged, every right to appeal ON THE FACTS HHJBIGGER JUST CORRUPT.
Consider local barrister and judge paper on malfeasance in public office,
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Well simple question in magistrayes court after arrest,,reason before court as my protest,,,,have i been wronged by defendants, who in IPCC investigation ,ignored IPCC regulations, and sent reply to an appeal where one not lodged.
d/ Can i quote RL judgement eg ,,background COMPELLING EVIDENCE in judgement of HHJCotter, BUT HHJCOTTER IS CORRUPT RL KNOWS CORRUPT,,,RL WAS SENT FEDJCAB ON THE 13.7.2018 ,,,, IRONIC WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS AS APPLICATIONS IGNORED,,,WHERE APPLICATION TO RL OF 13,7,2018 WAS IGNORED AND CONTAINED THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT. RL UTTERLY AWARE I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.
Can I refer to actual application skeletal argument to RL ,
SKELETAL ARGUMENT [as at 1.7.2018] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Lets look at this judgement paragraphs
PAR 1 /A ,,,,SO ISSUE AS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,page 2 ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence ignored,,,,,APPLICATIONS IGNORED ,,,,IN APPLICATION ALSO SAY STILL GOING ON IN 2018 GIVE EVIDENCE STILL NO REPLY TO APPLICATION 26.2.2018. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENT OFHHJDENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ITS ABOUT WE COULD NOT GET A JUDGEMENTS . FAILURE TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION PAGE 22 TO 26 HHJBIDDER HAS QUESTIONS I ASK DEFENDANTS AFTER THEY SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE .,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO MY LAWYER WHO ALSO COULD NOT GET A REPLY, HAVE YOU TALKED TO PRO BONO UNIT,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT MANAGER,,EG 5 MONTHS LATER,,,;;WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE AS WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WANTED COURT TO DO,,,,MAY I SUGGEST DAY ONE ,,,,,EMAIL DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR APPLICATION,,,
PAR1 B ,,,,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,
from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate
Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) Further these cases over a long period of time, so out of time to make complaint, defendants aware……………………………………….end of quote
IMPORTANT HERE RL UTTERLY AWARE I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,,,HE WAS SENT VIA EMAIL THE FEDJCAB IN APPLICATION 13.7.2018 ,,,,IRONICALLY IGNORED APPLICATION SO UTTERLY AWARE I HAD EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER
Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect,,, FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL RL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,, KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER
We asked RL that application to remove restraining order is not heard by him , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of RL from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAP document , plus 13.4.2017 letter,above , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAP in pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RL states further ,,,does not supply any evidence for bringing proceedings,,,,,,,,,,,so we have court saying you make application to defendants, perjury and malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, defendants state you have no evidence, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,what is this SECOND APPLICATION NOTE
further we have my lawyers where applications sent ignored, we even have court in email saying,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS. This is a IPCC investigation where defendants as CAB admit not following IPCC regulations, and sends reply to appeal, where admit one not lodged. As paper above of Ms Brunner QC HAVE I BEEN WRONGED BY DEFENDANTS. We know what happened as questioning that IPCC regulations not followed, asking 11 questions in judicial review,,,,have you talked to my lawyer whose application was ignored, have you talked to court staff in their email admit WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS. No they never followed IPCC regulations ,clear breach, so as Mr Crouch CAB sends reply to an appeal when one not lodged,,,malfeasance in public office.Well from above CPS document on malfeasance in public office
SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,
HE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND HAVE DUTY TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL eg WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS ,,,WHERE HE ADMITS I HAD MADE NO APPEAL FROM MS BRUNNERS PAPER HAVE I BEEN WRONGED BY MR CROUCH HE STATED
You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....HE THEN SENDS LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 STATING OUR REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL.
Lets state this as it is, the reference to restraining of Feb 2016, in judgement of RL is a cowardly act, and i will address this. Its a case of in a green house do not throw stones. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED COURT STATED REMOVE YOUR WEBSITE OR CONSEQUENCES WHICH WAS RESTRAINING ORDER. We had applications to remove this order 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 ignored by this corrupt court. In website you have detail you can see why HHJCotter removed application of 6.12.2017 as in AOIBS346/746 [WAS CITED as IN ALL APPLICATIONS ]
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective
This was case where CAB lawyer Ms Smith at hearing asked that judgement reads i acted unreasonably, rejected by DJWatson, read website account , Ms Smith lawyer for NBT is CAB and DJWatson comprehended this,,,,, at initial first hearing stated should never before the court, we were utterly unaware of possible proceedings, in email from NBT Ms Needs ,,,,we were aware of possible proceedings, ,,,,DJWatson said settle outside ,opened door for her where told to go, admitted in email, said ridiculous in email supply medical records, put statement in medical records, where she said no in email, then 5 months later ask to settle, puts statement in medical records, supplies medical records then AS UTTERLY CAB GOES TO COURT AND ASKS THAT JUDGEMENT READS I ACTED UNREASONABLY..REJECTED BY DJWATSON
WHAT DID I DO WRONG ,,, I ASK HHJCotter SAME QUESTION 6.12.2017 IHOWEVER HE KNOWS NO LEG TO STAND ON AND REWMOVES APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE JUDICIAL PROCESS
The second aspect was i wanted backup of emails, eg email of Ms Needs, i can say Ms Smith LAWYER is CAB as i can prove from email, she lied to DJWatson, otherwise could be in court for libel, further as seeking evidence to do judicial review have email from courts Mr Fowler that he would ignore my emails, as seek evidence for judicial review, utter breach of Article 6. Coming home found programme given by Compuwave would not work,to back up emails, where Compuwave state was working when you collected, we have no further comment to make, proceedings issued, straight away email, we sent wrong program, where matter settled, email to remove from listings matter settled, where Compuwave contact saying what is going on it went for hearing and struck out,as no one turned up, where i appeal, as matter settled , where restraining order as i appealed,,,Same issue today you appeal I will issue restraining order I will not be blackmailed CASE WAS SETTLED.
WE HAVE FURTHER DEDUCTIONS FROM RL JUDGEMENT,,,,BRINGING CLAIMS WITH NO MERIT ,,,,,,,THESE WERE CLAIMS WHERE CLAIMS HAD UTTER MERIT WHERE DEFENDANTS ASKED TO SETTLE BOTH
We asked 4.6.2019given parties 7 days to answer questions, no replies, where in application to court of appeal ask for court order to obtain. We have situation does court of appeal want to see what went on or do they want to sweep judiciary corruption under the carpet. What were questions,
APPENDIX 5 QUESTIONS TO PARTIES REPLY REQUIRED IN 7 DAYS TO COURT OF APPEAL WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME IF ANY REPLIES
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION
The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).
Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,
FOR COURT OF APPEAL
1/ Is the application email of 13.7.2018 on the courts file, timed 12.48 which contained the FEDJCAP document eg why I went to defendants .THEREFORE RL UTTERLY AWARE OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJCOTTER/BIGGER WERE WRONG AND THEREFORE HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WAS NOT A COMPELLING SUMMARY OF FACTS OF CASE,,,Further if in file know i had every right to appeal, which follows restraining order issued utterly without merit. ,Was there a reply to application.
2/ Did parties serve any documents with you, if so can we please have copy The only communication I had was from court saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,accept acknowledgement of service well out of time, however we will not get involved unless court instruct us to, this is issue between you and defendants. .If no replies parties had no objection to applications on the facts.
3/ The judgement of RL was a cowardly act considering reference to restraining order Feb 2016, as applications to remove were made 26.2.2016, 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 where judiciary just ignored applications. We know why binned/ignored as NBT asked at hearing AOIBS346/746 that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, this was rejected by DJWatson.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive
We have asked court for transcript where again applications ignored. We have just been paid compensation by HMCS of 150..00 , we ask court of appeal to confirm, I will pay for transcript, if it shows NBT asked that judgement that reads I acted unreasonably ,and was rejected by DJWatson then court of appeal will refund fee to obtain transcript, we have asked below for NBT to confirm facts in separate question for court of appeal/
FOR BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION COURT
4/ Can you please confirm emails I sent to you by date, and confirm if sent to Cardiff Admin Court as my instructions. Eg did HHJBigger read full application.,eg from ECHR case law,,,i had , time to submit further arguments ,,,,,,,,,,,
5/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copies.
FOR CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT
6/ What documents,,,,/emails by date were forwarded to you by Birmingham court.
7/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copy.
8/ In CO/1/2013 Mr Blair in Bristol court office, [recorded conversation at court] states ,,,,our Mr Till sent your application to the Cardiff court , is this application in Feb 2013 on court file, further can we please have copy of any documents in court file in period 1.1.2013 till 1.4.2013. eg documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, ,,,,
FOR BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.
9/ Are the applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 in court file
10/ In B26YM042 defendants asked to settle, wanted settlement done by Tomlin order, this was emailed to you, 23.12.2015 with request as settled to remove from court listings, where numerous requests over years to confirm this email in court file, where we ask again. Further example Ref 3 today email of 7.12.2017 ,where all requests over years ignored….part of email Ref 3 of email 7.12.2017
We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please
Was this email removed from file, or is IT IN COURT FILE.This was struck out at hearing, B26YM042 either to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process someone removed email from file, or court gave judgement knowing matter settled,. AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT RESTRAINING ORDER BY HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, THIS WAS CASE SETTLED.
11/ The judgement of HHJCotter is utterly incomprehensible with respect to application, eg FEDJCAP document in pre action protocol document please see Appendix 1 today
In judgement 9.1.2018 [Lord Goldring,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork] admit alleged email of 3.1.2018 is email of 29.12.2017.
Further in that judgement you state email of 14.11.2018 can you confirm this should be email of 17.11.2017, where aware as I stated[ ISSUE TODAY IN COURT OF APPEAL NOT CORRUPT FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJDENYER,TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ] issue before court of ignoring applications for years, next step the ECHR. If you have a email of 14.11.2017 [can not be 2018 as you state ]then can we please have copy. If in file 17.11.2017 HHJCotter again utterly aware why I went to defendants, not some fairy story he made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.
12/ Pre action protocol document emailed . 16.9.2017 is it on system.
13/ Visit court 5.12.2017 ask for file , ask for N244 , from recording inform today I had written on it not to be sent to HHJCotter, new application next day. Can we please have copy of N244 form presented to HHJCotter with application, WHICH WAS SENT EMAIL 6.12.2017 OR A DIFFERENT N244 NOT ONE EMAILED 6.12.2017???????????????????
14/ On the 6.12.2017 final application email forwarded to you, as retired district judge stated, before they have removed evidence from file,[we will see with answers to above if others court had removed to corrupt the judicial process] so advised next day to email you, 7.12.2017 Ref 3 is this document on file. Further Mr Hunt has confirmed application 6.12.2017 not in file, as someone again removed, can you confirm these facts, admit have recording, as retired judge stated,after seeing HHJCotters judgement ,,,,,,the bast,,,,,,have again removed from file. Came to court on recording told HHJCotter did not consider, , retired judge stated, should not be recording inside the court, take third party to court for statement for applications , please see Ref 5 . Can you confirm 6.12.2017 application not considered by HHJCotter, eg he read wrong papers not in file.
15/ Do not know what he read can you confirm again you will not allow inspection of files,, Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,
16/ We had applications in 2018, as I stated in judicial review application this criminal practice, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications still going on in 2018. We had application 27.2.2018 EOOBS236 ,was there a reply to application if so can we please have copy.
17/ Application 15.3.2018 to obtain evidence to do my judicial review, Mr Blair states your not looking at files over the years to show us ignoring your applications, make application to HHJCotter who will IGNORE your application, had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, utter breach of Article 6. Follow up emails ignored, can you confirm HHJCotters reply Ref 4 dated 10.5.2018 was his reply to application of 15.3.2018. .Again utter breach of Article 6, to get a reply to applications in reasonable time, only obtained this as my MP involved. We have further ECHR concept of equalties of arms, for example when NBT made urgent applications, THEY GET REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS SHOWING BIAS. .
FOR NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT]
17/ In hearing before DJWatson defendants Ms Smith [NBT] asked that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson is this correct.
When barrister told me to report perjury issue, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, warned as being brushed off,,,,the COPWATCH PAPER EXPLAINS EVERYTHING
COPWATCH which proved correct in every detail,
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
. Seen by defendants Sgt Price who asked for dissection of CPS paper on malfeasance in public office, the FEDJCAB document plus details of Eaga case, stated as recorded visit if not criminal matter will not give to someone to investigate, she gave to PCBird
ADDITION TO RESOLVER FILE WHICH LEADS TO OTHER ISSUES EG CASE BEFORE COURT OF APPEAL CO/1731/2018 AS WE ASK FURTHER QUESTIONS IN TODAYS DOCUMENT
1/ We have had email from Resolver asking me to escalate . Background complain to MP , advised to contact Avon legal help, who passed me on to PSU Bristol, where advised to contact Resolver. The issue as Salford court refused to issue proceedings,ENCLOSED V J LEWIS clear breach of human rights case law. In usual way document today in my website as we await reply to be added to internet. . .
The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 76). 72. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 73. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim to a tribunal meeting the requirements of Article 6 § 1. Where there is a serious and genuine dispute as to the lawfulness of such an interference, going either to the very existence or to the scope of the asserted civil right, Article 6 § 1 entitles the individual concerned “to have this question of domestic law determined by a tribunal” (Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 92; Markovic and Others v. Italy [GC], § 98). The refusal of a court to examine allegations by individuals concerning the compatibility of a particular procedure with the fundamental procedural safeguards of a fair trial restricts their access to a court (Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v. Switzerland
This is difficult as Salford court ignored emails in Resolver file, , and only recently replied, assume as application to Cardiff county court to issue proceedings. What did we ask the court to do, can I please refer to application to the Cardiff court, which was approved as fee except.
WHAT I AM ASKING COURT TO DO AND WHY
1/ MAKE AN ORDER FOR CARDIFF COUNTY COURT TO SUPPLY COPY OF RESTRAINING ORDER ALLEGED MADE 22.6.2018. IF NO ORDER EVER MADE THEN APPLICATION FOR COST IN MAKING APPLICATION TO SALFORD COUNTY COURT WHICH WAS REFUSED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT WITH NO EVIDENCE OR REASON .
2/ IF RESTAINING ORDER NOT MADE THEN COURT TO MAKE ORDER THAT APPLICATION JONESV JOHN LEWIS ENCLOSED IS PROCEESED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT AND ALREADY IN THEIR FILE AND IT IS ISSUED IN 7 DAYS AS APPLICATION CORRECT AT TIME OF INITIAL POSTING
From court reply enclosed, they will issue claim against J Lewis, and will pay compensation , so no need to ask for court order, every thing asked for given, today see papers from court case issued, can i please thank the Salford court.
However the Salford court reply enclosed raises more questions than answers, and we need further reply to conclude. .
2/ The court states in enclosure when application obtained you were still on CRO list. But this does not make sense, as we give Salford court opportunity to explain, before Resolver looks at case. In May 2018 another application made to this court, which was ACCEPTED , so restraining order not on list May 2018. Are the Salford court saying correct, however someone put back on May –October 2018 . Further in letter 3.1.2019 from Salford ,,,,allegations order made by Cardiff county court 22.6.2017. where did this data come from, no contact ever with Cardiff CC. . We ask where did they get data Cardiff CC and issued on specific date which this court states. How do you explain application over 6 months ago your staff approved as fee except, eg v RapidSecure.
3/ The application which Salford approved v RapidSecure as fee except, in May 2018. A case closed as defendants asked to settle the claim. The claim directly related to case in the court of appeal, CO/1731/2018. Fall at home where could not move, where ambulance staff had to break in. Police ask RapidSecure to board up the whole window. Coming home after 4 days from hospital, only small amount of wood secured by silicon on broken glass, where water entered home. Complaint to police, where they state not our fault they did not follow our instructions, your complaint with RapidSecure they did not follow our instructions., eg ,board up whole window. Police state in IPCC regulations as you made complaint, we have now to follow IPCC regulations, for example I have to talk to you.
IPCC REGULATIONS AFTER ANY COMPLAINT
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
At point where I state I refuse to talk to you, unless when you call in case before court of appeal you answer my question did investigation officer Mr Galloway ever talk to me. In court of appeal file it has reference 131/2 police the defendants admit that he never contacted me and reference 97/8 we accept we were wrong and your email 22.7.2017 can not be considered as an appeal. This is issue before the court of appeal can I please refer to page 1 line 1 of judicial review application.
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE [in judicial review] WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS [POLICE] IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL[grounds 2 in judicial review application page 4 and 5] ,,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter [tab 21] they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017
DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [document before HHJB]
4/ We have issue again related to court of appeal case co/1731/2018, ,,,,,,,court ignoringapplications malfeasance in public office STILL GOING ON IN LATE 2017 AND 2018 . From court of appeal bundle the full application eg email 6.12.2018 not sent to HHJCotter, NOW REMOVED FROM FILE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS,,,,we asked for compensation, as fee paid for this application, however in standard way Bristol CC ignored email and follow up emails. Issue before court of appeal, which we can follow up later, perhaps an issue for Resolver at a later date.
P JONES
COMPENSATION ,,,accepted, although on benefits do not know if treat as income, REPORTED TO DWP .Data Salford court asked for to pay compensation.
PD JONES
Barclays
30884960 02
20 1334
We have enclosed application, reference HMCS directions, that applications can be made, if no fees payable, this practice accepted by Bristol county court in 2018 which I thank them.
We have issue as allegations restraining order 22.7.2018 in place reason why Salford county court will not issue enclosed claim.
Unaware of any order , not in GOVUK site. Salford /Cardiff COUNTY court refuses to supply copy of order.
We have concern legally advised to contact court of appeal, as I issued co/1731/2018 , it would appear from enclosed application a fee should have been paid. As in medicine can not be involved in fraud, I was utterly unaware of any order. We ask the court of appeal separately to conduct their investigations, as I inform them of evidence, and ask to put in file of co/1731/2018 . . From enclosed court judgement of HHJBigger it would appear an order was in place, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did he make order ??????????????????????, if so why not as legal advice in enclosed judgement in ADMINISTRATION COURT, 3 days later, why issue as allegations in the COUNTY COURT 3 DAYS BEFORE. In terms of court of appeal if no restraining order in place, we ask ,,,DID YOU EVER LOOK AT FILE.
We await reply from Cardiff and court of appeal, .
P JONES
APPLICATION TO CARDIFF COUNTY COURT FOR COURT ORDER [REFERENCE CITED FROM COURT OF APPEAL APPLICATION DOCUMENT THIS APPLICATION TODAY COPIED INWWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM]
With reference to correspondence with HMCS applications can be done via email if no fees are involved, accepted by Bristol county court in 2018.
WHAT I AM ASKING COURT TO DO AND WHY
1/ MAKE AN ORDER FOR CARDIFF COUNTY COURT TO SUPPLY COPY OF RESTRAINING ORDER ALLEGED MADE 22.7.2018. IF NO ORDER EVER MADE THEN APPLICATION FOR COST IN MAKING APPLICATION TO SALFORD COUNTY COURT WHICH WAS REFUSED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT WITH NO EVIDENCE OR REASON .
2/ IF NOT MADE THEN COURT TO MAKE ORDER THAT APPLICATION JONESV JOHN LEWIS ENCLOSED IS PROCEESED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT AND ALREADY IN THEIR FILE AND IT IS ISSUED IN 7 DAYS AS APPLICATION CORRECT AT TIME OF INITIAL POSTING
SKELETAL ARGUMENT. [Salford court denying access to the court]
The application made under
The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 76). 72. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 73. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim to a tribunal meeting the requirements of Article 6 § 1. Where there is a serious and genuine dispute as to the lawfulness of such an interference, going either to the very existence or to the scope of the asserted civil right, Article 6 § 1 entitles the individual concerned “to have this question of domestic law determined by a tribunal” (Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 92; Markovic and Others v. Italy [GC], § 98). The refusal of a court to examine allegations by individuals concerning the compatibility of a particular procedure with the fundamental procedural safeguards of a fair trial restricts their access to a court (Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v. Switzerland
In Salford county court letter dated 3.1.2018 they state we will not issue enclosed claim as restraining order in place, dated 22.7.2018 , from GOVUK site retired district judge who saw my website states not listed, we have no evidence. . The Cardiff county court states we can nor put hand on order. Again utter breach of the ECHR case law never seen alleged order, Salford court will not supply.ALLEGED ORDER ..
Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,
We know alleged restraining order not on system, however see alleged made in letter by Salford court on 22.7.2018 by Cardiff county court ,3 days before HHJBiggers judgement, please see enclosed judgement CO/1633/2018. We may ask did he in corrupt way write to Salford court, in 2018, in cowardly way , did not have the moral fibre to inform me of his underhand actions, have i evidence of this judge being corrupt, and corrupting and frustrating the judicial process.
Moral v France ,,,,,legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge lacks impartiality this standpoint important but not decisive,,,,
Pabla v Finland ,,,what is decisive is whether their fear can be held to be objectively justified,,,,,
Further issue before court of appeal denying evidence in front of him, did he ever look at application ????????????????????????????
Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ,
Consider judgement enclosed,
It was wrong , utterly without merit, to say Public Law basis was not shown The public law basis was clear from application. From first line of application before HHJBigger eg ,,pasted page 1/line 1 ]]
SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUEWHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS [POLICE] IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL[grounds 2 in judicial review application page 4 and 5] ,,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter [tab 21] they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [document before HHJB]
HHJBIGGER judgement ,,,,,,,,,,,,You made application to police over HHJDenyers JUDGEMENTS UTTER NONSENSE. Again as retired judge stated let HHJBigger know as soon as possible issues, he has Public Law issue page one, on page 2 of judicial review application . HHJBIGGER,however states ,,,,,Further should have complained to JCIO. But malfeasance in public office a criminal offence, ignoring applications, as JCIO stated as criminal offence we can not investigate. The police [defendants] state we were told for you to complain to JCIO, BUT JCIO TOLD ME WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE REASON COMPLAINT TO POLICE over advice ,,,,,we have asked who told them,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BRISTOL COUNTY COURT,,,,,,,,,,,,,however all correspondence to police ignored, if told by the Bristol court then utterly aware that via regulations Bristol knew as criminal offence I could not complain to JCIO. PAGE 2 OF APPLICATION NEXT PARAGRAPH TO HHJBIGGER HIS JUDGEMENT A DISGRACE NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,PAGE 2 OF JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION BELOW
,,,,,day 1 letter to defendants,contained dissection of CPS document,,, dissected in letter to them.eg,,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications , from page 2 of JR application The issue with police ,[DEFENDANTS] ,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff/judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,,Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. [End of quote fromJR document.]As JCIO state these numerous cases cited out of time, and malfeasance in public office anyway a criminal offence and therefore we can NOT investigate,so could not go to JCIO, further retired district judge who saw my website, states no restraining order against you, he believes as seek advice from PBU a case for ECHR.
HHJBIGGER,,,,,,In pocket of police state they did nothing wrong, so they can ignore IPCC regulations, in their investigations, which police admit, REF 131/2 and send reply to an appeal, where police admit REF 97/8 I have not lodged one, WHERE ARE WE AS I ASK IN MY WEBSITE RUSSIA/CHINA AND NOW COURT OF APPEAL
Note as we ask question, from judgement HHJBigger states restraining order in place. If this proves untrue, MAJOR ISSUE IN COURT OF APPEAL APPLICATION,,,,DID HE LOOK AT APPLICATION ,,,,,FROM APPLICATION IF WE SAY IF ,,,,DID HE OPEN FILE,,,,,IF HE DID WOULD SEE FEE EXCEPT NO RESTRAINING ORDER .
IF YOU LOOK AT HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT HE STATES RESTRAINING ORDER IN PLACE DID HE ISSUE 3 DAYS BEFORE JUDGEMENT ENCLOSED OR WAS IT ISSUED BY SOMENE IN CARDIFF COUNTY COURT AS SALFORD ALLEDGE AND ON WHAT GROUNDS.
BACKGROUND
1/ With reference to correspondence with HMCS applications can be done via email if no fees are involved.
2/ This relates to application enclosed JONES V LEWIS to Salford court which was returned as no EX160 enclosed, it was enclosed, however was with documents sent to Salford court. The application was returned again to Salford court , sent back as court change story why we will not issue as restraining order in place. I was utterly unaware of any restraining order, for example current case before court of appeal where no issue of fee issue . Retired district judge who saw my website confirmed no order in place. On the 28.12.2018 correspondence from Mr Taylor ,Salford court where told return, mark for me and we will issue,DONE 29.12.2018. We then get reply letter dated 3.1.2019 saying restraining order dated 22.6.2018issued by CARDIFF COUNTY COURT REASON APPLICATION TODAY TO CARDIFF COUNTY COURT . The court states we can not put our hands on order.
3/ THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE EG NO ISSUE EVER WITH COUNTY COURT AT CARDIFF. AS RETIRED JUDGE STATED [I DID NOT KNOW WHERE TO LOOK ] THERE IS NO ORDER ON OFFICIAL GOVUK SITE. AND SALFORD COURT AWARE OF THIS CONFIRMED IN RECORDED CONVERSATION WITH SALFORD COURT.
4/ With this data now supplied it begins to make sense. For years Bristol county court/Administration court Cardiff gnoring applications, malfeasance in public office. Picket at court told by barrister to report to police. They state we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, this comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness for example ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,EVEN LAWYERS COULD NOT GET A REPLY TO APPLICATIONS REF 83 . The police stated from start if malfeasance in public office not a criminal offence, ignoring your applications, we can not investigate, asked to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office which i dissected, where judges convicted, they admit in correspondence a criminal offence , and aware from JCIO regulations as a criminal offence JCIO could not investigate any complaint, however told by police to contact JCIO who confirmed they could not investigate.
5/ Complaint made against police, where they admit that in their investigation IPCC regulations not followed,ref 131/2 , and their allegations I issued an appeal untrue, ref 97/8 . On appeal form have to confirm IPCC followed before they could consider any appeal,IF REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED. Issue comes before HHJBigger at CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT where judgement on the 25.6.2018 enclosed. . From above judgement nonsense.
6/ If Salford court statement is true it appears HHJBigger issued restraining order in the CARDIFF COUNTY COURT. This is utter deception as retired judge said, if he wanted to do this should have been issued in his judgement, in CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT .It appears in cowardly way he makes order, do not serve in official govuk site and writes to Salford court, and NEVER INFORMS ME.JUDGE UTTER CORRUPTION.
7/ Take up issue with my MP, advised to contact Avon legal help, where passed to PSU Bristol. Bristol does not understand why order made 22.7.2018 . Issue taken up as their advice with Resolver, however as Salford ignore correspondence we please ask for court order.
Enclosed is letter to Jack Lopresti MP as Cardiff Administration court continue to ignore correspondence to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , simple question Salford court ask for confirmation no restraining order issued by Cardiff court , we may ask why they want confirmation as in recording they state we have no evidence. Could it be they sked HHJBigger to issue, not done yet.
RELEVANCE TO COURT OF APPEAL CO/1731/2018 CAN YOU PLEASE PUT IN FILE.
1/ Jack can I please refer to your staffs Mr Cobb letter [ several years ago ] issue now before court of appeal c0/1731/2018 of Bristol county court/Administration court Cardiff, ignoring applications and correspondence, malfeasance in public office. Recently the court of appeal requested that references were split between core issue, and general reference, sent to court of appeal as order, recorded delivery, as we await judgement. Although retired district judge who saw my website, stated would conclude before ECHR. As Mr Cobb stated in his letter the courts ignored his letters, will write again, however can not force them to reply. Issue still going on in 2018, ignoring applications, before court of appeal.
2/ We have new claim v John Lewis, please see the particular of claim enclosed. Money claims [all] to Salford county court where returned 21.11.2018 ,please see their letter , as your aware we record all calls in and out . From later recording phone call , apology , sorry we saw bank statement , letter from DWP however missed form ,,,,,,application for fee remission ,,,could you please return, put form on top, and we will issue. We then get reply enclosed dated 4.12.2018. This letter utter nonsense eg no restraining order in place. This taken from Gov UK , could you please confirm, note up to date. Quote from government site.
These orders are issued by a judge and apply to all the County Courts and the High Court or both. They last 2 years, but can be renewed for a further 2 years.
If the order is ignored, the person will be in contempt of court and may receive a prison sentence.
The whole issue in these early documents,no need to read further, police letter to my second complaint and my appeal and their reply to appeal just below. Issue clarified in internet site COPWATCH nothing to do with me where complaint system a waste of time just there to protect officers of misconduct charges. [again in documents below]
IPCC statutory regulations in investigation of fist complaint [ Mr Galloway ]never followed . Statutory regulations allowed an appeal to police judgement. So we ask for data to do appeal, 22.7.2017 had been told we need to enclose police appeal form. On police appeal form have to tick boxes that statutory regulations followed , Mr Crouch utterly corrupt sends reply to email of 22.7.2017 on the 24.7.2017 saying this is reply to your appeal. What did that email of 22.7.2017 say admitted by police in document below, 5.12.2017 ,,,unless i hear from you by 28.7.2017 with answer to my questions, there will be no reply and then do appeal to you. So clearly on the 24.7.2017 no appeal lodged, Mr Crouch utterly corrupt. We ask in appeal , complaints Crouch /Galloway 3 elements one statutory regulations not followed, Galloway 2/ my email 22.7.2017 can not be appeal, Crouch and 3./ Crouch states told from start we would not investigate your complaints about court/perjury. All calls in/out recorded, no mobile, Sgt Price states passed to PCBird to investigate malfeasance/perjury issue .We have PCBird in correspondence saying impossible to contact you. No one ever told me we would not investigate, Crouch puts forward reason PCBird was not quilty of malfeasace in publc office, as refused to investigate as court/judges immune from proceedings, utterly corrupt in file he has CPS document i sent to police where these convicted. So second complaint Galloway/Crouch under 3 issues, look at police reply utterly corrupt know regulations not followed and never told they would not investigate, so never address issues in complaint. . They do address the issue of email saying your email 22.7.2017 indicated you want to appeal, suggest thats all it states, as i had stated with no reply would do appeal on/after 28.7.2017. So in appeal ask police to again address these 3 issues, LOOK AT REPLY of DI Edgington utterly corrupt where does he address these 3 issues. What we have combining police replies is your email 22.7.2017 indicated you want to appeal. Police never address issue of statutory regulations in investigation of any complaint, and as i asked if told we would not investigate, when was i told, or was Crouches statement dishonest. IPCC state only option now a judicial review, concerning legality of police investigation, eg statutory regulations. We are close to obtaining all documents for next stage waiting for reply from HMCS. The issue can police ignore IPCC regulations on investigations and send reply to a appeal i have not lodged. This from December 2017 sole issue before the court. We await reply from HMCS before as agreed sending papers to lawyers IrwineMitchell. If facts untrue have copied Crouch/Edgington into website entry they have recourse via the courts. [documents cited below]
We IPCC REFERENCE 093648 APPEAL TO POLICE LETTER OF 5 12.2017
SKELETAL ARGUMENT ,,,Appeal was lodged on the 5.12.2017. This relates to conduct of Mr Crouch and Galloway, malfeasance in public office ? As the appeal states it’s a different IPCC number as previous complaint which relates to failure to act eg investigate criminal activity, perjury issue and malfeasance in public office either court manager or HHJDenyer, resulting in miscarriage of justice.. . This made abundantly clear in appeal lodged however Mr Krouwel wishes to answer a complaint not made. [AS MR CROUCH] or to ignore elements of complaint. Further complaint was in 3 elements , where you refuse to answer 2 elements, eg numbers 1 and 3. so we will try again for a reply so issues clear for Administration court, as they consider legality of your judgement. The 3 elements are as below, can we please have reply under these 3 headings, so your stance unambigious as we present to the Administration court. Please take document filed with police appeal form dated 5.12.2017 and this document as the appeal.
ELEMENT 1 DID ANYONE [GALLOWAY] IN RESPECT TO DOCUMENT SENT TO ME A GUIDE TO THE POLICE COMPLAINTS SYSTEM CONTACT ME.IF SO WHEN . WE ASK FOR YES/NO IN YOUR REPLY EG
There are statutory regulations of IPCC in any police investigations….eg
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
ELEMENT 2/ You state [Krouwel ]
YOU THEN EMAILED ON THE 22.7.2017 AND ACCUSED THE DI OF SWEEPING YOUR COMPLAINT UNDER THE CARPET. YOU ALSO SAID WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU. I BELIEVE IT WAS ENTIRELY REASONABLE OF MR CROUCH TO CONSIDER THIS IS NOTIFICATION THAT YOU WANTED TO APPEAL,,,
What I ask you, and Administration court later you admit I wanted to appeal, but suggest no way could it be considered an appeal. ,,,,,,,eg
YOU ALSO SAID [you admit] WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 28.7.207 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.,,,,,,can then do appeal to you
DO YOU STILL MAINTAIN ALTHOUGH I STATE YOU ADMIT ,,,, WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017 THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL. SIMPLE QUESTION YES/NO.
ELEMENT 3 The courts consider elements of dishonesty, Mr Crouch states you were told from start we would not investigate your complaint of malfeasance in public office, and puts forward justification as CPS document why PCBird not guilty of malfeasance in public office, as courts/judges immune from proceedings. Mr Crouch knows this untrue as CPS document sent to him,judges convicted,,, .This is not issue today, all calls in/out recorded this is utterly dishonest, Mr Crouch is utterly dishonest making this statement, again a simple question , do you still maintain I was told, and if so when, eg again simple reply to this appeal, yes you were told on the ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,by,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. We know from correspondence Sgt Price states passed your complaint of malfeasance in public office to PCBird. We know PCBird stating unable to contact you.
1/ We need to keep statements identical in applications to various public bodies, for example this one already used. The sole issue today is [asking later Administration court over legality of police investigations in a judicial review]
WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC
REGULATIONS IN INVESTIGATION AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The Administration court , next step, as we await your rejection of this appeal. The sole issues clear, not previous complaint,,,,,,failure to investigate.
2/ This is utterly different issues to previous complaint to the police. Appeal with police already lodged, with police appeal form. IPCC ref 093648 We obtained reply dated 8.1.2018 , saying I had 28days to do appeal ,if done on line the appeal form on line. Could you please take previous email/police appeal form as our appeal, WITH this document.
3/ We would be grateful for later Administration court, [assuming you will reject this appeal] if you reply under the following 3 issues.
a/ CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY REGULATIONS. IPCC send me , please see IPCC booklet ,,,A guide to the police complaints system,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,in police investigations from that document
There are statutory regulations of IPCC in any police investigations….eg
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
NEVER TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY ALL CALLS IN/OUT RECORDED NO MOBILE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NVESTIGATION FLAWED. Can you confirm in reply Mr Galloway never contacted me, willfully neglecting his duty, malfeasance in public office. [or did someone else contact me]
b/ CAN POLICE SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL ALTHOUGH ONE NOT LODGED. Secondly may help to state history for the judge in the Administration court. Again identical letter from again DI Stephens, dated 18.7.2017, eg if doing appeal on line appeal form is available on our website,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. So if doing on line need to enclose your ,,,,,online appeal form….. This form was not sent 22.7.2017 as I sought data to do appeal, so can not be appeal, in your letter ,your words, ,,,,5.12.2017 ,,
YOU THEN EMAILED ON THE 22.7.2017 AND ACCUSED THE DI OF SWEEPING YOUR COMPLAINT UNDER THE CARPET. YOU ALSO SAID WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 28.7.207 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU. I BELIEVE IT WAS ENTIRELY REASONABLE OF MR CROUCH TO CONSIDER THIS IS NOTIFICATION THAT YOU WANTED TO APPEAL,,,
What I ask you, and Administration court later you admit I wanted to appeal, but suggest no way could it be considered an appeal. ,,,,,,,eg
YOU ALSO SAID [you admit] WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 28.7.207 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.,,,,,,can then do appeal to you
DO YOU STILL MAINTAIN ALTHOUGH I STATE YOU ADMIT ,,,, WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017 THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL. SIMPLE QUESTION YES/NO.
FOOTNOTE ,From ECHR
McMichael v UK,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF AND COMMENT ON ALL EVIDENCE ADDUCTED OR OBSERVATIONS FILED…I DID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OR EVIDENCE AS POLICE MOVE GOALPOST ON THE 24.7.2017 ALLEGED APPEAL EARLIER DATE 22.7.2017 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DEFENCE. SO COULD NOT COMMENT/DO ANY FORM OF APPEAL OF FACTS ON THE 22.7.2017 NEW DEFENCE 24.7.2017 SENT, FURTHER AS I ASK FOR EVIDENCE TO DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017.
,WE HAVE POLICE STATING WE DID INVESTIGATE NO CRIMINAL EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. SO THIS IS ISSUE OF. APPEAL. ,SAYING WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. POLICE THEN SEND REPLY TO ALLEGED APPEAL ON 24. 7.2017 . IN THAT LETTER 24.7.2017 POLICE ACCEPT UTTER NONSENSE TO SAY NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, NOW STATE WE NEVER INVESTIGATED. THEY ARE CONFIRMING MY COMPLAINT TO THE POLICE. POLICE ISSUE NEW DEFENCE BY MOVING GOAL POST HOWEVER COULD NEVER CHALLENGE THIS AS WAS UNAWARE ON THE 22.7.2017 OF POLICE POSITION. THIS IS ISSUE TO ADMINISTRATION COURT. This for Administration court not todays issue,. We have the letter 12.6.2017 rejecting first complaint. Can I cite that letter ,,,,,correct course of action was to make complaint to the JCIO, Can I refer to recording with Sgt Price at start where informed this route not open to me. Can I please refer to police letter 24.7.2017 where they confirm I could not make a complaint to JCIO. SO POLICE ADMIT MY COMPLAINT.
Second issue we did investigate,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence of malfeasance in public office. So we wish to appeal this aspect, in papers police aware eg 2YJ03757 applications date stamped by the court, recording with courts Mr Blair STATES that applications on file, and Mr Till sent to the Administration court. We have asked courts Bristol/Administration court many times ,,,
,,,,,eg ECHR,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, obligation incumbant on the administration authorities the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administration authority ,,,,
as appeal before court of appeal, as appealing,,,,, struck out by lower Administration court as you never asked for oral hearing ,no frustration of the judicial process Srickson v Preston cc [2017] ,,,,where Mr Blair confirms you did make application and Mr Till sent to the Administration court so ask courts to confirm facts it proves my case,as I sought evidence for hearing, courts aware perverting course of justicer both courts ignored all emails, to pervert course of justice. . We have LATER final miscarriage of justice in court of appeal,,,,,,,,,you never asked court for a oral hearing, WHERE CORRUPT COURT VIA MR BLAIR CONFIRMS I DID. COURT WITHHOLDS EVIDENCE.
We have issue 2016 application 26.2.2016 ,to HHJDenyer ignored. Defendants perfectly happy to go for hearing , however defendants states LATER date when out of time clinical negligence claim, so via appendix 2.3,2016 send email to HHJDenyer , can I quote start of that email,,which court ignored ,,,,
URGENT CAN YOU PLEASE PUT TODAY TO HHJDENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE PLEASE.
1/ On the 26.2.2016 an urgent application was made to HHJDenyer. This was in respect to 2 issues
a/ To issue proceedings
b/ Removal of order , made with complete utter no merit ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Emails to court for reply ignored ,,,,picketing at ,court where barrister told me to stop, told see from website you have excellent new claim wait until out of time and take to the ECHR,if court persists ignoring emails. .Email every week, emails ignored. Then via
,,,,,eg ECHR,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, obligation incumbant on the administration authorities the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administration authority ,,,,
Ask court for documents, ECHR claim, eg StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
where court manager states can you come to talk to us as we did just not know what you wanted court to do. SO HE ADMITS APPLICATIONS .Where in email state please see email 2.3,2016 very clear what I want court to do, I can not explain further.. To say we ignored for 6 months numerous emails as we did not know what you wanted court to do has no merit. Further if Fowler did not know what I wanted court to do why did he not contact me. Further refer to
Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Why did court not contact me before I ran out of time in clinical negligence claim.
The N244 CLEAR WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO. STILL COURT IGNORED APPLICATIONS.
New application 26.10.2016 , again NBristol NHS Trust happy to go for hearing, this in respect of removing restraining order and to issue proceedings as AOIBS346 to get medical records, and AOIBS746 to put statement in my medical records. Pro Bono Unit looking at restraining order , being chased for court reply. Explained court had 3 weeks eg 15 days to reply, where I chase court, told we will ignore all correspondence as your insulting court /HHJDenyer ,you have court order concerning AOIBS346/AOIBS746 now asking to issue proceedings over identical issues. Where I inform Pro Bono Unit in the 15 day period , COURT WOULD IGNORE IGNORE APPLICATIONS ,,,we will not get a reply, and send email to the court,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
From : philip.jones88@btinternet.com
Date : 23/11/2016 - 00:02 (GMTST)
To : jerry.fowler@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Cc : administrativecourtoffice.cardiff@hmcts.x.gsi.gov.uk
Subject : reminder ms weaver /mr fowler so court in no doubt.
Refer to previous emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by 24.11.2016 will assume the court refuses to reply to applications, can then inform my barrister and the press. Reply vie email please.
The barrister wants to look in detail at restaining order, application to remove 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 , we have no replies denying access to the courts, breach of
Article 6 HRA. Bristol/Cardiff court for years ignoring applications to the court to pervert the course or justice.
P JONES
MR FOWLER IGNORED
So for police to state we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness..
c/ FINAL ISSUE. Police state you were told from start we would not investigate complaint. ,please see skeletal argument above. We have ambigious statements we did investigate, no evidence malfeasance in public office, and now told we never investigated, as court/judges immune from proceedings, where before CPS document showing untrue , so police knows this untrue.
P JONES
k_stak 6�&�
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
.
