"Perceptions note: We are indebted to David Turner - Researcher - for the first clip below background to this file at http://www.perceptions.couk.com/answers2.html#turner ************************************************** ************************************************** From Associated Newspapers Ltd., 14 July 1999 "Corruption is target for Met's would-be chief" by Lucy Lawrence Corrupt detectives, judges, lawyers, government ministers and top businessmen are the reason that organised crime still exists, says the leading contender to become the new Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police next year. Peter Ryan, Commissioner of Australia's New South Wales Police, who is in England to be interviewed as a candidate to take over from Sir Paul Condon, believes that rooting out corrupt detectives is the only way to stop the activities of professional crime rings. He told the country's leading police officers today that getting rid of corrupt policemen was dealing only with part of the problem, when some of the leading people in society were also involved. Mr Ryan's commitment to end police corruption will win him favour with supporters of Sir Paul, who retires in January. The Commissioner set up the Met's "Untouchables" last year estimating that between 100 and 200 officers were involved in corruption. Last month, Deputy Commissioner John Stevens, who led the drive, announced that Scotland Yard had broken the back of corruption. Since Mr Ryan became head of the New South Wales force in 1996, the 55-year-old former Manchester policeman has attracted headlines for stamping out corruption and fighting the drugs gangs that threatened Sydney's hosting of the Olympic Games next year. In a speech to the Association of Chief Police Officers, Mr Ryan said: "The term organised crime often conjures up the images of Al Capone and the Mafia; however in the modern society, organised crime is far more sinister and aligned with corrupt police." "The traditional approach of targeting corrupt police officers, however, only solves half the problem. Removing corrupt police, yet not targeting the criminals in association with those police is not proactive. "The exposures of organised and corporate criminal activity has involved ministers of the Crown, members of the judiciary and leaders in business and commerce, with many of the worst cases of police corruption involved in a similar complex web." © Associated Newspapers Ltd., 14 July 1999 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Later addition from David Turner] Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:43:18 -0000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. I wonder if any of us could put names to the corrupt officials, officers or judges referred to? 2. I wonder why he [Peter Ryan - quoted above] was not appointed over John Stevens? [from David Turner] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Still later] message from Maurice Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:47:26 +0000 John Stevens was formerly Chief Constable of Northumbria. He is also a known mason as is Crispin Strachan who replaced him up here. I am in no doubt whatsoever that much of the organised crime in the UK involves masons. It would not have been a healthy situation if a none mason had been given the job. Anyone getting too near the truth never attains high office. The problem is far greater than most seem to be aware of. My web site only touches upon a small part of it. Best wishes to all. Maurice http://www.jiwalu.demon.co.uk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [And another (v. long) input from "Maurice" with a huge address-list beginning in Nov. 2000 and coming to date('ish)] ****** Subject: How The Court Service is Protecting Corruption Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:48:37 +0000 From: Maurice Date: 7th November, 2000 MR M KELLETT 16A THE LYONS HETTON LE HOLE TYNE & WEAR DH5 OHT Dear Mr Kellett RE: KELLETT -V- CARR Further to my letter dated 24th October, 2000 and your facsimile of the 3rd November, 2000. I confirm I have had the opportunity to ask District Judge Scott-Phillips if he had any recollection regarding a directive for Allison Stott to prepare the trial bundle around the period of 1995. He stated he did not have any recollection, especially in light of the 5 year time span. As a result of the aforesaid I have once more gone through the papers held in this office and I am still unable to find such an authority. I think the only option available is for me to invite you to attend this office, on a pre-agreed date, to enable you to search, personally, the file papers. If this proposal is acceptable to you please telephone me to agree a date and time. Yours sincerely K HUNT COURT MANAGER ------------------ NOTE: Solicitor Alison Stott had been