HOME | CASE STUDIES | LAW | POLITICS | RIGHTS | SCANDAL | SITE INDEX | WHISTLEBLOWING
1000 HOMES - Ann Newton and David Phillips who was still with Wealden despite his perjury as to photographic evidence on at least two occasions (David Charnley and Nelson Kruschandl) are seen here together in this Uckfield News article from 2013 concerning development alleging 35% affordable housing.
You must be joking, they are not affordable by any means in the legitimate sense of the average person on the average wage in Uckfield. Councillors generally are living in cloud cuckoo land paying lip service to the phrase in an attempt to bribe developers to build in their area. What about Climate Change and the 2008 Act. We don't see any micro energy generating features in their new-builds - and yet this council are making a big deal about the Ashdown Forest. Hypocrites or what!
The main point here is that Councillor Newton is confirmed to be working with a known criminal. Just because Sussex Police will not prosecute any of their friends at Wealden, you should bear in mind that there is no statutory time bar against perjury or attempting to pervert the course of justice. A man with a record like this has not place working in any council with councillors - and his courtroom dramas were well known within this council due to the Petition with Lord Richard Newton as the head of a rigged panel.
Why then is Councillor Newton seen here with David Phillips and how was it that Phillips was allowed to swap roles to work on environmental matters such as to qualify for an enhanced pension. Yes, they gave this planning criminal a bonus - most likely for being crooked - though they would never admit the reason for their generosity.
This is just as dodgy a decision as one can get, and presumably, the pay off for years of lying on oath and falsifying evidence, allegedly. No wonder he has white hair! Probably from the time in the High Court where he refused to enter chambers - because his photograph tampering had been identified. Don't forget that enforcement and planning officers are Officers Of The Court.
1,000 Uckfield homes: your chance to influence development:
Uckfield residents have the chance to influence the development of 1,000 homes to the south and west of the town.
David Phillips was the Enforcement Officer responsible for the demolition of the Bushy Wood animal sanctuary buildings and the fraudulent presentations to Committee members over many years that resulted in enforcement against the Old Steam House monument. Now Herstmonceux Museum.
From eye witness accounts, we can say that Mr Phillips was careful to collect evidence, that included collecting human hairs from the bathroom sinks. You may this that this is a bit of overkill, but then this man appeared to enjoy his work. On one site visit he commented: "I'm a professional."
Other officers of this council were also party to the deception (making this a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice) over a prolonged period of time, designed to deprive the occupier of the buildings a beneficial use in 1986, with the unlawful suggestion (agenda) that that buildings would be better in the ownership of neighbors in Lime Park. Article 14 prohibits discrimination as to property ownership, but Human Rights violations were at the time rife in Wealden land.
This was recorded and transcribed from an Area South Committee planning meeting to capture the discrimination as a permanent record of the relics of Nazi Germany ad resident evil in Hailsham. A copy of the recording was sent to every member of the Committee, with Councillor Roy Martin as chairman, but they did nothing - because they were told what to say and do by the officers. The same officers who had deceived planning inspectors and judges for many years - which is of course perverting the course of justice.
Councillor Ann Newton & David Phillips
Christine Nuttall & David Phillips - partners in crime doing their dirty work at Herstmonceux Museum, nursing the lie that would eventually be revealed when the truth in a Report by Archaeology South East was published. [Right] Artists impression of the psychological mindset of an enforcement officer during operations. This impression is based on interviews with several citizens whose homes have been invaded by Wealden's planning storm troopers leaving them feeling violated - as though they'd been paid a visit by the Gestapo.
A COURSE OF MALICIOUS CONDUCT
The suggestion that property should be in the hands of another person is not only unlawful discrimination in HR terms under Article 14, but it is akin to procurement by this corrupt council acting as an agent for neighbors who may have expressed an interest in acquisition, presumably, provided that the price was well below market value. And so Fraud creeps into the equation.
Many of you will know that unlawful discrimination as an agenda, goes from civil misfeasance in public office to criminal malfeasance. Wealden District Council routinely ignore European law, and only modified their behaviour to try to get away from past unlawfulness, in 2000, when the HRA 98 was enacted in the UK. They have since gone back to their old ways. Fraud is not only doing something, but failing to do something; such as forgetting to consult English Heritage.
"It was an easy mistake to make guvnor. It just slipped my mind."
"Not once, but several times?"
"Yeh, well, I've got a terrible memory."
"When you're paid to forget?"
"I can't recall honest."
Another ploy used by councils is to swap staff around, to distance themselves from their past misdeeds and prolong employment that is wholly inappropriate, being akin to obtaining monies by deception. The ratepayer does not want to employ dishonest people to run their councils. It increases their rates.
We will bring you more on this unresolved saga in the coming months - in the hope of obtaining a prosecution of the co-conspirators who worked for this Council at that time, and any member or officer of this Council who attempts to prevent or hinder any ongoing criminal investigation as of March 2016.
Victorio Patrick Scarpa & David Whibley - partners in crime
At the moment the Sussex Police appear to have granted their chums at Wealden immunity from prosecution. The law is though clear, where an instrument was obtained by deception some time ago and limitations may have applied, if that instrument is being used today, then the method by which the instrument was obtained may be the subject of a criminal investigation under the provisions of the Fraud Act 2006.
Chris Arnold is the latest Wealden officer to come under suspicion in terms of malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. Sussex Police are once again invited to investigate - and no doubt will do their level best to do nothing at all - which makes them party to the crime. It is a criminal offence to know of a possible crime, but not to investigate it.
EVIDENTIAL PROOF - David Phillips and Christine Nuttall attended the Old Steam House with a Sussex Police officer in evidence. The incident was recorded on video camera. Refusal to enter the premises became an issue where these officers were challenged as to the lawfulness of the above Warrant. The council officers were asked if they knew what a malicious prosecution was? Instead of pressing for entry, once this question was posed, the council officers ran down the drive, got in their car and exited Lime Park as fast as they could go. The police officer who was attending the scene at the request of Wealden District Council, was astounded. He had never seen such a reaction to what should have been a simple entry to a building. That the officers of WDC ran from the scene of their crime, is an admission as to the fact.
PHOTOGRAPHS - David Phillips has been involved in two cases that we know of where he fabricated photographic evidence that went into Statements put before the Courts, in so doing committing perjury. In one case involving pictures taken by J Douglas Moss in 1995, these were used at a later date in connection with a High Court injunction application by Wealden District Council. It is not clear if Mr Moss conspired with David Phillips or if another (legal) officer stole a copy of the photographs without the knowledge of Moss. What we do know is that this Council paid tax money for a Barrister's Opinion as to the legality of the situation. This much is recorded in their accounts. We'd love to see that Opinion. Wouldn't you?
LIAR, LIAR - Like Jim Carrey in the famous film where a lawyer who habitually lies for a living is forced to tell the truth for 24 hours, Douglas Moss lied to Nelson Kruschandl when he said in the above letter that he'd returned ".... all the Council's photographs and negatives relating to the site visit on the 14th September" 1995. For he surely did not. He (his council) kept a copy of these photographs to use at a later date in connection with another attempt to stitch Mr Kruschandl up. As we say exactly who played what part in this conspiracy to pervert the course of justice remains to be seen. There is no statute of limitations on crimes like these.
So, speak up David, are you the patsy in all of this, or were you the lead? We know that Christine Nuttall sailed close to the wind. Was she riding you? This information was part of the evidence of Mr Kruschandl to Lord Newton's Petition panel. The matter was then supposedly investigated by Sussex Police, but in fact there is no recorded Crime Number and not one of the 12 complainants were ever contacted by the police to collect the evidence that Lord Newton said was a matter for the police and not for his Council.
David Phillips and Christine Nuttall attended the Old Steam House with a Sussex Police officer in evidence. The incident was recorded on video camera. Refusal to enter the premises became an issue where these officers were challenged as to the lawfulness of the above Warrant. The council officers were asked if they knew what a malicious prosecution was? Instead of pressing for entry, once this question was posed, the council officers ran down the drive, got in their car and exited Lime Park as fast as they could go. The police officer who was attending the scene at the request of Wealden District Council, was astounded. He had never seen such a reaction to what should have been a simple entry to a building. That the officers of WDC ran from the scene of their crime, is an admission as to the fact.
The police officer concerned was then invited into the premises by Nelson Kruschandl, a victim of a long running vendetta. He explained to PC Crichton (Badge No:CC850) that the above Warrant was obtained by deception. That in itself should have resulted in prosecution of David Phillips, but to be sure the matter was investigated by the Sussex Police, a formal complaint was lodged on the 27th of May 2002 - as you can see from a copy of the letter that we have been lucky enough to secure.
A COURSE OF MALICIOUS CONDUCT
Malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence. A Council may not investigate themselves when it comes to officers at a high rank conspiring to pervert the course of justice. The Local Government Ombudsman is also precluded from criminal investigations, where they can only make a finding of maladministration, having no remit to go further. Maladministration is a civil wrong.
You may not be surprised to learn that to date, and despite repeated formal complaints, so far all of the Chief Constables of the Sussex Police (SP) force have managed to duck the allegation that they conspired with Wealden District Council officers to nurture a lie. The efforts that WDC and SP have gone to to bury this case is astonishing. We wonder how much longer they can keep this particular game of musical chairs in motion.
