|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
INDEX.
GO TO INFORMATION ON THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS.
1) Go to a copy of my letter to Prime Minister Tony Blair dated 4th June 2001. Downing Street passed it to the Home Office. This letter details the general background to my situation.
2) Go to evidence that former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding took deliberate action to pervert the course of justice. Other evidence exists which cannot at this time be published here.
3) Go to evidence that former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding had lied and falsely alleged that the three court actions under case numbers DH400950, DH400898 and NE401650 were subject of consolidation. In October of 1996 he tried the three actions at the Newcastle-upon-Tyne County Court as if subject of a consolidation order. By doing so he is held to be in contempt of Supreme Court Rules which required that he see such order for consolidation before trying the cases in that way. Head of our judiciary Lord Irvine, Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice Bingham, Prime Minister Tony Blair and Home Secretary Jack Straw were made aware of the fact that former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding had lied when he alleged that the three above cases had been subject of consolidation. Those facts were ignored by them. John H.Fryer-Spedding's approved transcript of judgement in the three above cases opens with his false claim that the cases had been subject of a consolidation order.
4) Go to photocopy of opening paragraph of Spedding's approved transcript of judgement showing that he wrongly tried the actions as if they had been subject of a consolidation order. He is thus held to be in contempt of supreme Court Rules. Under those Rules he was required to have seen an order for consolidation of the cases. At the time he tried the cases there was an order in force refusing consolidation of the cases. My wife and I did not own No. 17 as stated by Spedding.
5) The first judge to rule in the cases between Miss Carr and me was Deputy District Judge Baird. That was in March of 1994. In November of 1992 Baird unlawfully heard my appeal from an Order made by District Judge Scott-Phillips. A Deputy District Judge is not allowed by law to hear an appeal from a District Judge. Here is the evidence that this took place.
6) That former Recorder John H.Fryer-Spedding took deliberate acts to pervert the course of justice is proved beyond all reasonable doubt. It was also his intention to deprive me of my rights. He agrees this fact in the statement included in his approved transcript of judgement.
7) In 1995 District Judge Scott-Phillips sitting at the Durham County Court made an order to allow me to attend at the office of Solicitor Nancy Bone. Bone breached that order. When I reported the breach to the then Chief Clerk Mr I. Cuthbertson, he informed me that Phillips had told him he had not made an order but that my visit to Bone's office had only been done with her consent. Here is some of the proof that Phillips or Cuthbertson had lied.
As further proof of the lies mentioned above, here is a copy of solicitor Bone's attendance note at the time Phillips granted an order allowing me to attend at her office to take copies from my files.
8) Following Deputy District Judge Baird having unlawfully heard my appeal from the judgement of District Judge Scott-Phillips in November of 1992 I reported matters surrounding that to John Major who was then Prime Minister. Here is the reply which I received from the Lord Chancellors Department.
9) At a hearing in 1992 in the matter of damage to our property caused by a vehicle driven by a Mr Young a letter was handed to District Judge Scott-Phillips. Its contents were never shown to me. This was further gross misconduct by that judge.
10) In 1996 I provided Lord Nolan with a dossier for use in the Committee On Standards In Public Life Enquiry into Freemasonry within the Police and Judiciary. I kept in touch with Lord Nolan until I received a letter from him dated 15th January 1998. Despite having contributed to that Enquiry and the judges in actions DH400950,DH400898 and NE401650 being aware of that none would declare whether or not they were masons. In the circumstances they deprived me of the right to information which I needed to decide whether or not their courts had been impartial as required under Article 6.(10 of the European Human Rights Convention. I am now satisfied that the Nolan Enquiry was nothing short of an exercise to hide the real truth.
13) My appeal against the injunction granted by D.J. Cuthbertson on 17th October 1995 was heard by D.J.Cuthbertson on 10th November 1995. He refused my application following his having ruled in his own cause.
14) Here is copied the injunction order granted by District Judge Cuthbertson sitting at the Durham County Court on 17th October 1995 under highly improper circumstances. It greatly impaired my ability to take further evidence and ended with my imprisonment and subsequent stroke.
15) Here is copied the affidavit of Joyce Kellett detailing solicitor Alison Stott's declaration on 17th January 1996 that she had not been acting for Carr but was only assisting her. It also details the fact that D.J. Cuthbertson had never made us aware of when his adjourned hearing of 17th October 1995 was to recommence.
16) Evidence of part of the establishment stitch-up against me. In November of 1998 Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court convicted me of allegedly having approached National Insurance Inspector Carr and of threatening her at the Sunderland County Court. Here is published the proof that both Northumbria Police and the Crown Prosecution Service at Washington, Tyne-Wear were aware that a security officer on duty in the court on the day Carr had alleged I had approached and threatened her and when questioned by Northumbria Police had told them that he had been asked to be in court by its clerk and that nothing of not had occurred on that day. The letter published here was suppressed by solicitors A.N. Jackson of Hartlepool, Co. Cleveland and Charles David Hughes of Sunderland. Northumbria Police had to agree that the contents of the letter were very material to my defence and that to suppress it was a criminal offence. The question is, why did they along with the CPS prosecute me for it when they were aware of the facts contained in this letter?
18) Then Recorder John-Fryer-Spedding agreed he had the titles to the two respective properties in front of him. Why did he lie when he said that the two properties subject of the cases had been divided in 1976. The answer lies within this document and page?
19) Here is an extract from the title deeds that Spedding had in front of him showing that he had lied when he made the statement detailed above.
20) Section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925 is well known among all solicitors. It states that all rights, easements, privileges, etc. etc. appertaining at the time of the sale of property are deemed to be conveyed with it. Spedding was alleged to have Chancery experience so presumably his knowledge of the Act would have been better than the average solicitor. Here the man lies again and makes no mention of the Act.
21) Then Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding lied again when he falsely alleged that at the time Carr purchased 16 The Lyons, the enquiries before contract had been lost. In fact the enquiries before contract had never been mentioned on the illegal proceedings before him. Here is an extract copied from his approved transcript of judgement making yet another false statement obviously to assist in perverting the course of justice.
22) Solicitor Paul Graney had sworn false information in his statutory declaration that was used to lodge a caution at HM Durham District Land Registry. It concerned the land subject of dispute in case NE401650. I took the evidence that Graney had lied to detective sergeant McGann and detective constable Storey of Northumbria Police who were then stationed at Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne-Wear police station. They claimed that swearing that false information was not a police matter. They suggested that I take the evidence to Graney and see what he would do about it. I did that and he agreed to swear an affidavit effectively admitting that he had not told the truth in his statutory declaration. These documents were included in the judges bundle but see how then Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding dealt with them clearly as a further act to assist with his plan to pervert the course of justice.
23) Here is copied the statutory declaration sworn by solicitor Paul Graney. It contains a very material false statement. Then Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding had this document in front of him along with Graney's affidavit effectively admitting he had sworn perjury. He claimed he had not looked at them. It is certain that he did but to have admitted doing so would have assisted me. Obviously he did not want to do that when evidence now shown on this site shows it was his clear intent to pervert the course of justice. It is also clear that he was protecting the perjury sworn by Graney.