17,,,We have further incident as took photograph of police station ,so website same format as www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com. [THE POLICE ISSUE IN THIS SITE TO BE REMOVED WITH A SUMMARY ]Stopped by police no complaint just doing their job,understood reason why required. . The site will give old issues of malfeasance in public office, followed by present evidence . We have CORRUPTION from top to bottom in Avon Somerset Police, eg from PCC Ms Mountstevens down to PCBird. As explained to Ms Mountstevens if facts untrue for police to sue me. Lets quote Home Office publication on duties of a PCC. ,,,,,,,,,,HAS RESPONSIBILITY TO HOLD POLICE TO ACCOUNT ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. She has clear evidence of corruption by staff eg Mr Galloway never followed IPCC statutory regulations in investigation, we have Mr Crouch sending reply to an appeal that i had not even filed, in historic case she is aware police guilty of offence malfeasance in public office,.We have police from start told i could not make complaint about court/judges to HMCS. , ADMITTED BY POLICE IN LETTER 24.7.2017.PCBird then stating complain to HMCS knowing i could not make a complaint, further aware court/judges not immune from proceedings, from letter sent to him. . Mr Crouch IN REPLY TO AN APPEAL NOT LODGED STATES PCBird was not guilty of malfeasance in public office as via CPS regulations,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,justifable excuse to wilfully neglect his duty, refusal to investigate, as judges immune from proceedings, utterly CORRUPT he knows this untrue. So ask as IPCC advice to email PCC ask for copy to be sent to head Mr Marsh however PCC ignores clear evidence of corruption eg police sending reply to an appeal not filed. . She ignores evidence . Mr Crouch aware when i did police appeal i hadto confirm on appeal form, in previous investigation that statutory regulations were followed, he is aware this did not occur, now in utter corrupt way sends reply to an appeal i had not lodged. As i stated site up by1.12. .2017 with transfer of portion of www.corruptioninbristolcountycouom giving actual correspondence , UNDER SECTION 2. Transfer of previous website in section 2 , some documents not transffered properly , will be coreected by 1.12.2017. . The issue in present situation below. Legally advised to remove photograph taken on police property and use one taken from road. The site complete from above, in terms of issues, below is record of actual documents eg pre action protocol for judicial review sent to police all in date order. and application to issue proceedings.
SECTION 1
OF NOTE IS ECHR CASE MIROJUBOUS V LATVIA ,,,,,,,,FAIRNESS OF PROCEEDINGS IS ALWAYS ASSESSED BY EXAMINATION IN ENTIRETY IN THAT A ISOLATED INCIDENT MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IS PRESENT POLICE ISSUE A SERIES ISSUE DO WE HAVE ISSUE TODAY WITH HISTORIC POLICE COMPLAINT THAT CORRELATED IDENTICAL TO TODAYS ISSUE.
HISTORIC POLICE ISSUE
Eaga were a company appointed by UK parliament to install central heating. There is no dispute from defendants contract which they define as EPL1 to replace system A and remove cylinder B to inspect and if defective would replace system B also, eg lawyers later letter......contract you signed after installation,,,,
Told system B no defects, after installation as contractors did not replace floor water was dripping from cylinder B which entered pump and blew all fuses, third party contractor called in and was informed cylinder has never been removed, corrosion in fittings, breach of EPL1. Eaga return record visit they state was not leaking when we were here if so [as contract EPL1 ] we would have replaced. In later report in court bundle state by defendants change story,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,leaking over a long period of time. So defence was not leaking when we inspected in tatters, a few weeks before. The tape proves my case, sent to Bristol county court , they accept tape in reply state you need to get defendants permission to use and you can not bring in your own recording equipment you must organise this with court after you get their permission to use tape. So email defendants it proves my case, state to them if you want to commit PERJURY at hearing so be it. Parts of email answered although request to use tape ignored. The agreement over the months with Eagas Ms Suggett. Was lucky at day of hearing in waiting room sat next to a HTV reporter, with his mother i understand their case to remove students from house. The lawyer for Eaga in waiting room before hearing, asks if i have tape, where i start to explain no permission, where he states not interested have you the tape where i state no.Can i refer to transcript where Ms Suggetts emails are presented and from transcript lawyer states we do not know Ms Suggett and where these emails come from. After hearing where lawyer challenged OF PERJURY in letter states,,,,,Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application ,too late for you to do anything about it now. Further states ,did not commit perjury ,,,unaware of tape evidence until raised at hearing, not raised , utterly untrue BEFORE HEARING WITH THIRD PARTY EVIDENCE ASKED IF I HAD TAPE AWARE OF EVIDENCE.
Contact lawyers told to contact police with evidence. Seen by Sgt Bell at least open we are the police this is a civil matter, NO ITS NOT ITS PERJURY BEFORE HEARING WITH WITNESS EAGA AWARE OF CONTRACT. ,,, we do not want to be taking on the court , anyway from evidence all you have is transcript where lawyer deny they know Ms Suggett , suggest Sgt Bell contacts HTV reporter where told made some enquires now living across Severn bridge i have not time to interview him, AND YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY.
What an attitude, the reporter works in Bristol studio, compare COPWATCH ,,,,,if they can brush you off they will do so, complain to PCC Ms Mountstevens who refused to get involved. Aware miscarriage of justice, all Bell had to do was go to court ask for file, in file it has tape where they state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IF DEFECTS WHERE THERE WHEN WE INSTALLED SYSTEM A WE WOULD HAVE REPLACED. IN BUNDLE REPORT OF EAGA IT STATES NOT 2 WEEKS,,,,,LEAKING OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. Further knows reporter living in S Wales he states so no need to travel why not call,,,,,,,,i understand you and your mother were in the county court on the,,,,,,,,. you were sat next to a man in long conversations with you, i understand someone came to talk to this man and asked if he had tape, if i gave you a photograph could you confirm this was person who asked if he had tape. This would confirm the lawyer knew of evidence, and then commited perjury at hearing. Issue taken up with my MP where Eaga agree not to take costs awarded. See further in correspondence he wrote to court, no reply, with letter to me ,,,,,,i can not force them to reply.For years facts on internet . Did not know about police complaints system.
THE PRESENT SITUATION EXPLAINED BY INTERNET WEB SITE UKCOP WATCH
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
WE HAVE 2 TACTICS OF POLICE a/ BRUSH YOU OFF b/ QUOTE LEGAL REGULATIONS THAT WE KNOW UNTRUE TO BRUSH YOU OFF.
1/ For years Bristol county court ignoring applications, although we have court order to make application. Court receipt for applications. Application 26.2.2016 , with appendix 2.3.2016. So picket at court where told by barrister not my direct field, clear malfeasance in public office and end option make complaint to police over criminal offence malfeasance in public office. You have good NEW civil claim, court order to make claim to court , that court refuses to consider.Further as barrister advice email court every week/10days asking for reply to application, so no doubt court manager aware of application made, and court ignoring. Further pointed towards paper on malfeasance in public office, by a judge. Further application 26.10.2017 also ignored. Where court manager confirms he would commit offence malfeasance in public office , as he ignores final email, eg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless I hear from you by ,,,,,,,,,,,will assume court will ignore all applications, although court order to make applications. He confirms earlier in email he had request for reply to applications,,,,,,eg emails your sending on a regular basis for reply to applications,,,,,,,,,,,
2/ Visit Patchway police station Bristol , record conversation with Sgt Price. Being brushed off, malfeasance in public office not a criminal offence ect. Told to make complaint to court, however informed her due to regulations we could not make a complaint, confirmed in police letter of Mr Crouch of the 24.7.2017. Further she is told HMCS had stated anyway correspondence would be ignored. Agreed to send to her CPS document on malfeasance in public office. In letter dissecting that CPS paper aware judges/court convicted of offence.
3/ Although aware I could not make complaint to HMCS , confirmed later by police, in utter corrupt way, being brushed off, by PCBird told by him to make complaint to HMCS, and sends me two forms to fill in. Further in his letter confirms unable to contact me, In my reply of 13.4.2017 point out again to him I can not make a complaint,due to HMCS regulations, confirmed later by police letter 24.7.2017 , anyway HMCS had stated correspondence would not be read.
4/ Make complaint to police. . Mr Galloway states in email PCBird has no evidence of malfeasance in public office, He asked someone else also who confirmed this. May I suggest being brushed off, look at COPWATCH eg
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it.
This comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,,,,,,,,,
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
Lets consider judges paper, extracts below ,,,
The elements [of offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,,To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder .....Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest.
Kate Brunner QC
We have court order to make application, we have emails every week asking for reply, we have court manager confirming he would ignore application, is the court manager wilfully neglecting to perform his duty, in respect to judge Ms Brunner paper have I been wronged by court manager, we have court order to make application , where court manager ignores. . To say we have no evidence is outrageous . Mr Galloway still states way forward was to complain to HMCS, HOWEVER later you will see police admit I could not make complaint,,,,,,,,,police letter 24.7.2017. Clearly Mr Galloway trying to brush me off. In IPCC stautory regulations we have following
There are statutory regulations of IPCC in investigations….eg
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
Mr Galloway never talked to me, no mobile, all calls in/out recorded. Refer to threatning historic calls, all calls in out recorded, police did excellent job correlating calls, as defendant unknown to them , issued a caution. Asking police difficult questions,
tic.co� �W
4/ So appeal to police, in letter from police stating when you do appeal to us, need to enclose official appeal form in application. iIN APPEAL FORM HAVE TO TICK STATUTORY REGULATIONS OF IPCC FOLLOWED CROUCH KNOWS THEY HAVE NOT FOLLOWED .They have problem i am asking why Galloway did not follow statutory regulations, who was third party who said we had no evidence malfeasance in public office. In email 22.7.2017 can i quote end below,,,WITH NO REPLY TO QUESTIONS ANSERED CAN DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017
5/ Can I quote IPCC regulations,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you should obtain enough information at end of investigations to understand what has happened during the investigations,,,,if this ends up in the ECHR
Hirvisan v Finland ,,,,,,reason given to make effective use of any existing appeal,,,,[back to you/.ECHR AS WE ASK QUESTIONS]
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
P JONES
So with no reply to questions would do appeal after 28.7.2017. Mr Crouch in utter corrupt manner sends reply to appeal on the 24.7.2017 that i have not filed until 7.8.2017, he is utterly corrupt. HE KNOWS GALLOWAY INVESTIGATION GIVES CLEAR GROUNDS FOR APPEAL]
Mr Crouch aware Mr Galloways reply utter nonsense, eg no evidence of malfeasance in public office,has the court wilfully neglected to perform their duty, we have court order to make application, we have court manager confirming he would ignore applications, he is aware Galloway did not follow statutory regulations in his investigation, and confirms in his letter 24.7.2017 I could not make a claim to HMCS. So in utter corrupt way sends reply to appeal I had not lodged, as in corrupt way do not want to consider the appeal, consider POLICE WATCH protecting their own. Did he ever look at evidence clear application to court 28.10.2017 which was ignored, however he states complain against court over a year in his letter of 24.7.2017. He states in letter you were informed we would not investigate offence of malfeasance in public office, this utterly untrue as I ask when and who informed me, all calls in/out recorded. Can I refer to PCBirds letter I have not be able to contact you, who told me, his he saying Sgt Price told me. Lets examine criminal offence of malfeasance where police officers convicted, including Avon and Somerset, the case. Mr Crouch states PCBird refused to investigate as court/judges immune from prosecution , he is aware utterly not true via CPS documents sent to Sgt Price assume in file, or did he ever open file,,,,,,,,,,no application to court for over a year. Suggest PCBird guilty of malfeasance in public office, can I refer to CPS document on malfeasance in public office,,,
723=243��WC�D�
WHEN SITE UP WILL DISSECT FURTHER CROUCHES LETTER AND PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW WHICH THIS CORRUPT FORCE IGNORED
GUIDELINES INTRODUCTION TO COMPLAINT TO POLICE
This section expands issues in 2016, however the MAIN issue , same issue ignoring applications relate to 2013 issue. HAVE PEOPLE NEGLECTED THEIR DUTY
We have response from Sg Price ,Avon Somerset Police ,,,,,after criminal activity of court/judges her report she states no evidence, malfeasance in public office defined by CPS as,,,,,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,AS BARRISTER STATED A SIMPLE QUESTION HAVE WE SHOWN PEOPLE NEGLECTING THEIR DUTY OR HAS POLICE CONSPIRED TO SWEEP UNDER THE CARPET. . We have court order to make applications to the Bristol county court, where court/HHJDenyer ignores, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,malfeasance in public office. Court confirms orally they will commit malfeasance in public office told HHJDenyer had confimed applications would be ignored, with follow up email, 23.11.2016,to court manager Mr Fowler ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.copy to Pro Bono UNIT,,,,,,,,,,,,,UNLESS I HEAR FROM YOU BY 24.11.2016 WILL ASSUME THAT MY APPLICATIONS WILL BE IGNORED,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY, WE HAVE COURT ORDER TO PRESENT APPLICATIONS ,WHICH THIS CORRUPT COURT IGNORED, NO REPLY TO EMAIL 23.11.2916 CONFIRMING THEY WILL COMMIT OFFENCE STILL SG PRICE STATES SHE HAS NO EVIDENCE . WE SEEK WHAT EVIDENCE SG PRICE CONSIDERED OR WAS THIS ZERO SHE COMMITING OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
This is a dynamic system where police now involved, not really surprised by response, due to identical reply many years ago, where again overwhelming evidence given to them.. We had case heard in Bristol county court, heard by DDJGisby . Later he states in letter ,,,,on reflection something odd with defence against Mr Jones, comes before in judicial review Lord Goldring who confirms getting verdict badly wrong. From transcript could see why DDJGisby confused, as case built on emails with defendants Ms Suggett, however from transcript I have defendants lawyer stated, we do not know Ms Suggett, or where emails come from. Lawyer challenged over perverting course of justice, in letter I have from lawyer it states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ms Suggest was person who dealt with your application, however too late for you to do anything about it now, police, Ms Mountstevens PCC Avon and Somerset Police presented with evidence, perverting course of justice, however states no evidence of perverting course of justice. From internet,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if police can palm off an investigation they will do so.
Can I define malfeasance in public office from CPS document, wilfully neglects to perform their duty,,,,expanded in Ms Brummers QC Albion barristers chambers Bristol paper,,,,,,,,,,,,,,is offence a series offence ?................[YES since 2011 virtually every year this corrupt court ignores applications ] and what must be considered in respect to possible conviction, ,,,,,public outrage not from particular details, but from sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,So this is what Sg Price Patchway police station and Ms Mountstevens considered eg deduction again identical as years before ,,,,,NO evidence, in just ONE case ,suggest ALL , ,,,,,have i been wronged by an individual [Fowler/Denyer] , we ask reader.
So for many years Bristol court ignoring applications, details below, can I take one example,,,,court order to make application to HHJDenyer. Made 26.2.2016 , amendment 2.3.2016 , where it further confirms what I want court to do, can I please quote from above document just first lines of email 2.3.2016
URGENT CAN YOU PLEASE PUT TODAY TO HHJDENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE THANK YOU
1/ On the 26.2.2016 an urgent application was made to HHJDenyer in respect to 2 issues
a/ to issue proceedings
b/ removal; of restraining order made with complete/utter no merit. [matter decided EARLIER BEFORE RESTRAINING ORDER by court , defendants did not appeal judgement at hearing before DJWatson , defendants ask that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, DJWatson rejected their application, stated I had not acted unreasonably, issue already determined by courts]. 2/ ,,,,,,,3/………………………………………………………..ect.
Numerous follow up emails ignored, asking for reply to application, 26.2.2016 , so court manager Mr Fowler utterly aware what i was asking for, where ran out of time to issue proceedings clinical negligence, on 27.7.2016 as emails ignored.. Picketing at court as Mr Fowler ignoring emails, corrupt knowing soon out of time, had been told by barrister to email every week/10days asking for reply to application, court tactics at present to just ignore applications .malfeasance in public office ,so i could not issue proceedings via no win no fee lawyer who stated we had good claim. . Told further court/Denyer in breach of HRA eg denying access to the courts, also malfeasance issue as court/Denyer ,from above ,,,,,,,,,,are wilfully neglecting to perform their duty to consider application. Although for months emails ignored, asking for reply, when court aware of taking to the ECHR ,now OUT of time, as it were rats in a sewer,,Mr Fowler court manager starts to reply to email,,,,
Email 27.9.2016 ,,,,,,,could you ring me to discuss emails you are sending to court on regular basis, asking for reply to your applications ,,,,,,,,do not know what you want court to do,,,,,this is nonsense please see email above for example 2.3.2016. above a/ to issue proceedings b/ removal of restraining order,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Utterly not relevant he is not a judge, the application as court order is to present application to HHJDenyer, did he do so or did he not send,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THERE IS A COURT ORDER TO SEND TO HHJDENYER THE ORDER IN APPLICATION . This is utterly not relevant , from above, however if he did not understand claim why has he taken 7 months to reply, he has been sent numerous emails asking for a reply to application, WHY DID HE NOT SAY I DO NOT UNDERSTAND CLAIM MONTHS BEFORE NOW OUT OF TIME. . The rat Fowler only responding as now going to ECHR, .Further the court order was to send application to HHJDenyer, I could understand if he had stated sent to HHJDenyer he does not understand claim, re do it, .. Further he is admitting he is ignoring emails asking for a reply to applications,,,,,,,,,,,,eg ,HE ADMITS ,,,,,,,emails you are sending to court on regular basis …………HE IGNORED AS HE HAS DONE FOR YEARS ,,,,,he is not legally qualified its an application to HHJDenyer , not sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, malfeasance in public office
Email reply 29.9.2016,,,,,where I list all emails asking for reply to 26.2.2016 application which he ignored, and quotes in full again 2.3.2016 document, so aware exactly what I want HHJDenyer to do. [still I assume STILL did not send to HHJDenyer, [or did he] ]Several emails state,,,,,if I do not hear from you by,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,assume court refuses to reply,, COURT IGNORED CONFIRMING REFUSAL TO REPLY,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office.
Email reply 30.9.2016 ,,,where he now accepts his deception stance in tatters,utterly aware what I wanted court to do, where he throws his toys out of the pram,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i offer no further comment and therefore will not be offering any further replies to your emails, .Any further emails will be placed in file NOT READ SO NO POINT MAKING COMPLAINT. . So he is saying we will commit malfeasance in public office, he knows why application 26.2.2016 sent,,,,,,,,did he send to Denyer? Expected a reply to application, , no, so email below…………
Email 23. 11.2016 to Mr Fowler cc Pro Bono Unit ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless I hear from you by 24.11.2016 will assume the court refuses to reply to my applications ,,,,,,,[further application made and again ignored, 26.10.2016] SO NOW 2 APPLICATIONS HE IS IGNORING,,,,,EMAIL IGNORED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS NO REPLY HE IS CONFIRMING APPLICATIONS WILL BE IGNORED,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. WE HAVE THIS CORRUPT COURT ISSUING RESTRAINING ORDER WHEN I MAKE APPLICATIONS T O REMOVE /ISSUE PROCEEDINGS ORALLY TOLD THEY WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. . CPS STATES OFFENCE ,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTS TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY. SG PRICE PATCHWAY POLICE STATIONS DEDUCES FOWLER HAS NOT WILFULLY NEGLECTED TO PERFORM HIS DUTY. ,,,,,AS BARRISTER SAID WITH THIS CORRUPT COURT WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA,,,,,,,,,IN APPLICATION FOWLER HAS DENYERS COURT ORDER THAT APPLICATIONS MUST BE FORWARDED TO HIM. PERHAPS HE SENT TO DENYER ASSUME POLICE HAVE DONE THIS INVESTIGATION, WE AWAIT REPLY. We have Price/Mountstevens complicite in this corruption.
There was further application 26.10.2016 to HHJDenyer assume as Fowlers statement application IGNORED . We have court order to ask Denyer , if refusing to send again to Denyer , malfeasance in public office, neglecting to perform his duty, perhaps he did send, and Denyer ignored, malfeasance in public office, I trust police have done these investigations and look forward to official complaint below and, IPCC reply posted when obtained on site, eg defending allegation of no evidence. We have Fowler confirming applications will be ignored,. From barrister discussion you can see ways we think, further as all medical students in my year told to spend day at crown court to see how they take evidence to come to deductive conclusion, same way you clerk patient to come to diagnoses, looking at each fact. . We have Price/Mountstevens saying they have investigated, no evidence of malfeasance in public office. So assume they have discussed with court, court aware therefore of allegations, further therefore know about applications , and ask if any action court taken. even TODAY HAS FOWLER SENT TO DENYER .?
MOUNTSTEVENS STATES NO EVIDENCE THE EVIDENCE REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT BELOW TO IPCC IS EVIDENCE PRICE OBTAINED BEFORE 15.4.2017 eg HMCS FORMS SENT. EASY NOW FOR HER TO TALK TO SAY MR TILL AND STATE I TALKED TO MR TILL. THE ISSUE AT EARLIER DATE YOU ALLEDGE INVESTIGATIONS DONE AND CONCLUSION FROM THIS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. . What investigations were done to come to this conclusion, in previous correspondence aware for example the contents of my website so SQ PRICE HAD FULL FACTS OF CASE
I have been left disabled by hospital trust, GP exhausted all routes in UK, looking for compensation to look for treatment in the USA ,. Out of time as application to issue proceedings either ignored by corrupt Fowler or Denyer. In so much pain, somedays consider suicide ,purchased plot across path from where my parents are buried. However always counterbalanced by considering consultants lecture as a medical student. In early 1960s Twigge was a model in the UK. There were 2 main models the other from the Caribbean , she now in hospital St Marys Paddington . Bought in as becoming impossible to do job, as required toilet close by on acute basis, , suffering from ulcerative colitis ,problems sometimes get neoplastic change, [cancer] . This had occurred a very young woman told she had weeks to live, however confronts overworked doctor as not happy family problem, problems in prospective this woman early 20s weeks to live, as woman stated living in a wonderful world, she knows dying in a few weeks, puts in to perspective my problems, i failed Anatomy, did medical research UK government via New Deal sponsored return to medicine, taken time out to resolve todays problem. If Mountstevens /Price think they can shrug their shoulders and ignore my complaint they are looking for trouble, they have come to right place, below is letter sent to IPCC when we get reply it will be posted. Also MAIN issues of 2013, lets look for their reply concerning this corrupt court, also see www.corruptionincourtsystem.com,IN TODAYS PAPER . We ask one question if facts untrue why have i not been prosecuted for contempt of court or libel. Are the police afraid to take on this corrupt court. In the perverting course of justice case had same issues,,,,,,,,,police ,,,we can not walk into a court and ask for documents,,,,,,,,,,,,,,yes you can, however ,,,,,,,if you can sweep under the carpet, you will do so,,,,,,,,,,,,we look forward to alleged investigations Sg Price did.
Also ask Price/Mountstevens will i be charged recording at the court, or are you afraid of evidence i will produce at hearing. If being charged can we have date to present at police station with lawyer to be charged.
Below you have complaint to IPCC ,when we get reply it will be posted below complaint
COMPLAINT TO POLICE VIA IPCC PLEASE SEE COPY BELOW
SKELETAL ARGUMENT SPLIT INT0 BACKGROUND AND PRESENT ISSUE
COMPLAINT With despair I make this complaint, never wanted to do however the police leave no option, with emails ignored, eg what investigations did you do. We list questions where we please ask each one is addressed in your reply. Hirvisan v Finland ,,,,,,,,,,reason given by authorities [you state NO
evidence] to make effective use of any existing right to appeal,,,,,,,[ eg ECHR] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,This document in full later this week in www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com when we have reply the police given chance to reply in full., also therefore on internet site for fairness. . The issues are miscarriage of justice, 2013 where police have documents date/stamped by the court asking for oral hearing, however court of appeal judgement i never asked for oral hearing to correct lower court judgement.. Court of appeal to frustrate judicial process in papers, smoke filled rooms, no hearing, states i can not take to Supreme court, although in bundle THEY PRODUCED the 3 applications for oral hearing enclosed. We have recording taken at court, where Mr Blair confirms applications made. . Secondly not only ignoring applications [2013] the court/HHJDenyer again in 2016 ignore applications. We need to concentrate on these, however for example 2012 another application again date/stamped by court ignored by this court for example ,its malfeasance in public office,going on for years. HHJDenyer /court eg people at court, in email to police 15.4.2017, claim against judge/court/and now police. The CPS document defines offence ,,,,,,states,,,,,,,,,,,,offence if HHJDenyer /court ,,,,,,wilfully neglects to perform their duty,,,,,,,We have had contact with Albion chambers Bristol, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,although not direct with member of that chambers, Silk Ms Brumner QC in her paper on malfeasance quotes the CPS stance, on offence ,,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglects to perform their duty, ,,,,,,also she adds other issues to consider by CPS , , is offence a series offence, [YES] , further in advice on precedent if considering probability of success if taking to the courts,,,,,public outrage not from particular details [please see below] but from sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public,,,,,,,,,,,,,,So ask police do they have NO evidence ,or is this a cover up, no investigations undertaken, frustration of the judicial process. We have HHJDenyer saying applications must be made to me, application filed for example, with court 26.2.2016 ignored, numerous follow up emails as barristers advice asking for a reply, can i quote Mr Fowlers Bristol county court managers email of the 27.9,2016 you have been emailing court on regular basis for a reply, . We do not know did he [malfeasance in public office] just ignore, NUMEROUS FOLLOW UP EMAILS or did he send to HHJDenyer. Mr Fowler however states further any new applications would be sent to HHJDenyer, made 26.10.2016 so no misunderstanding sent APPLICATION direct to him, did he ignore and not send to HHJDenyer, malfeasance in public office, or in this aspect was it sent to Denyer, where he ignored so its Denyer who made the offence, malfeasance in public office trust police have done these investigations, we look forward to reply. . . ,So issue as i ask questions ,,,,,,,,have i been wronged and most important HAS claim been investigated .The Home Office from legal advice guidelines states all crimes must be investigated. Of course some are utterly trivial /vindictive and have been told less than 50 % are actually investigated. Also advised to look at guidelines ,the guidelines for example in malfeasance sent to Sg Price via CPS document, quoted in Ms Brummers QC article,,,,,wilfully neglects to perform their duty,,,,,has Fowler /Denyer from CPS,,,,wilfully newglected their duty,,,,,FOWLER ADMITS FOR MONTHS I AM ASKING FOR A REPLY. . Further concerned as legally directed towards internet site on Police Watch,,,,,,,can i quote word for word,,,,,if they can palm the complaint off with shrug of shoulders or wave of hand they will do so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, unless Sg Price in reply can show otherwise will suggest this is what she did never any thought to investigate. The police have history with this stance ,,,,,as today Sg Price,,,,,palm off complaint with shrug of shoulders,,,,,,,,,police years ago stated your MP was involved the defendants now have agreed not to take costs, we will not do anything ,,,,,,,,,,insufficient evidence, HOWEVER LOST CASE 2000.00 CLAIM . Told civil claim ,,,,,,,,we can not prosecute a court, it seems the court outside police judicial system. What did police have ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if they can palm the complaint off with shrug of shoulders or wave of hand they will do so,,,,,,,,,,Case heard by DDJGisby , [deputy district judge] heard later from barrister a lawyer in Park St Bristol going through pathway to become a DJ, working a day a week on probation at the court as a judge. Asked court for his notes, he replied to court saying yes he can have my notes for appeal, also stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i thought at time something very odd with this defence against Mr Jones, ,,,,barrister stated incompetence with court, this letter of Gisby should not have been sent to you. This concludes in judicial review before Lord Goldring, who confirms DDJGisby conclusion,,,,,,,,,,,,,,although getting verdict badly wrong, not a reason to grant a judicial review, Srickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA 1132. Further Bristol court utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without a transcript, Lord Goldring issued court order for a transcript for his hearing. We had now transcript of Gisbys hearing, where my case built on correspondence with defendants Ms Suggett, from TRANSCRIPT , obtained, defendants lawyer states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,my client does not know Ms Suggett , or where these emails come from. Barrister advised , Gisbys view,,,,,surely a lawyer would not try to mislead me, these documents Mr Jones puts to the court must be forged. You can see why DDJGisby states after letters sent from Ms Suggett that,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,with hindsight something odd with this case. Confront their lawyer perverting course of justice, send him internet blog site article assume still there with my allegation of him perverting course of justice, not directly addressed only saying in letter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,yes Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application, anyway too late for you to do anything about it now,,,,,,,,,,[eg gone through judicial review]. From transcript and this reply it confirmed perverting course of justice, however police ,,,,,,,,[if they can palm the complaint off with shrug of shoulders,,,,,,,,,,,they will do so,,,,,,,,,,,] state no evidence , complain to Ms Mountstevens who states she can not interfere , she is complicit in this corruption , we have mirror image today, eg no evidence, where suggest no investigation undertaken, R V Dytham [1979] where PC Dytham convicted over a failure to act. There is an issue of miscarriage of justice, part of evidence is recording made at the court, Sg Price/Ms Mountstevens aware of recording, eg breach i understand of Section 9 Contempt of court Act [1981] . This issue raised in one of questions below, where rarely at home, will be waste of police time coming to arrest, legally advised to ask for a date to present to Patchway police station with lawyer if going to be charged, or as we ask below,,,,,,,,,,,,will they shrug off with shrug of shoulders,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.as afraid of evidence I will present to crown court.
BACKGROUND
1/ We have a dynamic situation from barristers latest advice, in respect to my application. Informed not qualified with Bar to do direct access work, , I do not take therefore direct access, only work with lawyer. Further if taking to ECHR , as their regulations you have not exhausted all routes, as you can complain to police, as advised before We have history of although date stamped by court HHJDenyer ignoring applications. Issue taken up with my MP, however correspondence from MP ,,,,,,i have written again to court ,[Bristol county court] i can not force them to reply. SO POLICE AWARE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. FROM MP LETTER .We had higher court in order 2013 to ask HHJDenyer again, these 2 [not one] applications also date/stamped by court however HHJDenyer/court still ignored. These applications date/stamped by court asking for oral hearing, , also in bundle produced not by me, but court of appeal, with judgement in papers i had never asked for a oral hearing to correct ,and we could not take to the Supreme court, clearly a judge trying to pervert the course of justice. I please ask you to consider as you read, Mirojubous v Latvia ,,,,,fairness of proceedings always assessed by examination in entirety so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to render proceedings as a whole unfair,,,,,Is today an isolated incident, .
2/ We have clinical negligence claim, incident jan 2013, impingement of shoulder. , trust takes xray, report no abnormality. NHS /medical literature states must try to restore movement asap, or could get chronic shoulder pain/disability. GP was concerned with delay, he talked to trust again still no appointment until May 2013, however physiotherapist states going on course to allow me to inject into shoulder so still no treatment. Seen next by doctor doing research studies on shoulder 26.7.2013 he stated trust negligent , do not know what he saw however there is he believed from initial xray , abnormality in shoulder, missed before, took another xray, confirming Bigliane acromium, reason for impingement and trust informed my GP. . States believe too late will not work, nearly 8 months since injury, [NHS protocol need to restore movement as soon as possible] however will inject into shoulder get urgent physiotherapy in next 2 months, if no improvement would operate. Mix up at trust, refused to supply physiotherapy , no legal issue for you, as i complain, trust states in correspondence reason we did not offer you an appointment as doctor did not make clear urgent.
3/ No win no fee lawyers believed a good claim, so asked for medical records , and asked to put statement in my medical records, please see scan 10065 a NHS document must allow,
they refuse, so AOIBS346/AOIBS746 issued, struck out in papers where i appeal, ask trust to settle, eg release medical records and you must put statement in medical records, scan 10065 , they refuse, then 6 months later ask to settle, they supply medical records and puts statement in medical records. Well over a year scan 10065 sent 29 times before they offered to settle. Settlement they send to court rejected, told to attend hearing, where they ask that settlement reads i acted unreasonably with no merit, rejected by DJWatson, as he stated in judgement he had read file. I have asked court for transcript, as defendants argue for long time with judge where at end DJWatson stated no,i will not state in judgement, i wanted transcript for you, however court states,,,,,,,,,,,,,your emails will not be read, withholding evidence. . With reference to 1/ above applications /emails 2013 on Wndows XP ,[last few weeks we saw problems as NHS computers infected] ]so asked Compuwave to back up emails, would not work told was working when you collected, we will ignore correspondence, as soon as proceedings issued, they ask to settle, saying wrong program given, and settlement sent to the court, by email so know in court file.. Then although court knows settled, at later date struck out, followed by restraining order where HHJDenyer quotes above cases, both where defendants asked to settle. In terms of hospital trust DJWatson had stated i had not acted unreasonably, indicated defendants could appeal, his judgement ,can i please quote ,,,,,,,Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the executive ,,,,,,THIS IS ISSUE ALREADY DETERMINED BY COURT I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY
4/ PRESENT ISSUE. From order if i want restraining order amended /removed have to make application to HJDenyer. Further if i want no win no fee lawyers to issue proceedings need his permission. Application 26.2.2016 ignored as in 1/. Picketing at court, where barrister called, advised , FINAL ROUTE MALFEASANCE TO RESOLVE VIA POLICE WHEN ALL OTHERS EXHAUSED , APRIL 2017 MADE,TO POLICE. as all other routes failed, eg court saying correspondence will not be read, confirmed as follow up emails ignored, told to stop, states i am a commercial barrister not my direct field, however wait until out of time to issue proceedings, eg 3 years after being told of negligence by doctor, 27.7.2013. Further every week or so email court for a reply to application, . You will be out of time to issue proceedings, and take to the ECHR , EG denying access to the court, Beles et al v Czeck Republic ,,,,,litagants should have an effective judicial remedy ,,,,,[i do however as he/court has done for years, applications ignored],,,,,,Perez de Rota v Spain,,,,,depriving applicants of their right of access to a court,,,,,,,we have HHJDenyer stating you need to get my permission first, when i do he/court just ignores, as barrister said where are we Russia /China, further barrister stated contact police AS LAST ROUTE , first time i heard the word malfeasance, as HHJDenyer/court ignoring applications, and all follow up emails. .Had orally been told trust would reject negligence claim, taunted in letter, you have to get by HHJDenyer first , will reconsider if he gives your lawyer permission to issue proceedings. Why should they do anything they know lawyers could not issue proceedings without HHJDenyers permission and rapidly coming to state out of time. If permission given they could settle claim, to stop litigation.
5/ Had official reply from NHS insurer , rejecting claim, for example they state reason you have chronic pain and disabled from medical records, you never asked us for new surgical team, however from records 2 years before we have email from them ,,,,,,your asking us for new surgical team,,,,. You can see why no win no fee lawyers state i have a good claim. So asked again to add statement to medical records as scan 10065 and asked for remaining medical records up to date, as many months since previous ones supplied, AOIBS346 , trust again refuse, asked HHJDenyer in application 26.10.2016 again issue of proceedings to obtain medical records,put statement in medical records, as scan 10065 and to remove/amend restraining order, again application ignored by HHJDenyer/court and follow up emails. Court informs me HHJDenyer indicated applications will not be read , we will not be issuing any paperwork. Tried to resolve with Pro Bono Unit, would only look at restraining order.
6/ Take up issue with police ,as last way to resolve in the UK, wish to sweep under carpet, told not police issue, however one of OWN officers convicted for failure to act, R V Dytham [1979] they sent forms told to make complaint to the court, from these forms from regulations on forms could not make a complaint, eg against a judge,,,,,,,if over 3 months, .FURTHER VERY WELL FOR POLICE TO SAY MAKE COMPLAINT TO HMCS WHERE HMCS STATE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,APPLICATION WILL NOT BE READ, Is there a malfeasance issue with police, accept can not force them to investigate, however they did. Complain to PCC Ms Mountstevens Avon Somerset Police, told no evidence, What evidence does police/Mountstevens have, applications 2013, 2016 ignored, court in late 2016 saying applications will not be read, so evidence of malfeasance,[misconduct in public office] so undercover investigations to confirm, for example application 26.2.2016 never processed, the court/HHJDenyer no intention of looking at application, . Eg fee except forms never activated. I have money to pay barrister , for years I have eaten food out of date, eg purchase food at 10p that is out of date following day. Saving each week to pay barrister. . Lawyers/MP can not get a reply, suggest police never contacted them,never did any investigations, asked what investigations done, where they refuse to reply. From CPS document on subject, an offence if court/HHJDenyer ,,,,,,wilfully neglects to perform their duty, the police /Mountstevens know applications made, eg date/stamped by court as received, and they know ignored, as Silk Ms Brumner QC Albion chambers ,Bristol defines offence, states in her article ,,,,public outrage not from particular details,[above] but from sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public…….So we ask Mountstevens /Price a simple question have I been wronged by the court. Fowler admits application 26.2.2016 made, numerous follow up emails for a reply, he admits he ignored. Can I suggest they do not want to investigate because it’s a court. In 2013 had call from assume a district judge that HHJDenyer/ court is out to get you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they have forgotten to remove one of your applications for a oral hearing, record at court, true application in 2013 date/stamped by court on system. So police know I recorded conversation with Mr Blair at court office. We may ask as Ms Mountstevens /POLICE informed why not arrested for recording inside the court, or is she/police afraid of evidence that would be disclosed at crown court hearing.
7/ From ECHR regulations i have come to final stage to resolve issue, April 2017,.as police state no evidence, the complaint against Sg Price as no investigations undertaken,neglect of duty, in respect to malfeasance in public office. Lets present evidence in chronological order as questions to Sg Price answered, police aware of evidence as know about facts in www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com. [this document transferred tp www.corruptionavoncomersetpolice.com ] Suggest all replies with answer no to questions below. . All questions relate to time before being sent forms to complain to HMCS. Further if any can we have dates of investigations. [this is just record of events in police letter 24.7.2017 they CONFIRM THEY DID NO INVESTIGATION REASON THIS EMAIL WAS IGNORED BYTHIS UTTER CORRUPT POLICE FORCE. BUT WAS BEING BRUSHED OFF AS IN PREVIOUS LETTER TOLD WE HAD INVESTIGATED ,UTTERLY CORRUPT AND UNTRUE AND FROM COP BODGE START OF THIS DOCUMENT THIS CORRUPT FORCE IS QUOTING LEGAL FACTS KNOWING UNTRUE TO GET RID OF YOU,,,,,COMPARE QUESTION 1 THAT WAS ASKED]
QUESTION 1 Ask again what investigations did you undertake to come to conclusion NO evidence.
QUESTION 2 Have you interviewed Mr Till. ? [suggest in all these questions , no, no investigations undertaken. ] Had call assume from a district judge, as he talks about my court and other applications to the court. He states ,,,,,,,,,,,,do not approve of some of your applications to my court however will not stand by while corruption is going on, HHJDenyer/court out to get you, they have made a mistake, and forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing, 2YJ03757 From transcript of previous claim, which I won, 7 documents date/stamped by court as received removed from file, from transcript, DJWatson,,,,,,,,,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,,,,,,,,. As aware of corruption, court out to get me recorded conversation with Mr Blair at court. From recording he states yes only one now on computer records, Mr Till was told to send to Administration court Cardiff. We have judicial review judgement I had not asked for oral hearing to correct earlier judgement, this recording proves I did make application, although only proff required these date/stamped by court as received . So ask Bristol/Cardiff court for statement, it proves my case for the court of appeal.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,How does Mr Till make records of things he sends, how does Cardiff court make records of documents received. From file is there any record of this application, for example although all correspondence ignored, it would be fatal to court of appeal judgement, confirming a miscarriage of justice if any record of these applications. For example we ask why note on file in Cardiff not to discuss and to refer enquires to court manager Ms Weaver . We have string of emails to Ms Weaver ignored. Suggested to Sg Price a member of police staff in Cardiff obtain file, and look at records of obtaining documents, From recording not sure in malfeasance claim, did Mr Till ignore court order to ask HHJDenyer again for oral hearing, The court would never accept an application [date/stamped by court] if it did not have the court order . The court order clearly states to make application to HHJDenyer. Mr Till deals with appeals did he ignore court order by not sending to HHJDenyer, eg offence of malfeasance in public office, he is in charge of appeals, he has duty to send application to HHJDenyer, or did he send, and HHJDenyer ignored and told him to send to Cardiff court. Suggest if HHJDenyer did this then malfeasance in public office, from above definition of offence ,,,,,,,,,,,,failure to perform his duty,,,,. The issue with Mr Till taken up AT THIS TIME WITH COURT MANAGER MR FOWLER UNDER COMPLAINT HOWEVER COMPLAINT IGNORED numerous follow up emails ignored. Complaint as enquire what did Mr Till do, however did not know about malfeasance at this time. Did Sg Price make this investigation.
QUESTION 3 DID YOU CONTACT LYONSDAVIDSON.
Went to appeal 2YJ03757, court informs me out of time and they had been told by HHJDenyer not to accept application. This rejection of appeal in papers, asked as regulations for oral hearing, court would not accept as over 7 days since judgement HOWEVER LETTER OF COURT FRANKED OVER 7 DAYS AFTER HHJDENYERS JUDGEMENT REJECTING APPEAL IN PAPERS, I COULD NOT DO APPEAL IN 7 DAYS ENVELOPE SENT TO HHJDENYER IN APPLICATION BELOW. . Did application, can I quote from recorded delivery application, as court would not accept,,,,,,,,,,,,,Is HHJDenyer refusing to consider as out of time. Contacted lawyers, told we also can not get a reply for oral hearing , TOLD take to higher court as HHJDenyer is frustrating the judicial process. The above lawyers state no contact from Sg Price to discuss.
QUESTION 4 DID YOU C0NTACT MY MP . Complain also to my MP, obtain reply,,,,,,,,,,,I have written again to court for reply, I can not force them to reply,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. So even MP could not get a reply.
QUESTION 5 Have you interviewed Mr Fowler Bristol court manager. We know 3 applications date/stamped by court on system, what happened to these applications, have you looked at files. With evidence the court aware of applications as date/stamped by court, we know ignored, from court of appeal judgement, ,,,,,malfeasance in public office, what investigations has Sg Price made.
QUESTION 6 Have you contacted ANYONE AT ALL in the Cardiff court? Applications date/stamped by court, from recording told Mr Till sent to Cardiff court , have you investigated the miscarriage of justice.
QUESTION 7 Have you contacted North Bristol NHS Trust. ? In application to the court from restraining order have to inform them of application if they object to litigation. This is very much a catch 22 where hope they did object. However if they did not contact court they confirm happy to go for hearing. If they did object, then Mr Fowler AWARE of my application, which he ignored, malfeasance in public office. We have asked trust and court ,,,,,,,,,,,,did they object, however all correspondence ignored. The court in clear breach of the HRA , eg Ruiz-Mateus v Spain,,,,,It is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment ,,,,Further application 26.10.2016 again do not know if defendants objected, we ask Ms Price have you talked to trust , did they object to either application .
QUESTION 8 HAVE YOU TALKED TO MR CHAPLIN UNDER MANAGER AT BRISTOL COURT. Lets put in some background application to HHJDenyer 26.2.2016, the court N244 form what do you want court to do,,,,,,,,,,,,,issue proceedings against North Bristol,,,,,, ect, they have restraining order must be enclosed in any application, so know why application to HHJDenyer. The trust does not address if they will object to application , only when out of time in clinical negligence eg 27.7.2016. , so do appendix email to court for HHJDenyer, can I quote that email of 2.3.2016
Title email URGENT APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER
Email,,,,,,,,Could you please send to HHJDenyer or another circuit judge thank you
Attachment ,,,,,,,,,URGENT CAN YOU PLEASE PUT TODAY TO HHJDENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE THANK YOU.
1/ On the 26.2.2016 an urgent application was made to HHJDenyer , this was in respect to 2 issues.
a/ To issue proceedings
b/ Removal of restraining order made with complete/utter no merit.
2/,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,3/,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,so court/HHJDenyer utterly aware what I want them to do.
Mr Chaplin states can not trace application, his email 13.9.2016, which correlates with my undercover investigations, that court told to ignore, eg fee except application never processed , the court never was going to process. Mr Chaplin in further email 14.9.2016 given details, even in email gave him detail of 26.2.2016 application, even given time of email 13.01 to make it easier for him to find application . So he is aware of application, however ignores again, malfeasance in public office. ?
QUESTION 9 HAVE YOU INTERVIEWED MR FOWLER OVER ISSUE BELOW .Picketing at court as application 26.2.2016. amendment 2.3.2016 ignored malfeasance in public office. Barrister told me to stop, wait until out of time to issue proceedings over clinical negligence then take to European court.eg breach Article 6 denying access to a court, as he said every few week/10days email court asking for reply to your application. This proved excellent advice. From above Mr Chaplin is understudy, he is aware of application 26.2.2016 clearly he needs to inform manager Mr Fowler. Can I quote email from Fowler 27.9.2016,,,,,I would be grateful if you could ring me to discuss the emails [asking for reply to my application 26.2.2016] you are sending to the court on a regular basis. So Mr Fowler for months knowing about application 26.2.2016, AND FOLLOW UP EMAILS however is admitting all emails IGNORED. Does he not have duty to pass on to HHJDenyer, if he did not is this not malfeasance in public office, from email 2.3.2016 he is utterly aware, please see question 8 ,what I want HHJDenyer to do. Even if he does not he has court order to present application to HHJDenyer, He admits application made, numerous follow up emails asking for a reply, all ignored. Does he not have a duty from CPS guidelines ,,,,wilfully neglects to perform his duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he admits he has received numerous emails at regular intervals asking for a reply from Denyer. We have second application in 2016 can I quote Fowlers email 30.9.2016 ,,,,,,,,,,,,you will need to file application with the court then this will be referred to HHJDenyer for consideration, . This second application emailed this time DIRECT TO FOWLER, again he puts in bin, please Sg Price for you to maintain insufficient evidence, of malfeasance is no more than being complicit with the court over this corruption . Further asked Pro Bono Unit for help, being chased by them for reply from 26.10.2016 application, email to unit saying they have 3 weeks to reply, had call from court, within 3 weeks saying, HHJDenyer had informed them applications will not be read, [malfeasance in public office] and informed unit straight away, eg no reason to wait for 3 weeks. Have you contacted Pro Bono unit to discuss, they inform me as lawyers above , never contacted to obtain evidence, although accept not as fatal as Fowlers email where he admits numerous emails for a reply, which he ignored, malfeasance in public office. Sg Price states she has investigated, did Fowler send to Denyer.
QUESTION 10 Is it not true the forms sent to complain to HMCS were invalid not only from content, eg can not make complaint about judge ,,,,,,,,,,,,to fatal HMCS email that correspondence will not be read .
QUESTION 11 Will I be charged for recording at court, or will you be palming off with wave of hand, ,,,,,,,,,if being charged ask for 7 days notice with your appointment date so with lawyer can present at Patchway police station to be charged, before presenting evidence at crown court.
P JONES
mo":{\���%\�
COMPLAINT TO IPCC eg email below
FINAL REPLY TO IPCC THE BARE FACTS
REFERENCE IPCC EMAIL 8.6.2017 2017/086838
Can I please issue apology, many emails eg response from my internet site, a few legal advice indicating to let Chief Constable know of complaint, I had emailed Ms Mountstevens asking that complaint forwarded to him, as you indicate you also have now sent, with 3 weeks for police to reply. I please ask Ms Mountstevens again to forward this email to PSD . We can then conclude and wait for police reply. Will put this document in my website so we can add your reply when obtained for website. Can I please ask now from website we have introduction to complaint, complaint , and then this document, can you please use these 3 documents as complaint please.
Although much data, for example Sg Price aware of my website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com ,however states no evidence. This is and was never an issue do you have no evidence, its an issue of complaint to Sg Price , ignored, no investigations undertaken. The Home Office states all claims should be investigated, Sg Price states she has made full investigation and she has no evidence. Until she can show otherwise, suggest no investigations, malfeasance in public office, NEGLECTING HER DUTY. From complaint not first time police have done this, where defendants admitted perverting course of justice, where we had Lord Golding confirming court got verdict wrong. Not mentioned was also historic evidence in todays complaint to police . Recorded on visit government contract to do work. This tape sent to the court ,where court reply,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you need defendants permission to use at hearing, , can not bring in your recording equipment ,must be organised with court to produce machine to play. So email defendants, parts of my email answered , however request to use tape, and reminders ignored. [you can see in restraining order Compuwave case as only record on my computer wanted backed up for example of this data eg emails ] .In waiting room before hearing the defendants lawyer came to talk, Lucky sat next to HTV sports reporter with his mother trying to get students removed from house in different hearing. ASKED ME IF I BOUGHT TAPE where I state no you did not give permission. Where he now perverts the course of justice, knowing evidence existed. When questioned about this after hearing he states in email I was utterly unaware of recording confirming contract , another lawyer in office answered your email, I was on holiday when sent. This was utterly untrue, police could obtain evidence just by call to reporter/mother UTTERLY AWARE OF CONTRACT THEN PERVERTS THE COURSE OF JUSTICE MAKING SURE BEFORE HEARING I DID NOT HAVE TAPE . As explained in complaint , further in transcript of hearing , this lawyer states we do not know Ms Suggett or where these emails from her comes from, further as explained in todays complaint he states in letter,,,,,,,,,,,,yes Ms Suggett dealt with your application, too late for you to do anything about it now,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ASK POLICE FOR HELP WHERE TOLD NO EVIDENCE MS MOUNTSTEVENS WOULD NOT HELP COMPLICITE IN THIS CORRUPTION. NOT ISSUE TODAY
Lets look at each application to the court . Sg Price states she has NO evidence. Shown in detail in complaint the offence of malfeasance in public office,CPS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, to neglect their duty,,,,,,. IN ALL THESE WE HAVE ORDER TO MAKE APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER WHEN DONE IGNORED HAS HE /COURT NEGLECTED THEIR DUTY……..WE DO NOT KNOW FOR EXAMPLE IF COURT MANAGER SENT TO DENYER,,,,,,,TRUST SG PRICE HAS DONE THIS INVESTIGATION. Also human rights issue stopping access to a court.
1/ APPLICATION 26.10.2016 . This sent direct to courts manager Mr Fowler. We have no reply, follow up emails ignored, for example email 23.11.2016 ,,,,,unless I hear from you by,,,,,,,,,will assume court refuses to reply to applications 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016, MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE Court ignores, confirming malfeasance in public office. From application 26.10.2016 the court has 3 weeks to reply, within this time had call,from court ,,,,,,,,,,,,we have been told ,HHJDenyer will be ignoring all of your applications,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office and informed Pro Bono Unit. We ask simple question, the court confirms it will and has committed offence,,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office, Denyer issues order I must make applications to him, then states I will ignore your applications. What investigations before May 2016 has Sg Price done, to come to conclusion ,,no evidence. WE KNOW APPLICATION MADE AND IGNORED
2/ APPLICATION 26.2. 2016 Numerous follow up emails for reply, all ignored, except one asking for reference number claim made under, supplied. There is no issue here, Mr Fowlers email of 27.9.2016 …………emails you are sending to court on regular basis asking for reply to application 26.2.2016, …………..In that email also ask what I want court to do, explained in reply 28.9.2019 where I quote application 26.2.2016 plus amendment email 2.3.2016 where it states a/ to issue proceedings, in 26.2.2016 application fee except form, reason you seek fee except , I refer to court form N244 where again court ask why application made, where I state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,to issue proceedings against N Bristol NHS Trust , andb/ amend /remove restraining order. Interesting as application stated I know I will not get a reply, due to previous applications ignored . Fowler then throws toys out of pram, saying I will not talk to you. Of interest he is aware of application 26.2.2016, knows why application made, BUT STILL DOES NOT SEND TO DENYER OR DID HE. Assume Sg Price did these investigations. SHE KNOWS APPLICATION MADE ,APPLICATION IGNORED,,,,,,FOLLOW UP EMAILS FOR REPLY IGNORED,,,,,,,,,,COURT SAYING WE WILL IGNORE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BUT STILL SAY WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE WHERE ARE WE AS BARRISTER SAID RUSSIA /CHINA
3/ 2013 APPLICATION We know as date stamped by court that 3 applications again ignored, Sg Price is aware of miscarriage of justice, as court of appeal had stated in judgement you had not requested oral hearing to correct. We have recording with courts Mr Blair that applications for oral hearing made, and sent to Cardiff Administration court. Has Sg Price obtained files, as I suggested, or ask what investigations she did. What happened to 3 applications date/stamped by court asking for oral hearing. We have Cardiff court saying in email I can not comment , note on file, we may ask why note on file, note stating not to discuss with me file, , and refer my emails to court manager Ms Weaver, however all emails to her ignored.
We now await police reply to be added to website
P JONES
WE HAVE REPLY FROM PRO STANDARDS DEPARTMENT MR GALLOWAY . MY REPLY TO THIS LETTER 12.6.2017 BELOW
WE NEED TO KEEP INTO PROSPECTIVE WHAT COMPLAINT IS,,,,, MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AGAINST POLICE ,,,,,FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE. The letter contains a personal attack, my reply and personal attack on Mr Galloway in reply will follow in this public document via my website when Mr Galloway issues his reply, he is reminded of statutory stance of IPCC and HRA [human rights act ] as i ask questions and expect replies. The letter 12.6.2017 states ,,,,failing/refusing to hear a civil case you were attempting to bring,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this is COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE IF PCBIRD HAD READ EVIDENCE I PRESENTED IN RESPECT TO REMOVING/AMENDING RESTRAINING ORDER BY STATUTORY REGULATIONS THERE CAN BE NO HEARING. LETS CONSIDER RESTRAINING ORDER IN RESPECT TO NBT CASES CITED BY HHJDENYER WHERE DJWATSON IN JUDGEMENT PREVIOSLY STATED I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY.. COURT REFUSED TO SUPPLY TRANSCRIPT WISH TO HIDE FACTS ,,,,,,,,,,,THEIR TACTIC IF WE IGNORE IT WILL GO AWAY. CONSIDER THIS IN THIS PAPER.. THE CASES CITED RELATES TO MEDICAL RECORDS WHICH NBT REFUSED TO SUPPLY. SECOND ISSUE TO PUT STATEMENT IN MY MEDICAL RECORDS. PCBIRD AWARE FROM WEBSITE YOU HAVE NHS DOCUMENT IN WEBSITE A STATUTORY REGULATION THEY MUST ALLOW ME TO ADD STATEMENT. YOU CAN SEE WHY DJWATSON IN JUDGEMENT STATED I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY AS NBT ASKED TO SETTLE….SUPPLIED MEDICAL RECORDS AND PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS. CAN I TAKE ONE APPLICATION 26.10.2016 IN 2 PARTS TO REMOVE/AMEND RESTRAINING ORDER AND TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS AS NBT AGAIN REFUSE TO RELEASE LATEST MEDICAL RECORDS AND PUT NEW STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS. BOTH THESE ARE COVERED BY STATUTORY REGULAIONS EG PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS AND RELEASE MEDICAL RECORDS. THE REPORT 12.6.2017 IS UTTER NONSENSE IT IS NOT A CASE FAILING/REFUSING TO HEAR,,,,,DUE TO STATUTORY REGULATIONS AS EXPLAINED IN APPLICATION HE HAS NO OPTIONS. COULD BE HHJDENYER NEVER SAW APPLICATION, DID FOWLER COURT MANAGER SEND TO HIM. FROM COURT RESTRAINING ORDER SENT WITH APPLICATION FOWLER AWARE APPLICATION MUST BE SENT TO DENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE. WE ARE TOLD INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN BY PCBIRD WE ASK THEREFORE …..DID FOWLER SEND TO HHJDENYER……………………OR DID HE IGNORE COURT ORDER,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IS THIS NOT DEFINITION OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. WE HAD CALL THIS IS WHAT HE WOULD DO,IGNORE. I INFORMED PRO BONO UNIT OF COURT STANCE, WHERE TOLD TO EMAIL FOWLER FOR CONFIRMATION OF STANCE,,,,EG UNLESS I HEAR FROM YOU BY,,,,,,,,,,,WILL ASSUME YOU WOULD IGNORE MY APPLICATION OF 26.10.2016 AS IT HAD DONE WITH APPLICATION 26.2.2016 WHERE FOWLER CONFIRMS BY IGNORING EMAIL. CAN I CUT STRAIGHT AWAY POSSIBLE DEFENCE FROM FOWLER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I WROTE TO HIM,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I STATED I TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR LOST MAIL, PLEASE EMAIL IF YOUR GOING TO REPLY. PCBIRD STATES I ASKED FOR ADVICE ABOUT OFFENCE AND WAS TOLD NO EVIDENCE WHERE I THEN WROTE TO MR JONES SUGGESTING HE MAKES COMPLAINT TO HMCS. WE ASK WHO DID HE ASK WHO GAVE THIS ADVICE FOR MY WEBSITE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SUGGEST COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SO OUTRAGEOUS NO SENSIBLE PERSON COULD HAVE COME TO THIS JUDGEMENT. NO EVIDENCE [please see below]
This reply is a pig circus i say to Mr Galloway you state PCBird investigated, i say answer my questions in complaint 1 to 11 if f you have nothing to hide, what investigations did he do?,,,,YOU HAVE 11 QUESTIONS IN COMPLAINT .GIVE ME THE COPY OF THE INVESTIGATION REPORT SO GENERAL PUBLIC IN MY WEBSITE CAN SEE AFTER I POST YOUR REPLY ON SITE. . I WILL NOT ALLOW BLOGS ON MY SITE DUE TO LIBEL LAWS HOWEVER LARGE AMOUNT OF EMAILS GIVING ME SUPPORT. THE COMPLAINT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT IN WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM WHERE YOU HAVE INTRODUCTION TO COMPLAINT,,,,COMPLAINT AND CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,WE AWAIT NEXT PAGE. The letter 12.6.2017 is legally flawed in virtually every way, can i refer please to the IPCC document A guide to the police complaints system, under local resolution, where Mr Galloway person dealing with complaint .................will let you know outcome when they have finished looking at it They may do this in person or on the phone, but they should ALSO write to you. I have had no contact except letter sent, with respect suggest afraid to discuss contents. . WE HAVE RECORDING OF FIRST VISIT WHERE CLEARLY SG PRICE DOES NOT WANT TO DEAL WITH MATTER,,,,,,,,,,TOLD MAKE A COMPLAINT TO HMCS WHERE ME IN TEARS STATE WE HAVE EMAILS SAYING CORRESPONDENCE WILL NOT BE READ, PCBIRD FROM START AWARE OF MY WEBSTE AWARE OF CORESPONDENCE WILL NOT BE READ HOWEVER SENDS FORMS TO COMPLAIN TO HMCS , THESE FORMS DUE TO REGULATIONS ON THEM ANYWAY EG IF A COMPLAINT ABOUT A JUDGE MUST BE MADE IN 3 MONTHS COULD NOT BE DEALT WITH. Further the IPCC document states it would provide information and explanation of investigation, you should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened during the investigation and what decisions have been reached sometimes this might happen by you being giving copy of investigation report. We also have human rights issues for possible later courts,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hirvisan v Finland ,,,,,,,,,reason given [by Mr Galoway] to make effective use of any existing right to appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,obligation incumbent on the administration authority the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administration authority,,,,,,,,,,,[eg next appeal to IPCC, when exhausted in the UK, take to the ECHR]
In complaint we asked 11 questions, further one today, can we please have answers, can we please have copy of PCBirds investigation report , lets take one example the report states he took advice and was informed NO evidence of malfeasance in public office, who gave this advice, was it Sg Price who in recording taken at police station does not know what term means , believes a civil matter . Lets define CPS definition of malfeasance in public office, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty. Lets just take as example final application 26.10.2016, for years applications ignored by Bristol county court/HHJDenyer. We have court order issued by HHJDenyer, if I want restraining order removed/amended, or to issue ANY new proceedings need to ask his permission or another High Court judge. He has to do order in this way, eg Beles et al v Czech Republic ,,,,,,,,,,,,litagants should have an effective judicial remedy,,,,,,,,,,,. Court manager Mr Fowler sends me court forms, eg N244, plus fee except forms, application emailed BACK TO FOWLER. The application contains the N244.fee except forms, plus court order of HHJDenyer. So Fowler is aware of court order, and aware it must be sent to HHJDenyer, or another judge. Fowler aware from application IIdid et al v Italy,,,,,,,,,,,,,,courts must quarantee the right of everyone to obtain a final decision relating to civil rights and obligations in a reasonable time,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,basic principle must be capable of being submitted to a judge universally recognised fundamental principles of law which applies to international law,,,,,,,,,,,,,. Further in application [again QUOTED] aware of Perez de Rota v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,breach of HRA if,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,depriving applicants of their rights of access to a court,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. Pro Bono Unit chasing me as require Denyers reply, where we have call from court that application will be ignored, WE WILL DO NOTHING WITH IT , where reported to Pro Bono unit. To confirm Fowlers stance in email to Fowler state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless I hear from you by ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume court refuses to deal with my application, undercover investigations show fee except application not processed , [again as 26.2.2016 application , ] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,court WAS NEVER GOING TO DEAL WITH MATTER.
We have 2 pathways, trust PCBird/Galloway can supply answer.
1/ Fowler did not send to Denyer or another High Court judge , however aware from COURT ORDER HE MUST SEND, THEREFORE WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY, WHERE DEFINED BY CPS AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. He even confirmed stance as my email ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,eg unless I hear from you by ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume my applications will be ignored.
2/ Trust PCBird has done this investigation, pathway 2, question we ask, was application sent to Denyer, where Denyer ignored. He made order that application must be sent to him, he is wilfully neglecting his duty if he now ignores application. MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE,,,,,,,,
For Mr Galloway to say insufficient evidence is contained in Wednesbury legal definition, of unreasonableness in respect of a judicial review against a public body,,,,,Ass.Provincial Picture Houses v Webnesbury Corp [1948] 1KB 223,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DECISION SO OUTRAGEOUS IN ITS DEFINANCE OF LOGIC [insufficient evidence] OR ACCEPTABLE MORAL STANDARDS NO SENSIBLE PERSON WHO APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE QUESTION [INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE] TO BE DECIDED COULD HAVE ARRIVED AT IT,,,,,,,,,,,
We know Fowler has court order/application to send to HHJDenyer, if he did not send, he is wilfully neglecting to perform his duty, malfeasance in public office. Did he send where Denyer ignores, wilfully neglecting to perform his duty, malfeasance in public office, he issues order to send to him where he ignores, malfeasance in public office. Question 12 at end where we ask questions, did Fowler send ect,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.
SKELETAL RESPONSE
a/ From WEBSITE the complaint in chronological order, eg guide to complaint , actual complaint, email to IPCC 8.6.2017, Mr Galloways response now posted, followed by this document. where Ms Mountstevens informs me all documents before Mr Galloway, PC Bird copied into all documents. We then come to section INTRODUCTION THE FACTS which is no more than facts before all parties. Further in correspondence from start PC Bird aware of this website for further clarification if required in alleged investigation., ALLEGED he has investigated,assumed read.
b/ . Further lets define ,,malfeasance in public office,,,,,,,,,,,from CPS,,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY,,,,,.SILK MS BRUMMER QC ALBION CHAMBERS BRISTOL ,,,, AS JUDGE FURTHER DEFINES ISSUES IN PAPER TO CONSIDER IN CONTEMPLATING PROCEEDINGS,,,,,,[SERIES OFFENDER,,,,,,YES ,,,,EVERY YEAR APPLICATIONS IGNORED]….HAS SOMEONE BEEN WRONGED BY A FAILURE TO ACT .[YES NUMEROUS TIMES]
c/ You can not deal with Mr Galloway as he does not understand claim. Can I refer to start of website where it states main issue is 2013 issue, miscarriage of justice , due to malfeasance in public office. Just read above Mr Galloways reply,,,,,,,,,,,,,failure/refusing to hear a civil case,,,,,,,,,,,,. From website 2013 issue, you have the ACTUAL court order to hear an appeal, further from site again you have the 3 applications 2013 ….date/stamped by the court. We know court of appeal judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,I had not asked for a oral hearing to correct. There is [2013] a court order to produce APPLICATION AS TODAY ,,,, we know made, date/stamped by court, we have confirmation from recording at court made, as Mr Blair on recording states from computer records ,,,,,,,,,,,our Mr Till sent application to the Administration court Cardiff. From recording we know court gave application to Mr Till , he is aware from court order, [must be enclosed with application,] taken by hand , date/stamped by court , Mr Blairs job to make sure application complete. Mr Till is aware of court order, [as Fowler today] he deals with appeals, did he send to HHJDenyer, trust PCBird has done this investigation. If he did not send, aware of court order, has he not WILFULLY NEGLECTED TO PERFORM HIS DUTY……MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, OR DID HE SEND WHERE HHJDENYER IGNORED ,,,,,,,,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. THERE IS A COURT ORDER FOR HIM TO DEAL WITH APPLICATION,,,,,,,,,,,,IF HE REFUSED HAS HE NOT WILFULLY NEGLECTED TO PERFORM HIS DUTY. THIS AS IN WEBSITE/COMPLAINT IS MAIN ISSUE OF MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE .
d/ The 2016 applications. Common to both was application to remove restraining order. IF PC BIRD /Galloway had read order he would be aware there is no hearing, it is DEALT WITH IN PAPERS. SO FOR MR GALLOWAY TO SAY HEAR A CIVIL CASE IS UTTER NONSENSE. HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND COMPLAINT.HIS LETTER IS UTTER NONSENSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A HEARING,,,,,,IF PCBIRD HAD READ COURT ORDER HE WOULD BE AWARE IT STATES NO HEARING Lets consider second part of 26.2.2016 application, to issue proceedings against NBT. For both parts of application again court order [Ms Brummer QC,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SERIES OFFENDER ignoring applications ] to ask HHJDenyer. We know made, we know numerous emails every week/10 days asking for a reply. See please Galloways letter par 2,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,failure to reply to emails asking for a reply. However when out of time to issue proceedings, [Ms Brummer QC,,,,,,,,,,,HAS SOMEONE BEEN WRONGED BY FAILURE TO ACT] going to ECHR , court manager Mr Fowler now sends email, asking what I want court to do, SUGGEST THIS WAS REASON [EUROPEAN COURT] FOR REPLY FURTHER WHY DID WE NOT GET REPLY 7 MONTHS BEFORE,,,,where told, and informed further in appendix to application 26.2.2016 ,made 2.3.2016.YOU HAVE REASON FOR APPLICATION,,,,,PLEASE SEE BELOW] Via undercover investigations have reason to believe application still not to send to HHJDenyer, has he not ,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLICTED TO PERFORM HIS DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,FOWLER KNOWS APPLICATIONS MADE AND IS AWARE OF NUMEROUS EMAILS ASKING FOR A REPLY, EG,,,,,,,,,,,,,EMAILS YOU ARE SENDING TO COURT ON REGULAR BASIS ASKING FOR A REPLY TO YOUR APPLICATION 26.2.2016. THE APPLICATION 26.10.2016 [another application,,,,consider Ms Brummer QC,,,,,is he a seies offender...] SENT DIRECTLY TO HIM [EMAIL] WHERE WE HAVE PHONECALL WASTE OF TIME WE WILL BE IGNORING APPLICATIONS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WHERE HHJDENYER STATES APPLICATIONS MUST BE FORWARDED TO ME. IS GALLOWAY SAYING DENYER CAN IGNORE HIS HE NOT WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY OR LETS MAKE THIS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR CAN FOWLER REFUSE TO FORWARD TO DENYER.
e/ For Mr Galloway to say we have insufficient evidence of malfeasance comes under Wednesbury definition of unreasonableness for judicial review of a public body,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ass. Provincial Picture House v Wednesbury Corp [1948] 1KD 223,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DECISION SO OUTRAGEOUS IN ITS DEFIANCE OF LOGIC OR ACCEPTABLE MORAL STANDARDS NO SENSIBLE PERSON WHO APPLIED HIS MIND TO IT [ NO MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE] COULD HAVE ARRIVED AT IT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1/ With respect this is not an issue for me to prove, its an issue for Mr Galloway to prove i am wrong. Unless he can show otherwise suggest these are facts. Picketing at court barrister advised last result to make main complaint to police under malfeasance in public office, resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Record visit at Patchway police station visit. This is not open attack on police this is last thing i wanted to do eg making this complaint. Visited last week police station to try to resolve issues with PCBird, however understand away until 24.6.2017, and things worked out well as reprimanded by lawyer trying to resolve in unofficial way, as todays issue basis for escalating if required via the courts. Told in first visit Sg Price from tape recording ,,,,,she was busy, however if i waited she would talk to me. It has been stated in papers, i have thanked her for seeing me. She states she has never heard word malfeasance,a civil matter , NO ITS NOT ITS A CRIMINAL ISSUE,AS BARRISTER STATED ,, and she stated to make complaint to HMCS where told we have email from them ,,,,,,, correspondence will be filed not read., no point making complaint. . In the end agreed to consider correspondence, which included reference to website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com . SHE IN CONSIDERATION WAS AWARE OF WEBSITE CONTENT. The complaint is passed to PCBird who contacts HMCS and is told for me to make complaint to them, where he is aware complaint would be filed and not read, further from HMCS regulations i could not make a complaint .[CONFIRMED LATER BY POLICE LETTER 24.7.201
[Directly related to days issue complaint to Mr Fowler HMCS [identical issue,,,,,,,,,,, years ago at HMCS ]over Mr Till , malfeasance in public office, although did not know terms at this stage,,,, please see website , ,,,,,,,did he [Till] send application to HHJDenyer , you alleged today that PCBird has done this investigation.This complaint court manager Mr Fowler ignored, and follow up emails for a reply, ignored, suggest Fowlers tactics,,,,,,,,,,,ignore it will go away. COMPARE WITH TODAYS TACTICS . We have asked today, main issue 2013,,,,,,,,,,have you interviewed Mr Till did he,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,neglect to perform his duty by having court order to send application to HHJDenyer but ignored court order,,,,,,,,,,,or did he send to Denyer ……………….trust PCBird has done investigation . ]
PCBird then discusses with Sg Price and agreed easy way out to inform me to make complaint to HMCS. No investigations were undertaken, for example we know Mr Bird did not contact for example,,,,,,my lawyer/Pro Bono Unit / my MP. The police are defined in law as a public body, suggest PCBird guilty of malfeasance in public office as no relevant investigations into my complaint, from CPS definition,,,,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform his duty. From website he is aware main issue is 2013 issue,,,,,,,miscarriage of justice, in correspondence suggested officer in Cardiff obtain file, may i suggest he never at any time contacted the Cardiff court. Mr Galloway had chance in my complaint to prove me wrong by answering my 11 questions, accept may not accept conclusions however most questions just require yes/no answers. For example we have court order to remove restraining order, or to issue new proceedings need to make application to HHJDenyer. Further as order need to contact defendants TO ISSUE NEW PROCEEDINGS .....for their comment if any ,if they object to litigation claim. Did N Bristol NHS Trust object, we have asked them and court who ignore correspondence, one question was ,,,,,has PCBird talked to NBT . The court orally in November 2016 stated we will ignore any applications, malfeasance in public office, when questioned about non reply, can see their point of view, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,with our reply confirms application made and ignored , malfeasance in public office, eg DID NBT OBJECTED TO APPLICATION, trust PCBird had investigated, talked to them, catch 22 for court did they NBT not object , therefore happy for my no fee no win lawyers to issue proceedings, or hope they did object,. So court has my application, and have objection to proceedings , however Fowler does not send both documents to HHJDenyer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office, COURT ORDER TO SEND or did he send, where Denyer ignored, malfeasance in public office. I trust in reply from Mr Galloway he can as he alleged PCBird has investigated did NBT object, and was my applications sent to Denyer. With respect easy now to make call in reply , if any ask dates when alleged investigations done would be in investigation report] CAN WE HAVE INVESTIGATION FILE Further i suggest PCBird took easy way out as Sg Price we do not want to investigate , miscarriage of justice /malfeasance in public office, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,make complaint to HMCS. When aware of complaint state we have no evidence, may well be so, if no investigations undertaken, we await reply to now 12 questions,please see below. The judgement of no evidence comes under the Wednesbury protocol for judicial review of a public body, eg so outrageous no reasonable person who applied his mind to it, would have come to this decision,,,,,,,,,eg CPS defines,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,. No dispute [2013 to 2016] court order to make application to HHJDenyer, [numerous events lets consider 26.2.2016] ignored, numerous follow up emails ignored. When out of time to issue proceedings, as going to ECHR when all routes in UK exhausted] get a reply, what do you want court to do, where told to see email appendix to application 26.2.2016 dated 2.3.2016, where it states to issue proceedings against NBT, and removal of restraining order, still court manager does not send to Denyer, malfeasance in public office, or did he, look forward to reply as its alleged PCBird has investigated. Or did he send to Denyer where he is guilty of offence, he asked for application , now has a ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,duty to consider. Further application 26.10.2015 again ignored, call CONFIRMING OFFENCE ,,,,,your applications will not be sent to Denyer, for confirmation in email, asked court, unless i hear from you by,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume my applications will be ignored. NO REPLY .FROM COURT,,,, ORDER APPLICATIONS MUST BE SENT TO DENYER WHERE COURT IS SAYING WE WILL NOT DO ,,,,,,LETS MAKE THIS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR,,,,,,,,,,,,, ARE THEY NOT WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF MALFEASANCE.
WHEN WE GET A REPLY AGAIN PUBLISHED IN WEBSITE. BEFORE APPEAL TO IPCC JUST GOING THROUGH PROCESS .LETS REMEMBER THIS WEBSITE BASIS OF COMPLAINT AND FROM START MAIN ISSUE 2013,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WE ASK WHAT INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN. UNLESS YOU CAN SHOW OTHERWISE SUGGEST ZERO, MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. SIMPLE QUESTION ,,,,IGNORED IN INITIAL COMPLAINT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,JUST INFORM ME WHAT INVESTIGATIONS WERE UNDERTAKEN, INVESTIGATION REPORT,,,,,AGAIN UNLESS YOU CAN SHOW OTHERWISE SUGGEST NONE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WISH TO SWEEP UNDER CARPET BY ASKING TO MAKE COMPLAINT,,,,,,WHERE FROM FORMS SENT HAD NO GROUNDS TO COMPLAIN, AND ANYWAY HMCS HAD STATED CORRESPONDENCE WOULD NOT BE READ. YOU WERE UTTERLY AWARE FROM WEBSITE OF HMCS STANCE. SIMPLE QUESTION WHAT INVESTIGATIONS WERE UNDERTAKEN. WE ARE TOLD PCBIRD WAS ADVISED NO EVIDENCE OF OFFENCE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,WE ASK WHO ADVISED,,,,,,,,,,,,
LETS CONSIDER ONE APPLICATION,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,FROM WEBSITE OFFENCE DEFINED WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY,,,,,,HHJDENYER ISSUES ORDER TO MAKE APPLICATION TO COURT FOR HIS CONSIDERATION. NO DISPUTE MADE,,,,,NO DISPUTE IGNORED,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NO DISPUTE NUMEROUS FOLLOW UP EMAILS ASKING FOR REPLY IGNORED…………..NO DISPUTE COURT ASKED WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NO DISPUTE STILL DID NOT SEND TO HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,WE HAVE COURT ORDER TO SEND APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER ENCLOSED IN APPLICATION. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COURT WE MEAN MR FOWLER. SO UTTERLY AWARE OF COURT ORDER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,STILL DOES NOT SEND,,,,,,,,,,COURT CALLS SAYING HHJDENYER TOLD THEM TO IGNORE,,,,,IN EMAIL STATE UNLESS I HEAR FROM YOU BY ,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILL ASSUME COURT/DENYER REFUSES TO CONSIDER MY APPLICATION. NO REPLY ,SIMPLE QUESTION HAS HE WILFULLY NEGLECTED TO PERFORM HIS DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,IN FRONT OF HIM HE HAS COURT ORDER. FOR MR GALLOWAY TO SAY PCBIRD HAS NO EVIDENCE COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC BODY PROTOCOL…[Ass.Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp [1948] KB223 ]………DECISION [INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE] SO OUTRAGEOUS IN ITS DEFIANACE OF LOGIC OR ACCEPTABLE MORAL STANDARDS NO SENSIBLE PERSON WHO APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE QUESTION TO BE DECIDED COULD HAVE ARRIVED AT IT,,,,,
INTRODUCTION EXPANDING SHEKETAL ARGUMENT,,,,,,This is complaint about police,,,,,,,,,,,,,,failure to investigate. We have by police allegations that complaint investigated. By definition they must have contacted the court , so court aware of complaint malfeasance in public office, that complaint involved applications to the court WHICH WERE ignored, where HHJDenyer had made court order to make applications. Could be he never saw applications as Mr Fowler ,,,,,wilfully neglected to perform his duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,never sent to him. HOWEVER IF INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN COURT AWARE OF APPLICATIONS AND ASSUME EVEN TODAY ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,STILL NOT SENT TO HHJDENYER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
This is no surprise REFERENCE previous complaint, the facts. We had contract defined by defendants as EPL1 , where it states one heating water cylinder would be replaced, and other removed for inspection. Goverment free installation. Told second one no need to replace at present,,,,,,will further inspect first after removal ……. After installation my contractor advised, never removed and required replacing. Use VoiceCam where they state IN RECORDING if rusting evident when they inspected 14 days before they would have replaced, proves my claim. In report defendants produced for hearing,,,,,,,,,,this leak/rustng has been occurring over a very long period of time, so was there 2 weeks before. . Send tape to court, court reply you need to get defendants permission to use tape, can not bring in own recording equipment,please organise with court. My case built on over a year correspondence with defendants Ms Suggett . Email defendants to use recording it states if rusting evident 2 weeks before we would have replaced. In report of visit defendants stating leaking over a very long time. At hearing sat next to a HTV sports presenter, in waiting room, at court as their case to remove students from house. Defendants lawyer i n waiting room asked if i had tape, when tried to explain you did not give me permission told not interested just answer my question.So aware of contract that his client would replace other cylinder. At hearing further states , [we have TRANSCRIPT if required] ,,,,,,,,,we do not know Ms Suggett or where these emails come from her. After hearing write to lawyer perverting course of justice, where he states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,yes Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application, too late for you to do anything about this now. Further states i deny your allegations i was aware of recording on contract , as on holiday, your email was answered by another lawyer in my office. BUT HE ASKED ME BEFORE HEARING IF I HAD TAPE,,,,,SIMPLE TO CONTACT HTV PRESENTER. WHERE TOLD HE IS NOW LIVING IN SOUTH WALES NOT GOING OVER THERE TO INTERVIEW. WE HAVE POLICE CONCLUSION INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE [SUGGEST NO INVESTIGATIONS DONE] FROM LETTER LAWYER CONFIRMS PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE ,,,,,,MS SUGGETT WAS PERSON YOU DEALT WITH,,,,,,,,,TOO LATE FOR YOU TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT NOW. TRUE POLICE WISH TO SWEEP UNDER CARPET. AT LEAST VIA MP HELP AS GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR REFUSED TO TAKE COSTS. SUGGEST AS WEDNESBURY RULING NO REASONABLE PERSON WOULD COME TO RULING WE HAD NO EVIDENCE ...PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE,,,,,,BUT THATS POLICE DEDUCTION NOT RELEVANT TODAY.IN LETTER CONFIRM THEY PERVERTED COURSE OF JUSTICE.
1/ THIS COMPLAINT DATA CONDUCTED VIA MY WEBSITE FROM BEGINNING WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM PC BIRD INFORMED AND MS MOUNTSTEVENS INFORMES ME THAT STANCE PASSED ON TO AVON /SOMERSET POLICE MR GALLOWAY ON THE 9.6.2017 ,HE IS THEREFORE AWARE COMPLAINT COMES UNDER FROM WEBSITE WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTY COURT.COM AS GALLOWAY REPLY 3 DAYS LATER. LEGALLY TOLD TO KEEP IN ONE DOCUMENT,,,,,,,,,,, REASON WEBSITE GIVES FULL HISTORY. FOR POSSIBLE LATER USE AS FACTS IN ONE PLACE.
2/ LETS DEFINE OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE,CPS DOCUMENT ,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTS TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY ,,,,,,,,,,,,SO SIMPLY QUESTION HAS PERSON [X ] NEGLECTED TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY ................ CAN I QUOTE FROM MS KATE BRUMMERS QC ALBIONS BARRISTERS CHAMBERS BRISTOL DOCUMENT ON INTERNET .A CHAMBERS I HAVE CONTACTED. AS A JUDGE SHE QUOTES CPS DIRECTIVE ABOVE FURTHER ISSUES TO CONSIDER IN SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTION,,,,,,,,,,,,,SERIES OFFENDER,,,,,,,,,,,,[YES VIRTUALLY EVERY YEAR IGNORING APPLICATIONS ],,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, PARTICULARS NOT IMPORTANT THE ISSUE HAVE YOU BEEN WRONGED BY AN INDIVIDUAL. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SO PCBIRD AWARE LETS TAKE ONE EXAMPLE APPLICATION 26.2.2016 WE HAVE COURT ORDER AGAIN TO MAKE APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER,,, LETS MAKE CLEAR AGAIN,FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,IN MAKING APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER VIA THE COURT. THERE IS NO ISSUE IT WAS MADE. THERE IS NO DISPUTE IGNORED. THERE IS NO DISPUTE EVERY WEEK/10DAYS EMAIL TO COURT ASKING FOR A REPLY TO APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,,SOME SAYING UNLESS I HEAR FROM YOU BY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILL ASSUME COURT/HHJDENYER REFUSE TO REPLY,,,,,EMAIL S IGNORED CONFIRMING REFUSAL TO REPLY. CAN I REFER TO PARAGRAPH 2 OF REPLY 12.6.2017 WHICH IS UTTER NONSENSE HOWEVER THE POLICE MR GALLOWAY ADMITS NUMEROUS FOLLOW UP EMAILS WERE IGNORED. THERE WAS FOLLOW UP EMAIL 2.3.2016 AS DEFENDANTS DID NOT CONFIRM IF THEY OBJECTED TO APPLICATION FOR NEW PROCEEDINGS ,,,,,,BUT DID CONFIRM WHEN OUT OF TIME TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS eg 27.7.2016. CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE ,,,,,,,,WHEN OUT OF TIME ASKED COURT FOR INFORMATION AS TAKING TO EUROPEAN COURT, DENYING ACCESS TO THE COURT,,,,,,,,,,,WHERE NOW EMAIL ANSWERED ,,,, MR FOWLER ,,,,WHAT DO YOU WANT COURT TO DO, WHERE TOLD IN EMAIL PLEASE SEE EMAIL OF 2.3.2016 PLEASE SEE ABOVE IN WEBSITE WHERE YOU HAVE CONTENTS OF EMAIL 2.3.2016 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,EG A /TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS B/ REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER. . ALSO TOLD YOU CAN NOW SEND TO HHJDENYER HOWEVER NOT END OF MATTER AS NEW APPLICATION. THIS LATER APPLICATION SENT DIRECT TO MR FOWLER. FOLLOW UP EMAIL IN NOVEMBER 2016,,,,,,,,,,,,UNLESS I HEAR FROM YOU BY ,,,,,,,,,,,,WILL ASSUME YOU [FOWLER] /HHJDENYER WILL IGNORE MY APPLICATION WHICH HHJDENYER IN ORDER STATED I MUST MAKE APPLICATION TO HIM IF I WANTED TO USE THE COURTS. THIS EMAIL IGNORED CONFIRMING THAT APPLICATIONS 26.2.2016 AND 26.10.2016 WOULD BE IGNORED. WE HAVE PROBLEM HHJDENYER ORDER THAT APPLICATIONS MUST BE FORWARDED TO HIM,,,,,,,,,,DID FOWLER IGNORE COURT ORDER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULL NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS SDUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BY NOT SENDING TO DENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,FROM ABOVE DEFINITION MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,OR DID HE SEND TO DENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HE ISSUED COURT ORDER TO MAKE APPLICATION TO HIM,,,,,,,,,,,,WHEN SENT HE IGNORES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY,,,,,,,,BY DEFINITION ABOVE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. HE ASKED FOR APPLICATION NOW IGNORES HIS OWN ORDER. HE IS HEAD OF COURT HE HAS DUTY TO CONSIDER APPLICATIONS HE ASKED FOR .
We ask reader to consider reply from police we haveNO EVIDENCE. Can i raise the legal concept of irrationality/unreasonableness known legally as Wednesbury unreasonableness in application for judicial review of a public body,,,,,,,no reasonable person would have made it, NO EVIDENCE NEGLECTING DUTY…. cited in Ass.Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp. [1948]IKB 223,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DECISION SO OUTRAGEOUS IN ITS DEFIANANCE OF LOGIC OR ACCEPTABLE MORAL STANDARDS NO SENSIBLE PERSON WHO APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE QUESTION TO BE DECIDED COULD HAVE ARRIVED AT IT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,POLICE SAYING COURT/DENYER HAVE NOT WILFULLY NEGLECTED TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,EVEN MR GALLOWAY ADMITS NUMEROUS REQUEST FOR REPLY TO APPLICATION WHICH WAS IGNORED. FOWLER FROM COURT ORDER ENCLOSED WITH APPLICATION AWARE HE MUST SEND TO DENYER,,,,,,,,,,,DID HE SEND AND DENYER IGNORED. WE ARE TOLD MATTER INVESTIGATED CAN I ASK MR GALLOWAY FURTHER QUESTIONS, ONES LISTED IN COMPLAINT IGNORED
THE SOLE ISSUE HERE IS THAT ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS DONE ,,,,,,,WE ASK WHAT INVESTIGATIONS,,,,,,,TO COME TO CONCLUSION NO EVIDENCE. NOTHING TO DO EG MAKE A COMPLAINT,,TO HMCS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YOU STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE WHERE FROM COURT DOCUMENTS SUGGEST TO READER THEY ADMIT OFFENCE eg MR FOWLER ADMITS APPLICATION MADE 26.2.2016 NUMEROUS EMAILS ASKING FOR A REPLY ,,,,,IGNORED............THEN GET EMAIL WHAT DO YOU WANT COURT TO DO WHEN TOLD UNLESS MR GALLOWAY SHOWS OTHERWISE HE STILL REFUSED TO SEND TO HHJDENYER. HE IS AWARE COURT ORDER HE MUST SEND TO HHJDENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY ......FROM DEFINITION MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. IF HE DID SEND AFTER 7 MONTHS DENYER IGNORED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.
Lets expand for IPCC with another question, still ask for reply to questions 1 to 11 for IPCC.
