THE CITIZEN'S VOICE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

 

The Houses of Parliament, London, England

 

HOME   |   CASE STUDIES   |   LAW   |    POLITICS     RIGHTS    SCANDAL  |   SITE INDEX   |   WHISTLEBLOWING

 

 

 

TRANSPARENCY - Is the key to identifying councillors and council staff who might be abusing their positions of trust, to nip organized crime in the bud. The more a council, police force or other government official seek to cloud answerability, you know that office is more likely to be corrupt. We advocate Zero Tolerance to all persons in any chain of corruption that follows, including police officers, court officials and judges. Let's get rid of the rats in the system who are bleeding the ordinary man dry.

 

 

ORGANISED CRIME IN THE UK - When you hear about organised crime, you think of tough gangsters with knives and guns beating people up in dark alleys. You should be thinking about council staff in smart buildings and suits, who are on the take and crooked police officers who back them up in the taking. Yes, it is criminal and it is part of our culture, just as much as bribery is said to be part of the culture of Brazil, India, and many other countries, including the US where military contracts are involved - indeed courses are run on the subject of keeping bribery down to an acceptable level. AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL! This must surely be ZERO TOLERANCE.

 

LOCAL COUNCILS - We are sure that if you take a close look at the Councils in your area that there will be relatives of builders, architects and landowners on the committees. Look even closer and you will find that declarations of interest are rarely made and when those exist that the councilor concerned, or maybe even a planning officer with an interest, will not leave the room. Records of interests may even be re-written retrospectively and in the case of Wealden District, entries may be retrospectively tippexed and re-written. It is all about manipulating property values so that only certain people benefit.

 

 

 

THE WISHES OF THE MANY - In our view Mr Edmonds and the Ministers contacted were justifiably concerned as to Wealden District Council ignoring the wishes of the public and the needs of our wounded soldiers. Council officers are civil servants, not gods sitting on a throne deciding who gets what and the price it is going to cost them. All to often, councils put a legal spanner in the works just to hike up those costs to make whatever the proposal is too expensive to pursue. In this manner they retain their seated thrones at the expense of the taxpayer who is more than likely not being fairly represented by the members of these councils. Typically, members have conflicts of interest that are under-reported. Wealden is the only council who refused a researcher copy of their register when he found an entry changed with tippex to reflect what should have happened but did not. A totally different outcome was retrospectively logged in the register to that which had actually happened. Going back to our Royal Marine, Joe Townsend's case was taken up by the television show following criticism of the planning decision by Wealden District Council in East Sussex. More than 8,000 people had signed a petition on the 10 Downing Street website calling on the council to reverse its decision. This shows just how out of touch with reality Wealden's officers and members are. Surely, now is the time to change the system where the same old members get re-elected year after year. We need new blood. Young members who know what emerging families need and at least the drive to pursue a fairer society. The older and more entrenched a member becomes, the less in touch they are. Being a councilor could be a modern form of community service for the those with suitable qualifications who are temporarily out of work - rather than a pastime for the retired.

 

 

AFFORDABLE HOUSING - Nobody gets reasonably priced accommodation in the UK. You either buy a house where all the professionals in the chain have had their cut of your wages, or you apply for planning permission - where once again all those in the chain insist on a slice of your cake. Yes, your cake - a slice of your life. And that is why millions of youngsters will never break free of the renting society that these crooked officers have operated for years to create and control and make English landlords fat from what many might describe as immoral earnings. It's a great system for those in positions of trust, and as with Jimmy Saville and the BBC, they get the protection of the state.

 

KEEPING CONTROL - To keep control, executive officers in councils have a secret agenda to resist any development that has not been approved by them - unless they've had their pound of flesh. If you develop a site without paying them first (applying for planning permission with back handers), councils come down on you like a ton of bricks, even though such development may be lawful.

 

Councils, and other agencies who with them, employ the courts to obtain orders using false evidence, and for the most part the Judges are in on it more than happy to help the Old Boys Brigade. The Courts are not independent as they are supposed to be, neither are the police. All UK agencies work together to pile on the pressure to discredit and demoralize any person who challenges their right to profit from a system that is supposed to be fair. These agencies are immune from data protection and privacy laws and routinely abuse your rights.