attending the courts with Carr for around one and a half years. During that time Stott was given work to carry out for Carr. In January of 1996 Stott declared that up until that time she had not been acting for Carr but had only been assisting her. In these circumstances Stott had no lawful right to accept any work from the Courts as Carr's assistant. Not only are the courts trying to cover up this material fact, but Legal Services Ombudsman too is surely party to the attempted cover up. Stott was also given work to carry out in October of 1995. Directly resulting from that work I was imprisoned at Durham for alleged contempt of Court. I suffered a stroke after three days imprisonment when I refused all food and drink in protest at the corruption of which I was subject by others who included judges on the North East Court Circuit. --------------------------- The Chief Clerk, 16A The Lyons The Durham County Court, HalIgarth Street, Hetton-le-Hole, Durham City. Tyne-Wear DH5 0HT. 10th January 2OOl. Re: cases DH400950, DH400898, NE401650 Dear Sir Following my examination of the court files on 5th January 2001 concerning the above cases, I require clarification on the matters detailed below. I recently wrote you a letter of enquiry regarding District Judge Scott- Phillips for him to give the name of the party he directed to prepare the judges bundles ready for trial in 1995 in the above case numbers. Your reply was that the judge could not remember who it was to whom he gave that work Solicitor Alison Stott had been attending the Durham County Court at the material times with Miss Shirley Carr who was the Defendant in cases DH400950 and DH400898. At those material times District Judge Scott- Phillips had the care of the cases. In January of 1996 Alison Stott declared to the Newcastle County Court, before then Recorder John Fryer- Spedding that up until that time she had not been acting for Miss Shirley Carr but had only been assisting her. John Fryer-Spedding's reply was, "Either you are acting for Miss Carr or you are not?" Alison Stott's reply to him was, "Well I am now sir." Present when Alison Stott made that declaration were John Fryer-Spedding, Miss Shirley Carr, Mrs Joyce Kellett, barrister Michelle Temple and myself. There are two affidavits on the court file sworn by both my wife and myself detailing that declaration made by Alison Stott to the court in January of 1996. I am of the firm opinion that a record should have been made by the judge in 1995 as to whom he directed to prepare the judges bundles. I have found no such record on the court files. Bearing in mind that this matter, should a just resolution not be obtained, may now take the form of a writ of mandamus to be served on the Lord Chancellor, I ask that District Judge Scott-Phillips reply to the following questions which I ask to be placed before him as soon as possible. 1) If solicitor Alison Stott was indeed acting for Miss Shirley Carr during the material times, would he in those circumstances have directed that Miss Shirley Carr be allowed to prepare the judges bundles ready for trial? 2) Does he agree that such an important matter as to whom was to prepare the judges bundles should have been recorded on the court files? 3) Would he agree that in the circumstances of Miss Shirley Carr having prepared the judges bundles herself of which evidence included herewith, shows that she did, that to exclude from those bundles important documents which included his own Order made on 1st June 1994 refusing Miss Carr's application for consolidation of the three above cases is a another very serious matter? 4) Recorder John Fryer-Spedding falsely alleged that the above case numbers had been subject of consolidation and tried them that way in October of 1996. Does he agree that if his Order made on 1st June 1994 refusing Miss Carr's application for consolidation of the above cases had present in the judges bundles, then Recorder John Fryer-Spedding could not lawfully have tried the actions in that way? 5) The affidavits sworn by both my wife Joyce and myself regarding the declaration made by solicitor Alison Stott to the Newcastle County Court, presided over by then Recorder John Fryer-Spedding in January of 1996, referred to herein, is information which of course was sworn. Does District Judge Scott-Phillips agree that if information placed before the court such as that contained in those affidavits of which I refer, then if then if there is any doubt as to the validity and truth of the contents of those affidavits, then an investigation, be it by police or whoever be conducted given the fact that perjury is a very serious and criminal matter? 