QUESTION 12,,A,,,,Mr Galoway states Mr Bird sought advice and was advised no evidence of malfeasance , although Mr Fowler admits COURT ORDER TO MAKE APPLICATION AND ORDER TO SEND TO HHJDENYER made as court order, he ignored ....... follow up emails ignored asking for reply, ADMITTED QUOTED IN GALLOWAYS REPLY ……and inviting after 7 months to now send , he still did not send ,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform his duty,,,,,,,,IN APPLICATION HE HAS COURT ORDER TO SEND TO HHJDENYER…………………..,or did he, where Denyer ignored. So we ask ,,,,,,,,,,,was application 2013/2016 1 AND 13 2.2013 AND 26.2.2016 AND 2.3.2016 AND 26.10.2016 sent to Denyer if not [FOWLER] malfeasance in public office.
12B/ Further who gave advice to PCBird that we had no evidence of offence.,MALFEASANCE, We may ask when we get a reply was it Sg Price, which would leave reply in tatters. Virtually everywhere i carry VoiceCam to record, record at police station where she states ,,,,,,,,,,,,I DO NOT KNOW WHAT MALFEASANCE IS. We look forward to reply. WHO ADVISED PCBIRD
12C/ Can I please have investigation report. ;;;;;;;;IPCC ,,,,,,TO OBTAIN ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR MR GALLOWAYS JUDGEMENT
12D / Were applications 2013/2016 sent to HHJDenyer, or did Mr Fowler ignore applications.
12E/ We give you final chance,,,,do you still maintain court [eg Fowler for just one example] / HHJDenyer were not failing to perform their duties. If you do can we please have evidence you used, eg investigation report to come to this conclusion,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,CONSIDERING AWARE OF WEBSITE.
12F/ What is address and who did PCBird talk to when advised to make complaint to HMCS. For example was it Bristol county court, who previously stated your correspondence would not be read.
12G/ Do you still maintain insufficient evidence.
12H/ Do you still maintain issue so later people are abundantly clear that issue is Denyer refusing to hear a civil claim, and refusing to respond to correspondence. IF APPLICATIONS SENT TO DENYER,[we await answer to 12D, ,,,,,,,,,,CLEAR BREACH OF HRA [human rights act] , clear grounds to the ECHR,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Idid v Italy ,,,,,,,,,,,,,courts must guarantee the right of everyone to obtain a final decision relating to civil rights and obligations in a REASONABLE time,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Further aware from website documents that there is statutory regulations, reference application 26.10.2016 to issue proceedings, and MUST be allowed to put statement in medical records. Galloways report is utter nonsense, nothing stopping Denyer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,refusing to hear claim,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he can do this with his reply,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,in a reasonable time. He asked for application,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,by refusing to CONSIDER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,he is neglecting to perform his duties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office. YOU ALLEDGE YOU HAVE DONE INVESTIGATION WERE APPLICATIONS [2013-2017] SENT TO DENYER ,,,,,COULD BE ASSUME YOU HAVE DONE INVESTIGATIONS DID HE SAY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I HAVE NEVER SEEN APPLICATIONS, IT FOLLOWS THAT FOWLER ALTHOUGH AWARE FROM COURT ORDER HE MUST SEND HE ADMITS APPLICATION MADE,,,,,,,,,,,,NUMEROUS FOLLOW UP EMAILS FOR A REPLY TO APPLICATION,,,,,IGNORED,,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. ,FURTHER THE UTTER NONSENSE CONTINUES HE CAN IN ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,REASONABLE TIME IN COURT ORDER REFUSE TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER, [SECOND PART OF APPLICATION 26.10.2016] BUT HE CAN NOT IGNORE APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,OR IS MR GALLOWAY SAYING HE CAN. FURTHER IF ANY INVESTIGATION UNDERTAKEN FROM COURT ORDER THE POLICE AWARE THERE IS NO HEARING TO THIS APPLICATION OVER RESTRAINING ORDER . CAN MR GALLOWAY EXPLAIN HIS LETTER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,REFUSING TO HEAR A CIVIL CASE.
3/ From email from lawyer at weekend after seeing website, advised still steps to take before ECHR , eg need to exhaust all routes, your reply ,,,,,IPCC ,,,,,,,,,,,,,.
Best for next stage to conclude is to address your letter paragraph at a time.
Par 1 no comment
Par 2 I ask reader to consider above from website, and police reply. JUST LOOK AT WEBSITE FIRST LINES . This is nothing to do with ,,,,,,,,,,,to hear a civil case ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,The main issue FROM WEBSITE IT STATES MAIN ISSUE NEVER ADDRESSED IN POLICE REPLY ISSUES 2013 MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE READ WEBSITE VIA MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE . eg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Suggested to Mr Bird someone in Cardiff obtains court file, no point asking,,,,,,,,,,,did you get applications, we have recording taken at Bristol court that applications for oral hearing , received, sent to Cardiff court. We asked questions, unless you can show otherwise ,suggest PCBird never even contacted the Cardiff court.
From RECORDING TAKEN AT COURT the court states application was made for oral hearing. We know in 2013 court order to ask HHJDenyer for oral hearing , we know made, date stamped by the court, IGNORED. SECOND ISSUE IN COMPLAINT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. THE POLICE KNOW APPLICATION MADE AND IGNORED ,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. ,,,,,,,,NOTHING TO DO WITH HEARING A CIVIL CASE
2016 Applications 26.2.2016 again made from court order. Know made court receipt. Court admit numerous follow up emails for a reply ignored. COURT REFUSES TO CONSIDER DENYER STATES YOU NEED TO MAKE APPLICATION TO ME WHEN I DO HE/COURT JUST IGNORES THEY HAVE DUTY TO CONSIDER .THERE IS A COURT ORDER TO SEND TO DENYER IF FOWLER DID NOT SEND,,,,,,,,,,,WILFULLY NEGLECTING HIS DUTY,,,,,,,,,,,,confirming offence
2016 Application 26.10.2016 again ignored, email to court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by ,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume the court refuses to answer my applications 26.10.2016/26.2.2016.
What does CPS state defining offence malfeasance in public office,,,,,,,,,,,,,,neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WE HAVE COURT ORDER TO MAKE APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER AS IN 2013 .THE COURT MANAGER HAS DUTY TO SEND TO HHJDENYER IF NOT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, OR DID HE SEND WHERE DENYER IGNORED THEREFORE DENYER GUILTY OF OFFENCE.
Par 3 From website above police utterly aware HMCS had stated complaint would not be read. This is utterly independent to forms sent, as from regulations could not make complaint if over 3 months against a judge. SO COMPLAINT TO COURT UTTERLY NOT RELEVANT
Par 4 The HMCS had stated that correspondence would not be read. Further from website PCBird aware complaints would not be read, and before COMPLAINT to them had been ignored, eg Mr Till did he send in 2013 application to HHJDenyer ,,,,,,,,,,,,reason asked Ms Mountstevens for help, AS FURTHER TOLD NOW CORRESPONDENCE WOULD NOT BE READ SO ASK WHAT WAS POINT MAKING COMPLAINT. If Till did not send to Denyer he is guilty of malfeasance, he is in charge of appeals, he is aware appeal must be sent to Denyer, if he did not send,,,,,,,,,,,,,neglecting his duty,,,,,,,,malfeasance.
Par 5 no comment
Par 6 From complaint we asked 11 questions, can we please have a reply for reader, and court at a later date. For example question 1. Can i remind you of Ruiz-Mateus v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,obligation incumbent on the administration authorities ,,,,,,,,the appellant must have access to the relevant evidence in the possession of the administration authority,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Applies to question 12 ,,,,,who told Mr Bird insufficient evidence. We therefore ask NOT ONLY REPLY TO 1 to 11 QUESTIONS.....further who confirmed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence,,of offence ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,eg futher from question 1 what evidence was considered. Lets define offence,from CPS ,,,,,,,,,,,failure to perform their duty. Lets take one example application 26.2.2015,,,,,,,we know ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,court admits virtually every week asking for reply. ,,,,,,court when out of time TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS ,,,,,emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,what do you want court to do,,,,,,,,,,,email in reply explained please see complaint section above ,FOR MY REPLY ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,still court manager does not send to HHJDenyer,,, where AWARE WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO ,,,,,,,,,there is a court order to send this application to Denyer , which Fowler refused to do,,,,,,,,,eg neglecting his duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office, or did he send,,,,,,,,,,,,Denyer ignored,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office.. LETS MAKE THIS ABUBDANTLY CLEAR IT STATES PCBIRD SOUGHT ADVICE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WHO DID HE SEEK ADVICE FROM TO CONCLUDE INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. AS MS BRUMMER ALBION CHAMBERS STATES IN HER PAPER,,,,,,,,,PRIMARY CONSIDERATION HAS INDIVIDUAL BEEN WRONGED. THE COURT ADMITS APPLICATION AND IGNORED BY FOR EXAMPLE FOWLER OR DENYER .
Par 7 Believe paragraph confirms your stance,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,abuse of complaints process,,,,,,,,,,,MY REPLY WHEN I OBTAIN YOUR REPLY,,,THIS ATTACK UTTERLY WITH NO MERIT,,,,LET READER LOOK AT FACTS/ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS TAKEN. ,WITH RESPECT EVERY STATEMENT YOU MAKE UNTRUE/MISLEADING YOU DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND COMPLAINT PLEASE JUST ANSWER MY QUESTIONS IF NOTHING TO HIDE,
You maintain no evidence WHERE COURT ADMITS IGNORING APPLICATIONS . You do not know what main issue is, reason i wish to conduct through website, where you have evidence you considered, and your deductions.
Your letter has no basis in fact,and oppose disapplication. I wish to issue apology as further questions, eg who gave advice to PCBird that no evidence where court admits court order to make application to HHJDenyer,,,,,,,,,,,,admit made and ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,admit numerous follow up emails for a reply,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,email from court,,,,what do you want court to do,,,,,where told in email,,,,,,,,,,,call from court CONFIRMING OFFENCE ,,,,,TOLD that applications will be ignored,,,,,,my further email,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume my applications will be ignored,,,no reply. OFFENCE NEGLECTING THEIR DUTY LETS MAKE THIS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR ARE YOU MAINTAINING INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. NOTHING TO DO WITH MAKING A COMPLAINT WHERE COURT STATED COMPLAINT WILL NOT BE READ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YOU STATE YOU INVESTIGATED AND HAVE INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. WE HAVE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATION TO COURT ORDER TO MAKE APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER. CAN I REFER TO WEBSITE ABOVE WHERE BARRISTER SAID WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA.
All parties covered in reply we ask PCBird will i be charged over recording at court, or are you afraid of evidence before crown court, we await reply
P JONES
(?!��!r�-�4
AS AT 5.7.2017 NO REPLY FROM MR GALLOWAY. CONTACTED IPCC GIVING ME EXCELLENT SERVICE WHERE TOLD TO WRITE TO MR GALLOWAY AGAIN ASKING FOR DATE OF FUTURE REPLY. THIS ATTACHMENT TO EMAIL BELOW FOR OUR RECORDS. WE AWAIT REPLY FOR WEBSITE.
IPCC EMAIL 4.7..2017.....TO ASK MR GALLOWAY FOR DATE WHEN WE WILL HAVE REPLY TO APPLICATION TO HIM THAT DISAPPLICATION DOES NOT TAKE PLACE .WITH NO EMAIL FROM MR GALLOWAY IN 14 DAYS WILL ASSUME HEWILL NOT BE REPLYING TO MY APPLICATION .ITS ACCEPTED THAT HE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REPLY TO APPLICATION IN 14 DAYS HOWEVER THIS DOCUMENT ASKING SOLELY FOR DATE WHEN APPLICATION WILL BE ANSWERED AS IPCC REQUESTED ME TO CONTACT MR GALLOWAY AGAIN. FOR A DATE. THE APPLICATION FOR ANSWERS TO 12 QUESTIONS PLUS MOST IMPORTANT AS LEGAL ADVICE COPY OF POLICE INVESTIGATION REPORT AT SOME DATE BEFORE 13.4.2017. CAN NOW ADD THIS DOCUMENT TO WEBSITE AS WE AWAIT REPLY.
1/ We have simple summary complaint made to police , in reply told to make complaint to HMCS . Further in Mr Galloways reply this is confirmed with confirmation PCBird had investigated complaint , asked for advice [would be in police investigation report before 13.4.2017 ] and was advised insufficient evidence.
2/ In terms of making complaint PCBird aware [[from correspondence to police they are aware of my website] for example in 2013 issue a complaint had been made in 2013 over part again of todays issue, with follow up emails to court manager Mr Fowler Bristol county court ,where all correspondence ignored. Further HMCS had stated in 2016 that correspondence would not be read as they did above in 2013 , so we ask why suggest making complaint. Further forms sent by PCBird to send to HMCS as such not applicable, eg applications to HHJDenyer in 2016 to remove /amend restraining order ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,where forms state they can not consider judicial decisions, and can not complain about HHJDenyer if over 3 months. From recording with Sg Price , police aware from recording taken ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,that any complaint would not be read. POLICE AWARE FROM RECORDING ME IN TEARS THAT COMPLAINT TO HMCS WOULD NOT BE READ ,,WHERE WE HAVE POLICE SWEEPING UNDER CARPET LIKE IN 2013 COMPLAINT TO THEM ,,,,,WE HAVE POLICE STANDARD REPLY,,,,,INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE ,,,,,,WHERE 2013 WE HAVE STILL LETTERS OF ME ACCUSING DEFENDANTS OF PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE WHERE IN REPLY THEY STATE TRUE ,,,,,,HOWEVER TOO LATE FOR YOU TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT NOW,,,,,,,,AS THEY REFER TO CIVIL COURTS ,,,,EG EXHAUSED ROUTES CIVIL,,,,JUST LET DOWN BY POLICE,,,,,,,,,MY FURTHER WITNESS ,,,,,TOLD BY POLICE NOW LIVING IN SOUTH WALES HAVE NOT TIME TO TRAVEL ACROSS BRIDGE TO INTERVIEW,,,,,,,HE DOES TV SPORTS PROGRAM EVERY WEEK AT THIS TIME IN BRISTOL,,,,Ms Mountstevens as in 2016 issues aware of evidence.It appears the police have phobia of enquires across the Severn Bridge, for example in correspondence to PCBird suggested member of force obtain file working in Cardiff. We await as complaint what investigations were undertaken. This is issue of complaint.
3/ PCBird has done investigation, THIS IS ISSUE TODAY we await to see what investigations done, not place today to consider insufficient evidence , as barrister stated we need simple answers FACTS FOR HIM TO ACT TO TAKE FURTHER
a/ From applications 1.2.2013 13.2.2013 26.2.2016 2.3 2016 26.10.2016 court admits made, eg Mr Galloway admits further evidence,,,,,,,,,,,,,continue emails asking for reply TO APPLICATIONS ,,,,,,,as barrister stated i need to know ,,,,,,Mr Fowler admits he received applications, in application he has court order to send to HHJDenyer ,,,,,,DID HE SEND.,,,, Its alleged PCBird from Mr Galloways reply that PCBird had done investigations one of questions above we seek a reply. This will all come out when we get PCBird police investigation file done before 13.4,2017. DID FOWLER SEND TO DENYER
b/ For example we know application 26.10.2016 sent direct to Mr Fowler , its alleged sometime before 13.4.2017 PCBird had investigated, told insufficient evidence, of malfeasance in public office, a simple question did he send APPLICATION to HHJDenyer. Mr Galloway focus was on HHJDenyer hearing a case, this is utter nonsense, issue with respect today is PCBIRD HAS DONE INVESTIGATIONS WHAT INVESTIGATIONS DONE ,,,,were applications sent to HHJDenyer. This is not place to consider legal issues, eg court order to send to HHJDenyer , where Mr Fowler,,,,,wilfully neglects to perform his duty,,,,,he has order in front of him but does not send to judge, Mr Galloway has made this abundantly clear we have insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office, simple question were applications sent. Not stage to consider legal issues, police stance we have insufficient evidence, where they admit application made, and every week/10days asking for reply to applications that was ignored, WAS APPLICATIONS EVER SENT TO JUDGE.
We now get reply from police, please see end of this document 18.7.2017 where he wants while deception to move goalposts,,,,,,,,par 4 ,,,a civil matter, utter nonsence, as he frustrates appeal process, please see Galloways letter above,,,,,,,,criminal matter par 2 malfeasance in public office,,,,,my reply below
CC REFERENCE 2017/086838 DI STEPHENS REFERENCE HC/CO/369/17/HD
REQUEST FOR REPLY IN 14 DAYS NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR LOST MAIL PLEASE EMAIL
1/ Yesterday you had request for documents. Unless i hear from you in 14 days will assume you refuse to supply. Wanted to split letters , this just complete skeletal argument, for later , plus added in my chronological website. Do not expect reply, just putting on record, eg your file in 14 days, as you conceal evidence, we are told PCBird investigated complaint ,you appear to confirm barristers deductions you called HMCS , Bristol court ,who told you to inform me to make complaint to them, you did no investigations of actual complaint, ,,,,,,even my lawyer informs me you did not contact firm , where even they could not get a reply from court in 2012 . . . You where aware the HMCS had stated my correspondence would not be read, SO WHY INFORM ME TO SEND ,,,can I refer to recorded conversation me in tears, with your Sg Price, if any dispute can produce a CD of conversation at your expense, please confirm you will meet costs of production. Further the 2 forms to make complaint from statuary regulations could not make a complaint, eg first, complaint about judiciary [HHJDenyer] must be made in 3 months from incident,Mr Galloway comprehended situation,,,,,,,,,,,,complaint in particular HHJDenyer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, trust PCBird read forms. The second form under Complaint,,,,,,,,,,,,,,can not consider complaint about decision of a judge,,,,,,,,,,,,can I quote for later use, Gollaways letter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,failure/refusal to hear a claim,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. CAN I REFER TO APRIL 2017 EMAILS WHERE PCBIRD AWARE OF ABOVE HOWEVER DID NOTHING WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY. We are told however he did investigations, sought a second judgement, reason we ask for file was this Sg Price who states in recording,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I do not know what malfeasance means, reason we want file to add to my website. Further from file would see what if any investigations undertaken, or were there none,, except call to the court. So for Galloway to say investigations were done, investigations reported to third party [Sg Price ?] who confirmed insufficient evidence of offence is utter nonsense, how can PCBird seek a second judgement if he had not investigated allegations. Can I refer to correspondence with Sg Price concerning miscarriage of justice, due to malfeasance in public office . PCBird from correspondence aware of www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com.
Tab 12 court order to ask HHJDenyer for oral hearing
Tab 13 application DATE /STAMPED BY COURT FOR ORAL HEARING
SCAN 10299 second application DATE/STAMPED BY THE COURT
SCAN 14 I HAD NOT ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING IN JUDGEMENT OF COURT OF APPEAL
This was not just malfeasance issue, but miscarriage of justice presented to PCBird, can I refer to correspondence ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do not expect you to do, however could officer in Cardiff obtain file…………[recording at court, applications were made, sent to Cardiff court] We have R V Dytham where police officer convicted malfeasance in public office over failure to act, eg wilfully neglecting to perform their duty . Two issues here, PCBird aware of evidence, we have applications date stamped by the court, the court has court order eg tab 12 to send to HHJDenyer, did court manager send, if not he is wilfully neglecting to perform his duty,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office, or was applications sent, we are told PCBird had undertaken investigations, is someone at court wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, eg malfeasance in public office, which makes utter nonsense,,,,,,,,,,,,PCBird did investigation sought a second judgement, where concluded we had insufficient evidence. Not withstanding above PCBird aware we had recording AT COURT WHERE COURT CONFIRM MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE ON RECORDING,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,OUR MR TILL SENT APPLICATIONS TO CARDIFF COURT SO APPLICATIONS WERE MADFE . In terms of complaint was PCBird wilfully neglecting to perform his duties, eg malfeasance in public office. LETS SEE WHAT INVESTIGATIONS ALLEGED DONE BY PCBIRD,,,,,,,,,,,,could be only investigation,,,,,,,,,,,,,I called Bristol court. Again from recording with Sg Price aware in 2013 a complaint made to court, as recording states our Mr Till sent applications to Cardiff court.Mr Till has applications/court order did he wilfully neglect to perform his duties, eg ignore court order and not send to Denyer.
MAKES NONSENSE OF PCBIRDS ADVICE MAKE COMPLAINT TO HMCS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IN 2013 OVER THIS ISSUE COMPLAINT MADE,,,,,FOLLOW UP EMAILS,,,,,,,,,,,,,ALL IGNORED.
2/ Can then inform Constabulary of facts and unable to obtain documents can only formulate partial appeal, sent to you yesterday , breach of HRA and IPCC directive to obtain documents.
3/ The issue PCBird investigations done ,PCBird sought advice and from these observations it was concluded insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office, This deduction comes under Wednesbury classification as unreasonableness, eg Ass. Provincial Picture house v Wednesbury Corp 1948 ikd223. Standard of unreasonableness in assessing an application for judicial review of a public authority decision. ,,,,,Decision so outrageous in its defiance of logic or acceptable moral standards no sensible person who applied his mind [no malfeasance in public office] could have arrived at it. WAS IT SG PRICE WHO GAVE ADVICE WHO ON RECORDING STATES DO NOT KNOW WHAT MALFEASANCE IS. WE AWAIT REQUEST FOR FILE
ONE EXAMPLE 26.2.2016
Accepted application made, OURT RECEIPT AS OBTAINED , from Galloways letter admit application ignored. Further court order with application, ,,,,,,,,,,,,COURT ORDER .....application must be sent to HHJDenyer. Was it sent with every week asking for reply to application. Was it not sent then Mr Fowler wilfully neglecting to perform his duties, NOT SENDING TO JUDGE ,,,,,was it sent where judge ignored, wilfully neglecting to perform HIS duty, definition of malfeasance in public office. Trust PCBird did investigation was application sent to judge.
4/ The issue make complaint to HMCS utter nonsence, would be interesting if from Bristol court, as this court speaking for HMCS in letter states correspondence to HMCS will not be read by HMCS. Did they quote documents to be sent to them, knowing from regulations they could anyway ignore, eg complaint over 3 months. We need full log of investigations, for example did this come from Bristol court, where they had stated correspondence would be ignored. If police have nothing to hide forward log of investigations. Must admit called every step correct, told by court they would ignore application, MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE quoted in application 26.2.2016,,,,,,,[did not know about malfeasance until primed by barrister later
P JONES
FURTHER EMAIL SENT SAME TIME IF YOU WITHHOLD INFORMATION CAN DO APPEAL IN 14 DAYS. THEY KNOW I HAVE NOT FILED FINAL APPEAL HOWEVER SO AS BY DECEPTION SAY THIS IS FINAL APPEAR IT WILL STOP US RELEASING EVIDENCE TO FRUSTRATE APPEAL PROCESS. , AS YOU CAN SEE ON SAME DAY LETTER END OF THIS DOCUMENT WE GET LETTER FROM MR CROACH KNOWING HE HAS NOT FINAL APPEAL, AGAIN AT END OF DOCUMENT AS HE VIA DECEPTION KNOWS I HAVE NOT FILED FINAL APPEAL, EG MY EMAIL DATED 3 DAYS BEFORE HIS REPLY MY REPLY BELOW
WILL BE OF INTEREST WHEN WE GET A REPLY POLICE SHOULD CONSIDER OLD ADDAGE WHEN IN HOLE STOP DIGGING. WE HAVE PCBIRD AS IT WERE A LION SUPERVISED BY A GROUP OF CORRUPT DONKEYS. TAKE HIS EMAIL 13.4.2017 CAN NOT CONTACT YOU ,,,,,,,,,I HAVE TRIED NUMEROUS TIMES, ALL CALLS IN/OUT RECORDED RARE THING FOR ME TO BE AT HOME. TAKE CROUCHES LETTER 24.7.2017 ,,,,,AT END OF
vd �X
REFERENCE HC/CO/369/17/JM LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 OF S R CORRIGAN
1/ You have NOT MY APPEAL in respect to this issue. WE MAY ASK WHERE IS CLAIM FORM IF YOU BELIEVE THIS WAS APPEAL. WITH RESPECT SUGGEST AFTER YOUR REPLY TO APPEAL AS I GO TO IPCC ,,,,,APPEAL TO THEM ,,,,YOU WERE FRUSTRATING APPEAL PROCESS AS WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE,,,,I did not expect a reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 to questions asked, and am preparing appeal now to be filed with you in next few days. Going through motions before going back to IPCC as you frustrate IPCC REGULATIONS, EG after investigations you should have enough information to understand what has happened during the investigations,,,,,,,,,,,EG for example still do not know if court manager sent numerous applications to a judge,,,,,,,,you state police investigated, and we have insufficient evidence. Matter of dispute barrister QC states we do, WE HAVE ASKED WHO SUPPLIED YOUR ADVICE,,,,SG PRICE ?. As you state ,24.7.2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,none of issues have yet to be considered,,,,,,thats fair enough i asked you a simple question ,,,,will i get a reply to 12 questions asked , not asking for reply, just asking WILL I GET A REPLY .ASKED FOR CONFIRMATION BY 9.00 28.7.2017. IT APPEARS YOU WILL IGNORE QUESTION UNLESS I GET A EMAIL SOMETIME TODAY. THE DATA REQUESTED TO SEE WHAT INVESTIGATIONS OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE UNDERTAKEN,,,,.WILL EXPLAIN WHEN APPEAL FILED YOUR FRUSTRATING APPEAL PROCESS AS I DO NOT HAVE ,,,,,,,,,ENOUGH INFORMATION OF ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS, AND SECOND CONSIDERATION OF FACTS CONCERNING OFFENCE UNDERTAKEN BY POLICE.
2/ The IPCC regulation state several things , for example Mr Golloway will contact to agree way forward, ect ect,,,,never talked to him or PCBird . Further states at end of investigations I will have clear knowledge of what investigations done. ,,,,,,,you are joking,,,,,
3/ Accepted recorded conversation with your Sg Price, she is aware the court had stated in email HMCS would not read my correspondence, on recording me in tears. DID SHE INFORM PCBIRD OR NEGLIGENT/IMCOMPETANT . Still your PCBird in letter informs me to make complaint to HMCS , even gives me 2 forms to fill in. In April 2017 via email he was informed due to regulations I could not make complaint , can I refer to Mr Golloaways letter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,principle complaint about HHJDenyer,,,,,. However regulations state must be made in 3 months against judiciary. Suggest PCBird ALSO negligent/imcompetant as aware path not one I could take, FROM FORMS ,,,NOT ISSUE TODAY .
4/ From recording with Sg Price agreed to look at malfeasance in public office, no issue here, please see Mr Gollaways letter. Further in letter states insufficient evidence of offence, PCBird sought further advice and confirmed after alleged investigations we had insufficient evidence. My complaint to you this judgement comes under Wednesbury classification of unreasonableness ,,,,,,Ass Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp, 1948 IKD223. Standard of unreasonableness in assessing an application for judicial review of a public authority decision ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,so outrageous in its defiance of logic or acceptable moral standards no SENSIBLE person who applied his mind [insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office] could have arrived at it.
CPS defines offence wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, can we show this. . Mr Golloway admits application sent to court , just consider one example, 26.2.2016 , further admits numerous applications via email sent to court ignored, asking for reply to application 26.2.2016 . In ALL applications must have court order WHICH STATES that applications must be sent to a judge. Correspondence with court about this. . Was application sent to HHJDenyer,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NO THEN COURT MANAGER WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY. Was it sent to a judge who ignored application WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS DUTY. MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. MUST BE ONE
5/ We have problems here, can I refer to Mr Golloways letter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the judges refusing to give you a hearing……………. Is Golloway saying your application was answered, however as barrister stated, we know the court admits after 7 months i[26.2.2016 APPLICATION ] t was NOT SENT TO A JUDGE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ALTHOUGH EMAILS VIRTUALLY EVERY WEEK ASKING FOR REPLY TO APPLICATION,,,,,,,,court manager asked what I want court to do, SO WE KNOW FOR 7 MONTHS NOTHING . Was it now sent, For example in 26.10.2016 had call that all applications would be ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WHAT ARE BIRD/GALLOWAY ALLEGATIONS AFTER ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS HOW CAN I DO APPEAL,,,,,,
6/ I can not make appeal until I have facts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,as IPCC state from you ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,should have full details of what investigations undertaken. When we have data can do appeal. I have no evidence of any investigations undertaken, for example 2013 issue also included a miscarriage of justice ELEMENT . BASIC SIMPLE QUESTION IF INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN DID COURT MANAGER SEND TO A JUDGE. Suggested second letter from you, D I Stephens ,,,,,where you state PCBird did right thing called HMCS who informed him to make complaint via 2 cited forms. Was this HMCS , Bristol county court, who previously in email states my correspondence will not be read, told seeking,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, second judgement was this via SG Price who on recording states do not know what malfeasance means. HOW CAN I DO APPEAL WHERE YOU FRUSTRATE PROCESS,,,I DO NOT KNOW FACTS AND YOU REFUSE TO SUPPLY INFORMATION.
7/ The complaint was incompetence/negligence and could not make complaint, as evidence concealed, eg what investigations done before conclusion insufficient evidence, and PCBird/ plus another malfeasance in public office as allegations of court/judge malfeasance in public office never investigated, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,R V Dyther [1979] [PCDyther convicted over failure to act] although you state you had investigated and found insufficient evidence. We asked 12 questions , asked for a reply by 28.7.2017 with no reply , concealing evidence, all I can do is do appeal on the 28.7.2017 , and refer later to IPCC AS I HAVE NOT FULL EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS DONE APPLICATIONS TO COURT VIA COURT ORDER THIS ENCLOSED WITH APPLICATION WHICH STATES APPLICATIONS MUST BE SENT TO A JUDGE,,,,,,,,,,,,WERE THEY SENT, OR MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, IF SENT AND ALSO IGNORED JUDGES GUILTY OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. YOU ALLEDGE INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN CAN I HAVE REPLIES TO 12 QUESTIONS ANSWERED. WE EVEN HAD COURT IN 26.10.2016 APPLICATION CALLING SAYING APPLICATION WOULD BE IGNORED INFORMED PRO BONO UNIT CONFIRMING THEY WOULD COMMIT OFFENCE.
8/ Will do application Friday ask again for you or PCBIRD to supply data required, so I am aware ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,as IPCC regulations what alleged investigations were undertaken of malfeasance in public office, or were police wilfully neglecting to perform their duty. . Asked for reply to 12 asked questions, gave you 14 days, which would give me time [28days ] to do appeal. Further asked that confirmation i would get confirmation i would have reply to 12 questions in 14 days, by 28.7.2017 , unless i hear from you assume you will ignore question and do appeal on Friday, could you please email today if you will be supplying reply to 12 asked questions so i can do appeal P JONES
You can not deal with this group of police,,,,,,,,,,,
UK Cop Watch Crime Bodge,,,,,INTERNET SITE
If they start reciting huge chunks of legislation in bid to get rid of you do not be afraid to remind them its not their job to interpret law , BUT TO INFORCE IT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,See their letter 24.7.2017 at end of document, you can not complain to us over criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, only people yes ONLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HMCS WHO CAN DEAL WITH CRIMINAL OFFENCE when I sent CPS document below TO POLICE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, WHICH OUTLINES POLICE CHARGING PRACTICE OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
Misconduct in Public Office ,,,CPS DOCUMENT INDEX
Nature of the neglect or misconduct
Seriousness of the neglect or misconduct
Without reasonable excuse or justification
BELOW IS FINAL APPEAL TO POLICE BEFORE JUDICIAL REVIEW WILL BE OF INTEREST WHAT QUESTIONS THEY WISH TO ANSWER WHEN IN A HOLE STOP DIGGING. YOU CAN NOT DEAL WITH PSD AS AWARE SENT TO POLICE SG PRICE PATCHWAY POLICE STATION THE CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, HAS SECTION ON POLICE CHARGING PRACTICE ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE SO AWARE POLICE CAN DEAL WITH ISSUE. HOWEVER MR CROACH LETTER 24.7.2017 KNOWING UTTERLY UNTRUE INFORMS ME ,,,,,IF YOU WANT TO COMPLAIN [CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE ] ABOUT CONDUCT OF A JUDGE OR COURT STAFF YOU CAN ONLY DO VIA JCIO . ,,,THE POLICE HAVE NO POWER TO INVESTIGATE [CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE] THE CONDUCT OF JUDICIARY OR COURT STAFF. BUT CROUCH KNOWS THIS IS UNTRUE AS SENT MUST BE IN FILE,,,,,,HE HAS POLICE CHARGING PRACTICE OF OFFENCE CRIMINAL OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. .TAKE CROUCH LETTER 24.7.2017,,,,,,,,,,YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD FROM OUTSET THAT POLICE WILL NOT INVESTIGATE YOUR COMPLAINT CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. . COMPLAINT ACCEPTED BY PCBIRD LETTER 13.4.2017 GALLOWAYS LETTER 12.6.2017 WAS CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. SO WHAT CROUCH IS SAYING WE TOLD YOU WE WILL NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. SO CROUCH IS CONFIRMING THE POLICE WILL WILFULLY NEGLECT TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY,,,,,BY DEFINITION MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. WHEN WAS I TOLD THIS. ? ALL CALLS IN/OUT RECORDED. WAS LETTER SENT I HAVE NOT SEEN ONE. PCBIRD I BELIEVE ACTED AT START IN GOOD FAITH ASSUME NOT AWARE HMCS WOULD IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE TO THEM TOLD SG PRICE ALTHOUGH ON RECORDING WITH HER DID SHE NOT INFORM HIM. THEREFORE STANCE WE HAVE ALLEGATIONS OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE GET HIM TO SEND COMPLAINT TO US, WE HAVE TOLD HIM IN EMAIL HIS COMPLAINT WILL BE IGNORED. PCBIRD IN LETTER 13.4.2017 CONFIRM YOUR DIFFICULT TO CONTACT NO MOBILE WORKING AT LIBRARY DURING DAY,ON STUDIES ,,,,,WHEN WAS I TOLD THE POLICE WILL WILFULLY NEGLECT TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY AND NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. WE HAVE FURTHER UTTER NONSENCE WHERE PCBIRD TOLD ME TO MAKE CLAIM TO HMCS KNOWING IT WOULD NOT BE READ AND AS CROUCH ADMITS DUE TO REGULATIONS I COULD NOT MAKE A COMPLAINT,,,,,SEE LETTER 24.7.2017 AT END OF THIS DOCUMENT. AS IN 2013/4 ISSUE MS MOUNTSTEVENS AWARE OF WHAT IS GOING ON BUT TURNS A BLIND EYE TO THIS PIG CIRCUS
FINAL APPEAL TO POLICE REF HC/CO/369/17/HD APPEAL TO LETTER 18.7.2017
APPEAL SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH WEBSITE WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM
INTRODUCTION NOTES/QUESTIONS/BACKGROUND
From enclosed email 21.7.2017 it is clear no final appeal lodged, as advise from IPCC -- appeal enclosed please find final appeal, mindful as formulating seeking reply for judicial review.
CAN I ASK THAT COMPLAINT TO POLICE WAS OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCE, MALFEASANCE IN PUBLC OFFICE . CAN I REFER TO POLICE LETTER 12.6.2017 WHICH CONFIRMS THIS .FURTHER ALL EMAILS FROM PCBIRD IS TITLED ,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. IF POLICE DISPUTE ABOVE CAN THEY STATE IN THEIR REPLY. SO WHEN THEY USE TERMS LIKE CONDUCT OF THE COURT,,,,THEY ARE DEFINING THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.
WHY I CONTACTED POLICE ,,,,
Barrister advice to contact, malfeasance in public office, criminal offence, defined as wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, . The defendants judges/court staff of Bristol county court. Wilfully neglecting to perform their duty.
There is no dispute here please see police letter 12.6.2017 why they admit contacted over criminal offence issue of malfeasance in public office. . Further in R V Dytham [a police officer] Lord Widgery defined a public officer as one who has a obligation to perform a duty. The police in correspondence sent aware the courts/judges accepted by courts as holding public office ,[ please see CPS guidelines below from CPS paper Misconduct in public office, in red below sent to police]
The following have been accepted as holding a public office by the courts over several centuries:
· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
· Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010] EWCA Crim 2857
sent to them,with dissection of this document in correspondence. Eg R V Llewellyn –Jones [1968] a district judge cited in above CPS document, as a public officer. . We may ask , utterly relevant today, was only route via HMCS, or did police/CPS deal with criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. Further from correspondence cited in my website they were directed towards judge Ms Kate Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol article on malfeasance in public office paper, please see extracts below in red
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
WHY COMPLAINT ABOUT POLICE. SKELETAL ARGUMENT
The appeal in 6 main themes,
1/ The police utterly refusing to follow statutory guidelines on investigation of complaints.
2/ PCBird guilty himself of malfeasance in public office failing to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office of staff at Bristol county court. We have in police letter 24.7.2017 confirming PCBirds guilt ,,,,,,the police would not investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. From CPS guidelines please see below again in red, ref paper Misconduct in Public Office CPS document
Without reasonable excuse or justification
It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the absence of a reasonable excuse or justification, although the nature of the prosecution evidence should in practice negate any such element.
The defendant may advance evidence of a reasonable excuse or justification. It is for the jury to determine whether the evidence reveals the necessary culpability.
We accept Mr Croach is not PCBirds legal adviser , however he puts forward justification reason PCBird wilfully neglected to perform is duty to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, , as police have no power to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, although sent CPS document above where judges convicted. Further see Ms Brunners paper.
THE POLICE FURTHER ARE PUT ON NOTICE AT NO TIME WAS I TOLD THEY WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE. WE ASK FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FOR EVIDENCE TO SHOW THIS.COULD YOU PLEASE SUPPLY EVIDENCE I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD WILFULLY NEGLECT TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY TO INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE.
3/ From my website get calls, as discussed with lawyer who called, if police are going to concoct a story,you would think they would check letters, reason for this section. From 2/ they admit PCBird,,,,,wilfully neglected to perform his duty, investigating criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, . letter 24.7.2017,they state ,,,,,from outset POLICE WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE COMPLAINT OF CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. . IIs alleged letter 12.6.2017 that PCBird had investigated , also third party had investigated criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, and both come to conclusion we had insufficient evidence of criminal offence malfeasance in public office. Can i refer to Mr Galloways letter of 12.6.2017 IT IS CLEAR THAT OFFICER HAS SOUGHT ADVICE AND HAS BEEN INFORMED ,,,,,NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.....If so clear, who was third party, and on what evidence did they conclude we had insufficient evidence., could police in reply supply evidence. We have from letter 24.7.2017 ,,,,,,, OUTSET told we would not investigate, [24.7.2017 letter ,], confirming criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, however told on the 12.6.2017 letter it was CLEAR we had investigated, ALSO THIRD PARTY HAD INVESTIGATED CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. We need clarification did PCBird refuse to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, or did he investigate, insufficient evidence.
4/ If police CONCOACTED stance we reject 2/ PCBird is not quilty of criminal offence malfeasance in public office, as both investigated criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, and we have insufficient evidence , then appeal under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,,,,,,,,,as verdict so ridiculous no reasonable person would have come to it. Or was Mr Galloway giving false statement,,,,as letter 24.7.2017 states from outset told police would not investigate, NEVER TALKED TO PCBIRD OR GALLOWAY........
5/ From information from day 1 aware due to failure to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance , we had a miscarriage of justice, . Are police saying we accept miscarriage of justice but can not investigate, as we have an element of criminal offence malfeasance in public office.
6/ Police did not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, all they offered was issue a recommendation for me to make complaint to HMCS where they were aware complaint would not be read, and further from forms , sent to me aware i could not make complaint, as they admit in letter 24.7.2017. It follows PCBird negligent /incompetent as must be aware i could not make a complaint, and refused to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office/or did he. Further refer to HMCS were we asked courts if 2013/4 ,,,,,applications on system,eg i did ask for oral hearing, will you confirm, from website my copies date/stamped by court, where we have oourt saying note on file, do not discuss, all enquires to court manager,,,,,,,,,,,,,,refer to numerous emails to court manager EVERYONE YES EVERYONE IGNORED . Police know from forms i can not make a complaint to HMCS due to regulations, ADMITTED IN THEIR LETTER 24.7.2017 but ask me to make a complaint.
DETAILS
1/ Paragraph in red from IPCC publication Guide to the police complaints system.
What will happen when I have made a complaint? If your complaint can be resolved by giving you some information or explaining what happened then the police should do this. If your complaint needs to be looked into, the police force should make a formal record of your complaint and let you know they have done this (see section three of the IPCC’s guidance for police forces for more information about recording complaints). Recording a complaint means that it has formal status under the Police Reform Act 2002. It must then be dealt with according to certain rules and guidance. If the police do not record your complaint you can appeal to the IPCC. The person dealing with your complaint should contact you to make sure they have all the details of what you are complaining about. They should ask you what you want to happen. For example, you might want an apology, a problem to be put right, or an officer to be held to account. They will be able to tell you what is likely to happen as a result of your complaint. The person dealing with your complaint should also talk to you about what they will do to deal with your complaint. For example, they may provide you with information or an explanation; they may arrange a meeting with the person you are complaining about or there may need to be an investigation.
From above ,,,,person dealing with complaint [Mr Galloway] ,,should contact you to make sure they have all details ,,,,,,,should ask what you want to ,,,,,,should talk to you what is likely to happen,,,,,talk to you ,,,,to deal with your complaint,,,,,what they will do to .....NEVER ANY CONVERSATION WITH MR GALLOWAY. ALL CALLS IN/OUT RECORDED HAVE NO MOBILE PHONE.
Again in red IPCC document
Local resolution Local resolution is a way of dealing with complaints at a local level. It is appropriate for many complaints, but not for more serious matters, where an investigation must be carried out. The person dealing with your complaint might take some of the following actions to locally resolve your complaint: • provide information and explanation • give an apology on behalf of the force • explain the circumstances of the case and any action taken • arrange a meeting with the person complained about • arrange for force policy or procedures to be changed • take some investigative steps to find out more information. The person dealing with your complaint will let you know the outcome when they have finished looking at it. They may do this in person or on the phone, but they should also write to you.
From above Galloway must in person or on phone contact over outcome, and ALSO write to me. Again no contact just letter sent.
Again in red from IPCC document
Local investigation Most complaints will be dealt with by local resolution. However, if a complaint is not suitable for local resolution, a local investigation should be carried out. Certain complaints must be dealt with by a local investigation. The person dealing with your complaint (the investigating officer) may set terms of reference to explain what the investigation will look at. If there are terms of reference you should receive a copy. Keeping you informed during an investigation The investigating officer must keep you informed about the progress of the investigation. They should agree with you how you would like to be kept informed – this could be by phone, in person or by letter. The investigating officer must update you at least every 28 days. When the investigation is complete, you will be told what it has found, and if your complaint has been upheld. You will also be told whether any action is going to be taken as a result of your complaint, what the action is and what the outcome of that action is. For example, an officer might have to attend a misconduct hearing and, as a result, receive a final written warning. You should receive enough information at the end of the investigation to understand what has happened during the investigation and what decisions have been reached. Sometimes this might happen by you being given a copy of the investigation report.