 

Councils are skilled at involving MAPPA agencies to enforce mercilessly until they break you, both mentally and financially. But, every once in a while a citizen fights back. In one case we are following, the citizen was unlucky enough to buy an old building in the Wealden area. That was in 1982. More to the point, having beaten them into a corner on the origins of the building by about 2000, they tried first to bankrupt the citizen in 2003 using costs obtained by a defective (fraudulent) enforcement notice with the help of Dame Butler-Sloss, then when that failed to stop him winning client cases, they did their hardest to discredit the citizen, because he was winning cases for clients by using their own tactics against them, even to the point of effecting citizens arrests at illegal site visits - and this they knew would lead to an eventual prosecution of their officers - and exposure of the corruption in the system: Organized Crime, with a few Masons in the mix to add yet more intrigue.

 

THE WORST CASE OF LOCAL AUTHORITY CORRUPTION - In all the cases we have reviewed on this website, this is by far the worst of institutionalized discrimination that we have witnessed. As the case is so scandalous, we know that readers will not believe it. We also know that the perpetrators will seek to deny any and everything and again try to discredit the Victim and say his claims are unsupported. For that reason, we are publishing the key documents - so that you can see for yourself the level of conspiracy between agencies - here supported by documentary proof to the criminal standard. We hope that the general public might learn from this tragic tale of mental torture how it is that your council and local police work together using the courts, to pervert the course of justice. You will also be amazed to learn that Crime Commissioners almost never take chief constables to task for their criminal involvement. It is of course a crime to fail to investigate a crime.

 

 

 

THE HEAD OF STATE - When fresh evidence shows that a conviction is unsafe it falls to the Criminal Cases Review Commission to test the evidence in the Court of Appeal. Unfortunately, the corruption is so strong and at such a high level where Masonic influence is involved (as in this case) that even the CCRC may not be counted on to act impartially and without discrimination, or to act at all.

 

If it is that the CCRC have also become entangled in a cover up, then the only recourse for any victim is the Head of State. A Prime Minister is only a temporary head of state. If no satisfaction may be obtained from such a temporary appointee, then the matter devolves the the permanent head of state, which at the time of writing is Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth on England. Article 13 of the Convention of Human Rights provides every European citizen with the right to an effective remedy. If you take a look at the UK's Human Rights Act 1998, you will find that there is no Article 13. This is another example of English organised crime at the very highest level. As a country we helped draft the Convention to bind all of the other countries in Europe to our will, but then opted out ourselves. Who can you place your trust in knowing that? God? In England you are deprived of the right to an effective remedy. Europe will say that in such cases the effective remedy resides with the head of state. If the temporary appointee fails to act (any prime minister) your effective remedy devolves to Her Majesty - or so logic dictates. It is worth writing to the head of state to ask who it is that guarantees your Article 13 rights - and please let us know what you are told - if anything.

 

 

HOW DOES THE QUEEN FEEL ABOUT THAT AT THE AGE OF 90?

 

Why the Queen you might think? Because the Queen is Head of State in every case. The buck stops with her at the moment. It will eventually be her successor. The get out for the Queen, is that she transfers her power to an elected Government and from that point on the Prime Minister is ultimately responsible. Acts of Parliament, no matter how unjust - or in some cases unlawful under European or International law, receive Royal assent - and only then pass into law with support of the Spiritual Lord Bishops.

 

The Queen is responsible for appointing the Prime Minister after a general election or a resignation. In a General Election The Queen will appoint the candidate who is likely to have the most support of the House of Commons.

 

Dissolution (the act of dissolving) happens when: the Government's fixed four-year term is complete, the Government loses a vote on important bills – the budget, for example – in the House of Commons, or impropriety is uncovered. Typically, the Queen will avoid such scandal with an arrangement that a minister will resign, such as when Tony Blair's was called a war criminal by protestors for invading Iraq.

 

 

TO BE CONTINUED ......