The vendetta did not stop here. Knowing the Mr Kruschandl is a determined character, Sussex Police tried their very best to gain other convictions. They know he has the goods on them and Melanie Liebenberg in the sex case and that it is just a matter of time before medical science sets that record straight. So they tried to compound the character assassination by (possibly) soliciting complaints from Don Wales and T J Hughes. In the case of Don Wales they raided office archives, smashing five doors down, but were forced to concede wrongful entry in the return of most of the documents seized, some being allegedly stolen by Sussex Police. SP did not prosecute Don Wales for wasting police time and so far have not offered compensation for the damage to property.
In the case of T J Hughes, SP failed to disclose exonerating video evidence and failed to interview the key witness for the defence. It is somewhat worse than that, video evidence was doctored to remove the salient parts, being payment. Despite these disadvantages, and being directed by Judge Scott-Gall to disregard the missing evidence, a Jury acquitted Kruschandl where it was obviously a fit up. The point here being that the modus operandi of SP has now been exposed and tested in a court of law. Sussex Police routinely craft their cases by not investigating evidence that proves innocence. This is of course a breach of the Criminal Procedure & Investigations Act 1996, Section 23, Code of Practice, as reproduced below. If you only investigate one aspect of a crime, such as to mask evidence that would upset the possibility of a conviction, that also constitutes fraud, as per the Fraud Act 2006, also reproduced below for convenient reference.
FRAUD ACT 2006
Section 4 - Fraud by abuse of position [such as a police or planning officer]
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he —
dishonestly abuses that
intends, by means of the abuse of that position—
to make a gain for himself or another, or
to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2) A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission
rather than an act.
COMMENT - In relation to David Phillips' suggestion that The Old Steam House would be better in the possession of another property owner in Lime Park, you can see from the above that he breached Sections (1) (a) and (1) (c) (i) and (ii) of the Fraud Act 2006. In that this Council then sought to obtain possession with a Statutory Demand, such as to be in a position to effect a transfer of land, that reinforces the allegation that all of those officers of this Council involved, conspired to that effect. The Fraud Act 2006 was not statute at the time, but it is now (March 2016) and the vendetta is ongoing. That then brings into time their earlier transgressions as a continuation of the earlier malfeasance in public office.
A COURSE OF MALICIOUS CONDUCT - When their conventional efforts were defeated, Wealden's enforcement team then embarked on a different tack. This time the council bullies tried to use a costs order from Dame Butler Sloss in the High Court, to bankrupt their target. But this backfired when Mr Kruschandl counterclaimed, knowing that he could prove the deception. Once again this cowardly council ducked the issue. Rather than face Kruschandl in a Courtroom, they offered to sweep the costs (that had themselves been obtained by deception) under the carpet and to correct their earlier deceptions before the Secretary of State and various High Court judges, by making a planning application at their own expense. Kruschandl was persuaded by his prospective father-in-law, a friend of Councillor Nigel Coltman, the then Leader of the Council, not to pursue the Council, but to accept their offer that was cast in stone in a Consent Order in the Eastbourne County Court.
A COURSE OF MALICIOUS CONDUCT
When their conventional efforts were defeated, Wealden's enforcement team then embarked on a different tack. This time the council bullies tried to use a costs order from Dame Butler Sloss in the High Court, to bankrupt their target. But this backfired when Mr Kruschandl counterclaimed, knowing that he could prove the deception. Once again this cowardly council ducked the issue. Rather than face Kruschandl in a Courtroom, they offered to sweep the costs (that had themselves been obtained by deception) under the carpet and to correct their earlier deceptions before the Secretary of State twice (Raymond Dannreuther and Raymond Michael) and various High Court judges, by making a planning application at their own expense. Kruschandl was persuaded by his prospective father-in-law, a friend of Councillor Nigel Coltman, the then Leader of the Council, not to pursue the Council, but to accept their offer that was cast in stone in a Consent Order in the Eastbourne County Court.
Having bought themselves time, this Council were then able to look at other ways of taking out or discrediting their target. It appears from the paper trail that they had no intention of honoring this Agreement, and they are still in Contempt of Court as of March 2016.
What happened next was that a sex charge appears to have been manufactured. Kruschandl had split from his former fiancée after she became first controlling and when that did not go her way, aggressive, ending with her assaulting Kruschandl and smashing his laptop. They nurtured the upset to gain a revenge conviction that is now the subject of review. Due to poor representation, their target was convicted of rape, despite the fact that the claimant was still a virgin after the claimed sexual episodes. Where WDC had hidden the fact that the Steam House was a historic building, the Sussex Police hid the fact that the former Mason's granddaughter was intact, by employing the services of Dr Melanie Liebenberg, who stated on oath that a naturally occurring feature was (in effect) not natural, but in her opinion could only have been caused by penetration. Dr Liebenberg ducked the issue of virginity by not following correct procedure, allegedly a deliberate omission, once she realized that the girl she was examining had an intact hymen. Liebenberg failed to use a colposcope to measure the distance from the hymen to the vaginal wall.