Again issue of keeping informed, NEVER ANY CONTACT. With respect suggest no contact, as Galloway wants to sweep under the carpet,we have the final betrayer as Mr Croach wishes to sweep under carpet, sending final report where utterly aware, emailed today. enclosed that appeal not lodged. It appears the PSD will go to any lengths to corrupt and frustrate the appeal process.
2/ Police appear to confirm PCBirds is guilty of malfeasance in public office, not investigating criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. There letter 18.7.2017….correct remedy via Judicial Conduct Investigation Office [JCIO], we did nothing. Letter 24.7.2017 confirming above, Further states no power to investigate, malfeasance in public office, and on page 2 of letter 24.7.2017 , you can ONLY make a complaint [criminal offence malfeasance in public office] via JCIO. YOU CAN NOT REPORT CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE TO THE POLICE AS COURT IMMUNE. THIS UNTRUE SEE CPS SITE ,WE ASK POLICE IN REPLY TO APPEAL DO THEY STILL MAINTAIN IN ISSUE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE THE COURT STAFF /JUDGES ARE IMMUNE FROM PROSECUTION. May I suggest for reference in my website, an internet site on police. UK Cop Watch Crime Bodge,,,,,
If they start reciting huge chunks of legislation in bid to get rid of you do not be afraid to remind them its not their job to interpret law , BUT TO INFORCE IT,,,,,although we seek a reply are you saying judges/court staff immune from prosecution over criminal offence malfeasance in public office.
We have however paradox as in letter 12.6.2017 it states PCBird sought a second opinion of malfeasance in public office , and they investigated also, and PCBird advised we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office. Indicates AN OTHER also investigated my starting issue malfeasance in public office, and concluded ,,,,,,,we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office. So it appears issue was investigated.
WE ASK WHO WAS AN OTHER AND WHAT EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS THEY USED TO COME TO JUDGEMENT WE HAD INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE.
We have asked what evidence was considered , however you refuse to supply. You must have evidence, as alleged investigations, in this appeal ask you do you still maintain you had insufficient evidence. Suggest the judgement ridiculous . We know IN ALL applications made, with court order that applications to be sent to a judge. You accept sent and numerous follow up emails for reply, your letter 12.6.2017 however court manager refuses to deal with application,
Reason for todays appeal the judgement of police so outrageous in its letter 12.6.2017 , WE HAD INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE no sensible person would have come to it. Wednesbury classification of unreasonableness [PLEASE READ ABOVE CPS/JUDGE MS BRUNNERS PAPER]
Ass Provincial Picture House v Wednesbury Corp [1948] IKD 223. Standard of unreasonableness in assessing an application for judicial review of a public authority decision ,,,,,,so outrageous in its defiance of logic or acceptable moral standards no sensible person who applied his mind [[we have insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office] could have arrived at it.
Of course with reply to appeal would understand why PCBird/AN OTHER came to judgement we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office. Difficult as police refuse to supply data to frustrate/ corrupt the appeal process, see for example in letter 12.6.2017 stating ,,,,refusing to hear a civil case, are police saying, your application was sent to a judge who refused you a hearing. However this does not make sense from 26.2.2016 application, as court after 7 months ADMIT they did not send to a judge, asked what I wanted court to do, further in 2013 issue we know no reply to applications, as court of appeal state,,,,,no evidence you asked for a oral hearing to correct.
3/ Why did you send letter dated 24.7.2017 with allegations that you had my appeal. Can i refer to email s 21.7.2017 , ENCLOSED where I state and 22.7.2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILL ASSUME WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND DO APPEAL TO YOU. As i stated to you would appeal to IPCC who asked me in 28 days to forward appeal to you, enclosed. Can i please refer to that letter 18.7.2017 where you require on line appeal form only now sent to you. Can i address that form. You ask 3 questions, on form,
WERE YOU PERMITTED TO COMMENT ON THE COMPLAINT AND HOW IT SHOULD BE ANSWERED
DID POLICE FOLLOW THE PROCESS YOU AGREED WITH THEM FOR THE LOCAL RESOLUTION OF YOUR COMPLAINT.
HAVE THE POLICE COMMUNICATED ANY LEARNING POINTS TO YOU [why you believe not proper outcome of your complaint ]
TO ALL THREE QUESTIONS ANSWER NO AS ON FORM TICKED BOX SEE THIS DOCUMENT
From IPCC guide form, investigation officer to ,,,,
Talk to you what you want to happen
Talk to you about what they will do to deal with your complaint
Person dealing with complaint [Mr Galloway] will let you know the outcome when they have finished looking at it, they may do this IN PERSON OR ON PHONE BUT hey should also write to you.
Keep you informed , agree with you how you would like to be informed
You should receive enough information at end of investigations to understand what has happened during investigations
The police want to ignore all regulations to frustrate judicial/appeal process NEVER TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY. Have not obtained enough information as all request for data ignored, third issue on claim form,,,,learning points to you, why you believe not proper outcome to your complaint. Picketing at court, barrister told me to stop, make claim to police over criminal offence malfeasance in public office. [ Previous complaint to police [ Sg Bell ] over judicial review case cited below, where i send letter to defendants, perverting course of justice, where they reply, true too late for you to do anything about it now, told by Sg Bell do not want to be taking on courts ] Suggest same situation today. Barrister advised [2016] police may try to brush off, so record conversation at desk Patchway police station with Sg Price, expected to be brushed off, required as evidence, asked police if they want copy of recording , emails ignored, agreed i would send CPS document on malfeasance in public office. There is anyway no dispute of issue for police, their letter ,12.6.2017 ,,,,made allegation of offences malfeasance in public office, and in letter , further in letter states PCBird also sought advice and both concluded from letter,,12.6.2017,,,,,,,,,,,no apparent evidence of malfeasance in public office,,,. This was issue bought to police, and issue they investigated, its so outrageous no sensible person would come to it, we had insufficient evidence.
4/ We accept going through motions as i have always said to you, concluding in judicial review, JR .This time via barrister not myself, ironic as cause of problem today, when i ran case . We had JR judgement in papers that Bristol county court awarded 1500.00 , where i sought a oral hearing. We have judgement from Lord Gouldring,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,in a county court although getting verdict very badly wrong not a reason to grant a judicial review, Srickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132. However Lord Golding in judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,,why can Bristol county court not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing your Bristol appeal without a transcript and cost award to them will be quashed, NEVER FORGIVEN.
CONCLUSION
The appeal ,,,,,,,,,,as agreed with Sg Price t[RECORDED] that police would investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed in their letter 12.6.2017., after i sent evidence to her. In letter 24.7.2017 admit police themselves commited offence malfeasance in public office as PCBird refused to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. From CPS paper section, ,,,,,without reasonable excuse or justification, ,,,,,,,the letter 24.7.2017 gives justification why PCBird commited offence malfeasance in public office a criminal offence, as court/judges immune from prosecution , and ONLY way to forward complaint about criminal offence, malfeasance in public office is via the JCIO office. Suggest as legal advice, this is legally wrong and can make a complaint to you, over criminal offence, malfeasance in public office. We have paradox as this is change of story, as letter 12.6.2017 states was investigated by 2 people, and found insufficient evidence of criminal offence, malfeasance in public office. If this is new police stance, then judgement from Wednesbury, so outrageous in defiance of logic, no reasonable person would come to it, reason for a judicial review.. Police offered a solution to contact HMCS. Where in police letter 24.7.2017 another paradox, told was correct advice, however from their file my email to PCBird dated 13.4.2017 aware i could not make claim to HMCS, in letter 24.7.2017 admit this advice was negligent, PCBird incompetent as i could not make claim to HMCS, .Further i refer to recording, where Sg Price aware, except for new applications to HHJDenyer, ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO HMCS WILL BE IGNORED,We are left police saying make comlaint to HMCS where aware they will ignore complaint, as before. We are therefore left with a criminal offence malfeasance in public office where police state we will not investigate criminal offence.
P JONES
AS EXPECTED THE POLICE IGNORED MY APPEAL. CONTACTED IPCC AND PCC MS MONTSTEVENS BELOW WILL PUBLISH HER LETTER WHEN WE GET A REPLY. WE HAVE UTTER NONSENSE WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE HOWEVER RECENTLY HER OWN OFFICERS YES HER OWN OFFICERS CONVICTED OF OFFENCE. NOTE TABS 5 6 8 IN ENCLOSD DOCUMENT ELSEWHERE IF REQUIRED
REQUEST FOR HELP TO GET A REPLY FROM AVON/SOMERSET POLICE
IPCC REFERENCE 2017/086838
POLICE REF HC/CO/369/17/JM
TO OBTAIN DATA FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW –ECHR
SKELETAL ARGUMENT
Believe issue summarized from internet article below ….
Ebooks July 2, 2015 Rob Warner
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and...
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, [WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS NO POWER TO DO SO TAB 8 ] don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sargeant’s exam……
For example actual complaint to Avon/Somerset police as PCBird refused to investigate a complaint of criminal offence malfeasance in public office. No dispute about this please see PCBirds email tab 3, and police letter tab 5, complaint criminal offence malfeasance in public office, defendants Bristol county court. From tab 8 the police confirm that PCBird refused to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, , therefore willfully neglecting to perform his duty, guilty himself of malfeasance in public office.
The CPS document extracts on malfeasance in public office tab 2, with dissection of full contents sent in letter April 2017 to Sg Price Patchway police station,,, WE ASK MS MOUNTSTEVENS IN MY DISSECTION OF CPS DOCUMENT DID I NOT DISCUSS IN DETAIL THAT COURT/JUDGES HAD BEEN CONVICTED EG IN TAB 2 , R V Llewellyn –Jones [1968] 1QB 429 WHERE DISTRICT JUDGE CONVICTED. FURTHER JUST UNCONHENSIBLE STANCE AS OWN OFFICERS RECENTLY CONVICTED OF OFFENCE EG BIJAN EBRAHIMI CASE. Further they are directed to my website, plus high court judge Ms Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol [criminal] article on criminal offence malfeasance in public office, please see extracts in green from this document, tab 9. POLICE UTTERLY AWARE JUDGES/COURTS/POLICE HAD BEEN CONVICTED. FOR CROUCH TO SAY WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE UTTERLY DISHONEST WITH DOCUMENTS IN FRONT OF HIM.
The police stance can not investigate the court/judges which they know from tab 2 sent to them utterly untrue, JUDGES CONVICTED , ITS ON FILE THEY ARE TRYING TO CALL BLACK IS WHITE, UTTERLY DISHONEST FOR MR CROUCH TAB 8 TO SAY WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE WHERE HE HAS TAB 2 IN FRONT OF HIM FRUSTRATING AND CORRUPTING THE APPEAL PROCESS, further state ONLY solution tab 8 send a complaint to HMCS where from my email April 2017 tab 4 , aware due to regulations outlined in tab 4 I could not make a complaint, CONFIRMED IN POLICE LETTER TAB 8. They are asking me to make a complaint however IN LETTER TAB 8, CONFIRMING I COULD NOT MAKE A COMPLAINT. The police will go to any length to corrupt this appeal process, asked for data email 21,7,2017 tab 7 so I could do final appeal in 28 days in August 2017. They refuse to supply data and 3 days later knowing appeal not filed, send tab 8 as reply to alleged final appeal. Talk to IPCC who instructed to file final appeal, tab 9, with tab 10 asking tabulated for reply to questions for later proceedings in the court. The police from above utter dishonest, see above,,,,,,,,,,,depressing waste of time to make complaint, protecting their own ,,,,,,,,,,,from statutory regulations, please see tab 9 never talked to Mr Galloway. Eg
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened
NEVER TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY IF POLICE MAINTAIN HE DID ALL CALLS IN/OUT RECORDED CAN WE HAVE DETAILS EG DATE/TIME COULD MS MOUNTSTEVENS SUPPLY. FURTHER DISHONEST STATEMENT TAB 8,,,,,,TOLD FROM START WE WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,MS MOUNTSTEVENS WHEN WAS I TOLD .
We await reply to appeal tab 9 and answer to questions tabulated in tab 10.
a/ From ECHR case law Hirvasan v Finland ,,,,,should give ,reasons to make effective use of any existing right to appeal,,,,[judicial review/ECHR]. Its proved impossible to get information from the police. Legally , tactically told to email Ms Mountstevens,,,,PCC Avon Somerset Police, ,from Gov.UK,,,complaint about how your local area is policed, eg her officers ignoring correspondence, and to inform also IPCC.
b/ Picketing at court told by barrister last resort to report criminal offence malfeasance in public office, as explained if route ECHR need to show all routes in UK exhausted.
c/ Applications to Bristol county court for years ignored, although in application must enclose court order, which states application must be sent to a judge. Criminal offence malfeasance in public office defined as a public officer wilfully neglecting to perform his duty. Please see tab 1 ,email which was ignored, confirming court guilty of criminal offence, as email ignored, confirming my applications would be ignored.
d/ Complain to police who ask for CPS document, tab 2 which shows from extracts court/judges not immune from prosecution, JUDGES CONVICTED. Further referenced my website, so utterly aware of facts of case. Then get letter from PCBird tab 3 where he admits I contacted over criminal offence, malfeasance in public office, sends me 2 forms to complain to HMCS. . However from my website aware from regulations could not make a complaint, where I informed him also, tab 4, where latest letter from police tab 8 confirms advice was incompetent and negligent, I could NOT make a complaint. POLICE ADMIT ADVICE INCOMPETANT/NEGLIGENT
e/ Complain to PSD their reply tab 5, where they confirm that complaint over criminal offence malfeasance in public office.Can I refer to tab 9 no need to reproduce again as sections taken from IPCC document Guide to Police Complaints System, where numerous times from statutory regulation Mr Galloway should have contacted me, never talked to him, clearly police want to sweep under the carpet.. Further confirm my complaint to PSD TAB 8 as PCBird refused to investigate, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, however tab 5 states ,,,,,clear he did, and also asked for second judgement who confirmed we had ,,,no apparent evidence of malfeasance in public office. Police nonsense. This comes under Wednesbury,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
From police letter tab 5 admits applications made, with numerous follow up emails for a reply, from my email tab 1 as no reply,,,,,,,,,,,,the court confirming it is wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, malfeasance in public office as applications would be ignored and not sent to a judge. Can I please refer to tab 1.
f/ Take up issues with police their reply tab 6 which states only ,,,,,,route via HMCS however from above aware not a route I could use, confirmed in later police letter tab 8, eg due to regulations could not make complaint, which police admit in tab 8.
g/ From my website, actual emails sent, ask for more data to do appeal, further please see tab 7 email 21.7.2017 where I ask for data to do appeal in August 2017. The police do not want to give information and via deception although utterly aware no final appeal lodged send letter tab 8 as reply to appeal their letter dated 24.7.2017
h/ Can we go through tab 8 states correct advice from PCBird to take up issue with HMCS, however also admits in letter the officers negligence/incompetence as Crouch confirms I could not make complaint due to regulations. He states police have no power to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, all I can say is this a utter whitewash, as in file he has tab 2, utterly aware judges can and had been convicted, further in previous emails I references paper by local judge, Ms Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol, extracts in green in tab 9. We may ask did he ever look at file, from letter states over a year since latest application to the court, however utterly untrue,,,,,,,,,,,26.10.2016. He states further only way to deal with criminal offence, malfeasance in public office is via HMCS ,he is utterly aware if assume he opened file, he would be aware of tab 2. We have real concerns in this pig circus, further states from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,outset told that police would not investigate complaint of criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. Is this not confirming my complaint to PSD that PCBird himself guilty of criminal offence, malfeasance in public office as if we accept letter it states,,,,,,,,,,he wilfully neglected to perform his duty, please see his email tab 3 and police letter tab 5 which confirms issue criminal offence, malfeasance in public office. Lets discuss in next section, believe IPCC will see relevance.
i/ Some years ago was getting threats of violence via phone calls. Took no notice until threats of damage to car/brakes , where all calls in /out recorded. Contacted police not good service, just excellent, able to trace calls recorded, where I accepted their advice,,,,,,,,,,,unknown to us, he has accepted caution, still record all calls in and out. Can I now refer to that letter tab 8 ,,,,,you were told from outset the police would not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, therefore by definition PCBird was wilfully neglecting to perform his duty, although in tab 3 he states he was investigating criminal offence malfeasance in public office. We know from phone records no call in respect to alleged statement,,,,,,,,,,,,,you were told from outset we would ourself commit offence malfeasance in public office, as we would not investigate your complaint about court in respect to same offence. Or are police saying,,,,,,we did call, then when,,,,who called,,,was a letter sent I have not seen one, can we have copy of letter.
j/ The appeal and check list of questions I want answered in tabs 9 and 10, for example tab 5 states malfeasance was investigated by police, no apparent evidence , however tab 8 states never investigated.
DETAILS
1/ PCC Ms MOUNTSTEVENS COVERED IN EMAIL AS I PLEASE ASK FOR HER HELP TO GET A REPLY FOR JR/. ECHR FROM HER STAFF,,,, eg FROM GOV.UK,,,,,,,,,,,COMPLAINT ABOUT HOW YOUR LOCAL AREA IS POLICED IGNORING APPEAL
2/ INITIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST POLICE AS PCBIRD COMMITED CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE EG REFUSING TO INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. IN POLICE LETTER 24.7.2017 THEY CONFIRM HIS GUILT ,,,,TOLD POLICE WILL NOT INVESTIGATE COMPLAINT [NEVER TOLD SEEK EVIDENCE[
3/ MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE DEFINES AS A PUBLIC OFFICER WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM HIS/HER DUTY.
4/ At this stage need to reference a document I was directed to by barrister,,,, UKCOP WATCH CRIME BODGE
If they can brush you off with shrug of shoulders they will do so.
If they start reciting huge chunks of legislation in bid to get rid of you ,do not be afraid to remind them its not their job to interpret law BUT TO ENFORCE IT.
[for example you will see the reason the police state , PCBird commited offence REFUSED to investigate, as we can not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, against court/judges, however from start sent CPS document tab 2 where they know their stance utterly untrue, utterly with no merit as court/judges convicted,.please see above,,,,ENFORCE LAW
5/ This is very much skeletal argument, full details in www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com.
6/ There is reference to historic events in website, for example ran a judicial review myself, many years ago. In papers Bristol county court awarded 1500.00 in papers, oral hearing comes before Lord Goldring, in judgement,,,,,,,,,although getting verdict very badly wrong not a reason to grant a judicial review, Strickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA 1132. Further why can the Bristol court not issue proper paperwork, also utterly legally flawed hearing your appeal in Bristol without a transcript, and the court award above will be quashed.
NEVER FORGIVEN
7/ We have previous issues of this case bought to police, eg Sg Bell. He states do not want to be taking on courts, from transcript now obtained for Lord Goldrings hearing, defendants stated we do not know Ms Suggett, [basis of my claim in email correspondence] or where these emails come from. Contact defendants perverting course of justice, where they state in letter TRUE , Ms Suggett dealt with application,anyway too late for you to do anything about it now. Further had recording with defendants workman confirming work to be done, recording sent to court, court reply you need defendants permission to use recording, can not bring in your recording equipment must be organised with court. Email defendants , all emails ignored. In waiting room BEFORE hearing sat next to HTV sports reporter where defendants lawyer asks if I have bought tape. In later correspondence ,[ perverting court of justice ] he states utterly unaware of evidence, proving your claim as I was away on holiday, until you raised at hearing. This defence utter nonsense ,could be proved by contacting reporter, where Sg Bell states reporter has now moved to South Wales have not time to go there. Contact Ms Mountstevens PCC who states I will not get involved, although from evidence utterly aware defendants perverting court of justice. The issue here was that even here applications, date/stamped by court ignored by the court, eg wilfully neglecting to perform their duty.
8/ Can we move to 2016 issues. Application 26.2.2016 , with all applications need court order, where court aware application must be sent to a judge, many emails for reply from a judge to application ,please see police letter tab 4 ,,,,failure to respond to correspondence .. court as in 7/ just ignores. Picketing at the court, where barrister told me to stop, wait until out of time , in later clinical negligence claim, then take at end to ECHR. Further first time I heard term malfeasance in public office, told to make complaint to the police, as criminal offence, further informed of UKCOP Watch. Another application 26.10.2016 just ignored. Send email 23.11.2016 tab 1 , no reply confirming court refusal to deal with applications, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty , eg malfeasance in public office. In application have court order that application must be sent to a judge.
9/ In Feb 2017 contact police, told no one available at time. Early March 2017 contact Sg Price Patchway police station, warned by barrister [please see 4/ CopWatch] I could be brushed off record conversation. . Told contact court, from recording told the court had informed me they would not even read correspondence, ,,,.told not my problem, where from recording states are you saying you refuse to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office. . Agreed to send CPS document, on malfeasance in public office, tab 2, which I dissected in letter to Sg Price, further in correspondence I refer to local judge Ms Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol , article on criminal offence, malfeasance in public office please see tab 9 in green highlight. Further in letter they are aware of my website by name. From tab 3 PCBird title of email, malfeasance in public office, states in email he is investigating criminal offence malfeasance in public office. He states to contact HMCS with complaint, however from website aware I could not make a complaint, please see my email to PCBird tab 4 confirming I could not make a complaint. Please see police letter tab 8 confirming I could not make a complaint. So ignoring criminal offence, asking me to make a complaint, however aware and admitting i could not make a complaint.
10/ Complaint to PSD , please see reply tab 5. Can we examine that letter ,
a/ Initial complaint to police over malfeasance in public office, a criminal offence, admitted by police, over ,,,,,applications ignored, and follow up emails for a reply ignored also, criminal offence malfeasance in public office.
b/ PCBird sought advice and has been informed that there is no apparent evidence of malfeasance in public office and that correct course of action is this matter is to raise complaint via HMCS. Well police admit applications made, from tab 1, further numerous emails for replies ignored, , as no reply email tab 1 which confirms the court would ignore applications although in application they have court order to send to a judge. The court is wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, malfeasance in public office. The Pro Bono Unit chasing for a reply, inform them court had 3 weeks to reply . Within 3 weeks had call that they would commit offence malfeasance in public office , as they would ignore all applications. When I start to state human rights case law, told to f,,,,,,,off and phone put down. For police to say we had we had no apparent evidence of criminal offence, malfeasance in public office, comes under Wednesbury definition of unreasonableness,,,,
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
The police admit applications made, many emails asking for a reply, in tab 1 clear the court would ignore the applications, where in application the court has court order that application must be sent to judge, therefore not doing so wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,defined as malfeasance in public office,,,,,so outrageous ,,,,that we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office, no sensible person could have come to it, WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR MONTHS WHO WAS THIS PERSON THAT CAME TO JUDGEMENT WE HAD NO APPARENT EVIDENCE. See tab 10 where we ask again.
There is second issue that we should complaint to HMCS however even police admit , tab 8 that I could not make a complaint, as they were told a long time before in tab 4.
c/ To stop duplication please see tab 9 where we have IPCC statutory rules for police [Mr Galloway] to deal with complaint, clear never wanted to deal with issue and sweep under the carpet, HE NEVER TALKED TO ME, as required by statutory rules of IPCC.
11/ So appeal, please see my website, and get reply from police tab 6. The reply from D I Stephens is utter deception, which he is utterly aware of from previous letters from police. He states you contacted police over a civil matter, utterly untrue , he knows he is corrupting /frustrating the appeal process, see Mr Galloways letter tab 5,,,,,you contacted police over criminal offence malfeasance in public office, via deception moving goal post. Further states again correct way to deal with issue is via HMCS, however aware from above a route not open to me, confirmed by police later, please see tab 8.
12/ I need data for appeal, please see my website, emails ignored, send tab 7 email dated 21.7.2017 asking again for data, as I state with no reply can do appeal in 14 days, eg would be in time. Next thing I know 3 days later, letter dated 24.7.2017 via utter deception by Mr Croach he knows appeal not filed, sends tab 8 as reply to an appeal not even filed, until I did in August 2017, tab 9. Lets consider not only his further attempt as Stephens deception trying to sweep under carpet,as afraid of appeal to be sent , however lets consider contents.
a/ Croach/Stephens want to move gaolpost, see Galloways letter, and PCBirds email, the complaint was over criminal offence malfeasance in public office, look at Croachs letter as Stephens letter afraid to state facts. Mr Croach again states correct way via HMCS , however from above I could not use that route, we have the UTTER NONSENCE PLEASE SEE PAGE 2 OF HIS LETTER WHERE HE ADMITS I COULD NOT MAKE COMPLAINT VIA HMCS HOWEVER ON PAGE 1 STATES WAY VIA HMCS. FURTHER IN LETTER STATES ONLY ROUTE
b/ Mr Croach carries on with his deception, saying in criminal issue, malfeasance in public office, we have no power to investigate, please see 8, however from file he is utterly aware of tab 2, where as explained in letter to Sg Price,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,JUDGES HAD BEEN CONVICTED,,,,ON FILE HE IS AWARE OF JUDGE Ms BRUNNERS ALBION CHAMBERS BRISTOL ARTICLE IN GREEN TAB 9 ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE,,,,,EG A PUBLIC FIGURE WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY. FOR CROACH TO SAY POLICE HAVE NO POWER TO INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COMES UNDER UKCOP WATCH,,,,,,,,,,,,,
If they [Crouch] start reciting huge chunks of legislation in bid to get rid of you ,do not be afraid to remind them its not their job to interpret law BUT TO ENFORCE IT.
c/ Suggest Mr Crouch had never looked at my appeal, just wanted to sweep under carpet, he states over a year since latest incident,,,,,again utterly untrue application from above 26.10.2016.
13/ From tab 7 email 21.7.2017 ask for data so i could do appeal.The police ignore email and their deception continues, send tab 8 , 24.7.2017 as reply to an appeal not even lodged. Contact IPCC told to lodge appeal, please see tabs 9 and 10.
TAB 1 reminder ms weaver /mr fowler so court in no doubt.
23/11/2016 - 00:02
Refer to previous emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by 24.11.2016 will assume the court refuses to reply to applications, can then inform my barrister and the press. Reply via email please.
The barrister wants to look in detail at restaining order, application to remove 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 , we have no replies denying access to the courts, breach of
Article 6 HRA. Bristol/Cardiff court for years ignoring applications to the court to pervert the course or justice.
P JONES
TAB 2
Misconduct in Public Office
o Policy
o Wilful neglect or misconduct
§ Nature of the neglect or misconduct
§ Seriousness of the neglect or misconduct
§ Motive
o Without reasonable excuse or justification
o Level of misconduct required
§ Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
§ Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
§ Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
§ Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
§ Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
§ Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
§ Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
§ Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
§ Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
§ County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
§ Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
§ Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
§ Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
§ Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010] EWCA Crim 2857
TAB 3
Report of Malfeasance
13/04/2017 - 15:19
Good Afternoon Mr Jones,
I am PC Bird and I am currently investigating your report of Malfeasance against HHJ Denyer, I have approached the HM Courts and Tribunals Service who have advised that originally a report of malfeasance should be directed at the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office as they are better equipped to deal with allegations of this nature as this is their remit.
I have attempted to call you a couple of times today but I have been unsuccessful and there was not a voicemail function hence the reason for my email.
I have attached two documents which explain the court complaints and disciplinary proceedings which I hope will assist you in your efforts.
Regards,
PC 922 Bird
Team 3 Response
Patchway Police Station
Avon and Somerset Constabulary
TAB 4
Re: Report of Malfeasance
15/04/2017 - 16:28
Goodafternoon,
Covered PCC in email. Can we draw line under correspondence, and let Ms Mountstevens deal with issue.
Aware preparing documents for later use, can i remind you, as it appears when in a hole stop digging.
a/ Form you asked me to fill in states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,can not investigate conduct of judge
b/ Other enclosure if citing a judge must be made in 3 months, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SO NO GROUNDS TO MAKE COMPLAINT.
c/ Recent correspondence from HMCS stating your correspondence will not be read.
d/ There is malfeasance issue with Denyer and the court, further a malfeasance issue now with police, R v Dytham [1979] as you will not investigate, allegations of criminal activity.
As i stated with respect can we draw a end to correspondence and await official reply from Ms Mountstevens.
P JONES
TAB 5
TAB 6
TAB 7
---Original message----
From : philip.jones88@btinternet.com
Date : 21/07/2017 - 16:36 (GMTDT)
To : ProfessionalStandardsDepartment@avonandsomerset.police.uk
Cc : Henry.Bird@avonandsomerset.police.uk
Subject : Re: FW: appeal,,,request for documentation from psd 2017/086838 case ref ipcc
Goodafternoon
Will not be paying for any information, with respect await reply in 14 days to questions asked in documentation,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,would show what investigations done before 15.4.2017. if you withhold answers can do appeal in 14 days time, before you reject claim before taking to IPCC. cOULD YOU EMAIL REPLY DO NOT ACCEPT ANY LATER DEFENSE THAT LETTER SENT,,,,,,PJONES
TAB 8
TAB 9
Fwd: FW: appeal,,,request for documentation from psd 2017/086838 case ref ipcc
07/08/2017 - 14:25
APPEAL PLEASE SEE ENCLOSURE
FINAL APPEAL TO POLICE REF HC/CO/369/17/HD APPEAL TO LETTER 18.7.2017
APPEAL SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH WEBSITE WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM
INTRODUCTION NOTES/QUESTIONS/BACKGROUND
From enclosed email 21.7.2017 it is clear no final appeal lodged, as advise from IPCC -- appeal enclosed please find final appeal, mindful as formulating seeking reply for judicial review.
CAN I ASK THAT COMPLAINT TO POLICE WAS OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCE, MALFEASANCE IN PUBLC OFFICE . CAN I REFER TO POLICE LETTER 12.6.2017 WHICH CONFIRMS THIS .FURTHER ALL EMAILS FROM PCBIRD IS TITLED ,,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. IF POLICE DISPUTE ABOVE CAN THEY STATE IN THEIR REPLY. SO WHEN THEY USE TERMS LIKE CONDUCT OF THE COURT,,,,THEY ARE DEFINING THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.
WHY I CONTACTED POLICE ,,,,
Barrister advice to contact, malfeasance in public office, criminal offence, defined as wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, . The defendants judges/court staff of Bristol county court. Wilfully neglecting to perform their duty.
There is no dispute here please see police letter 12.6.2017 why they admit contacted over criminal offence issue of malfeasance in public office. . Further in R V Dytham [a police officer] Lord Widgery defined a public officer as one who has a obligation to perform a duty. The police in correspondence sent aware the courts/judges accepted by courts as holding public office ,[ please see CPS guidelines below from CPS paper Misconduct in public office, in red below sent to police]
The following have been accepted as holding a public office by the courts over several centuries:
· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
· Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010] EWCA Crim 2857
sent to them,with dissection of this document in correspondence. Eg R V Llewellyn –Jones [1968] a district judge cited in above CPS document, as a public officer. . We may ask , utterly relevant today, was only route via HMCS, or did police/CPS deal with criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. Further from correspondence cited in my website they were directed towards judge Ms Kate Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol article on malfeasance in public office paper, please see extracts below in green
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
WHY COMPLAINT ABOUT POLICE. SKELETAL ARGUMENT
The appeal in 6 main themes,
1/ The police utterly refusing to follow statutory guidelines on investigation of complaints.
2/ PCBird guilty himself of malfeasance in public office failing to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office of staff at Bristol county court. We have in police letter 24.7.2017 confirming PCBirds guilt ,,,,,,the police would not investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. From CPS guidelines please see below again in red, ref paper Misconduct in Public Office CPS document
Without reasonable excuse or justification
It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the absence of a reasonable excuse or justification, although the nature of the prosecution evidence should in practice negate any such element.
The defendant may advance evidence of a reasonable excuse or justification. It is for the jury to determine whether the evidence reveals the necessary culpability.
We accept Mr Croach is not PCBirds legal adviser , however he puts forward justification reason PCBird wilfully neglected to perform is duty to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, , as police have no power to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, although sent CPS document above where judges convicted. Further see Ms Brunners paper.
THE POLICE FURTHER ARE PUT ON NOTICE AT NO TIME WAS I TOLD THEY WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE. WE ASK FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FOR EVIDENCE TO SHOW THIS.COULD YOU PLEASE SUPPLY EVIDENCE I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD WILFULLY NEGLECT TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY TO INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE.
3/ From my website get calls, as discussed with lawyer who called, if police are going to concoct a story,you would think they would check letters, reason for this section. From 2/ they admit PCBird,,,,,wilfully neglected to perform his duty, investigating criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, . letter 24.7.2017,they state ,,,,,from outset POLICE WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE COMPLAINT OF CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. . IIs alleged letter 12.6.2017 that PCBird had investigated , also third party had investigated criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, and both come to conclusion we had insufficient evidence of criminal offence malfeasance in public office. Can i refer to Mr Galloways letter of 12.6.2017 IT IS CLEAR THAT OFFICER HAS SOUGHT ADVICE AND HAS BEEN INFORMED ,,,,,NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.....If so clear, who was third party, and on what evidence did they conclude we had insufficient evidence., could police in reply supply evidence. We have from letter 24.7.2017 ,,,,,,, OUTSET told we would not investigate, [24.7.2017 letter ,], confirming criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, however told on the 12.6.2017 letter it was CLEAR we had investigated, ALSO THIRD PARTY HAD INVESTIGATED CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. We need clarification did PCBird refuse to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, or did he investigate, insufficient evidence.
4/ If police CONCOACTED stance we reject 2/ PCBird is not quilty of criminal offence malfeasance in public office, as both investigated criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, and we have insufficient evidence , then appeal under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,,,,,,,,,as verdict so ridiculous no reasonable person would have come to it. Or was Mr Galloway giving false statement,,,,as letter 24.7.2017 states from outset told police would not investigate, NEVER TALKED TO PCBIRD OR GALLOWAY........
5/ From information from day 1 aware due to failure to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance , we had a miscarriage of justice, . Are police saying we accept miscarriage of justice but can not investigate, as we have an element of criminal offence malfeasance in public office.
6/ Police did not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, all they offered was issue a recommendation for me to make complaint to HMCS where they were aware complaint would not be read, and further from forms , sent to me aware i could not make complaint, as they admit in letter 24.7.2017. It follows PCBird negligent /incompetent as must be aware i could not make a complaint, and refused to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office/or did he. Further refer to HMCS were we asked courts if 2013/4 ,,,,,applications on system,eg i did ask for oral hearing, will you confirm, from website my copies date/stamped by court, where we have oourt saying note on file, do not discuss, all enquires to court manager,,,,,,,,,,,,,,refer to numerous emails to court manager EVERYONE YES EVERYONE IGNORED . Police know from forms i can not make a complaint to HMCS due to regulations, ADMITTED IN THEIR LETTER 24.7.2017 but ask me to make a complaint.
DETAILS
1/ Paragraph in red from IPCC publication Guide to the police complaints system.
What will happen when I have made a complaint? If your complaint can be resolved by giving you some information or explaining what happened then the police should do this. If your complaint needs to be looked into, the police force should make a formal record of your complaint and let you know they have done this (see section three of the IPCC’s guidance for police forces for more information about recording complaints). Recording a complaint means that it has formal status under the Police Reform Act 2002. It must then be dealt with according to certain rules and guidance. If the police do not record your complaint you can appeal to the IPCC. The person dealing with your complaint should contact you to make sure they have all the details of what you are complaining about. They should ask you what you want to happen. For example, you might want an apology, a problem to be put right, or an officer to be held to account. They will be able to tell you what is likely to happen as a result of your complaint. The person dealing with your complaint should also talk to you about what they will do to deal with your complaint. For example, they may provide you with information or an explanation; they may arrange a meeting with the person you are complaining about or there may need to be an investigation.
From above ,,,,person dealing with complaint [Mr Galloway] ,,should contact you to make sure they have all details ,,,,,,,should ask what you want to ,,,,,,should talk to you what is likely to happen,,,,,talk to you ,,,,to deal with your complaint,,,,,what they will do to .....NEVER ANY CONVERSATION WITH MR GALLOWAY. ALL CALLS IN/OUT RECORDED HAVE NO MOBILE PHONE.
Again in red IPCC document
Local resolution Local resolution is a way of dealing with complaints at a local level. It is appropriate for many complaints, but not for more serious matters, where an investigation must be carried out. The person dealing with your complaint might take some of the following actions to locally resolve your complaint: • provide information and explanation • give an apology on behalf of the force • explain the circumstances of the case and any action taken • arrange a meeting with the person complained about • arrange for force policy or procedures to be changed • take some investigative steps to find out more information. The person dealing with your complaint will let you know the outcome when they have finished looking at it. They may do this in person or on the phone, but they should also write to you.
From above Galloway must in person or on phone contact over outcome, and ALSO write to me. Again no contact just letter sent.
Again in red from IPCC document
Local investigation Most complaints will be dealt with by local resolution. However, if a complaint is not suitable for local resolution, a local investigation should be carried out. Certain complaints must be dealt with by a local investigation. The person dealing with your complaint (the investigating officer) may set terms of reference to explain what the investigation will look at. If there are terms of reference you should receive a copy. Keeping you informed during an investigation The investigating officer must keep you informed about the progress of the investigation. They should agree with you how you would like to be kept informed – this could be by phone, in person or by letter. The investigating officer must update you at least every 28 days. When the investigation is complete, you will be told what it has found, and if your complaint has been upheld. You will also be told whether any action is going to be taken as a result of your complaint, what the action is and what the outcome of that action is. For example, an officer might have to attend a misconduct hearing and, as a result, receive a final written warning. You should receive enough information at the end of the investigation to understand what has happened during the investigation and what decisions have been reached. Sometimes this might happen by you being given a copy of the investigation report.
Again issue of keeping informed, NEVER ANY CONTACT. With respect suggest no contact, as Galloway wants to sweep under the carpet,we have the final betrayer as Mr Croach wishes to sweep under carpet, sending final report where utterly aware, emailed today. enclosed that appeal not lodged. It appears the PSD will go to any lengths to corrupt and frustrate the appeal process.
2/ Police appear to confirm PCBirds is guilty of malfeasance in public office, not investigating criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. There letter 18.7.2017….correct remedy via Judicial Conduct Investigation Office [JCIO], we did nothing. Letter 24.7.2017 confirming above, Further states no power to investigate, malfeasance in public office, and on page 2 of letter 24.7.2017 , you can ONLY make a complaint [criminal offence malfeasance in public office] via JCIO. YOU CAN NOT REPORT CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE TO THE POLICE AS COURT IMMUNE. THIS UNTRUE SEE CPS SITE ,WE ASK POLICE IN REPLY TO APPEAL DO THEY STILL MAINTAIN IN ISSUE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE THE COURT STAFF /JUDGES ARE IMMUNE FROM PROSECUTION. May I suggest for reference in my website, an internet site on police. UK Cop Watch Crime Bodge,,,,,
If they start reciting huge chunks of legislation in bid to get rid of you do not be afraid to remind them its not their job to interpret law , BUT TO INFORCE IT,,,,,although we seek a reply are you saying judges/court staff immune from prosecution over criminal offence malfeasance in public office.
We have however paradox as in letter 12.6.2017 it states PCBird sought a second opinion of malfeasance in public office , and they investigated also, and PCBird advised we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office. Indicates AN OTHER also investigated my starting issue malfeasance in public office, and concluded ,,,,,,,we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office. So it appears issue was investigated.
WE ASK WHO WAS AN OTHER AND WHAT EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED INVESTIGATIONS THEY USED TO COME TO JUDGEMENT WE HAD INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE.
We have asked what evidence was considered , however you refuse to supply. You must have evidence, as alleged investigations, in this appeal ask you do you still maintain you had insufficient evidence. Suggest the judgement ridiculous . We know IN ALL applications made, with court order that applications to be sent to a judge. You accept sent and numerous follow up emails for reply, your letter 12.6.2017 however court manager refuses to deal with application,
Reason for todays appeal the judgement of police so outrageous in its letter 12.6.2017 , WE HAD INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE no sensible person would have come to it. Wednesbury classification of unreasonableness [PLEASE READ ABOVE CPS/JUDGE MS BRUNNERS PAPER]
Ass Provincial Picture House v Wednesbury Corp [1948] IKD 223. Standard of unreasonableness in assessing an application for judicial review of a public authority decision ,,,,,,so outrageous in its defiance of logic or acceptable moral standards no sensible person who applied his mind [[we have insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office] could have arrived at it.
Of course with reply to appeal would understand why PCBird/AN OTHER came to judgement we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office. Difficult as police refuse to supply data to frustrate/ corrupt the appeal process, see for example in letter 12.6.2017 stating ,,,,refusing to hear a civil case, are police saying, your application was sent to a judge who refused you a hearing. However this does not make sense from 26.2.2016 application, as court after 7 months ADMIT they did not send to a judge, asked what I wanted court to do, further in 2013 issue we know no reply to applications, as court of appeal state,,,,,no evidence you asked for a oral hearing to correct.
3/ Why did you send letter dated 24.7.2017 with allegations that you had my appeal. Can i refer to email s 21.7.2017 , ENCLOSED where I state and 22.7.2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,WILL ASSUME WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND DO APPEAL TO YOU. As i stated to you would appeal to IPCC who asked me in 28 days to forward appeal to you, enclosed. Can i please refer to that letter 18.7.2017 where you require on line appeal form only now sent to you. Can i address that form. You ask 3 questions, on form,
WERE YOU PERMITTED TO COMMENT ON THE COMPLAINT AND HOW IT SHOULD BE ANSWERED
DID POLICE FOLLOW THE PROCESS YOU AGREED WITH THEM FOR THE LOCAL RESOLUTION OF YOUR COMPLAINT.
HAVE THE POLICE COMMUNICATED ANY LEARNING POINTS TO YOU [why you believe not proper outcome of your complaint ]
TO ALL THREE QUESTIONS ANSWER NO AS ON FORM TICKED BOX SEE THIS DOCUMENT
From IPCC guide form, investigation officer to ,,,,
Talk to you what you want to happen
Talk to you about what they will do to deal with your complaint
Person dealing with complaint [Mr Galloway] will let you know the outcome when they have finished looking at it, they may do this IN PERSON OR ON PHONE BUT hey should also write to you.
Keep you informed , agree with you how you would like to be informed
You should receive enough information at end of investigations to understand what has happened during investigations
The police want to ignore all regulations to frustrate judicial/appeal process NEVER TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY. Have not obtained enough information as all request for data ignored, third issue on claim form,,,,learning points to you, why you believe not proper outcome to your complaint. Picketing at court, barrister told me to stop, make claim to police over criminal offence malfeasance in public office. [ Previous complaint to police [ Sg Bell ] over judicial review case cited below, where i send letter to defendants, perverting course of justice, where they reply, true too late for you to do anything about it now, told by Sg Bell do not want to be taking on courts ] Suggest same situation today. Barrister advised [2016] police may try to brush off, so record conversation at desk Patchway police station with Sg Price, expected to be brushed off, required as evidence, asked police if they want copy of recording , emails ignored, agreed i would send CPS document on malfeasance in public office. There is anyway no dispute of issue for police, their letter ,12.6.2017 ,,,,made allegation of offences malfeasance in public office, and in letter , further in letter states PCBird also sought advice and both concluded from letter,,12.6.2017,,,,,,,,,,,no apparent evidence of malfeasance in public office,,,. This was issue bought to police, and issue they investigated, its so outrageous no sensible person would come to it, we had insufficient evidence.
4/ We accept going through motions as i have always said to you, concluding in judicial review, JR .This time via barrister not myself, ironic as cause of problem today, when i ran case . We had JR judgement in papers that Bristol county court awarded 1500.00 , where i sought a oral hearing. We have judgement from Lord Gouldring,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,in a county court although getting verdict very badly wrong not a reason to grant a judicial review, Srickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132. However Lord Golding in judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,,why can Bristol county court not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing your Bristol appeal without a transcript and cost award to them will be quashed, NEVER FORGIVEN.
CONCLUSION
The appeal ,,,,,,,,,,as agreed with Sg Price t[RECORDED] that police would investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed in their letter 12.6.2017., after i sent evidence to her. In letter 24.7.2017 admit police themselves commited offence malfeasance in public office as PCBird refused to investigate criminal offence of malfeasance in public office. From CPS paper section, ,,,,,without reasonable excuse or justification, ,,,,,,,the letter 24.7.2017 gives justification why PCBird commited offence malfeasance in public office a criminal offence, as court/judges immune from prosecution , and ONLY way to forward complaint about criminal offence, malfeasance in public office is via the JCIO office. Suggest as legal advice, this is legally wrong and can make a complaint to you, over criminal offence, malfeasance in public office. We have paradox as this is change of story, as letter 12.6.2017 states was investigated by 2 people, and found insufficient evidence of criminal offence, malfeasance in public office. If this is new police stance, then judgement from Wednesbury, so outrageous in defiance of logic, no reasonable person would come to it, reason for a judicial review.. Police offered a solution to contact HMCS. Where in police letter 24.7.2017 another paradox, told was correct advice, however from their file my email to PCBird dated 13.4.2017 aware i could not make claim to HMCS, in letter 24.7.2017 admit this advice was negligent, PCBird incompetent as i could not make claim to HMCS, .Further i refer to recording, where Sg Price aware, except for new applications to HHJDenyer, ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO HMCS WILL BE IGNORED,We are left police saying make comlaint to HMCS where aware they will ignore complaint, as before. We are therefore left with a criminal offence malfeasance in public office where police state we will not investigate criminal offence.
P JONES
TAB 10
YOUR REFERENCE HC/CO/369/17/HD FINAL APPEAL BEFORE JUDICIAL REVIEW
CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE –WILFULLY NEGLECTING TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY
1/ Can you please email to give estimate of date of reply, to appeal application already lodged. Aware you refuse to supply data, eg email asking for data so i could do appeal , where you refused then did reply to appeal knowing i had not lodged appeal as awaiting data.
2/ The police are put on notice of case law ECHR ,,,,Hirvisan v Finland ,,,,,,,reasons given to make effective use of any existing right to appeal [judicial review]
In my LATEST application asked set questions, for next stage, do not want to be going to IPCC as you refuse to answer. Need facts for judicial review.
3/ Can we please go through these cited in appeal lodged. .can you please ensure we have full data, as IPCC regulations, eg to understand in full ,,,,,,,investigations you did.
a/ IPCC statuory regulations over complain. NEVER talked to Mr Galloway, . If you maintain he did can we have dates/times. Can i remind you of calls of threats of violence, where police contacted, calls recorded, where you called after investigations, saying via BT traced also number ,he was not known to us before , we have issued a caution , today still record all calls in and out.
b/ Complaint to police over criminal offence malfeasance in public office, confirmed in your letter 12.6.2017 is this correct, also all emails from PCBird confirm this. .
c/ From your letter 24.7.2017 you state told from outset we would not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office. I ask when was i told and who told me.
d/ From letter 24.7.2017 you state no power to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, do you still maintain this ,although as requested on recording by Sg Price Patchway police station, she was sent details and dissection of CPS document below, which even gave you charging practice , and judiciary not immune from prosecution.
Prosecution Policy and Guidance » Legal Guidance » L to O » Misconduct In Public Office
Misconduct in Public Office
o Policy
o Wilful neglect or misconduct
§ Nature of the neglect or misconduct
§ Seriousness of the neglect or misconduct
§ Motive
o Without reasonable excuse or justification
o Level of misconduct required
he following have been accepted as holding a public office by the courts over several centuries:
· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
· Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010] EWCA Crim 2857
Further refer you were informed of local judge, Ms Kate Brunner QC at Albion chambers Bristol article on criminal offence malfeasance in public office, can i cite extracts below
The elements [of offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,,To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder .....Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest.
Kate Brunner QC
e/ You state in paradox letter 12.6.2017 the criminal offence malfeasance in public office was investigated , PC Bird sought a second opinion , who also confirmed we had insufficient evidence. We ask who was this person. For example take one of many examples, application 26.10.2016 [makes nonsense of police letter 24.7.2017 that more than 12 months since latest incident] police admit letter 12.6.2017 that application made and numerous follow up emails for a reply. In every application must enclose court order your application refers to. On all court orders states application must be sent to a judge. Pro Bono Unit chasing for a reply, inform them not out of time they have 3 weeks to reply to application Within 3 weeks get call from court that application would be ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office, told to f,,,,,,,off, inform Pro Bono Unit, who advised contacting court by email,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you VIA EMAIL by,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume application will be ignored, confirming offence. NO REPLY
f/ From letter 24.7.2017 assume from CPS regulations that PCBird not guilty of malfeasance in public office, wilfully neglecting to perform his duty, as in letter confirms his guilt as it states told from start, we await details, he refused to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office. He is not guilty as he had ,,,,,,reasonable excuse not to investigate, ,,,as correct and ONLY way was to make complaint to HMCS. However from recording with Sg Price aware HMCS would not read complaint, from email they sent, and from letter 24.7.2017 admit as i informed PCBird via email 13.4.2017 we can not make a complaint due to HMCS regulations. In letter 24.7.2017 admit i could not make a complaint over HHJDenyer as over 3 months, but PCBird knew this at onset. Further second form sent states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,can not complain about decision a judge has made. Do you accept i could not make claim to HMCS. Further from my website suggest if a route and PCBird not incompetent and negligent as can not make a complaint wrong route. In correspondence he was aware of my website and facts. Further from my website, numerous calls with examples, as a lawyer stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you bought you car insurance on line, have certificate in car. PCBird via numberplate recognition stops you for no insurance. Alright he knows paid, however a rogue company, we ask does he ignore criminal offence, say report to insurance ombudsman ,,,,,,we know answer. He is aware of a criminal offence today of malfeasance in public office.
We await reply to appeal lodged with you over a week now.
PJONES
THE IPCC STATE YOU NEED A JUDICIAL REVIEW SO ENCLOSURE SENT WE DO NOT EXPECT A REPLY FROM CORRUPT POLICE IF WE DO WILL BE PUT IN TEXT. .
�*$��.m��< �a5
PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW [JR]
PLIAINTIFF
PHILIP JONES 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL BS346DF
DEFENDANTS
AVON SOMERSET POLICE PO BOX 37 VALLEY ROAD BRISTOL BS208QJ HC/CO369/17 [ASP]
DETAILS OF MATTER BEING CHALLENGESD
SKELETAL ARGUMENT [DETAIL FOLLOW IF REQUIRED. ]
The format all issues in a few pages, SYNOPSIS so reader would have all information,no need to read further, these are issues, followed by detailed breakdown of pre defendants involvement in a/ followed by defendants involvement breakdown in b/. before full detail under the facts in detail, for protocol.
SYNOPSIS SKELETAL ARGUMENT .
This document produced for several routes, eg after todays reply presenting file to barrister and judge , Ms K Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol , as recommended and understand does direct access, applications made to release money on my home. . . Accept need to explain issues in a few pages, [Ms Bruner QC] in synopsis, detail follows , as protocol rules. The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants, warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,and recommended Ms Brunner and found her later article on malfeasance in public office shown in text, defendants aware of this paper. Further barrister stated present good claim, wait until out of time, then take to ECHR, denying access to a court, TOLD TO EMAIL EVERYWEEK asking for a reply, to application until out of time to issue proceedings in new claim.
UK COP WATCH
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
Can we please define being brushed off in complaint by ASP as ASPBO
Can we please define using legislation to brush off as ASPL
Defendants reply 12.6.2017 saying 2 people have investigated ,[appendix 6] and we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, and make complaint to HMCS, in letter 24.7.2017 appendix 8 defendants admit I could not make a complaint, due to regulations. . The reply from defendants 12.6.2017 comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
In that same letter appendix 6 admit applications made, every week asking for a reply to applications, , and email 23.11.2017 confirming court manager would ignore application. So ask is it true we had no evidence, comes under Wednesbury. . On the 18 7.2017 told I had 28 days to appeal, and if doing on line need to enclose official appeal form, asking for data to do appeal, for example in response 12.6.2016 reply IPCC have statutory regulations, that should be followed please see in text all these ignored, for example email 22.7.2017 concluded appendix 9 …
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
So if no reply would do appeal sometime after 28.7.2017, the defendants Mr Crouch knows I am asking difficult questions, now acts in utter corrupt and dishonest way, he has not the appeal form , appendix 12, as accept in form I would have to tick boxes with yes, confirming IPCC regulations followed where I tick box, no, appendix 12 appeal filed 7.8.2017.. The defendants Mr Galloway never talked to me, no mobile, all calls in and out recorded. ASP sends letter appendix 8 dated 24.7.2017 as reply to an appeal not lodged. Complain to IPCC told to email defendants PCC who ignored email, in further call to IPCC told defendants have informed us appeal final response issued 24.7.2017 appendix 8 , your evidence showing appeal not filed, until 7.8.2017 will not be considered due to legal regulations, need a judicial review. We now have what can only be called a different story,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Mr Croach now states PCBird commited offence malfeasance in public office as he refused to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, and puts forward as CPS paper, ,,,,,without reasonable excuse or justification,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,that judges /courts immune . From letter to defendants, 22.3.2017 know not immune, have also CPS paper appendix 4 and 5 , please see also appendix 13 . From above does this not come under , ASPL to get rid of me,,,,,,,quoting legislation, knowing UNTRUE to get rid of you. Note difference in appendix 6 and 8 saying in one we investigated , no evidence of criminal offence malfeasance in public office, knowing this comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness , need to change story, and in other we would commit offence malfeasance in public office as we would not investigate, .
SKELETAL ARGUMENT UNDER a/ pre defendants involvement
At one point in time [several before] application 26.2.2016 ignored, in March picketing at court where barrister told me to stop wait until out of time in new claim, and then take to ECHR, further advised to email every week asking for reply, and need to exhaust all routes in UK, before taking to ECHR, l first time I heard term ,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office to take to police, this last result. . . North Bristol NHS Trust NBT had stated they will ignore correspondence, however informed them application made to issue proceedings, , and if they objected to contact the court as court order. We had reply, NBT only reference when out of time, so informed court of reply in appendix to application 26.2.2016 on the 2.3.2017, start of that email document below,,,,
urgent application to hhjdenyer
02/03/2016 - 12:18
COULD YOU PLEASE TODAY SEND TO HHJDENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE THANK YOU
P JONES.....
Attachment ,,,,,,first lines
URGENT CAN YOU PLEASE PUT TODAY TO HHJDENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE PLEASE.
1/ On the 26.2.2016 an urgent application was made to HHJDenyer. This was in respect to 2 issues
a/ To issue proceedings
b/ Removal of order , made with complete utter no merit
, 2/ Things have changed, the trust emailed 31.2.2016 saying please do not issue proceedings, the issue of 3 year rule when you become aware of negligence will not be raised in defence, we will accept/reject your claim by the 5.4.2016, and will further give you a few weeks to issue proceedings If need be .
3/ So this previous application must be amended to read permission to issue proceedings on the 5.4.2016, details of claim in previous application, this is an application where in letter to my GP they admit negligence, eg initial xray,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no adnormality, in new xray requested by surgeon, he confirms negligence as scapula abnormality , Bigliane Acromium, which was missed.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SO THEY KNOW FROM SECTION 1 EXACTLY WHAT APPLICATION WAS FOR
Asking for a reply to application, ignored, picket at court in late March 2016, so email BCC every week for reply, until out of time 27.7.2016. Lawyer asking for data, for ECHR possible litigation, so now contact court, where we get at last response what do you want court to do, this is pathetic excuse as they have done for years reason to ignore applications,,.
THIS IS UTTERLY NOT RELEVANT THEY HAVE APPLICATION ,N244 FORM ,FEE EXCEPT APPLICATION ,COURT ORDER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, APPLICATION MUST BE SENT TO JUDGE, NO REASON TO KNOW DETAILS OF APPLICATION,, HOWEVER FROM ABOVE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT APLICATION WAS FOR ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,JUST SEND TO A JUDGE ,,,,DID COURT MANAGER SEND [believe not undercover investigations show fee except application not even filed]
However I give data,,,,
Re: RE: echr
13/09/2016 - 15:23
Goodafternoon,
With respect I do not know what to add, and ask the ECHR for judges to judge your response today. Accept now preparing papers for ECHR so barrister can do application
THEREFORE
I REFER ALL PARTIES TO APPLICATION 26.2.2016 SEE TIMED 13.01.
..........................................................................2.3.2016 WHERE MATTER FURTHER CLEAR WHAT WAS REQUIRED FIRST 2 LINES AS NOW OBTAINED AGREEMENT FROM NORTHBRISTOL NHS TRUST WHEN OUT OF TIME. …,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Then get email from court manager Mr Fowler,,,,,,,,,28.9.2017 stating we asked you to attend court to see what you want court to do, utterly not relevant he had N244, application, court order that application must be sent to a judge, ,,,,,,,, did he send, or did he wilfully neglect to perform his duty, malfeasance in public office.
Application 26.10.2016, ignored, Pro Bono Unit chasing for a reply, informed them BCC had 3 weeks to reply, however within 3 weeks BCC inform me application will be ignored, and informed Pro Bono Unit, as legal advice email BCC for confirmation, ,,,
reminder ms weaver /mr fowler so court in no doubt.
23/11/2016 - 00:02
Refer to previous emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by 24.11.2016 will assume the court refuses to reply to applications, can then inform my barrister and the press. Reply via email please………………………………………………….
SECTION b/ TODAYS ISSUES.SKELETAL ARGUMENT
Complain to police, being brushed off, told not our issue, make complaint to HMCS, informed due to regulations could not make a complaint, in defendants letter appendix 8 confirm I could not make a complaint, agree to send CPS documents on malfeasance in public office, where I also dissect document, , please see appendix 4 and 5, for example aware court/judges not immune from proceedings. Defendants also aware of judge, also barrister Ms Brunner QC Albion chambers Bristol paper on malfeasance in public office , extracts below…
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Get police reply 12.6.2017 appendix 6 where they state complain to HMCS and state we did investigate, even another member of staff investigated, and we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, from above BCC admit they had and would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office, ASP judgement comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
Ask for data to do appeal, ignored, so email 22,7,2018 , appendix 9, can I please quote end of appendix 9 ,
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
P JONES
There are statutory regulations of IPCC in investigations….eg
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
Mr Galloway never talked to me, no mobile, all calls in/out recorded. Asking difficult questions, for example reply appendix 6 , 12.6.2017 comes under Wednesbury, So from email 22.7.2017 clear no appeal lodged, would do after 28.7.2017 if defendants did not reply. Now by utter corruption to save answering questions, send reply appendix 8 to an appeal not lodged. Now accept utter nonsense to say no evidence of malfeasance in public office, and complain to HMCS,state as my complaint that PCBird himself commited offence malfeasance in public office, as told from start he would not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, now excuse why he did not act, under CPS document,,,,,,,,,without reasonable excuse or justification,,,,,,,,,,,, why he did not investigate as judges/courts immune from proceedings , HE KNOWS UTTERLY UNTRUE SENT APPENDIX 4 AND 5.
Appeal lodged 7.8.2017.
Contact I[PCC told to email, PCC of defendants, email ignored. Contact IPCC again, they state, defendants inform us appeal was made 22.7.2017, and we have reply, appendix 8, file closed, only route via JR. From appendix 9 all parties know appeal not filed, as we state will do after 28.7.2017. We require reply to appeal lodged.Assume further grounds for litigation when we get reply
THE FACTS IN DETAIL
This document used for numerous issues, eg application to judge, also barrister Ms Brunner Albion chambers Bristol.From legal advice recommended, understand she does direct access. Process of remortgage to pay her or another barrister .
1/ We have for many years Bristol county court BCC ignoring applications, for example, please see appendix 1 at end of this document, where also human rights issue here as court refused to give me a defence, note document stamped/dated by court, a case i won.Please see appendix 2 where court order to ask HHJDenyer for oral hearing, ignored , told via court order to make second application, note this receipt for second application again date/stamped by the court, appendix 2. Ignored ,resulting in miscarriage of justice,,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence he made application to correct, .
2/ Application 26.2.2016 again ignored, picketing at court where barrister told me to stop, stated a commercial lawyer not my direct field, you have good new claim ,clinical neglifence, wait until out of time to issue proceedings and then take to the ECHR, eg for example
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
Barrister further stated must exhaust all routes in UK, at end to contact police over criminal offence,malfeasance in public office., the court manager wilfully neglecting to perform his duty. first time i heard about offence. Warned that police may try to brush me off , be firm, they quoting any excuse or legal terms, to get rid of you, please see appendix 3 assume standard police stance from internet site, .also below
UK COP WATCH
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
Can we please define being brushed off in complaint by ASP as ASPBO
Can we please define using legislation to brush off as ASPL
Note definition of being brushed off ASPBO , and if using legislation as excuse ASPL. Barrister further advice to email court every week asking for a reply to your application, so no doubts later, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty.. This not disputed from defendants letter 12.6.2017 appendix 6 . ,,,,,applications made with continue request asking for reply to applications ,,,,Do not understand nonsense ,,,,court refusing to hear a case,,,,,,as NEVER OBTAINED REPLIES TO APPLICATIONS CONFIRMED BELOW BY BRISTOL COUNTY COURT BCC,,,,,emails your sending on regular basis,,,,,,.
3/ Further application 26.10.2017 , Pro Bono Unit chasing for reply, inform them BCC had 3 weeks to reply, however in this 3 weeks had call from court BCC saying application would not even be read. Informed Pro Bono Unit , and advised to email BCC to confirm they would ignore application [, Weaver/Fowler court managers. eg email below]
Reminder ms weaver /mr fowler so court in no doubt.
23/11/2016 - 00:02
Refer to previous emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by 24.11.2016 will assume the court refuses to reply to applications, can then inform my barrister and the press. Reply via email please.
Court confirming applications although court order to make, enclosed with application, would be ignored, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty ,malfeasance in public office.
4/ Contact police, Patchway police station , being brushed off as warned, told to make complaint to HMCS, told malfeasance in public office not a criminal offence record visit to Patchway police station. In recording aware BCC had stated correspondence would not be read, further from regulations could not make a complaint. . Agreed i would send evidence including CPS document on malfeasance in public office, this letter in appendix 4, where i dissect the CPS document, on criminal offence, malfeasance in public office, and extracts from that CPS document in appendix 5. Ask Sgt Price are you saying you refuse to investigate, where told to send CPS details.
So defendants aware a complaint to HMCS not an option, and court/judges not immune from litigation.
Further defendants made aware of judge also barristers paper on criminal offence malfeasance in public office, by Ms Brunner QC extracts below.
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
5/ Then get reply from PCBird below,,
Report of Malfeasance
13/04/2017 - 15:19
Good Afternoon Mr Jones,
I am PC Bird and I am currently investigating your report of Malfeasance against HHJ Denyer, I have approached the HM Courts and Tribunals Service who have advised that originally a report of malfeasance should be directed at the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office as they are better equipped to deal with allegations of this nature as this is their remit.
I have attempted to call you a couple of times today but I have been unsuccessful and there was not a voicemail function hence the reason for my email.
I have attached two documents which explain the court complaints and disciplinary proceedings which I hope will assist you in your efforts.
Regards,
Avon and Somerset Constabulary
PC 922 Bird
Team 3 Response
Patchway Police Station
Accept I have been betrayed Sgt Price getting her way as she wanted from day 1 to brush me off, to ignore criminal offence, and ask me to make complaint to HMCS, my reply below
Re: Report of Malfeasance
15/04/2017 - 16:28
Covered PCC in email. Can we draw line under correspondence, and let Ms Mountstevens deal with issue.
Aware preparing documents for later use, can i remind you, as it appears when in a hole stop digging.
a/ Form you asked me to fill in states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,can not investigate conduct of judge
b/ Other enclosure if citing a judge must be made in 3 months, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SO NO GROUNDS TO MAKE COMPLAINT.
c/ Recent correspondence from HMCS stating your correspondence will not be read.
d/ There is malfeasance issue with Denyer and the court, further a malfeasance issue now with police, R v Dytham [1979] as you will not investigate, allegations of criminal activity.
As i stated with respect can we draw a end to correspondence and await official reply from Ms Mountstevens.
P JONES
6/ Make complaint to police, their reply in appendix 6. They state PCBird investigated criminal offence, sought second judgement and we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office, admit applications made, numerous follow up emails for a reply, and final email above where BCC confirm they will ignore applications, BCC has N244 forms, fee except certificates enclosed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,to say we have no evidence of someone wilfully neglecting to perform their duty is outrageous , and comes under Wednesbury definition of unreasonableness,,,,,,
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
Further still continue saying make complaint to HMCS, where not correct route investigating themselves, further from above my email 15,4.2017 aware could not make a complaint, which they confirm in their letter 24.7.2017. appendix 8 ..
7/ Told in letter 18.7.2015 ………….i had 28 days to do appeal. Asking for data to do appeal, eg asking 11 questions, email 21.7.2017 saying will give you 14 days to supply data so I can do appeal , for example who was person who stated we had no evidence of criminal offence malfeasance in public office., due to personal events, circumstances changed, where emailed again 22.7.2017 saying could we have data by 28.7.2018 to do appeal, , with no reply would assume they refuse to supply data and do appeal after 28.7.2017, please see appendix 9 Please note end of email appendix 9 below, asking for data ,if no reply would do appeal AFTER 28.7.2017 eg end of email...
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
P JONES
8/ Defendants Mr Crouch now in utter corruption manner, accept i am asking difficult questions, so as not prepared to answer , sends reply to an appeal not filed dated 24.7.2017, appendix 8. For example asking to confirm they did not follow statutory regulations of IPCC. Eg Mr Galloway never talked to me. .Where i file appeal dated 7.8.2017 in time.
9/ Contact IPCC told to email PCC of defendants, email ignored, go back to IPCC told the defendants inform us you issued an appeal, we have reply 24.7.2017 ,legally we can do nothing about it need a judicial review, we accept from above appeal not lodged on the 24.7.2017.
10/ Lets consider appendix 8 reply to alleged appeal.Its a utter parodox, still saying correct way was to complain to HMCS ,but ADMITTING I COULD NOT MAKE COMPLAINT. For PCBird to say way forward via complaint to HMCS , was incompetent and negligent. It admits my complaint to ASP as it states appendix 8 ,,,someone informed me from start they would not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office. This person therefore guilty of criminal offence malfeasance in public as refusing to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office. From CPS document on offence we have section,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,without reasonable excuse or justification,,,,,,,,,,,. For example Mr Crouch appendix 8 puts forward a defence why PCBird did not act as court/judges immune from prosecution, but he knows this statement is untrue, In appendix 4 is my dissection of CPS document on criminal offence malfeasance in public office where i state,,,,,,,,,,,,,PUBLIC OFFICER,,,,,,,,,,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,, in appendix 5 , with appendix 4 they have case law where people in list convicted of criminal offence malfeasance in public office, including
R V Sainsbury [a justice of the peace.....criminal judge]
R V Lleweelyn –Jones [a district judge..civil judge]
It has Ms Brunners QC document extracts,,,
The elements [of offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,,To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder .....Without reasonable justification or excuse
Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest.
Kate Brunner QC
How can Mr Croach come to verdict that judges/courts immune. May i suggest a ASPL, eg knowing completely and utterly untrue quoting legislation to get rid of you.With respect if making up evidence you would think ASP would have a constant story. Compare appendix 6 we investigated, ,,,,we have no evidence of criminal offence malfeasance in public office, look at appendix 8,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you were told from start we would not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office? ?? ? ?. All calls in/out recorded, no mobile phone, we know after contact with Sgt Price i had no contact until letter of PCBird saying not been able to contact you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,investigating malfeasance in public office,,,,,,,,,,,who told me , when was i told.
11/ Advised Ms Brunner would need to know why applications made in 2016, however to keep separate, i have filed at end of appendix section, number 11. . As Ms Brunner states ,,,,the public outrage comes not from the particular details of misconduct but from sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest,,,,,. ASP admit numerous applications made , take one example 26.. 10.2017, sent direct to court manager, follow up email to him where he confirms application would be ignored, although in front of him he has court order that the application must be sent to judge. We ask,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,am i being wronged by an individual whose duty to serve the public interest.Identical argument with PCBird, however do not know why he did not investigate, was it because we had,,,,,,,,no evidence, or because,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,court/judges immune from prosecution.
INTERESTED PARTIES
IPCC PO BOX 473 SALE M33 OBW 2017/086838 [IPCC]
NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST BRISTOL BS105NB [NBT]
BRISTOL CIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE 2 REDCLIFE ST BRISTOL BS16GR [BCC]
THE ISSUE
BCC for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.
THE DETAILS OF ACTION THAT DEFENDANTS ARE EXPECTED TO TAKE
We expect criminal offence to be investigated, the Home Office state all crimes should be investigated.
WANT A REPLY TO APPEAL FILED 7.8.2017, as it raises other issues of dishonesty by defendants.
ADR PROPOSALS
There is no relevant options here. Contacted IPCC told to email PCC [ASP] for help, however all correspondence ignored. Further emailed [ASP] who have confirmed they will ignore appeal lodged 7.8.2017,,,,eg unless I hear from you,,,,.eg email part in red below 30.8.2017
Concerned by your reply, ,,,,,unable to provide you with any additional material. are you saying you will not reply to appeal lodged 7.8.2017. Will assume this is position unless I hear from you during the day, before going back to IPCC. Not asking for reply, or estimate of your reply date , just asking if you refuse to answer appeal lodged 7.8.2017. Will assume this is case , confirming your email unless I hear from you today.
On the 21.7.2017 ask ASP for data so I could do appeal, give them 14 days to supply data so I could do appeal in 14 days time. [events occurred being away] On the 22.7.2017 clarified so no doubt in email. Again asking for data to do appeal, we reference email of 21.7.2017, ABOVE eg 14 days, eg end of email below 22.7.2017 … [as email eg in RED ,,,,,,ASP KNOW APPEAL NOT LODGED]
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
P JONES
The email ignored followed by a reply 24.7.2017 , not giving data, but reply to an appeal not lodged,IPCC stance ASP state you have filed an appeal, although you have shown evidence waiting for data to do an appeal, which was ignored, however legally the court will take that reply 24.7.2017 as reply to an appeal, which they admit not lodged. We ask in JR how can email 22.7.2017 be taken as appeal, as we await data to do appeal after 28.7.2017 , where ASP reply to alleged appeal dated 24.7.2017. Further in defendants letter 18.7.2017 , they state we need if doing on line our appeal form completed,,,,,NOT SENT UNTIL 7.8.2017
The IPCC STANCE ALTHOUGH FROM YOUR EMAIL clear you had not filed appeal, eg end of email 22.7.2017 as I sought data to do the appeal,,,, AFTER 28.7.2017, we accept this is reply 24.7.2017 to appeal lodged 22.7.2017.
THE DETAILS OF ANY OTHER INFORMATION SOUGHT
FROM ASP , In reply 12.6.2017 states a third party also investigated and there was no evidence of malfeasance in public office, we ask again the following
1/ Who was this person
2/ Does this come under ASPBO eg a statement at random to brush me off, eg no investigations were undertaken
3/ If you maintain investigations were undertaken can we have replies to 12 questions asked concerning alleged investigations.
4/ Can we have copy of file, as IPCC regulations.
5/ You state in letter 24.7.2017 that i was told from the start that ASP would not investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, who told me and when, all calls here in/out recorded, no mobile phone. If letter can we have copy of letter.
6/ There are statutory regulations of IPCC , can you supply dates/times when items below took place, with Mr Galloway
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
7/ In letter 24.7.2017 obtain a different story, confirming PCBird himself guilty of malfeasance in public office as ASP refused to investigate criminal offence malfeasance in public office, and told from start, however from CPS document ,,,,without reasonable excuse or justification ,,,puts forward justification as court/judges immune from litigation. Does this not come under ASPL quoting chunks of legislation to get rid of you. In letter as requested by Sgt Price aware court/judges not immune from litigation, from Ms Brunners QC paper aware not immune, do you still maintain,,,,PCBird had reasonable excuse and justification not to act as judges/courts immune from litigation.
8/ We need to clarify alleged 22.7.2017. appeal, reply 24.7.2017 . Can you confirm this is one timed [ alleged appeal 22.7.2017 ] 13.42, do not want at later date, appeal lodged sometime on same date after 13.42.
9/ Need to make clear, in alleged investigation appendix 6 states HHJDenyer refused to give me a hearing, are you saying applications were sent to him, does not make sense application 26.10.2016 to issue proceedings over STATUTORY REGULATIONS ONLY. Further in BCC emails admit applications not sent, now out of time , asking me what I want court to do.
FOR NBT 1/ For applications 26.2,2016 /26.10.2017 as court order had to inform you of proceedings, and if you objected , did you object to proceedings to the court, or were happy for issues to go to proceedings. We have asked you and court before , however you refused to reply data.
THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY
BCC Can we please have copy of all documents filed by NBT, your response to you in period 1.1.2016 to todays date concerning above. . Further can we have copy of any documents in files relating to ASP contact with you, over above issue.
ASP Can we have copy of your file, eg who informed you that I had been told PCBird would commit offence, malfeasance in public office and not investigate criminal offence.
BCC Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.
THE ADDRESS FOR REPLY AND SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENTS
31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL BS346DF
PROPOSED REPLY DATE
14 DAYS
APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
Can we please define being brushed off in complaint to ASP as ASPBO
Can we please define quoting huge chunks of legislation to get rid of you as ASPL
APPENDIX 4
APPLICATION BRIEFING [legal barristers advice malfeasance [misconduct] in public office /nonfeasance,,,ECHR , perverting course of justice, although topics not his field eg commercial barrister , . Further advised to contact press over criminal activity by court, reference newspaper communication i do not want anything for story] THIS GOING ON FOR YEARS WITH HHJDENYER
PHILIP JONES 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL BS346DF 01454614420
INTRODUCTION Have reservations if police will treat matter seriously, eg told i will call court, however this is court for years ignoring correspondence, from file from my MP ,,, can not force them to reply, even he could not get a reply. With respect to PC Price she had not seen evidence and ask her please to reconsider. Have court order scan 10389 , applications scan 10390 10392 10396. Ignored told sent to Cardiff court, ask Bristol court if sent as order to HHJDenyer first, email ignored. Make complaint to manager Mr Fowler , court order 10389 to ask HHJDenyer for oral hearing was there contempt of court by Mr Till [deals with appeals ] by ignoring court order, did not send to Denyer. . The issues in discussions at end, however police asked for history, and i ask lawyer also for advice. The issue is court ignoring applications to pervert the course of justice. The siuation shown recently where we have cases v hospital trust , please see below , they ask to settle,settlement they sent rejected by court, at hearing ask that settlement reads i acted unreasonably/with no merit REJECTED by DJWatson,,,,,,no,not going to state that . Denyer then issues restraining order quotes these cases, where issue determined by court, where i can from order ask for it to be amended/removed, also need to ask his permission to issue any further proceedings, done 26.2.2016, please see scans 10273/10275 , part documents, amendment 2.3.2016 ,ignored, numerous follow up emails ignored, please see later one ,one that was answered ,where data requested, given, however no reply to that email of 11.7.2016, now out of time to issue proceedings [clinical negligence] as that application in scans 10273/10275, done by email so know obtained. Just one example. From restraining order had to inform Mr Smith trust lawyer if she objected to court proceedings being issued, numerous emails to trust, no replies. Therefore complaint to trust, asked Ms Needs in complaints department for a reply by 24.3.2017 ,with respect suggest PC Price calls her, as do not expect a reply. Very much as it were a catch 22 situation, eg i made application to issue proceedings, no fee no win lawyers state i have good claim, please see email 20.3.2017,if trust happy to resolve in litigation, however HHJDenyer would not allow my lawyer to issue proceedings. If she did object, HHJDenyer aware therefore of application and objection, however refuses to consider application, now out of time, malfeasance [misconduct] in public office. ?
You acted for me in a case,. Accept I will not get legal aid, as asking for advice as litigant not defendants. We had issue with North Bristol NHS Trust[ NHT] . The issue that day taperecorded, understand from police can detect if edited via background noise on tape. From recording ,,,,state change of plan , lets go and find Packham, wanted to record conversation, get arrested, bring NBT to the public via the courts, no issue here, from defendants statement,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,observed coming in to main building talking to staff, via CTV, could not trace Packham ,,,,as I state on tape,,, lets go and confront Smith [trust lawyer] to get arrested, no violence, please see below for details, while walking to Smiths office slipped , further damaged a window already broken, from police photograph virtually no glass on ground. Agan from recording, bloody trust can not even epair damaged window, and a few minutes later that day 24.7.2015 recording concludes with nurse in A/E department. Police take no action, however trust write to my GP, saying I had broken window, trust made clear to take for private criminal prosecution , or we would sue, they withdraw complaint. You gave me excellent service, accept I need to pay can I come to discuss below , accept can not use legal aid, say 30 mins, of your time. Went into Patchway police station, talked to PC Price 4457 , if higher rank I issue apology. Asked for statement, enclosed, for her, can I address what I want to talk to you about at end. As i have said for a year now the trust just as it were a Trogan horse in claim against HHJDenyer. The issue is malfeasance, misconduct in public office, perverting course of justice, .there is no issue with trust.Historic issues data required by PC Price, from Mirojuboes v Latvia ,,,,proceedings always assessed by examining in entirety, so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient, ,,,,,,this is no isoalated incident, for example 2 in last year, plus others. Beles v Czech Republic ,,,,,litigant should have an effective judicial remedy...Perez de Rota Caveviile v Spain,,,,,,depriving applicants of their rights to the court,,,,SranGrek v Greece,,,,,,the right can only be seen to be effective if observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court,,,,Principle whereby a civil claimant be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law,,,,Idid v Italy ,,,,courts to guarantee the right of everyone to obtain a final decision relating to civil rights and obligation in a reasonable time,,,We have HHJDenyer breaking all these HRActs , via misfeasance [misconduct ]in public office.,,,,perverting course of justice This is not an issue of rehearing cases for you to consider.
1/ Can i thank police for patience, they state do not know if an offence. . Advice need to define offence, recently told to use CPS site . Lets go through site, with them , SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with Bristol County Court appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my application PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure to act ,,,,,clearly we have a failure to act,,,over applications filed,,,CONSEQUENCS ,,,,,it will normally be necessary to consider the likely consequence of breach,,,,,,well he ignores application to issue proceedings over clinical negligence claim, now out of time, he has frustrated the judicial process where clearly verdict is wrong, particulars of claim 2YJ03757 scan 10330 ,N460 rejecting claim,,,,,told way to make claim,,identical to way claim was made, on the,,he sent,,,to,,,and regulations he was claiming under, then would not consider application for appeal, please see below via New Deal government sponsoring my medical school studies, they ask GP for statements, the medical records are untrue about me eg i had not asked hospital trust for new surgical team, where trust email states i had not asked.,,,,,application to amend records ignored We conclude CPS document CRARGE PRACTICE ...... LEVEL OF MISCON DUCT ,,,examples of behaviour that have in past fallen within the offence include wilful neglect of a public duty,,BREACH OF DUTY,,,,see CPS list please,,,,to days issues tick every cited list, including,,,,,,,did defendant have a subjective awareness of the likely consequence of the action or omissions.....eg will be out of time in clinical negligence claim.
HISTORY SUMMARY AS REQUESTED
To summarize, detail below, NEVER FORGIVEN by Bristol County court for judicial review judgement by Lord Goldring ,states ,,although getting verdict badly wrong, not a reason to grant a judicial review, Strickson v Preston cc [2007] EWHC 1132,,,,why can they not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without transcript, and award to the court in papers 500.00 will be quashed. [the appeal judgement entitled by DJRoath, as Lord Goldring stated i can help you with this ,is DJRoath one of your district judges, i did not know, he explained a DJ could not hear an appeal, his clerk made enquires, he was a circuit judge, could hear appeal]
OBS08441 v Royal Mail Given no defence, applications by hand ,date/stamped by court to court ignored, , at court office told had note , no official reply, from DJDaniels however ,,,,your application will be ignored for a defence take up issue with judge at your hearing. Clear breach of the HRA [human rights act] . I take letter scan 10419 date/stamped by court, just page 1, enclosed today, saying might as well collect leave to appeal papers now,, no defence,,,,,Defendants refuse to give a defence, saying we have been discussing with the court. [it arose at hearing defendants told i had ignored court order to supply data, my copy date/stamped by court as received, you can see why DJDaniels ignored application, after court removed my papers, on surface i had ignored order and would be struck out at hearing, start of hearing DJWatson understand both of you want to address me defendants had letter from court i had ignored order NO, my copy stamped as received after court removed, and i ask for defence, where told,,,do you really want to come back. . So had address issues that may arise at hearing, including immunity from proceedings, eg documents from BS315289 [2003] where they state in this case could recover loss in proceedings or future claims if they arise, they quote regulations,,,,,,,,,they can amend regulations as they feel fit,,,further suggested 5 previous cases, issue never raised, if they should raise quoted, , Stuart v Goldberg [2008] Civ 1 ,,,The raising of a defence in later proceedings may without more amount to abuse if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in previous proceedings,,,,,]Documents removed from file,,7 in number ,,,DJWatson,,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,again my copies date /stamped by Bristol court as delivered, taken by hand, now removed., you will find practice continues. As at hearing DJWatson states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,over missing documents, WON CASE
2YJ03757 identical to OBS08441 , same POC [ particulars of claim] , THEREFORE abuse of process ,at hearing told will not consider, going to any length to pervert course of justice, in bundle had copy of barristers internet site on abuse of process, skeletal argument for hearing also, cases cited,,in barristers article,,,GoreWood v Johnson [2000] ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts, when issue determined by the court,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have ,different verdicts to same facts,,,DJBrittan states have you full transcript of GoreWood,,not just few lines,,IN BARRISTERS ARTICLE,,,no,,,then i will ignore. From later legal advice all you required to inform Brittan it was an abuse of process. In POC [particulars of claim] you have page 2 before the court in scan 10330 enclosed , states as OBS08441 ,,,,,,,,,,,on the,,,,,,,,,i sent,,,,,to,,,,,and claiming under regulations 7.4. We have judgement claim unclear ,struck out,by DJBrittan , [this is same judge previously asked me to go so he could discuss case with defendants, they refused saying we have to catch a plane, enquires showed many hours before flight, in communications they state true however we would not be discussing for you to exploit , MP involved, court ignores his correspondence, however award to be paid each month returned to me, due to MP] way to make claim in N460, ON THE,,,,HE SENT ,,,TO,,,AND REGULATIONS HE WAS CLAIMING UNDER, . The court envelope which enclosed the N460 , is franked just over 7 days after judgement. Court refuse to accept appeal as out of time, we may ask who told court staff not to accept, anyway claim sent recorded delivery, envelope enclosed, COULD NOT appeal in 7 days, appeal to HHJDenyer, ignored, ask for legal advice lawyers LyonsDavidson, stated talked to court, HHJDenyer will not reply ask for judicial review, they in order, twice ask me to ask HHJDenyer again,first please see scan 10389, and my reply scan 10390 10392 one of 4 pages, date stamped by court, second application again date/stamped by court scan 10396. again taken by hand, my copies as you can see date/stamped by court, , HHJDenyer ignores applications. Out of my depth ask for legal advice, they were not told of hearing, we have judgement ,,,,,,you never requested a oral hearing to correct matter , ombudsman confirms lawyer not told, where Cardiff [judicial review court ]states if you want to continue take to court of appeal,. Had call one evening ,,,,, do not approve of some of your applications to my court, however will not stand by when corruption is going on, they have made a mistake they have not removed all of your applications for oral hearing,remember removing documents in OBS08441, further your fee exception applications never processed ,,,,posh voice possible DJ ?....,visit court true, told only one now on system, sent later to Cardiff court , we ask numerous times via email for both courts to confirm, these applications ,,,,,ignored, proves my case I had asked for oral hearing to correct , PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE . Contact my MP, over corruption, get reply, my letters ignored, can not force them to reply. He knows corruption is going on, reference child abuse present problem, where people knew what was going on., MP knew what was going on, did nothing, Court of appeal produce bundle , asked if i want to add further documents , between us the 3 applications for oral hearing before the court, date/stamped by court, we have judgement in papers ,no evidence i asked for oral hearing to correct. Breach of human rights act HRA, McGinley/Egan v UK…to deny existence of documents,,, Can not take to Supreme court In order. These applications before courts. suggest rejected as shows utter incompetence of judges, ,,,,,way to make claim on the,,,,,,,,,,,,he sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,and regulations he was claiming under, but this id identical to way claim was made, ,,,,, HHJDenyer ignoring applications for oral hearing, documents being removed, years before in court papers the issue of Denyer out to get you,,,,cited, the higher courts did not want before the general public.
AOIBS346/AOIBS746 v North Bristol NHS Trust First for medical records, second to leave statement in medical records, and for travel expenses,please see scans 10404 10400, trust responsible, struck out in papers, appeal, defendants pay now travel expenses, and ask to settle, give medical records, and agree to add statement to my medical records, defendants send settlement to court rejected by court, comes before DJWatson, defendants ask that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, and with no merit, application rejected by DJWatson, matter decided by the court.
B26YM042 v Compuwave ,,,My only record of emails, for example asking trust for new surgical team, is on my computer, asking Cardiff court did you get application Bristol court sent to you,,,,would prove my case, they ignore to pervert the course of justice, ,,,, I had asked for oral hearing , so ask defendants to produce program to back up, eg police may now need evidence, , program did not work, told was working when you collected, as soon as proceedings issued,they confirm wrong program given, and settlement sent to the court. At later date although settled, it is struck out. It must be in file as settlement emailed, assuming not removed.So judge knows settled.
RESTRAINING ORDER AND CONCLUSION. We have order, where HHJDenyer quotes the 3 cases above, however one was settled, defendants admit error, and the other 2 had been heard by the court eg I had not acted unreasoinably and had not acted with no merit, Brumarescu vRumania ,,,when courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,In order if I need to amend/remove restraining order or issue any new proceedings, I have to ask HHJDenyer, North Bristol NHS had indicated they might reject clinical negligence claim, was worried about being out of time, so asked in application 26.2.2016 t o HHJDenyer to issue proceedings, further to remove/amend restraining order, you can anticipate from above he would ignore application. Please see scans 10275/10273, , We know obtained this time not taken by hand, but emailed, Defendants had 7 days to object to application, we did get a reply, from trust, proceedings not mentioned, only confirming when out of date to issue proceedings. So on the 2.3.2016 email the court,,,can i quote start of document
URGENT CAN YOU PLEASE PUT TODAY TO HHJDENYER OR ANOTHER CIRCUIT JUDGE
1/ On the 26.2.2016 an urgent application was made to HHJDenyer, this was in respect to 2 issues
a/ to issue proceedings
b/ Removal of order, made with complete utter no meri
Numerous emails to court asking for reply, ignored. Now near out of time, 5 months later to issue proceedings over negligence claim, send email enclosed of the 11.7.2016, however ignored. . Now out of time ask court for set data, suggest possible taking to ECHR, where they panic, what do you want court to do, I state please see email 2.3.2016, quoted above.. Get official rejection of my claim for clinical negligence, April 2016, by trust, with allegations , please see , , in email to trust 20.3.2017, so as AOIBS746 ask to leave statement in my medical records, as regulations in scan 10404 , and ask for related medical records, 24.7.2015 ,trust again refuse to supply, so in new application to HHJDenyer 26.10.2016, ask to issue proceedings over these , and again ask to amend/remove restraining order, you know next part, ignored, Pro Bono Unit dealing with narrow issue they would not consider ECHR/malfeasance issues, court had 3 weeks to reply, for goodwill said I will give 4, however in a few weeks had call that HHJDenyer would be ignoring would not consider application again, and I informed the Pro Bono Unit, before 4 week deadline. I had an effective judicial remedy however HHJDenyer is ignoring all applications, as he has done for years, ,,,Perez de Rota Caperille v Spain ,,,,breach if stopping access to the courts,,,,,StranGreek v Greece,,,,,,,,,,,,,,right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court,,,,,,Has come to stage before deadline the court calls saying HHJDenyer will be ignoring your application. MALFEASANCE/ MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE
PICKETING AT BRISTOL CC Barrister who i gave leaflet to , called , told wait until out of time, in negligence claim, then consider ECHR/malfeasance.
DISCUSSION -SUGGESTIONS THIS IS NOT ISSUE OF PREVIOUS CLAIMS LOOKING FOR SETTLEMENT. THIS IS SOLELY A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION HHJDENYER IGNORING APPLICATIONS
Concerns with police initial reply,,,will give court a call. With respect suggest they should be at court, accept Cardiff court , a Cardiff based officer should attend. In terms of applications 26.2.2016/26.10.2016 was application dealt with, or as my request for data told ,,,,we will not read,,,malfeasance /misconduct in public office,,,,did this instruction come from HHJDenyer, applications were fee except, question to ask,,,,can i see paperwork accepting/rejecting fee except application, or was it completely ignored. Application never considered. . From Ms Needs you would know if trust opposed application. Did Ms Smith make later application for restraining order. At hearing AOIBS346 ask that judgement reads i had acted unreasonably, did Ms Smith go behind DJWatsons back as application rejected, already determined by court, asking that i acted unreasonably, ,,,,,,,negligence claim coming before you, can you issue restraining order, acted unreasonably before, this is our report on negligence claim, .At settlement before DJWatson, is Ms Smith trying to say, alright i spent over 2000.00 of NHS money defending, although we gave at end medical records, and allowed him to add statement to medical records, his claim, however proves i was right as we have restraining order, he had acted unreasonably. Court asked for correspondence from 1.1.2016 from defendants to court, with reply we will not be reading your letters, although cited,,Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,It is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,Did however trust not object, happy to go to hearing, however DJDenyer refuses to consider. Simple question with respect , were applications dealt with, in respect to appendix 2.3.2016 above court utterly aware what was required, and in scan 10273 application utterly clear. HHJDenyer responsible for appeals, stated in future i need to ask his permission in any proposed actions, refuses to consider applications,,,malfeasance /misconduct in public office ?
For OBS08441 we are aware applications even for a defence ignored scan 10419 ,documents removed from file. DJWatson something very very odd here. Consider 2YJ03757 judgement nonsense ask for appeal, HHJDenyer ignores, even lawyer could not get a reply. Administation court issues order to ask TWICE to ask HHJDenyer again for oral nearing, please see order scan 10389 and applications date stamped by court 10390 [just first page] 10392 stamped by court 1.2.2013, and second application 18.2.2013, these as 2016 issues HHJDenyer feels fit to ignore to pervert the course of justice, malfeasance misconduct in public office. With this in mind with respect ask officer to attend courts, to look at list below. ANY FURTHER EVIDENCE OF ASKING FOR A ORAL HEARING ALREADY HAVE SCANS 10392/10396 WILL FURTHER SHOW MALFEASANCE /MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE . VIA ASKING FOR EVIDENCE BELOW
We know in 2016 from above applications HHJDenyer would not consider, malfeasance /misconduct in public office.....in 2013 you have same problem, asking for oral hearing, first question suggest you ask court,,,what was fate of these applications,,,,,,,,,followed by,,,
a/ ask ,,,,can i see file of 2YJ03757 ,,,,,,,is there any reference to above 2 applications.[if police call will be told nothing in file]
b/ can i see any records on computer in respect to 2YJ03752 .[before told record on system Mr Till sent application to Administration court]
c/ from scan 10392 Administration court reference CO/1/2013,,,,,,,could officer ask again to look at file /computer records in respect to CO/1/2013
d/ Mr Till deals with appeals,,,,,,,could officer ask to look at his records [eg did he send applications to Denyer] , evidence in paper /computer
e/ how does court record documents sent,,,,,,,,fax? Can we see records in 2013 is there record of application being sent,,,from Bristol to Cardiff
f/ from email from Cardiff court know file exist in Cardiff ,,,,,,,police ask can i see file how do you record documents sent, computer records,of case ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
P JONES
APPENDIX 5
o Policy
o Wilful neglect or misconduct
§ Nature of the neglect or misconduct
§ Seriousness of the neglect or misconduct
§ Motive
o Without reasonable excuse or justification
o Level of misconduct required
he following have been accepted as holding a public office by the courts over several centuries:
· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
· Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010] EWCA Crim 2857
APPENDIX 6
Original message----
From : philip.jones88@btinternet.com
Date : 21/07/2017 - 16:36 (GMTDT)
To : ProfessionalStandardsDepartment@avonandsomerset.police.uk
Cc : Henry.Bird@avonandsomerset.police.uk
Subject : Re: FW: appeal,,,request for documentation from psd 2017/086838 case ref ipcc
Goodafternoon
Will not be paying for any information, with respect await reply in 14 days to questions asked in documentation,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,would show what investigations done before 15.4.2017. if you withhold answers can do appeal in 14 days time, before you reject claim before taking to IPCC. cOULD YOU EMAIL REPLY DO NOT ACCEPT ANY LATER DEFENSE THAT LETTER SENT,,,,,,PJONES
APPENDIX 8
APPENDIX 9
YOUR REFERENCE HC/CO/369/17/HD IPCC REF 2017/086838
1/ Impatient to move things on, need to tease out issues. Accept now in a pathway of complaint about police, where we should have police dealing not as defendants, but as plaintiff with my assistance input , eg IPCC ….person dealing with complaint should contact you, ,,,,,,. Must admit called every step correct for example can I refer to just one 26.2.2016 application , taunted , told by court court/Denyer would ignore application , QUOTED in application,In application quoted human rights judgements, please see my website for full judgements,,,,Idid v Italy,,,,obtain decision in reasonable time.,,,StrandGreek v Greece ,,,observations actually heard that is to say considered by the court…..[we have court order to make application, now told it would be ignored] Perez de Rota v Spain,,,breach of human rights if stopping access to a court. However as IPCC REGULATIONS expected an apology FROM POLICE to conclude as they NOW investigate, too late now. From website get emails most days, where lawyers now seeking litigation against police, however we need details.
2/ From website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com we have subsection under police complaint, advised to do it this way as easy now in any appeal to just quote site. For example in latest appeal form ,questions not relevant, all I can say on forms is please see documents in chronological order in above website, eg for example this document. . For example we have question,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did police follow the process you agreed with them for the local resolution of your complaint [NO] ,,,,,,if no reasons you were given as to why they were changed.
This form on surface utterly logically, however IPCC document,,,,
Person dealing with your complaint should contact you to make sure they have all details
They should ask you what you want to happen
Person dealing with complaint should also talk to you about what they will do dealing with your complaint
Person dealing with complaint will let you know the outcome when they have finished looking at it, they may do this in person or on the phone,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but they should ALSO write to you,
PCBIRD WANTS TO AS IT WERE COACH AND HORSES WILFULLY NEGLECT/IGNORING IPCC REGULATIONS,,,,,,HE HAS NEVER TALKED TO ME.
3/ Initial contact at Patchway police station, with Sg Price , recorded conversation, told to make claim to HMCS , from recording AWARE HMCS had stated in email any complaint would not be read, had made complaints before that were ignored.Agreed to send details at end so complaint could be investigated, eg malfeasance in public office. Further PCBird although aware of evidence, asks me to make complaint to HMCS and sends me 2 forms to fill in, where in email reply 15.4.2017 timed 16.28 PCBird is informed further that from regulations on forms I can not make a complaint, eg can I refer to Mr Galloways letter 12.6.2017,,,,,,,,,,,,,allegations particular against HHJDenyer,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,where in one form it states if making complaint about judiciary [HHJDenyer] must be made in 3 months from incident. The second form states can not investigate a decision a judge has made,………….can I refer to Mr Golloways letter 12.6.2017,complaint ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,particular HHJDenyer failing/refusing to hear a civil case,,,,,. Decision judge alleged has made.
THE POLICE AGAIN STATES 18.7.2017 COMPLAINT REJECTED ,,,,,,PCBIRD ,,,,,,, ENQUIRES ,MADE ,,,CORRECT REMEDY IS HMCS MAKE COMPLAINT . WHERE THEY KNOW FROM FORMS ABOVE CAN NOT MAKE A COMPLAINT.
4/ This is utter smokescreen as DIStephens tries to sweep complaint under the carpet. . From Golloways letter 12.6.2017 he accepts police issue MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. Further states investigations undertaken, where PCBird sought further advice and was informed after their investigations that we had insufficient evidence of malfeasance in public office, AWARE OF WEBSITE . Its rather odd, that in DIStephens letter of 18.7.201 the issue of malfeasance NEVER mentioned.
The complaint against police is malfeasance in public office, eg PCBird ect wilfully neglected to perform their duty investigating the court malfeasance in public office. From letter of Galloway 12.6.2017 we are informed investigations undertaken and they found no evidence of malfeasance in public office, again reason for website above [in www,corruption,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,] as we refer in appeal , this decision comes under Wednesbury legal term ,,,,,,,,,,,,so outrageous no sensible person would come to it. ……PLEASE SEE WEBSITE, .from Galloways letter 12.6.2017 admitted application made, attached was court order, which states application must be sent to HHJDenyer or another high court judge,,,,again from letter he admits every week emails sent for reply to application, all ignored, ,,correspondence with court manager, did he send applications to HHJDenyer,,,,,trust/ASSUME PCBird did investigations before 15.4.2017 , told investigations done and we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, defined as wilfully neglecting to perform his duty. Reason we ask 12 questions, eg did he not send to Denyer, then he was wilfuuly neglecting to perform his duty, definition of malfeasance in public office, or did he send where HHJDenyer ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office, must be one.
5/ Can I quote IPCC regulations,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you should obtain enough information at end of investigations to understand what has happened during the investigations,,,,if this ends up in the ECHR
Hirvisan v Finland ,,,,,,reason given to make effective use of any existing appeal,,,,[back to you/.ECHR AS WE ASK QUESTIONS]
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
P JONES
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 11 BACKGROUND TO 2016 APPLICATIONS
The enclosure concerning NBT is summary of events presented in settlement to DJWatson in letter for hearing, where he referenced letter.
1/ Beginning of 2013 have impingement of shoulder. Defendants take xray , report no abnormality. Sent by defendants to their CATS physiotherapy department ,no treatment told not qualified to treat going on course to allow me to inject into shoulder.
2/ Seen by surgeon 26.7.2013 , [so much treatment in 13 weeks seven months after injury] do not know what he saw, told do not believe report , asked for another xray to confirm, where told negligence, abnormality in shoulder Biglian acromium, where he informed my GP. Asked urgent physiotherapy in 2 months,injected into shoulder , did not believe it would work, eg in impingement of shoulder should try to restore movement asap, or will get chronic shoulder disability, 7 months after injury. . After a month heard nothing from NBT visited physiotherapy told trivial we will not see you in 2 months, call consult and write taken by hand to inform consultants secretary what is occurring, phone records confirm call, my own, plus BT records.
3/ Heard nothing so after 2 months seen by surgeon Mr McCann , as told negligent record consultation, states physiotherapy will not work, where i state do you want me to inform them, where he states HE WOULD DEAL WITH IT.
4/ Complain to NBT angry reply from consultant Mr Packham saying i am dishonest never contacted his office where we have phone records i did, where i state he would not treat me as called dishonest and asked NBT for new surgical team. Correspondence asking for new surgical team including replies from NBT,,,,,,,,,,,,your asking us for new surgical team.
5/ No fee no win lawyers want medical records up till 1.8 2014, all enquires ignored, where on the 13.7.2014 write to NBT saying if they did not release by 1.8.2014 would issue proceedings to get medical records, on the 3,8,2014 proceedings issued,. Proceedings issued under new dated regulations on Access to medical records, did not realise should have been under older regulations, as new dated ones related to deceased. Limited medical records now supplied, NBT pay cost, comes before DJWatson who asks for statement from Ms Needs concerning outstanding medical records, in that hearing lawyer for NBT Ms Smith misleads DJWatson saying proceedings should never have been issued , as we were utterly unaware of possible proceedings. [IN LATER LETTER MS NEEDS CONFIRMS DECEPTION SHE WAS AWARE OF REQUEST BUT IGNORED] . Ms Needs stated all medical records supplied, where AOIBS346 struck out in papers and I appeal, for example I had recordings with departments that further records existed.
6/ In AOIBS746 asking to put statement in my medical records, please see appendix 10 a NHS document where statutory regulations they must allow. Again proceedings under same regulations, from legal advice now informed wrong regulations write to NBT/ BCC issue apology ask in application to remove or could I amend the POC, . The application ignored followed by case struck out in papers where I appealed asking for oral hearing,I had asked to remove or amend.
7/ This is ridiculous waste of all parties time, with appeal, ask NBT to settle, for example in AOIBS346 , NBT accepted claim under new regulations, and as my appeal used…..
Stuart v Goldberg [2008] EWCA Civ 1 ,,,,The raising of a defence in later proceedings may without more amount to abuse, if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in previous proceedings,,,,,,,,,,,,
Suggested a trap NBT knew from appendix 10 they must put statement in medical records, however forced me to issue proceedings. They still refuse to settle in letter 19.2.2015, so we await oral hearing , . 5 MONTHS LATER ask to settle, supply outstanding medical records, and put my statement in medical records, meeting 3.7.2015. Settlement NBT send to court, which court rejects, and put down for hearing, comes before DJWatson.
8/ At hearing numerous times NBT ask that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , from above DJWatson accepted I had not, ,,,,,why did Ms Needs not supply medical records in request 13.7.2014, why did Ms Smith lie to him that NBT unaware of request for medical records, and if not supplied would issue proceedings after 1.8.2015, , I asked to settle in Feb 2015, they refused, in July 2015 ask to settle on IDENTICAL TERMS. If settled on the 19.2.2014 no need for this court time, you can see why rejected application I had acted unreasonably, they now only in July 2015 supply outstanding medical records/put statement in medical records. . Ms Smith continue to argue where no complaint, as I try to put input in DJWatson raises his hand to me indicating he does not require my input, , clearly an issue I had acted unreasonably would be rejected by him.
9/ Email history on Windows Mail, no server backup, eg records for example today with NBT/BCC. Asked Compuwave to backup, you can not select all,,,,,,and save. Program would not work, where told was working when you collected, no further comment will be made. Advice that program from IT consultant would not work, proceedings B26M042 issued, where defendants straight away, admit wrong program given, and settlement sent to BCC, where DJWatson asks what was position of person in Compuwave that made SETTLEMENT. This they supplied and joint email as SETTLED ASKED FOR HEARING TO BE VACATED , and settlement put in file . . Next thing we hear matter struck out where I appeal, this matter SETTLED.
10/ We then get restraining order over above, take NBT case DJWatson had stated,,,,,,,,,,,I had not acted unreasonably, follows from ,,,
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective
This is issue already determined by the courts the restraining order just a vindictive act.
Further in B26MO42 this matter settled. So at hearing know settled, why struck out.
11/ From above application 26.2.2016 to issue proceedings c and remove/amend restraining order
Application 26.10.2016 again to remove/amend restraining order, further as AOIBS346/AOIBS746 to obtain specific medical records and put statement in medical records, post previous events. In terms of these a statutory event, eg medical records /statement in medical records. For example in NBT lawyers rejection of clinical negligence saying from records you never turned up for physiotherapy, where trust admit they refused to do, and from recording told new appointments not required and he would inform physiotherapy.
§ APPENDIX 12
§
§ Newsroom
§ Home
Appeal against the resolution of your complaint
If we have advised you that you have the right of appeal on any complaint resolution to the Chief Constable then please use this form to lodge a formal appeal.
If you have been advised that your appeal should be to the IPCC please visit the IPCC web site.
If you would like to discuss the result of your complaint before making a formal appeal please fill in the General contact and enquiry form and we will get back to you as soon as possible.
Avon and Somerset Constabulary must receive a written appeal within 28 days of the date on which you think the Police made the final decision on your complaint.
A red asterisk (*) denotes a required field.
Top of Form
Appeal against your the outcome of your complaint
About you
Title Please select Mr Mrs Miss Ms Dr
First name Last name
Address 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL BS346DF
Daytime telephone number
Evening telephone number
Confirm email
About your complaint
Date you made your complaint
IPCC or Police Reference number
If you have received a letter from the Police informing you of the outcome of your Local Resolution, please give the date of that letter Were you permitted to comment on the complaint about how it should be resolved? Yes No If no, please explain what the police told you (if anything) about how they were going to look into your complaint. Please provide as much information as possible. Did the police follow the process you agreed with them for the Local Resolution of your complaint? Yes No If no, please explain what process the Police followed and any reasons you were given as to why there was a change. Please provide as much information as possible. Have the Police communicated any learning points to you? Yes No Please explain why you believe this is not a proper outcome for your complaint If you have any evidence or information to support your complaint, for example photos or letters, please list below What is your ethnicity? *
Avon and Somerset Constabulary is obliged to record the ethnicity of people using its service. Being able to identify the ethnicity of complainants helps us and the IPCC to check it is reaching all sections of society. Please describe your ethnicity using the boxes below.
Please select I prefer not to say Asian - Bangladeshi Asian - Indian Asian - Pakistani Asian - Other Black - African Black - Caribbean Black - Other Chinese Mixed - Other Mixed - White and Asian Mixed - White and Black African Mixed - White and Black Caribbean Other ethnic group White - Other White - British White - Irish
APPENDIX 13
EXTRACTS FROM CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AND CONCLUSIONS
§ Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
§ Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
§ Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
§ Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
§ Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
§ Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
§ Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
§ Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
§ Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
§ County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
§ Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
§ Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
§ Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
§ Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton [2010] EWCA Crim 2857
JUDGES/ COURTS /POLICE NOT IMMUNE FROM PROSECTION
Acting as such
The suspect must not only be a 'public officer'; the misconduct must also occur when acting in that capacity.
There must be a direct link between the misconduct and an abuse, misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of the office or position.
PCBIRD FROM HIS EMAIL WAS ACTING AS HE STATES INVESTIGATING CRIMINAL OFFENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.
Wilful neglect or misconduct
Nature of the neglect or misconduct
There must also be an element of knowledge or at least recklessness about the way in which the duty is carried out or neglected. The test is a subjective one and the public officer must be aware that his/her behaviour is capable of being misconduct.
FROM LETTER 24.7.2017 STATES PCBIRD WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL OFFENCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. PUTS FORWARD REASON HE DID NOT INVESTIGATE AS JUDGES/COURT IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS HOWEVER IN LETTER REQUESTED BY SGT PRICE HE IS AWARE OF SITE AND KNOWS NOT IMMUNE.
Meaning of 'wilful'
In Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 2003 the court approved the definition of 'wilful' as 'deliberately doing something which is wrong knowing it to be wrong or with reckless indifference as to whether it is wrong or not'.
Lord Steyn added:
the stronger the objective indications of risk, the more difficult it will be for defendants to repel the conclusion that they must have known. (R v G [2003] UK HL 50)
FROM ABOVE HE MUST HAVE KNOWN FROM LETTER IN FILE. THAT JUDGES/COURTS NOT IMMUNE
Abuse of the public's trust
Public officers carry out their duties for the benefit of the public as a whole. If they neglect or misconduct themselves in the course of those duties this may lead to a breach or abuse of the public's trust.
HE ACCEPTED COMPLAINT OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IN LETTER APPENDIX 8 DATED 24.7.2017 ADMITS HE REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE
Seriousness of the neglect or misconduct
The behaviour must be serious enough to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder. In R v Dytham, Lord Widgery said that the element of culpability:
must be of such a degree that the misconduct impugned is calculated to injure the public interest so as to call for condemnation and punishment.
In Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 2003 the court said that the misconduct must amount to:
"...an affront to the standing of the public office held. The threshold is a high one requiring conduct so far below acceptable standards as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder".
FROM ABOVE CALCULATED FROM ABOVE HE KNOWS JUDGES/COURTS NOT IMMUNE.
Consequences
The likely consequences of any wilful neglect or misconduct are relevant when deciding whether the conduct falls below the standard expected:
"It will normally be necessary to consider the likely consequences of the breach in deciding whether the conduct falls so far below the standard of conduct to be expected of the officer as to constitute the offence. The conduct cannot be considered in a vacuum: the consequences likely to follow from it, viewed subjectively ...will often influence the decision as to whether the conduct amounted to an abuse of the public's trust in the officer". (Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 2003).
Whilst there is no need to prove any particular consequences flowing from the misconduct, it must be proved that the defendant was reckless not just as to the legality of his behaviour, but also as to its likely consequences.
The consequences must be likely ones, as viewed subjectively by the defendant. Although the authorities do not say so, likely can probably be taken to mean at the very least 'reasonably foreseeable'; it is arguable that likely may mean 'probable' in this context.
FROM DOCUMENTS SUPPLIED HE KNOWS A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE
Motive
In order to establish whether the behaviour is sufficiently serious to amount to the offence, the officer's motive is also relevant:
"...the question has always been, not whether the act done might, upon full and mature investigation, be found strictly right, but from what motive it had proceeded; whether from a dishonest, oppressive, or corrupt motive, under which description, fear and favour may generally be included, or from mistake or error..."
"To punish as a criminal any person who, in the gratuitous exercise of a public trust, may have fallen into error or mistake belongs only to the despotic ruler of an enslaved people, and is wholly abhorrent from the jurisprudence of this kingdom".
(R v Borron [1820] 3 B&Ald 432: Abbott CJ, at page 434.)
At its highest the motive may be malice or bad faith but they are not prerequisites. Reckless indifference would be sufficient
Without reasonable excuse or justification
It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the absence of a reasonable excuse or justification, although the nature of the prosecution evidence should in practice negate any such element.
The defendant may advance evidence of a reasonable excuse or justification. It is for the jury to determine whether the evidence reveals the necessary culpability.
THE DEFENDANTS PUT FORWARD THAT COURT/JUDGES IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS THEY KNOW THIS UNTRUE.
Charging Practice
General principles
Misconduct in public office should be considered only where:
§ there is no suitable statutory offence for a piece of serious misconduct (such as a serious breach of or neglect of a public duty that is not in itself a criminal offence);
§ there was serious misconduct or a deliberate failure to perform a duty owed to the public, with serious potential or actual consequences for the public;
THIS WAS DELIBERATE HE KNOWS COURT/JUDGES NOT IMMUNE.
Level of misconduct required
The culpability 'must be of such a degree that the misconduct impugned is calculated to injure the public interest so as to call for condemnation and punishment' (R v Dytham 1979 QB 722).
Examples of behaviour that have in the past fallen within the offence include:
§ ;
§ 'malicious' exercises of official authority;
§ wilful neglect of a public duty;
WILFULLY REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE
Breaches of duty
Some of the most difficult cases involve breaches of public duty that do not involve dishonesty or corruption.
§ In all cases, however, the following matters should be addressed:
§ Was there a breach of a duty owed to the public (not merely an employment duty or a general duty of care)?
§ Was the breach more than merely negligent or attributable to incompetence or a mistake (even a serious one)?
§ Did the defendant have a subjective awareness of a duty to act or subjective recklessness as to the existence of a duty?
§ Did the defendant have a subjective awareness that the action or omission might be unlawful?
§ Did the defendant have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission.
§ Did the officer realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur?
§ Were those consequences 'likely' as viewed subjectively by the defendant? Did the officer realise that those consequences were 'likely' and yet went on to take the risk?
§ Regard must be had to motive.
THIS IS ISSUE WHERE DEFENDANTS TICK ALL BOXES
APPLICATION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS V AVON SOMERSET POLICE,,,,,,,TODAYS APPLICATION FROM PARAGRAPH 4 REST BACKGROUND.
URGENT APPLICATION MUST SERVE ON OR BEFORE 30.11.2017 APOLOGY LATE DUE TO ILLNESS
DRAFT ORDER PERMISSION GIVEN TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST AVON SOMERSET POLICE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW.
NOTE
a/ This is all we are asking for , the restraining order out of time in few weeks, not asking to be removed, we have tried before 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 applications ignored, although asking for a reply regularly and at end court confirmed it would ignore applications, with no reply. .
b/ Police have stated they have no further comment to make, for example pre action protocol for judicial review ignored, this email copied to them, if they wish as HHJDenyers order to make now comment to court on this application , they can do so, request in email i am copied into their letter. For example in ADR please see below they refuse to consider alternative settlement.
SKELETAL ARGUMENT
We ask judge via judicial review was statutory regulations followed. Please see enclosure , police never contacted me to ask what i want to happen,,,,,,,,,,,,,ect, ect,,,,,,all calls in/out recorded. From regulations you can appeal police judgement, from below saying in email dated 22.7.2017 as i request information to do appeal, as i stated with no reply by 28.7.2017 can do appeal to you on or after 28.7.2017. On the 24.7.2017 send reply to appeal i have not lodged. Appeal lodged in time 7.8.2017. Police utterly dishonest saying that email of 22.7.2017 was appeal. In letter 18.7.2017 police state our appeal form on website, this not in email 22.7.2017, so could not be appeal. . Its like me making this application, without N244 form, fee except document, which court would ignore . No dispute regulations not followed, police issue statements,a/ make complaint to HMCS ,,,, in letter 24.7.2017 admit i could not make complaint as out of time, b/ state judges /courts immune from proceedings, however from enclosure from CPS document untrue. c/ they state we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, this comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness ,please see below, .
English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.........which we ask court to do
We have court order to make application to the court, we have emails to court on regular basis as barristers advice for reply until out of time in new claim. We have court via Mr Fowler confirming in email it would ignore applications, is he not wilfully neglecting to perform his duty.
reminder ms weaver /mr fowler so court in no doubt.
23/11/2016 - 00:02
Refer to previous emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless i hear from you by 24.11.2016 will assume the court refuses to reply to applications, can then inform my barrister and the press. Reply vie email please.
The barrister wants to look in detail at restaining order, application to remove 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 , we have no replies denying access to the courts, breach of
Article 6 HRA. Bristol/Cardiff court for years ignoring applications to the court to pervert the course or justice.
P JONES
Its outrageous to say we have no evidence. Consider judge/barrister Ms Brunner below
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
,,,,have i been wronged by court . IPCC ask me to ask PCC to look again at official appeal, dated 7.8.2017, which she refused to do.
FACTS
1/ Picketing at Bristol county court, barrister told me to stop, told not my direct field however complain to police, clear evidence malfeasance in public office. Further in new excellent claim email court every week for a reply , until out of time in new claim. Bristol NHS Trust had stated restraining order in place we will do nothing until proceedings issued, further as pre action protocol for clinical negligence regulations, 5.2 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION [ADR] , i asked to settle by arbitration, again told will do nothing ,until proceedings, you have restraining order. Application to issue proceedings 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 court ignored. Further we had restraining order over 2 issues, so asked to remove/amend and to issue these new proceedings. .
a/ North Bristol NHS Trust. ,,,,Application to get medical records for no win no fee lawyers, stated we had excellent claim, asked for medical records. . Further trust were making allegations, utterly untrue. Via statutory regulations , please see NHS document, scan 10065 , trust must allow me to add statement to my medical records, trust refuse, proceedings issued. Limited medical records supplied , where it comes before DJWatson. He asks that medical records staff write to him , further from transcript, suggested talking outside to resolve. Can I refer to transcript as I wait, open door for her, where she states go. In later correspondence admit she refused to talk. Trust states I have all medical records, however from recordings, eg say radiology confirm medical records missing. Now DJWatson strikes out where I appeal. Email defendants ,,,,I ,send tapes, inform them further from scan 10065 must allow me to add statement in medical records, where in email reply,,,,,,case struck out we will do nothing. 5 months later down for hearing, 2 weeks before defendants write to settle, supply outstanding medical records , and now puts statement in medical records, settlement defendants send to court rejected told to come for hearing. From transcript defendants ask several times that judgement states I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson, please read above. Defendants keep on where told you asked him to settle. We have asked court several times for transcript, all request ignored. DJWATSON AT HEARING AS HE STATES IN JUDGEMENT HE HAD READ FILE AND CONFIRMED I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLELY IT APPEARS HHJDENYER WANTS TO REHEAR THAT HEARING.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective
In case of putting statement in my medical records, used wrong regulations,in application to court, defendants covered in application, ask court to amend the POC, or remove and reissue, however court ignored application.
b/ Emails old stored in Outlook Express, no back up, so asked Compuwave to back up. Program given would not work, told was working when you collected, we will ignore further correspondence, as soon as proceedings issued, admit wrong program given, settlement sent to the court to vacate hearing. Two weeks later comes before a hearing where struck out, it’s a case SETTLED .We have asked court was settlement in file, again all correspondence ignored. Could be settlement not in file, reason came before a hearing,no one attended, we asked hearing to be vacated, these 2 cases no reason to issue restraining order.
2/ So application 26.2.2016 to amend/remove restraining order and for no win no fee lawyers to issue proceedings. Court ignores, where picket at court. Barrister told me to stop, wait until out of time in new excellent claim , and email court EVERY week for a reply until out of time,[Mr Fowler emails , much later out of time,,,,emails your sending to court on regular basis for reply to application ] further barrister stated malfeasance in public office. Told a HRA issue also eg
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
Further warned police would brush me off eg
For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]
When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”
And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……
3/ Further application to court 26.10.2017 also ignored, with email,,November ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,court order to make application , unless I hear from you by ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume court will ignore applications, malfeasance in public office
COMPLAINT TO POLICE
4/ Being brushed off , told malfeasance in public office, civil offence ect, police ask me to send CPS document on offence, extract below , so know a criminal offence , judges convicted.
· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140
· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380
· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32
· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451
· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702
· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226
· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91
· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747
· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245
· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429
· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387
· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505
· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
· Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010] EWCA Crim 2857
Further told and aware I could not make complaint to HMCS confirmed in their letter dated 24.7.2017.
5/ , PCBird asks me to complain to HMCS, where Mr Fowler at court in email stated correspondence will not be read, ,,,,,,,,,and anyway in police letter dated 24.7.2017 confirms I could not make a complaint, out of time
6/ Complain to police please see reply, dated 12.6.2017 . State we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, however admit court order to make application to the court, emailed every week for a reply until out of time, and court saying correspondence will be ignored. Further they are aware of email to court,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless I hear from you by,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume court will ignore applications. Further police aware of judge/barrister document on malfeasance in public office, eg
The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC
Have I been wronged by the court, is court wilfully neglecting to perform their duty, further to say we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,eg outrageous we have court order to make application , asked every week for reply, and email to court,,,,,,,,,,,,unless I hear from you by,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume court refuses to answer application, is court wilfully neglecting to perform its duty.
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 [1] is an English law case that sets out the standard of unreasonableness of public-body decisions that would make them liable to be quashed on judicial review, known as Wednesbury unreasonableness.
The court gave three conditions on which it would intervene to correct a bad administrative decision, including on grounds of its unreasonableness in the special sense later articulated in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service[2] by Lord Diplock:
So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.
7/ Can I refer to above letter , you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office, can I please refer to IPCC regulations on statutory regulations below ,,,
There are statutory regulations of IPCC in investigations….eg
Contact to make sure have all details
Ask what you want to happen
Inform you what is likely to happen
Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint
Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you
Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,
Can I refer to historic police case, partner getting threating calls, we record all calls in/out , NEVER TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY, CLEAR BREACH OF IPCC INVESTIGATION REGULATIONS.
8/ So need appeal to police asking questions to do appeal, for example please see email 22.7.2017, saying with no reply would do appeal on/after 28.7.2017.,,,,,,please see end of email. Below .........
WILL ASSUME WITH NO EMAIL REPLY BY 9.00 AM 28.7.2017 THERE WILL BE NO REPLY AND CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU.
1/ Do you require copy at your costs of recording with Sg Price.
2/ Will you be supplying me with answers to 12 questions asked to see what investigations if any over malfeasance in public office before 17.4.2017 were done. . Accept earlier given 14 days to supply data, JUST ASKING IF WE WILL GET A REPLY.
P JONES
Police please see letter 24.7.2017 sends reply to an appeal not filed. In their letter dated 18.7.2017 state when you do appeal, need to enclose police appeal form from internet, appeal lodged in time 7.8.2017. In that letter 24.7.2017 confirm PCBirds malfeasance in public office, change story, not you have no evidence of offence, but we wilfully neglected to perform our duty, however from CPS guidelines he had justification why he neglected his duty, as judges/court immune from proceedings, but judges/courts immune from proceedings, is utter nonsense from above CPS document IN POLICE FILE. however from above they know untrue. FOR JUDICIAL VIEW SAYING WE HAD NO EVIDENCE AND NOW JUDGES IMMUNE UTTER NONSENSE. ISSUE STATUTORY REGULATIONS NEVER FOLLOWED, AND NO DISPUTE WE HAVE REPLY TO AN APPEAL THAT I HAD NOT FILED. Police refuse to consider unique and only appeal lodged 7.8.2017 , i have statutory rights to make that appeal. Please look at letter 24.7.2017 states over a year since application to court, utter nonsense last one 24.10.2016, we may ask did Mr Crouch ever open file.
9/ Complain to IPCC told to email PCC for reply to appeal , email ignored, further stated to inform them of judicial review application, told to send template of pre action protocol for judicial review which they also ignored.
10/ Can I please cite part of my preaction protocol for judicial review, ADR below 30.8..2017
ADR PROPOSALS
There is no relevant options here. Contacted IPCC told to email PCC [ASP] for help, however all correspondence ignored. Further emailed [ASP] who have confirmed they will ignore appeal lodged 7.8.2017,,,,eg unless I hear from you,,,,.eg email part in red below 30.8.2017
Concerned by your reply, ,,,,,unable to provide you with any additional material. are you saying you will not reply to appeal lodged 7.8.2017. Will assume this is position unless I hear from you during the day, before going back to IPCC. Not asking for reply, or estimate of your reply date , just asking if you refuse to answer appeal lodged 7.8.2017. Will assume this is case , confirming your email unless I hear from you today.
So we need to issue judicial review in 3 months, eg 3 months before confirmation appeal 7.8.2017 would be ignored, from above therefore required reply by 30.8.2017, therefore need reply from court at least a few days before 30.11.2017. Hope application done by lawyers, for example talked to KelseyHall told we have problem, as we could do via legal aid as we have criminal licence, not civil legal aid, , suggested civil lawyers for help, at present asking permission to issue proceedings, eg statutory regulations never followed, and unambigious appeal not lodged until 7.8.2017 , with replies further,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence of malfeasance in public office and judges immune in utter tatters, utterly with no merit AND UTTER NONSENSE.
P JONES
INTRODUCTION THE FACTS Was picketing at the Bristol County Court where barrister who i gave leaflet to, called that evening told to contact the Pro Bono Unit in London for free barrister legal help Also to contact police for years the court perverting the course of justice, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance [misconduct ] in public office .[Correspondence when we have final reply, outcome , at a later date, ,on site when we get reply from Ms Mountstevens PCC Avon Somerset Police, Accept can not dictate operational way the police wish to act. We have situation however the police suggest a complaint to this corrupt court, via HMCS , however see must be made in 3 months, therefore assume police refuse to investigate. Malfeasance in public office, R V Dytham 1979, also applies to police as public body. Further as regulations we can not make claim over HHJDenyer over decisions he made, police aware of this from form they sent. There are allegations of criminal activity, utterly unacceptable as barrister said, if we should get reply, ,,,,,,,,,ask HHJDenyer again, as legal advice if say no car tax, the police would not say, pay tax , we will ignore. Can not do anything over 2YJ03757, anyway please see below. Not only this, just told to make claim to the corrupt to investigate their self. The police have clear evidence of malfeasance, perverting course of justice, and miscarriage of justice,. We have the corrupt courts ignoring correspondence to pervert the course of justice, we have them saying when we try to obtain evidence ,,,,,,,,we will not read your correspondence. ] Stated I was aware of your website, as previously raised in chambers, awaited proceedings for contempt of court, however later someone else at chambers asked if I had seen site, and see now documents added , which produce a completely different picture, and can see why the court/judges would not want issuers before the courts, ,and not start proceedings over contempt of court/libel. Free speech. As Bristol barrister stated this is perhaps one of largest legal scandals in the UK , which has even gone to lower depths in last few months. For example as barrister said looking at evidence , and court behaviour, where are we Russia/China. The barrister explained I am not a human rights lawyer, however gave me references for breach of human rights act, further told to stop picketing, all HHJDenyer will do is say your latest application [clinical negligence no win no fee lawyers state good claim] has no merit, and end of matter, your back picketing. By ignoring present application has he has done for years over previous applications, you can take to the European court over breach. If you make applications to HHJDenyer and he puts in bin, will not consider, clear breach of the HRA [human rights act] ,also malfeasance in public office.Wait until out of time, however keep emailing court, over application for lawyers to issue proceedings for clinical negligence,
StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]
Further stated if Pro Bono Unit can not help then contact national press/Panorama , and gave me legal firms/barristers chambers that may be able to help. Further stated legal firms will be busy, need sections ,,,,,, skeletal argument/details/and references. Further stated to inform legal firms, that todays issue relates to second half of 2016, eg proceedings in time, if lawyer observes evidence over a year will not look further, and say we can not help. Previous applications that were binned, although you have evidence taken by hand, stamped by the court over a year ago EVIDENCE relevant, in series behaviour of HHJDenyer,,,,eg
Mirojubous v Ukrain ,,,,fairness of proceedings is always assessed by examination in entirety so that a isolated incident may not be sufficient to render the proceedings as a whole unfair,,,
The latest situation, of not considering applications, to pervert the course of justice,NO ISOLATED INCIDENT ,,,,, has gone on for years, just personal vindictive stance.
Moral v France ,,,,legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge lacks impartiality , this standpoint important but not decisive, what is decisive is whether their fear can be held to be objectively justified,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Pabla v Finland
For years will show applications, taken by hand stamped by the court are binned/ignored,to pervert the course of justice, had call from court,,,,,,,,,,,,do not approve of some of your applications to us, will not stand by while corruption is going on, HHJDenyer/court out to get you, they have forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing from court file,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. todays issue are applications in second part of 2016 that HHJDenyer again still bins/ignores to pervert the course of justice has he has done for years. He believes he can do this, utterly corrupt , and get away with it. Malfeasance in public office. HHJDenyer utterly corrupt issues restraining order where he cites issue already determined by court, where defendants had asked that judgement reads i acted unreasonably and with no merit, DJWatson stated i had not acted unreasonably, as he stated in judgement he had read file, told defendants ypu asked to settle, where for example claim for medical records, where case struck out in papers. i appeal, where defendants ask to settle and supply medical records, fair enough he states you can appeal to me to remove/amend, when i do he is so corrupt application ignored, malfeasance in public office, where are we Russia/China as local chambers stated. We contact MP ,assume he contacted court, get reply,i have written,to court,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i can not force them to reply.This corrupt court ignores my MP correspondence.