 

 

Kirk Odom was wrongfully convicted of rape, a victim of false testimony by the FBI  Victim of a flawed system: Kirk Odom

 

US SEX CASE EVIDENCE - The testimony on Myron T Scholberg FBI, invoked the certainties of science to guide a Jury and the ruse did its job: the verdict came in guilty - sending Kirk Odom to jail for 22 years on bogus hair evidence. On the basis of a single hair Kirk Odom was to spend the next 22 years in prison and a further nine living the half-life of a paroled sex offender. The trouble is that Scholberg’s testimony wasn’t scientific, and it wasn’t true. Fast forward to 2009, by which time Odom had spent 28 years in prison and on parole. In that year the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (NRCNAS) released a landmark report into the practice of forensic analysis in the US. The NRCNAS report pointed out a basic problem with the idea that you can compare two hair samples and produce a positive match. No statistics exist that map the distribution of hair properties in the general population, and that renders it impossible to make any meaningful calculations about the probabilities of a particular hair type being found. As a result, “all analyst testimony … stating that a crime scene hair was ‘highly likely’ to have come, ‘very probably’ came, or did come from the defendant violates the basic scientific criterion that expressions of probability must be supported by data”. To put that in plain English, Scholberg’s statement to the jury at the Odom trial – that the match he had found between the defendant’s and the rapist’s hair was a “very rare phenomenon” – was complete fantasy.

 

The FBI’s 1977 pamphlet Microscopy of Hair: A Practical Guide and Manual.  The assumption running through its 53 pages is that with the help of a microscope a skilled examiner can positively match two hairs to the same person with a high probability of accuracy. Clarence Kelley, then director of the FBI, wrote a starry-eyed foreword to the manual in which he expressed his hope that it would promote “maximum use of physical evidence in our criminal justice system of America”. At its peak the microscopic analysis unit in Washington had 11 special agents devoted entirely to hair comparisons, working on up to 2,000 cases a year and testifying 250 times annually. Between 1972 and 1999, the unit produced at least 2,500 positive hair matches that were used in criminal cases, and tens of thousands more may have resulted from FBI “so-called experts” training detectives to use the technique in states across the country.

In April 2015, Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post reported that the FBI and the US justice department formally acknowledged that it had given flawed testimony in almost all the criminal trials in which its agents were involved. Those cases included 32 that put defendants on death row – nine of whom have already been executed.

 

 

Julian Assange, freedom of information fighter  David (the chameleon) Cameron, it pays to blow with the wind

 

UK PRIME MINISTERS - In our opinion David Cameron failed to tackle accountability for the ordinary taxpayer.  Will Theresa May give every citizen an equal opportunity in dealings with their local Council and the Police? Hardly! She called a general election not long after taking office. Why?

 

JULIAN ASSANGE - If you go about revealing all about politicians and their sneaky tactics, you are bound to find yourself accused of something unsavory. Wikileaks! Nice one Julian. Freedom of speech and transparency in office. If they abided by those principles for real, the world would be a safer place.

 

UK SEX CASE EVIDENCE SIMILARITIES - Substitute Myron Scholberg for Melanie Liebenberg and anatomical evidence, rather than the matching of a hair - Mr Odom's conviction was obtained using the same methods used in the UK by the CPS. The CPS knowingly called out of date medical evidence to seal a wrongful conviction, the FBI used outdated anatomical evidence. It's time the UK did the needed research to not only convict those guilty of offences based on scientific data rather than fantasy opinion, but also to protect those falsely accused of crimes. Ref: Extracts from a Guardian article by Ed Pilkington

 

 

 

 

 

OUR NEW YEAR MESSAGE 2017 - THE UK ECONOMY

 

As of 2015 UK government debt amounted to £1.56 trillion, or 81.58% of total GDP, at which time the annual cost of servicing (paying the interest) the public debt amounted to around £43bn (which is roughly 3% of GDP or 8% of UK government tax income).

 

You should bear in mind that irresponsible public spending, so more borrowing,  will result in higher taxes for you, the man in the street. These politicians are costing you more to live. That is more money you have to earn for them to squander on empire building that is un-sustainable. At the moment the UK's policies are robbing you blind.