6) The judgment of John Fryer-Spedding with his subsequent Order for costs has formed the basis of my al1eged bankruptcy. The creditor is named as Miss Shirley Carr. Given that both Miss Shirley Carr and solicitor Alison Stott were fully aware that the above case numbers being heard before Recorder John Fryer-Spedding had unlawfully been tried as a consolidated action, in the circumstances included herein, then as an officer of the courts, does he agree that it was solicitor Alison Stott's duty to have made the court aware of that fact? Instead they were both party to the filing of my alleged bankruptcy which, amongst other things, was to become instrumental in the break up of my marriage and subsequent death of my father within hours of the publication of my alleged bankruptcy. 7) Does he agree that given the seriousness of the circumstances I detail herein, that it is his duty to inform the Lord Chancellor of them so that justice may take its true course and/or that a full and proper investigation be carried out by such authority as may be deemed necessary? I include with this correspondence copies of two letters written by solicitor Alison Stott. Both are already on the court files. One is dated 13th November 1995 and her reference AMS/JF/C123J. The other is also a letter written by solicitor Alison Stott dated 18th September 1996 containing her reference AMS/JF/Cl23.13. In both of these letters solicitor Alison Stott agrees that Miss Shirley Carr had prepared the judges bundles. I offer my sincere apologies to you Mr Hunt any inconvenience caused to you relative to my investigations into the matters contained herein. Yours sincerely Mr M. Kellett ------------------- >From The Court Service, London. Mr Kellet 16A The Lyons Hetton-le-Hole Tyne & Wear DH5 OHT Dear Mr Kellet Date:08 February 2001 DURHAM COUNTY COURT I am writing to you further to your telephone conversation with the Newcastle Group Manager's office and your request that this office re-- examines your complaint. On examination of the correspondence, I am satisfied with the replies and investigations carried out by the Group Manager's office, indeed, there is little I can add to those previous replies. While I can understand your frustration, I should explain that neither the Lord Chancellor, nor any government officials, can comment on, or intervene in, any case that comes before the courts. This is not because of any lack of concern but because to do so would undermine the principle that Judge's are free to decide how cases should be conducted, and what evidence they consider relevant. If you remain unhappy with the judge's decision, you may wish to appeal. I can only suggest that you seek legal advice from a solicitor, Citizens Advice Bureau or law centre as to the merits of such a step. Yours sincerely Alpa Patel Customer Service Unit. ---------------------------- The Court Service 16A The Lyons, Southside, Hetton-le-Hole, 105 Victoria Street, Tyne-Wear DH5 0HT. London SW1E 6QT Friday 16th February 2001. Dear Mr Patel Re:DURHAM COUNTY COURT I am receipt of your letter of 8th February 2001 containing your reference given above. You write that you are, "satisfied with the replies and investigations." As you are surely well aware there have been no investigations carried out in this matter? This is what I am now demanding should happen. The questions asked of District Judge Scott-Phillips are very straight forward and uncomplicated. He has declined to reply to them thus deliberately depriving me of information in what is now a criminal investigation. As there have in fact been no investigations carried out into the matters I have reported to the Durham County Court, then as of right, because the matters are extremely serious and have already caused me considerable damage I now expect a full and proper investigation. Nothing less than this will satisfy justice being served. If you are unable to satisfy that which I demand, then I can only deduce that your department too is trying to cover up gross misconduct by the court and also by an officer of that court, namely solicitor Alison Stott. You have my full co-operation in any investigation. Failing such investigation I will have little choice but to take the matter up with higher authority and publish the full facts of the gross misconduct complained of and the undoubted attempts to conceal it. Yours sincerely Mr M. Kellett ------------------- >From The Court Service, London Mr M Kellett 16a The Lyons Hetton le Hole Tyne & Wear DH5 OHT Dear Mr Kellett, 23 February 2001 Thank you for your letter of 16 February which has been passed to me for reply. You are unhappy with the response to your request for a full investigation. I understand from looking at your file, an investigation has been carried out in order to answer your enquires. I am sure you are aware, judges are and must be independent of the executive, and as already stated in the reply to yourself from the Court Manager, the judge, due to the length of