FIRST SECTION SKELETAL ARGUMENT [was sending about 100 packets/week]
BS315289 [2003] V Royal Mail, over lost mail . Worried about defense indicating immune from proceedings, also stating in defence ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they have discretion as they feel fit to amend regulations, agreed in correspondence that I could recover loss in proceedings , or future claims if they arise, further issue raised at hearing by DJStewart Brown where defendants confirm agreement, immunity not a issue they wish to raise,,or in future claims if they arise ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,claim paid. [several further claims for lost mail heard at court,]
OBS08441 v Royal Mail over lost mail. We have no defence to part 3 and all applications for defence ignored by the court, please see tab 1. Therefore several aspects raised my me in correspondence, in court file, for example,,,,,,,,,,,are they going to say immune from proceedings, so BS315289 correspondence in file. Defendants state before we do a defence we need our reference numbers, court order to supply , tab 2 shows I supplied. We know court obtained please see tab 3 and tab 4, however court wrote to defendants saying I had ignored court order. At hearing DJWatson stated I understand both of you want to address me. Told do you really want to come back after I get you a defense, court in clear breach of the HRA,[human rights act] eg no defence. ,,,,,defendants want struck out via court letter received,,,,,,eg , I had ignored court order. I present tab 2 and tab 3 etc, please see below, and as DJWatson stated ,,,,,,,,,,,DDJO Neil in order stated she would strike out if you did not answer court order, SHE MUST have seen as she put down for hearing. Later in evidence THREE OTHER documents as tab 1, date/stamped by court also missing from file,,,,,,,,,,,,DJWatson,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,something very very odd here. Someone at court removing documents from file to pervert the course of justice[ I WIN CASE]
2YJ03757 V Royal Mail [lost mail] . Defendants state years before your handwriting difficult to read, so Master produced, in tab 5a data not filled in, in tab 5b you have details filled in the Master, eg just dates ect. required for Master. This is summary of defendants claim form sent to defendants ,Master SENT with claim form. ,if claim rejected can use as POC [PARTICULARS OF CLAIM] eg claim to the court. From tab 5b in all claims from Master,,,you have on the,,,,,,,,,,,,I sent,,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and claiming under your regulations 7.4, also sent tab 6 and tab 7. Although DJWatson HEARD OBS08441 states he does not understand claim, would strike out if I did not write to him, please see reply tab 8. From tab 8 I ask defendants if they still maintain they do not understand claim, to contact me and the court, the court inform me no reply, assume they understood claim. From tab 8 again i reference BS315289 and documents supplied.,eg DEFENDANTS not immune from proceedings this corrupt court know this from file However he strikes out claim and it comes before DJBrittan. This is identical claim as OBS08441 , where I state an abuse of process, issue determined by the court. States I will not consider, where I raise from my bundle [internet barristers chambers site on abuse of process ]
GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today]
Told by judge DJBrittan ,,,,,,this is a barristers site, you have limited evidence of case, have you full transcript of GoreWood hearing, no, then I will ignore this evidence. Later barristers advice all you need to have said is this is an abuse of process .DJBrittan going to any length to frustrate the judicial process. Start at tab 5b on the,,,,,,,,,,,,I sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and claiming under your regulations 7.4, go in bundle to defendants 7.4 document ,,,,,where they would accept a auction valuation,as proof of value, as tab 7 explained, told,by DJBrittan ,,,,,,,DJWatson correct not a clear statement of fact, where I told him he had before hearing determined verdict. The N460 rejecting claim sent after hearing, in tab 10,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,we have the utter nonsense where he states,,,,,,,,,,,,the way to make claim was,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,on the,,,,,,,,,,he sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,,and regulations he was claiming under. BUT THIS IS TAB 5B IDENTICAL TO WAY CLAIM WAS MADE. THIS WAS THE POC .Suggest a conspiracy, DJBrittan knows he can say any nonsense, however if i appeal, HHJDenyer has he has done for years as he does today, would ignore appeal, eg malfeasance/misconduct in public office. The issue in the N460 immune from proceedings NEVER raised at hearing IN ANY FORM . DJBrittan although aware of evidence, gets around this by saying, in N460 , sent after hearing, evidence may be in file, not my duty to trawl through file, if he raised issue at hearing could have used BS315289 documents in file. He is aware from file not immune.
APPEAL ,The judgement dated just over 7 days from date franked on envelope, eg over 7 days, where person at court desk refuses to accept appeal ,as out of time ,,,,,sent recorded delivery,tab 11 and now out of my depth contact lawyers LyonsDavidson, told we can also not get a reply to appeal application, go to Cardiff for judicial review.
JUDICIAL REVIEW /COURT OF APPEAL ,,Application in 2 aspects, accepted grounds for judicial review,
Strickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA Civ 1132,,,,,,,,,frustration of the judicial process,,,,,,,,,,,as the court states tab 12 your allowed to make application for oral hearing, when I do its binned/ignored, date/stamped by court as obtained .You will see later HHJDenyer/court in 2016 they will again bin/ignore applications to pervert the course of justice.
Sharing v Preston CC [2012] EWHC 515,,,,,,,,case judged before hearing, eg immunity issue never raised,,,
,,The court reply in tab 12 asking me to ask HHJDenyer again, please see tab 13, eg tab 13 c as court again stamps application dated 1.2.2013,for oral hearing, HHJDenyers ignores, contact administration court Cardiff, told to ask again, please see second application tab 13g dated 18.2.2013, again HHJDenyer ignores to pervert the course of justice. Lawyers on file not told of hearing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ombudsman,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence in file lawyers informed of hearing date. The judgement stated I had not adhered to correct by asking for oral hearing, told by Cardiff court, only way forward go to court of appeal, their judgement in tab 14. From above utter nonsense , court of appeal produced file, asked if I wanted to add further documents, between us the court has tab 11 tab 13 tab 13g , 3 documents stamped by court as obtained. COURTS JUDGEMENT UTTER NONSENSE I HAD ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING
BEFORE THIS JUDGEMENT FURTHER CLAIM TO ROYAL MAIL AGAIN JUST TAB 5 PAID RETURN OF POST. TOLD MS DRAWWATER HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES HAS LEFT REASON PAID WE WANT TO TURN OVER A NEW PAGE REASON CLAIM PAID. FORGET ABOUT AWARD TO US . HAD CALL ONE EVENING ,,,,,,DO NOT APPROVE OF SOME OF YOUR APPLICATIONS TO MY COURT ASSUME A DISTRICT JUDGE HOWEVER WILL NOT STAND BY WHILE CORRUPTION IS GOING ON DENYER/COURT OUT TO GET YOU IF YOU CHECK AT COURT THEY HAVE FORGOTTEN TO REMOVE ONE OF YOUR APPLICATIONS FOR ORAL HEARING OTHERS REMOVED AS IN OBS08441,,,,,,, RECORD AT COURT TOLD THIS ONE APPLICATION STILL ON SYSTEM WE [MR TILL] LATER SENT TO CARDIFF COURT. BRISTOL/CARDIFF COURT REFUSED TO ANSWER IF ON SYSTEM,,,,,,,,,,,,,IT PROVED MY CASE I HAD ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING. COURT IGNORES EMAILS TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE. SUGGEST COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT WANT THIS BEFORE COURT,,,,,,,,,,,,,EG CAN NOT TAKE TO SUPREME COURT. TAB 14
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Contacted human rights lawyers, told good claim, [believe McGinley v UK cited,,,,,eg court denying existence of documents, ]. The court of appeal had produced bundle , asked if I want to add anything else, for bundle, in letter also cite applications enclosed, sent where court of appeal state,in letter ,,,,,,,,,,will also be considered by judge, IT HAS BEYWEEN US ,,,,,,,THE 3 APPLICATIONS DATE/STAMPED BY THE COURT ASKING FOR ORAL HEARING [ these ANYWAY in judicial review APPLICATION INMATERIAL OF BUNDLE] HOWEVER IN JUDGEMENT TAB 14 STATES …..NEVER ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING. DENYING EXISTANCE OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED SUGGEST COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT WANT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT EG REMOVING DOCUMENTS FROM FILE. ,,,,,,,,, HHJDENYER IGNORNING APPLICATIONS THE UTTER CORRUPT JUDGEMENT OF DJBRITTAN,,,WAY TO MAKE CLAIM ON THE,,,,,,,,HE SENT,,,,,TO,,,,,,AND REGULATIONS HE WAS CLAIMING UNDER WHERE THIS WAS EXACTLY AS WAY CLAIM WAS MADE. THEY ARE UTTERLY AWARE FURTHER THIS WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS MATTER DECIDED BY COURT SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE,,,WHERE BRITTAN STATES HE WOULD NOT CONSIDER SOMEONE GOING TO ANY LENGTH TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE.. Application via Strickson v Preston CC [2007] ,,,,,frustration of the judicial process,,,,,,,,,,,,,,from court document tab 12 , states I can make application for oral hearing, when I do to frustrate the judicial process,,,,,,,,,,,,HHJDenyer ignores, and court perverts course of justice by removing documents from file, as THEY DID IN OBS08441.; .The court of appeal clearly saying no frustration of the judicial process,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you never asked court for oral hearing. Barrister Andrew Marsden, informed me ,,,, experience in HRA then told never done an application, made application myself however rejected as POC in wrong place, which I did not understand, when obtained court reply out of time. Then case v NHS trust please see below
CASES V NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST
We have clinical negligence claim, impingement of shoulder, lawyers state a good claim , however quantum may not exceed 2000.00 and we will not take on. Ask for medical records, trust ignores correspondence, AOIBS346 issued. Limited medical records sent, eg recording with radiology confirmed documents withheld. Inguinal hernia operation, no claim against trust, trust refuse to take home after surgery. After surgery while shopping asked by nurse are you alright, heard you had fallen down going home, doctors protecting their backs, nurse offered to give a sworn statement in confidence to trust, trust refused offer. No real damage, need to add a statement to medical records ,was not offered transport home, , as regulations, please see tab 17. Trust refuse to allow. Further in going for surgery allowed travel expenses please see tab 16 , so sent tickets recorded delivery for payment. Trust refuse to pay, AOIBS746 issued. AOIBS346 comes before DJWatson, who asks trust Ms Needs for written statement, where she states he has all records, a few weeks later, where he strikes out claim and I appeal, recording with radiology for example shows medical records missing. Due to above problems with HHJDenyer sought legal advice where told I had used wrong regulations, should have been 1988 regulations not 1990, as quoted in POC [court claim ] for AOIBS346/AOIBS746. They had accepted claim in AOIBS346 , please see tab 15 . Therefore made application to remove and reissue A0IBS746 or asked permission to amend the POC, application ignored by the court, where 4 weeks later DJRowe strikes out, where I appeal. The appeals does not come to hearing, defendants ask to settle, previously had now paid travel expenses, now agree to supply medical records , and put statement in medical records, we both produce settlement document, which is rejected by the court by DJBrittan with order to settle at hearing. The settlement in tab 20 . Defendants asked that judgement reads ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,claims unreasonable, and utterly without merit, THIS REJECTED BY DJWATSON. Saying he would not state in judgement, . defendants application rejected.
CASE V COMPUWAVE Relates to backing up emails, ONLY UNIQUE COPY on my old computer, Outlook Express, for example it shows in Denyer case above emails to Cardiff court ,,,we have no replies to enquires did Bristol CC send you application for oral hearing,,,,,,,,,,,,. Evidence you would require. Produce program, with viewer as emails now copied to a USB stick. Program did not work, told it did when you collected , we will ignore further correspondence, B26YM042 issued where defendants state we gave wrong program, they now supply ,....matter settled, settlement tab 21 sent to court via email, where at a later date the claim is struck out although settled by parties.
RESTAINING ORDER In tab 22 , however Compuwave had admitted mistake, and hospital trust asked to settle, supply medical records , and put statement as tab 17 regulations, and had paid travel expenses, in medical records. Further issue determined by the court, trust asked that judgement tab 20 reads I acted unreasonably and claims utterly with no merit, however at hearing APPLICATION REFUSED BY DJWATSON.
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective
This is issue already determined by the courts the restraining order just a vindictive act HHJDenyer will go to any length to frustrate and corrupt the judicial process
THIS IS POINT WHERE TODAYS ENQUIRY BECOMES LIVE .
APLICATIONS TO HHJDENYER
From restraining order tab 22 if I need to issue proceedings, or amend/remove the restraining order I need to ask permission from HHJDenyer. This was done on the 26.2.2016 , tab 23 with follow up email amendment tab 24, all you have is page one of these applications, eg included was fee except forms ect, sent via email. . Follow up emails which are ignored, . We do not know if defendants were happy to go for hearing, as in reply just indicate when out of time to issue proceedings over negligence claim, this was email to court, tab 24 , as far as I knew they did not object to negligence claim coming before the court. . There were numerous emails asking for a reply, just ignored, as years before in evidence above cited. Was picketing at the court, handing out leaflets, inside and out, outside told to move or be arrested, where someone comes running out saying do not want arrested. That evening had call from barrister, who I gave leaflet to , told to stop picketing , HHJDenyer would respond saying negligence claim had no merit ,and would not remove restraining order, end of matter leaving you picketing, wait until out of time in your negligence claim, then take to the European court, ECHR. We have now run out of time to issue proceedings over clinical negligence claim as HHJDenyer ignored application. His court going to any length to pervert the course of justice/corrupt the judicial process..
SECOND APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER
The hospital trust reject negligence claim, taunt me you can not issue proceedings without HHJDenyers permission. They state reason disabled, you did not come for appointments, never asked us for new surgical team, and did not turn up for physiotherapy, full details below, to summarize defence utter nonsense, suggest rejected claim hoping has he has done for years HHJDenyer would ignore applications. For example in tab 25/ 27 asking for new surgical firm, further as awaiting NEW surgical firm complain as I get letters to see old surgical firm consultant Mr Packham, and in tab 26 the trust issues apology as letters sent, as awating new surgical team.. So medical records are wrong from above, as in AOIBS746 ask to add a statement, again trust refuse as stance in AOIBS746. So in application 26.10.2016 , again just page one given tab 29 ask as in AOIBS746 to issue proceedings, this time hospital trust did not reply, assume happy to go for hearing. There is allegations in a consultation nurse was threatened with physical violence, we have recording utterly untrue, so as AOIBS346 asked for medical records , which again trust refuse to supply. We ask therefore to issue proceedings, for medical records, trust refuse to supply, where in application court ignores. They have 15 working days, to reply, eg 3 weeks , where I suggest for good will 4 weeks, before time have call saying HHJDenyer will be ignoring application, no paperwork will be issued, , and before deadline inform the Pro Bono Unit, that HHJDenyer would be ignoring application
PRO BONO UNIT
State in first reply, issue of restraining order, where in my reply , and NUMEROUS others this is not issue. For example say removed, however my clinical negligence claim out of time. They have rejected application as can not consider human rights issue over restraining order. The issue is access to the courts, see above with evidence, HHJDENYER FOR YEARS STOPPING ACCESS TO THE COURTS. HE WILL GO TO ANY LENGTH TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS
Perez de Rota v Spain ….breach of the HRA if stopping access to the courts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[also see Strain Greek v Greece case cited in red above] .
Beles v Czech Replublic ,,,,,litagants should have an effective judicial remedy,,,,,Princiiple whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law
Idid v Italy ,,,,,,,,,,,court must guarantee the right of everyone to obtain final decision relating to civil rights and obligations in a reasonable time,,,,,,[WE HAVE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT UTTERLY CORRUPT DO NOT TALK TO ME REASONABLE TIME ,,,,,,,,NEVER GET A REPLY]
WE HAVE JUDGE HHJDENYER WHO WILL JUST IGNORE APPLICATIONS TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE WHERE HE KNOWS WITH EVIDENCE COURT WRONG. . THIS IS NO ISOLATED INCIDENT HE HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS,,,,,,,APPLICATIONS TAKEN BY HAND MY COPY STAMPED BY COURT ,,,,,,JUST BINNED. CAN WE SHOW THIS CORRUPTION AT BRISTOL COUNTY COURT WITH HHJENYER chronological order , yes we can going on for years, even now saying in call he would be ignoring application of 26.10.2016. WHERE WE HAVE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE HE GET AROUND THIS BY IGNORING APPLICATIONS.
2YJ03757 FROM TAB 5B POC ON THE ,,,,I SENT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,TO,,,,,,,,,,,,AND CLAIMING UNDER DEFENDANTS REGULATIONS 7.4. IN FILE FROM DEFENDANTS NOT IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS. CLAIM REJECTED N460 TAB 10 UTTER NONSENSE,,,,,,,,,,, DJBRITTAN WAY TO MAKE CLAIM ON THE,,,,,,,,,,,,HE SENT,,,,,,,,,,,,,TO,,,,,,,,,,,,AND REGULATIONS HE IS CLAIMING UNDER. FROM FILE FROM CORRESPONDENCE NOT IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS. APPEAL TAB 11 IGNORED BY HHJDENYER LAWYERS LYONSDAVIDSON COULD NOT GET A REPLY. JUDICIAL REVIEW COURT TOLD TWICE TO ASK HHJDENYER AGAIN TAB 12 DONE TAB 13 TAB 13G DATE/STAMPED BY THE COURT. AGAIN HHJDENYER IGNORES. WE HAVE JUDGEMENT TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE BY ADMINISTRATION AND COURT OF APPEAL THAT NO EVIDENCE I ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING. WE HAD CALL COURTS/DENYER OUT TO GET YOU BEFORE JUDGEMENT BY COURT OF APPEAL, ISSUE RAISED WITH COURT SUGGEST DID NOT WANT BEFORE THE COURT REASON FOR COURT OF APPEAL JUDGEMENT . WE HAVE CLAIMS V N BRISTOL NHS TRUST WHERE THEY ASK TO SETTLE AT SETTLEMENT HEARING MAKE APPLICATIONS THAT JUDGEMENT READS CLAIMS UNREASONABLE AND ISSUED WITH UTTERLY NO MERIT,,,,,REJECTED BY DJWATSON. CASE V COMPUWAVE WHERE AS SOON AS GET PAPERS ADMIT MISTAKE THEY ASK TO SETTLE AND SETTLEMENT SENT EMAIL TO THE COURT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WHERE AT LATER DATE CLAIM STRUCK OUT ALTHOUGH SETTLED. . WE GET RESTRAINING ORDER OVER COMPUWAVE CASE WHERE DEFENDANTS ADMIT THEIR FAULT, FURTHER FROM HOSPITAL TRUST CASE AN ISSUE ALREADY DETERMINED BY THE COURT EG DJWATSON I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY AND WITHOUT MERIT. FROM TAB 22 CAN MAKE APPLICATION TO REMOVE THIS ORDER DONE 26.2.2016 TAB 23 AMENDMENT TAB 24 AGAIN HHJDENYER IGNORES. IN THIS APPLICATION ASKED TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS OVER CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM WHERE NOW OUT OF TIME. IN REJECTION OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE PLEASE SEE ABOVE,,,,,,MORE DETAILS BELOW UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT, EVIDENCE SUPPLIED FOR YOU ….IN THESE ALLEGATIONS ASKED TO ADD STATEMENT TO MEDICAL RECORDS, ALLOWED PLEASE SEE TAB 17 FROM NHS REGULATIONS AND ASK FOR FURTHER MEDICAL RECORDS. HHJDENYER KNOWS AGAIN I HAVE VALID CLAIM AS DEFENDANTS IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE HOWEVER IN APPLICATION 26.10.2016 TAB 29 HHJDENYER IGNORES APPLICATION.TO ADD A STATEMENT FURTHER IN THIS APPLICATION WAS REQUEST TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER AGAIN. ACCEPT HHJDENYER IN DIFFICULT POSITION IN TAB 22 RESTRAINING ORDER QUOTES AOIBS346/AOIBS746 HOWEVER APPLICATION 26.10.2016 IS IDENTICAL TO THESE CLAIMS EG ASKING FOR MEDICAL RECORDS AND PUTTING STATEMENT IN MY MEDICAL RECORDS, THE LEGAL ISSUE DETERMINED IN TAB 17,,,,,THEY MUST ALLOW ME TO ADD A STATEMENT HOWEVER DEFENDANTS REFUSE TO DO AND HHJDENYER WILL NOT ANSWER APPLICATION TAB 29 TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS .FROM RESTRAINING ORDER NEED TO ASK HOSPITAL LAWYER Ms SMITH IF SHE OBJECTED TO ISSUE OF PROCEEDINGS SHE IS PART OF CORRUPTION WITH BRISTOL COUNTY COURT MANAGER Mr FOWLER WE HAVE ASKED BOTH DID THEY OBJECT TO MY APPLICATIONS THEY IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE. FOR EXAMPLE WE ASK POLICE TO GET INFORMATION FOR BOTH AS IT WERE A CATCH 22 SITUATION. IF THEY OBJECTED IN APPLICATION TO THE COURT WE HAVE HHJDENYER IGNORING APPLICATION MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE, SIMILAR CONCLUSION IF THEY DID NOT OBJECT. WE AWAIT POLICE REPLY FOR THIS WEBSITE
SECOND SECTION THE FURTHER DETAILS
1/ Case BS315289, [2003] claim v Royal Mail. Concerned before hearing, paradox in regulations, eg immune from proceedings , however also saying we have discretion over regulations as we feel fit, talked to newspaper, told do not go running to press, you can recover loss via proceedings, and future claims if they arise, confirmed in correspondence, issue raised at hearing, where defendants inform DJStewart Brown it was agreed I could recover loss in todays court proceedings, or future claims should they arise. .
A FEW MORE HEARINGS V ROYAL MAIL ISSUE IMMUNITY FROM PROCEEDINGS NEVER RAISED
2/ Case OBS08441. The court refuses to give me a defence, part 3/ please see tab 1. Did not know what they may raise at hearing, so numerous documents filed with the court , for example BS315289 documents. Are they going to raise immunity from proceedings, as I stated, we have had 3 cases since 2003 [BS315289] issue never raised, if raise at hearing, would reference
Stuart v Goldberg [2008] EWCA Civ 1 ,,,,The raising of a defence in later proceedings may without more amount to abuse, if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in previous proceedings,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Defendants state claim not valid, will send to our appeal department, who told them to pay, so know reference number. There was a court order to supply defendants reference numbers although they knew numbers before their application to the court, eg they sent claim to their appeal department. The order was answered , date/stamped by court taken by hand tab 2 dated 23.2.2011 . Applications for a defence ignored, enquires at court, told court ignoring applications, all we have is you answered court order on the 2.3.2011 , where I informed court I had answered order on time, eg by 28.2.2011, adamant court stance on system 2.3.2011, , ask for letter to confirm, tab 3 take up issue with court tab 4 where told in later letter you did answer on time, this was date we put on our system, not date you delivered.
Comes before DJWatson, at hearing he states do you really want to come back after I get you a defence. This court behaviour eg no defence before hearing, ,clear breach of the Human Rights Act HRA. Article 6 . Further states to defendants , understand you also want to address me, where they state court had written stating I had ignored court order and wanted case struck out. From tabs 2, 3. 4 ect clearly I had not ignored court order , however the court had removed all these documents from file, eg tab 3 is a court document missing from file.
THIS IS NOT JUST ONE DOCUMENT MISSING
A/ I HAD ANSWERED ORDER
B/ FROM TAB 3 THEY ADMIT I HAD ANSWERED ORDER.
C/ALSO I HAD WRITTEN TO COURT AS RECORDS WRONG, AND IN THEIR REPLY STATES THIS WAS DATE WE PUT ON SYSTEM NOT WHEN YOU ANSWERED COURT ORDER
DJWatson states something very very odd here, from order of DDJO Neil, without your reply, eg answering court order on time, she would strike out claim, DJWatson states she MUST HAVE SEEN YOU ANSWERED HER ORDER ON TIME as she put down for todays hearing. As case continued 3 other documents, again date/stamped by court as received removed from file. Someone at the court removing documents from file, to pervert the course of justice. . Royal Mail now
accept claim,at hearing, and pay. Note
a/ DJWatson heard this case. Was not happy I had won, asked for interest in the POC, ,,,,he states from CPR rules Civil Court Act 1984 I have discretion ,rates are low ,will only give you 1%
b/ Before OBS08441 Royal Mail state your handwriting difficult to read, so send also typed summary of their claim form in form of Master produced, eg in claim for 2YJ03757 page 1 tab 5A all I had to add is dates , and 46.00. ect IF CLAIM REJECTED CAN USE tab 5 AS POC [PARTICULARS OF CLAIM] IN APPLICATION TO THE COURT. In tab5 B ,POC for 2YJ03757 for example you can see data filled in Master eg Aldridges,,,,,,,,,,,,,10.2. 2012,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
c/ Lets play Devils Advocate say I did not have tab 2 3 4 ect with me, have no defence did not know what they may raise at hearing. So lose case ,,,,,appeal I did answer court order, give tabs 2 3 4 ect,,,,,,,,,,,,where HHJDenyer ignores application, although application filed tab 2 shows answered as taken by hand, date/stamped by the court, and court confirmed answered in tab 3. I APPEAL WHERE HHJDENYER IGNORES APPLICATION TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE
3/ 2YJ03757 please see claim tab 5, also sent tabs 6 and 7 . Although he heard OBS08441 DJWatson states he does not understand claim, ATHOUGH HE HEARD OBS08441 POC TAB 5 IDENTICAL TO BOTH.CLAIMS ,,,,HE UNDERSTOOD OBS08441 would strike out unless I write to him, please see tab 8 , note BS315289 PROCEEDINGS. CITED, WITH DOCUMENTS SO KNOWS DEFENDANTS NOT IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS THIS DATA IN COURT FILE where he does strike out and I ask for oral hearing, which comes before DJBrittan. Again BS315289 documents in file.
So the claim , POC to the court,,,,,states tab 5 page 2 ,,,, on the,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I sent,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,of,address ,,,,,,,,,,,and claiming under regulations 7.4. As I explain to DJWatson tab 8 how else can I state claim, we both agree a package sent to Aldridges is lost. For example IN DEFENCE
On the 10.2.2012 paragraph 12 of defence I sent,,1950 cup final programme par 18 of defence to Aldridges par 12 of defense . and claiming under regulations 7.4.
I further state you must remember OBS08441 as we had no defence, and you accept papers removed by court from file. The skeletal argument for hearing, tab 9 where I state an abuse of process the issue over proof of value determined several times by the court in previous proceedings. Eg please see tab 7 AND 9
This is an abuse of process legal issue determined in 0BS08441, and cases before. . Take up legal issue with DJBrittan, told I will not consider, in file was document from barristers internet site, on abuse of process, eg stating for example
GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts where issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the court in disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[as occurred at this hearing, identical claim to OBS08441]
DJBrittan states have you full transcript of hearing, GoreWood,case ,,,,,,,,,no, then I will ignore your application, going to any length to corrupt/frustrate the judicial process. From later legal advice told all you required to state was this is a abuse of process, already determined by the court, in document skeletal argument for hearing, first thing I stated was this is an abuse of process, issue already determined by the court. Start from tab 5b on the,,,,,,,,,,I sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,claiming under regulations.7.4 tab 5b , where they will accept [as in OBS08441] an auction valuation as proof of value, The auction comes from Ebay auction, as I find same item as lost item, similar condition sold by a third party. Told , this does not inform defendants what claim is, DJWatson correct your claim not clear, where I inform him he had decided case before hearing. States further ,,,,,,,claim may be clear from documents in file, not his duty to look at file.
THIS IS SAME JUDGE PREVIOUSLY WHO ASKED ME TO LEAVE SO HE COULD DISCUSS CASE WITH DEFENDANTS . THESE DEFENDANTS STATED NO WE HAVE TO CATCH A PLANE. MY ENQUIRES SHOWED MANY HOURS BEFORE FLIGHT ,,,,,ADMITTED BY DEFENDANTS WITH REPLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,TRUE HOWEVER WOULD NOT BE DISCUSSING CASE BEHIND YOUR BACK WITH BRITTAN FOR YOU TO EXPLOIT AT LATER DATE.
The N460 rejecting claim in tab 10. UTTER NONSENSE
a/ States in tab 10 N460 way to make claim ,,,on the,,,,,,,,,,,,he sent ,,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,of,,,,[address] and claiming under regulations.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BUT THIS IS IDENTICAL TO WAY CLAIM WAS MADE [tab 5b PAGE 2 ] WHICH I SHOWED HIM 5 MINS BEFORE. POINT WHERE I STARTED TO GIVE MY EVIDENCE.
b/ States immune from proceedings, gets around this by saying evidence may be in file, [eg BS316289 documents in file stating not immune from proceedings] eg not immune from proceedings, however can not be expected to trawl through file to find evidence
ISSUE NEVER RAISED AT HEARING IF HE DID COULD HAVE PRODUCED BS315289 DOCUMENTS ALREADY IN FILE . FURTHER HAD JUDGED CASE BEFORE HEARING THE ISSUE OF IMMUNITY FROM PROCEEDINGS NEVER RAISED AT HEARING A REASON TO GRANT A JUDICIAL REVIEW OF WHAT WENT ON AT HEARING eg SHARING V PRESTON COUNTY COURT EWHC ADMIN 515 [2012]
c/ States I insult court, from tab 8 , no I did not I had no defence, and documents were removed from file in OBS08441.
Later appeal proceedings below asking for transcript of hearing, just ignored by the court, corrupt court do not want evidence disclosed.
States I insult defendants, no I did not, he has in 2YY03757 file OBS08441 documents ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,defendants state non valid claim, we will send to our appeal department, to confirm, however told them to pay me .
SO THEY KNEW REFERENCE NUMBER HOWEVER MADE APPLICATION TO THE COURT FOR ME TO SUPPLY. IT’S THE TRUTH I WAS NOT INSULTING DEFENDANTS DJBRITTAN HAS ALLEGATION WITH EVIDENCE HOWEVER IGNORES EVIDENCE EG BEFORE SENT TO APPEAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENDANTS
4/ APPEAL TO HHJDENYER 2YJ03757 ,,,The application in tab 11 . The judgement had been franked dated on envelope over 7 days since judgement. Take to court as usual, to get stamped , told HHJDenyer would not accept application as just over 7 days, ….
WE MAY ASK WHO INFORMED COURT STAFF NOT TO ACCEPT.
Application by post, tab 11
and contacted lawyers LyonsDavidson due to stance of court, getting out of my depth, eg refusing now to accept applications. They inform me court has your application, we can not get a reply from court/ HHJDenyer, and told to make application for judicial review.
5/ APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW ,,,THE courts reply in tab 12 and therefore application as court instructions to HHJDenyer , tab 13 , which he ignored. From tab 13c date/stamped by court 1.2.2013. Contact Administration court where told to ask HHJDenyer again, again in tab 13g you have proof of further application for oral hearing, again HHJDenyer ignores to pervert the course of justice.. Now need legal advice, contacted new ,lawyers, they were NOT TOLD of hearing. Confirmed by ombudsman,,,,,,,,,,,,,,poor legal service however no evidence told of hearing. Administration court instruct to take to court of appeal.
6/ APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL. ,,,,In application file it has THREE applications, for ORAL HEARING tabs 11 13 13 g asking for oral hearing, however judgement tab ,14 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I had never asked for a oral hearing to correct. The application as reasons the court has stated to grant a judicial review is frustration of the judicial process, Strickson v Preston CC [2007] , however court saying no frustration , you NEVER asked HHJDenyer for oral hearing. In terms of immunity issue NEVER raised at hearing, DJBrittan had judged case BEFORE hearing, again reason to grant a judicial review, Sharing v Preston CC [2012] EWHC 515, in judgement tab 14 not mentioned, applications for transcript of hearing, OBS08441/2YJ03757 ignored, court going to any length to corrupt/frustrate the judicial process. In note below court of appeal aware ALSO of this evidence. As emailed court of appeal to put in file. TO CONSIDER AT HEARING
NOTE Before judgement TAB 14 had another claim v Royal Mail , AGAIN JUST TAB 5 SUPPLIED paid return of post. Enquire to Royal Mail, I have court of appeal application, you were just sent in usual way tab 5 just dates ect altered in new claim , so you must understand claim. Told head of legal services Ms Drawwater had left, and they wanted to turn over a new page, and forget award to us in 2YJ03757. Picketin g at court. Had call one evening,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do not approve of some of your applications to my court however will not stand by where corruption is occurring, Denyer/court out to get you, if you check at court they have forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing. Visit court, correct, told just ONE application on computer system now ,told we sent to the Administration court later. EMAILS TO BRISTOL COUNTY COURT AND ADMINISTRATION COURT IGNORED AS I ASK IS THIS APPLICATION ON SYSTEM, EG APPLICATION FOR ORAL HEARING. IT PROVES MY CASE I HAD ASKED AND ON SYSTEM. THEY IGNORE TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE.
PLEASE SEE IN SECTION 1 ABOVE DETAILS OF APPLICATION TO ECHR
7/ ISSUES WITH NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST
AOIBS346 ,,,,Would not release medical records over negligence claim, impingement of shoulder, so AOIBS346 issued 1 August 2014. They accept claim, tab 15 and pay costs. Inform defendants not full and final settlement until I get all medical records.
AOIBS746 This related to inguinal hernia operation in August 2014. Was not offered transport home, later that month stopped while shopping asked by nurse if alright, heard you had fallen down,going home, doctors now protecting their backs. The nurse stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you were told not to go home on bus, however never offered transport home, she offered to give statement to trust in confidence, offer rejected by trust. Going for operation ,allowed travel expenses,tab 16 so bus tickets sent recorded delivery to trust for payment, trust responsible for payment please see tab 16 . Further from tab 17 allowed to add statement to medical records, in respect of not offered transport home, trust refused request in both issues so AOIBB746 issued. In defence tab 18 they state not responsible for payment, and they do not know issue I want to leave a statement about, utterly untrue, please see one of many tab 19 PAR 4 dated 17.9.2014 and they cite issue in defence, eg not taking home, defence dated month later 17.10.2014 . Further in tab 16 responsible for travel expenses.
AOIBS346 comes before DJWatson, who asks for statement from trust Ms Needs, who stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,he has all medical records, where he strikes out claim. For example untrue in recording with radiology they confirm medical records were still outstanding, so I appealed confirmed in recording with manager in radiology e g medical records still outstanding.
AOIBS746 Due to problems above eg HHJDenyer ignoring applications, 2YJ03757 sought advice from barristers chambers,direct access, ,told in AOIBS746 used wrong regulations, so informed the court, and made application to remove, and reissue, or ask to amend . Application AGAIN ignored. Eg made application to amend claim or remove and then reissue , as above applications to court/HHJDenyer ignored. Then later DJRowe strikes out, where I appeal, eg from tab 17 they must allow me to add a statement and tab 16 they must pay travel expenses. Was it struck out as I used wrong regulations, however DJRowe utterly aware 4 weeks before she struck out, I asked to amend claim, or remove and reissue, which she ignored. So I appeal, for example trust accepted proceedings regulations in AOIBS346, so argument ,,,,which we expected DJRowe to consider. She ignored application .
Stuart v Goldberg [2008] EWCA Civ 1,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,The raising of a defence in later proceedings [AOIBS746] may without more amount to abuse if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in previous proceedings [eg AO1BS346] DJRowe could say ,,,,,,,not abuse, however application ignored.
In email application 20.10.2014 to court asked I to amend to 1988 regulations. Require background to application. Failed several years ago the Anatomy exam at the Royal College of Surgeons. Doing medical research , made redundant asked to consider return to medicine, government sponsored by New Deal scheme. To start clinical studies university required statement from GP. From trust medical records it states,,,,,,,,I am dishonest, never contacted Mr Packham, and ignored clinical advice,which I wanted corrected, these allegations sent to my GP.
So cases come to appeal, where at last minute trust ask to settle, earlier had PAID travel expenses, EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL , now agree to put statement in medical records, and supply outstanding medical records. The settlement in papers, prepared by trust, rejected by court, where court order to settle terms at hearing.
At hearing trust ask that judgement reads claims issued utterly without merit, DEFENDANTS APPLICATION REJECTED BY DJWATSON AS HE STATED YOU ASKED TO SETTLE AND I HAVE CONSIDERED CASE HISTORY AS A WHOLE. . The settlement in tab 20 . In application to court defendants had stated issued with no merit, however i also as above sent documents to the court in defence of allegations, as DJWatson states in judgement ,,,,,reading documents filed by parties, tab 20, and oral request at hearing that judgement reads ,,,,,,,,,,,,issued with no merit,,,,,rejected by DJWatson.
8/ ISSUES WITH COMPUWAVE
Ask to backup emails, program given, and viewer produced to view to recover emails. Program given which would not work, told was working when you left , will not enter further correspondence. Proceedings B26YM042 Issued, where defendants state WE GAVE wrong program they now supply CORRECT PROGRAM, , settlement tab 21 sent to the court, where settlement rejected by the court, and case struck out. . This is case where court aware matter settled by parties.
9/ THE RESTAINING ORDER
The restraining order in tab 22 . It quotes the Compuwave case, where every right to issue proceedings, as defendants admit mistake, wrong program given,they ask to settle, and before case struck out court aware MATTER SETTLED BY PARTIES tab 21 .
In terms of hospital trust issue, this was issue from above already determined by the court, as at hearing DJWatson stated I had not acted with no merit,issue previously determined by the court eg DJWtson HEARING Further cite
Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty, which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The restraining order tab 22 just a vindictive action by HHJDenyer, the issue in respect to hospital trust already determined by DJWatson. . From restraining order, it states you can make application to him to remove/amend. Further if i wish to issue any proceedings i must ask his permission.
10/ FURTHER APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER
Done by email 26.2.2016 just the N244 form shown here, page 1 tab 23 amendment 2.3.2016, again just page 1 , tab 24 to remove/amend,restraining order, permission to issue proceedings, over negligence claim, as previous applications before to him eg 2YJ03757 he ignored. As court order tab 22 hospital trust can object to application, all they confirm to me when out of time to issue proceedings over negligence claim, assume HAPPY to go to hearing. . Reminder emails to the court ignored. Further from order tab 22 I can not issue proceedings, so need to ask his permission to issue proceedings over my clinical negligence claim, as he ignored application ran out of time to issue proceedings on the 27.7.2016.
THE CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM.
Defence,summary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, you did not turn up for appointments, you never asked us for new surgical firm, and did not turn up for physiotherapy. This is reason your disabled.
After 5 months seen by physiotherapy told not qualified to treat you. Need to inject corticosteroid into shoulder then try to restore movement, going on course shortly, so sent to surgeon, seen after 7 months after injury . Told too late, I will inject will get urgent physiotherapy in next 2 months, do not think it will work, will see you after 2 months, if no significant improvement we will operate. After one month heard nothing, visited physiotherapy told trivial , we will not see you in 2 months, call consultant, proved by phone records, take letter to consultant, correspondence ignored, TRUST STATE DOCTOR DID NOT MAKE CLEAR TO BE SEEN IN 2 MONTHS after 2 months visit trust, where put down for surgery. From complaint consultant states I am dishonest never contacted his office, , although he has record of call from my home number to him. As called dishonest ask for new surgical team, and trust aware I would not see this consultant. Please see tabs 25 26 aware I would not see this consultant and request for new surgical team. From tab 27 trust ask me to confirm again my request. At final consultation recorded discuss physiotherapy , where surgeon states not required now,TOO LATE and we will operate. THE DEFENCE A UTTER NONSENSE YOU CAN SEE WHY NO WIN NO FEE LAWYERS STATE I HAVE A GOOD CLAIM
11/ NEW APPLICATION AS A0IBS746 TO LEAVE STATEMENT IN MY MEDICAL RECORDS.
In defence state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,from medical records you did not turn up for appointments, the trust aware I was not coming, in records we have email from defendants with apology tab 26 as from previous tab 25 aware I would not be coming, as again from tab 25 request for new surgical team. . From tab 27 even defendants admit I had asked for new surgical team. AGAIN HOSPITAL TRUST REFUSE TO PUT STATEMENT IN MY MEDICAL RECORDS EG REPEAT OF AOIBS746. Eg UNTRUE I HAD NOT ASKED FOR NEW SURGICAL TEAM AND UNTRUE I HAD NOT TURNED UP FOR APPOINTMENTS FROM TAB 26 DEFENDANTS ISSUE APOLOGY AS THESE LETTERS FOR APPOINTMENTS SENT AS AWAIT NEW SURGICAL TEAM
12/ FURTHER BACKGROUND CONCERNING TRUST RELEVANT TO APPLICATION BELOW
Before AOIBS346 was issued, numerous request for medical records. On the 13.7.2014 informed trust unless I hear from them by 1.8.2014 I would issue proceedings for medical records. At hearing before DJWatson the trust lawyer Ms Smith goes whining in a malicious way to judge as I issued proceedings, as Ms Needs was on holiday and did not see email, please see tab 28 from Ms Needs she was not on holiday , and did see email. Ms Smith was acting in a malicious way, whining to DJWatson , misleading the court.
While at trust slipped and further damaged a window that was already broken. Confirmed by police, due to no glass on floor,although large hole in glass, eg broken for sometime, and they would be taking no further action, legal letters to trust to take for private criminal prosecution , or with draw allegation, where they write to my GP, confirming matter closed.
On the visit to trust recorded, there is no threats of physical violence to nurse .
WE ASK FOR MEDICAL RECORDS AS IN AOIBS346 HOWEVER TRUST AGAIN REFUSE TO SUPPLY eg need to see allegations of nurse.
Of note asking for medical records in July 2014 eg AOIBS346 as required for negligence claim, please see tab30 20.11.2014. In July 2015 when hospital trust ask to settle board member Mr Cresswell at meeting where trust lawyer Ms Smith states utterly unaware of possible negligence claim, please see tab 30 utterly untrue. From CPR Pre Action Protocol for Resolution of Clinical Disputes section
1.8 LITAGANT IN PERSON ,,,,,,They should send a copy of the Protocol to litigant in person at the earliest opportunity,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[ONLY SENT NEARLY 12 MONTHS AFTER TAB 30]
Lets consider trust lawyer Ms Smith,,,
a/ …misleads court in A0IBS346 saying Ms Need was on holiday,,,,please see her statement tab 28
b/ ,,,AOIBS746 in defence tab 18 states not responsible for travel expenses,,,,,from tab 16 she is , this is NHS document,,,,,,states do not know issue you want to add a statement to, however quotes it in defence, further see tab 19 utterly aware of issue.
c/ ….misleads her boss Mr Cresswell, utterly aware of negligence claim, further from CPR regulations utterly disregard for court protocol rules.
13/ FURTHER APPLICATION TO HHJDENYER
This made 26.10.2016 please see tab 29 , just front page, again ask to amend/remove restraining order, further ask from above as AOIBS746 for permission to issue proceedings eg to be allowed to put statement in medical records,medical records utterly untrue, saying not asked for new surgical team ect,,,,, and as AOIBS346 ask for medical records as reference to allegation, nurse threatened with physical violence. Gave court 4 weeks to reply, had call before 4 weeks from court,,,,,,, HHJDenyer will be ignoring application, no paperwork will be issued, where I inform the Pro Bono Unit before the 4 weeks. . HHJDenyer misconduct in public office, ignoring applications, we have situation,,,you can do nothing without my permission, when as in corrupt way he has done for years, when applications made he ignores to pervert the course of justice.
14/ THE LEGAL ISSUE
Was picketing at the court , Barrister who i gave leaflet to, called saying in July 2016 you will be out of time to issue proceedings over clinical negligence, as HHJDenyer is ignoring applications , as he had done for years, then take to European Court of Human Rights . Stated i am not a human rights lawyer, however this afternoon did some reading,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Quoted
Strain Greek v Greece ,,,,,,,,,,,,a right to present which they regard as relevant, The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations ARE ACTUALLY HEARD that is to say considered by the court ,,,,,,,have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments adducted by the parties
Perez de Rota v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,breach of HRA if stopping access to the court
HHJDenyer makes order I must ask his permission when I do,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, as he has done for years just ignores. From above is HHJDenyer impartial, .
Moral v France …..Do I have legitimate reason to fear that Denyer lacks impartiality this standpoint important but not decisive , what is decisive is whether the fear can be held to be objectively justified eg Pabla v Finland …..
Many applications for YEARS from above to HHJDenyer ignored, eg 2YJ03757, letters from my MP ignored, with reply ,,,,,,I can not force Bristol court to reply. Call from court where told Denyer/courtb out to get you.
Recommended to contact Pro Bono Unit, if they will not help, gave further details of people who may be able to help. The Pro Bono Unit would only consider if human rights breached in respect to restraining order, which is not issue, THE ISSUE IS NOT BEING ALLOWED ACCESS TO THE COURTS
We have .gA�jgv�
erP � )N�
Google Sites
Report abuse