 

How have did we get here? Let's start at local level: In the Wealden district around Hailsham between 1998-1999 around 10 cases of abusing the citizens rights were costing the taxpayers upwards of £100,000 a year. One case exceeded £500,000 by 2001 and is still unresolved in 2016.

 

Let us stay with just 10 cases we know of in 1998, which totals a cool £1million. We believe that just about all council planning departments were operating the same discriminatory practices country-wide. Now let us multiply the Hailsham area by the number of councils in England & Wales: 455 x £1m = £455m. Then let's multiply that by the years from 1999 to 2013 = £6.37 billion. That's a lot of money down the drain. And this is just corrupt planning departments. Imagine what else is lurking in other departments, social services and the like?

 

It gets worse. All the while those councils were working to prevent lawful development, they were stopping houses, etc, being used that were needed. Remember the housing shortage? Yup, that is all down to councils trying to keep development in the hands of their chums and at premium rates. Chums are called 'favoured developers.' Favoured developers hand out sweeteners to planning officers, councillors and the like to keep their consents flowing - usually for unsustainable developments = high price houses. The national debt is proof of practices that are unsustainable. It is up to council chief executives to prevent corruption, but they are at the top of the pile, more than likely orchestrating cover ups, etc.

 

In order to keep house prices artificially high, it is necessary to abuse the rights of the ordinary citizen to develop land for himself. That is the hidden agenda that is ruining our country and making financial slaves of most of us.

 

What is worse, is that the experts predict a national debt of 99% of GDP within four years if we continue to allow corrupt officials to live off the fat of the land. Please note that several websites give different GDP and debt figures.

 

One solution is to stop paying council officials high salaries (including gov ministers & NHS consultants). Rotate staff and perhaps consider zero hour contracts for all. That would give us a level playing field, lower wage bills and pay for performance. No more fat bums on chairs for doing nothing but obfuscate and procrastinate. Rotating staff with audits on planning consents, cross linked with enforcement, would show us where policies are not being applied consistently. I.e. where the favors are being handed out, to who by whom. And lastly, fines for councils who do not conform to government dictums.

 

What all this amounts to is an appalling lack of understanding of administration across the land, or rather a "blind eye" policy, so long as the MPs are nice and comfy and the public don't realize what is going on. The corruption appears to be cross party, by which we mean that each successive government has failed to tackle the grass roots issues.

 

 

PRISONS & INJUSTICES - NOBLE CAUSE CORRUPTION

 

It costs a fortune to keep a prisoner, though it costs virtually nothing to convict a person, provided that the Police do not spend time on investigating the crime scene. Legal Aid is capped at £1,500 for preparation and trial no matter what type of case or the complexity of the trial. For example, a simple burglary trial could be concluded in one day, with preparations and pleas also taking one day. In which case the £1500 fee would cover that type of representation. But, complex cases mean that solicitors have to justify expenses - which they don't like, and so will not do the extra work and risk being out of pocket.

 

 

 

 

Now let's look at a complex case involving historical sex allegations. There will be umpteen witness statements to collect, forensic analysis of computers, medical reports - the same for the defence. Do you thing £1500 will cover that? Of course not, and that is the inequality of the system, where a defendant in such a case will not get proper representation. In addition, in the burglary case, the defendant is deemed innocent until proven guilty, whereas, in the sex case he/she is deemed guilty. The burden of proof shifts to the defence, and on £1500 that is hardly fair - and that is why the state are virtually guaranteed a guilty verdict. And, that is why Lord Denning and other high ranking persons in the British Justice system say: "It is better that some innocent men remain in jail that the integrity of the English judicial system be impugned." What he really means is with the loaded dice, he knows that he will be convicting a significant number of innocent men. And, we have not even taken a peek at the fit-up angle. That's all very well Lord Denning, but what about Article 6; the right to a fair trial? Those wrongly convicted take years to get their names cleared, in the process their lives are ruined - and even with their convictions overturned, many people will still not believe that they were innocent. How does the state compensate for that? Surely that is degrading treatment! is it any wonder the the prison population is exploding - and we know what that means. Yup, more state borrowing.

 

 

JUSTICE IS ABOUT FUNDING A DECENT DEFENCE

 

Those who cannot afford a full and proper defence will more than likely be convicted. Legal Aid lawyers get so little money to defend a case that the defence they mount is almost non-existent. The result is that the CPS, who have unlimited funding, will trounce the defence - and it does not matter if the defendant is innocent or guilty. Changes in the law in England were designed to disadvantage any person accused of a sexual offence.

 

 

The case of Nigel Evans is yet another case that demonstrates that where a person is able to fund a case privately, he or she is more likely to be acquitted. Click on Mr Evan's picture to read more on the inequalities in the English justice system.

 

 

 

ABUSERS - So-called law enforcement agencies are among the worst offenders. Fitting up targeted members of the public, by crafting evidence to obtain a conviction. See "The Girl Who Kicked The Hornets Nest" They will then use their positions of trust to groom the girls and boys who helped them, many of which have given false testimony - so are themselves caught in a web of lies that the wily officers will exploit for their jollies. Many children and even adults crave this attention so much that they are willing to say just about anything to please a police officer or social worker who lavishes attention on them.

 

..

.   

 

 

.

SUSSEX ROGUES GALLERY - WDC officers and Members involved in covering up the history of Herstmonceux Museum - In the process raising our National Debt. Being involved can mean doing something wrong, or not doing anything when something is called for - such as consulting the experts, or making sure that council officers carry out their duties correctly - or have done so in the past. The latter is just as bad as being the one who presents false information to a committee - or even going along with discriminatory agendas in denial of Article 14.

 

Many members draw benefits for being a member, but do not reply to correspondence - being more interested in remaining in the "club" than standing up for what is right. Such behaviour may now be considered under Section 4 of the Fraud Act 2006, and also as a breach of their duty under the Representation of the Peoples Acts = failure to properly represent a member of the public. Worse still, if a councilor knows something is not right and sits on his or her hands, they may fall foul of the Accessories and Abettors Act in addition to the Fraud Act. What this country needs is a case setting precedent. Which force will have the guts to go after a councillor, planning officer, or even a chief executive?

 

We'd like to hear the views of those above. Why is it that nothing is being done to correct past misdeeds? Their silence is deemed acceptance of the situation as we have published - and guess what, it is awfully quiet around here, so we must have got it right!

 

 

 

APPEAL HEARINGS CAN NOW BE FILMED AND TWEETED


Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has announced he will issue new guidance that will formally open up planning appeal hearings “to be filmed, tweeted and reported”.

He also challenged councils to open up their planning committees and other meetings.

As part of the government’s review of planning practice, new guidance by the Planning Inspectorate will make clear the rights for members of the press and public, including local bloggers and hyperlocal journalists, to report, film and tweet planning appeal hearings.

Ministers hope this initiative will open up a rarely seen side of the planning process.

The Department for Communities and Local Government has stated that: “provided that it does not disrupt proceedings, anyone will be allowed to report, record and film proceedings including the use of digital and social media”.

Inspectors are to advise those present at the start of the event that the proceedings may be recorded and/or filmed, and that anyone using social media during or after the end of the proceedings should do so responsibly.

Pickles said: “Watching television programmes like Grand Designs, viewers have been baffled as cameras are stopped from filming meetings of the planning committee. Councillors shouldn’t be ashamed or be trying to hide the work they do.

“I am opening up the planning appeals that my department oversees, so the public can see how the planning system works in practice.

“Councils should match this by opening up their planning meetings and other committees,” he said - and we could not agree more.

 

 

 

 

FAIR USE NOTICE

 

 

This site is free of © Copyright except where specifically stated 1997 - 2017.  Any person may download, use and quote any reference or any link, and is guaranteed such right to freedom of information and speech under the Human Rights and Freedom of Information Acts.  However, be aware that we cannot be held liable for the accuracy of the information provided.  All users should therefore research matters for themselves and seek their own legal advice and this information is provided simply by way of a guide.  Horse Sanctuary Trust UK   All trademarks herby acknowledged. Contact Us.

 

 

 

 

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS SITE IS OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE HORSE SANCTUARY TRUST UK VOLUNTEERS,  WITH SUPPORT FROM MAX ENERGY LIMITED