time passed, is unwilling to comment on this case. I have enclosed a copy of this reply for your information. I can only apologise if this explanation is unsatisfactory, but we can go no further into this case than we have already been. Yours Faithfully Maria Byrne Customer Service Unit ------------------------- Ms. Maria Byrne 16A The Lyons, The Court Service, Hetton-le-Hole, Southside, Tyne-Wear DH5 0HT. 105 Victoria Street, London SW1E 6QT. Wednesday 28th February 2001 Dear Ms. Byrne I am in receipt of your letter of 23 February 2001. You have still failed to take the action required of you. The matter I have reported to you is of a criminal nature. You are not empowered to protect any criminal act carried out by members of the judiciary or legal profession. By doing so you become accessory after the fact. You may also be considered as being guilty of misconduct in public office. My letter to the Durham County Court dated January 10 2001 contained simple straight forward questions which District Judge Scott-Phillips is required to answer. I presume that you have a copy of the letter I refer to? In your letter you say that it is not the function of the judiciary to give opinions. I have not asked for any opinion. I think under the circumstances District Judge Scott-Phillips is not the man who should give it had I asked for an opinion. In 1995 he granted me an Order to allow me to go to the office of former solicitor Nancy Bone at Durham City to take copies from my files which she unlawfully held by lien. Bone breached that Order and was held to be guilty of contempt of court. When I referred the matter back to the Durham County Court District Judge Scott-Phillips lied. He said that my visit had not been by Order of the court but had only been done with the consent of solicitor Nancy Bone. When Bone was eventually struck from the register of solicitors my files were returned to me. In those files Bone referred to my visit to her office as being by ORDER OF THE COURT. The question is, why did Mr Scott-Phillips protect solicitor Nancy Bone? Why is he obviously protecting solicitor Alison Stott. If he wont answer the questions I have put to him in my letter of 10th January 2001 then I can only presume that he is trying again to cover up corruption of which I have been subject at the Durham County Court. In 1992 Deputy District Judge Baird heard my appeal from a ruling made by District Judge Scott- Phillips. That was also unlawful and equally covered up. In the circumstances if you will not undertake an investigation into what I have reported to the Durham County Court and now to you, I require that you pass the matter to the Lord Chancellor or I will. We are now subject of European Human Rights Law and what has gone before in the matter of the corruption of which I am subject will not be allowed to continue. These matters are far from being concluded. I await your reply. Yours sincerely Mr M. Kellett ------------- After a telephone conversation today (1st March 2001) with my barrister he has agreed to amend his application for leave to appeal my case of alleged harassment to the House of Lords. In his earlier application he had excluded the fact that the the appeal court bench sitting at Newcastle refused to declare any membership of Freemasonry. They had been told prior to my appeal that I had taken part in the Nolan Enquiry into Freemasonry within the Police and Judiciary and that I was giving major publicity on both the internet and radio to matters regarding corrupt masons. My barrister was not too happy that I insisted on his application being amended. He admitted that technically I am now out of time to amend his application but he would nonetheless apply out of time for the amendment. He was aware on the same day as the High Court judges refused my appeal that I wanted the matter of Freemasonry included in the application to seek leave to appeal the House of Lords. He said that in his application to amend the earlier application, he would make it clear that the subject of Freemasonry being included in it was not his decision but my own. I will leave all to draw their own conclusions regarding this. More on police and judicial corruption at: http://www.jiwalu.demon.co.uk You have received this e-mail because it is believed that you have an interest in injustice in the UK. If you you have received this mail in error please contact me at Maurice@jiwalu.demon.co.uk and your name will be deleted from my mailing list. Best wishes to all. -- Maurice ************************************************** ************************************************** part of http://www.perceptions.couk.com/answers2.html __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ FURTHER REFERENCES GO - "search perceptions" - in SEARCH-ENGINE file-ID www.perceptions.couk.com/promises.txt