It is well know that high ranking members of the police are Masons. Though there is no evidence as yet to prove the Masonic link, it is a highly suspect set of circumstances. The CCRC are to be asked if they can investigate. It later transpired that a diary hidden in the loft of the complainant's mother, so that Sussex Police could not find it, proved that there was no opportunity for Kruschandl to carry out the assaults claimed. It was unfortunate that during the trial, Judge Cedric Joseph got so confused that he instructed the Jury to take the diary evidence as belonging to the defendant, rather than the claimant's mother. The Judge also neglected to point out that the diary had been secreted in a loft so that the police could not find it. Was the Judge a Mason you might ask? More than 30% of judges are masons according to an authoritative report.
What, if any part, David Phillips may have played in all of this remains a mystery. We know that his colleague Ian Kay had told a client of Mr Kruschandl, that he was going to prison for a very long time. Ian Kay said this over a year before any trial. How then did Ian Kay know the outcome of a trial that was yet to be heard? It begs the question: was Mr Kay or any other officer in WDC a Mason? We know that Mr Kay's father in law (B Best a local builder) was a Mason and was in the same Lodge in Eastbourne as the complainant's grandfather. We know that Mr Kay deceived a planning inspector in 1997 and was still working for Wealden in 2006 into 2013. We also know that Mr Phillips received an enhanced pension voted on by the Councillors of Wealden District Council.
We would love to hear comment on these issues from Ian Kay, Nigel Coltman and David Phillps. We will publish any clarification or explanation they might care to offer as part of our fairness and transparency policies. Plainly, the injustice of these issues must be rectified. Their failure to respond to these allegations in over 6 years tends to suggest that the allegations are well founded in our opinion.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE & INVESTIGATIONS ACT 1996, SECTION 23 - CODE OF PRACTICE
The Secretary of State shall prepare a code of practice containing provisions designed to secure
WDC Autumn 2010 STAFFING UPDATE (MUSICAL CHAIRS)
Can we find photographs of these officers on the web? Can we buggery. Any person who is afraid to publish their photograph on the internet for fear of recognition, is to our mind hiding a whole lot and is more than likely to be ashamed to be associated with their predecessors and any legacy officer from the bad old days.
Vicarage Lane, Hailsham,
East Sussex, BN27 2AX T: 01323 443322
www.dailymail.co.uk Amanda Knox victim anti American trial Hillary Clinton launch investigation
Kelvin Williams, Victorio Scarpa, David Whibley, Julian Black, Daniel Goodwin
Christine Nuttall, David Phillips, Douglas Moss, Ian Kay, Charles Lant
Abbott Trevor - Alcock Charmain - Ditto - Arnold Chris (Christine) - Barakchizadeh Lesley - Paul Barker - Black Julian - Boakes Beverley
Brigginshaw Marina - Brown Ashley - Coffey Patrick - Douglas Sheelagh - Dowsett Timothy - Flemming Mike - Forder Ralph - Garrett Martyn
Goodwin Daniel - Henham J - Holness Derek - Hoy Thomas - Johnson Geoff - Kavanagh Geoff - Kay Ian - Kay I. M. - Barbara Kingsford
Lant Charles - Mercer Richard - Mileman Niall - Moon Craig - Moss Douglas, J. - Nuttall Christine - Pettigrew Rex - Phillips David - Scarpa Victorio
Scott Trevor - Kevin Stewart - Wakeford M. - Whibley David - White, George - Williams Kelvin - Wilson Kenneth - White Steve
Sexual cannibalism in humans is commonplace where the (UK) state still pays bunny-boilers to fabricate allegations - despite the untenable ratio of false allegations. This is called Noble Cause Corruption, so named because the cause (more convictions of rapists and perverts) is noble, but the means (convicting significant numbers of innocent men) is corrupt. A decent justice system is one where convictions are safe; where an appeal is guaranteed and where the court system does not refuse appellants the evidence for their barristers to perfect grounds of appeal. Unlike most European countries, the right of appeal in the UK in not mandatory and the discretionary single judge paper system is open to startling abuses. This book is based on a real case study, that reveals the fatal flaws in the English justice system. No man in England is safe until these issues are dealt with - it could happen to anyone.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
This site is protected under Article10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.