WHOOPS - This is the document that Cramp & Co did not know about when defending a case between 2006 and 2008 - but would have discovered if they had challenged the medical evidence as instructed by their client. This could have led to an adjournment, and following specialist reports, dismissal of the case, on the assumption that appropriate applications would then have been made. The Crown's expert, Dr. Melanie Liebenberg, told the Court that a naturally occurring anatomical feature was suspicious. The above document reveals more than that little error, it also reveals that if the girl had been penetrated as claimed, there would have been physical evidence to back that up. When as a matter of fact the girl was "tightly closed and could not be opened with labial traction." Virginity tests should be mandatory in all cases where penetration is alleged. It's time for a change in the law to protect victims of false allegations. Children from single parent families are more prone to making false allegations - especially against departing (foster/step) parents, who they treat as disposable items against which to vent their frustrations at being abandoned by their biological fathers. Anyone legally aided in a British court is unlikely to receive a fair trial. There is no right of appeal in the UK contrary to SDG 16 of the United Nations sustainability goals. The Criminal Cases Review Commission appear to biased in the extreme where masons are involved.
Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination)
"The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status".
Article 14 also applies where your local authority fail to act to protect your rights, hence this important legislation introduces for the first time positive rights. In the past you only had negative rights.
There is a strict time limit to begin litigation of just 12 months. In some special circumstances the Courts will extend this time limit.
Article 8 should be taken in context with Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) seeking to prevent discrimination on any ground. Therefore, council's may not treat some members of society favourably, while in other cases using all their powers to obstruct lawful development and prevent targeted persons enjoying their home.
Article 6 should be read in context with Article 14, in that the right to a fair hearing (or appeal) should not be the subject of discrimination - which at the moment it is in terms of finance for effective representation where a man accused of a sexual offence is guilty until proven innocent, instead of innocent until proven guilty. The reversal of the burden of proof requires additional funding over and above the £1500 allowed for case preparation in other criminal cases. To date this has not been addressed after David Blunkett, Jack Straw and other ministers changed the law of the land to more than double the conviction rate.
How can you do that? Simple, you arrange it so that a man is guilty, unless he is able to prove the claimant is lying. That is a tall order, where legal aid barristers will not take instruction, and just do their own thing, arguing that there are not funds to challenge, for example, medical evidence. Sentences doubled too and those convicted are sent to special camps where they are subjected to experimental sexual treatments, such as HMP Bure in Norwich, Norfolk. It appears that eugenics is alive and well in England, ingrained in those in many parts of the criminal justice system.
This is relatively new and untested legislation, which is already altering the way Council's proceed. Unfortunately, vendettas begun by Council's before implementation may not be reviewed in light of the new rights accorded, except where the Council concerned carries forward similar perverse behaviour past October 2000.
Perhaps this is a contributing factor to the plethora of reported serious abuses of authority plaguing Council's up and down the country. Where planning is concerned there is very limited access to justice! What is your MP doing about it?
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS