|
THE BRITISH EMPIRE
HOME | CASE STUDIES | HISTORY | HUMAN RIGHTS | LAW | POLICE | POLITICS | RIGHTS | SHIT CREEK | SITE INDEX |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ABOUT TIME - While the move to highlight the crisis in the criminal justice system is welcome news to those accused of crimes in the future, what about those poor souls who were wrongfully convicted years ago. Even after release from prison some of those brought face to face with a weighted system that meant no chance of a fair trial, are still paying the price for the Government under funding and pressures on police to secure more convictions for less money. All of this seeking to retain the appearance of an Empire while stifling dissenters.
On
top of that some police forces are guilty of institutional
discrimination, being more than willing to lend councils a hand
if trying to stitch up challenging members of the public,
especially ones that are getting the hang of public appeals and
have already won a few that have embarrassed them, as the
involuntary advocate showed how vile their administrative
practices were, to include bulldozing and animal sanctuary
before the hearing of an appeal, doing their level best to
devalue land owned by a builder who was in competition with a mason
who was the son-in-law of am assistant
district planning officer.
The British Empire comprised the dominions, colonies, protectorates, mandates and other territories ruled or administered by the United Kingdom and its predecessor states. It originated with the overseas possessions and trading posts established by England between the late 16th and early 18th centuries. At its height, it was the largest empire in history and, for over a century, was the foremost global power. By 1913, the British Empire held sway over 412 million people, 23% of the world population at the time, and by 1920, it covered 35,500,000 km2 (13,700,000 sq mi), 24% of the Earth's total land
area. As a result, its political, legal, linguistic and cultural legacy is widespread. At the peak of its power, the phrase "the empire on which the sun never sets" was often used to describe the British Empire, because its expanse around the globe meant that the sun was always shining on at least one of its territories.
SILENCING OPPOSITION - Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention are supposed to protect a person's right to challenge authority. It is hardly surprising where councils pursue what amounts to eugenics agendas in secret sessions, that members of the public suffer. Because of this secrecy institutional discrimination is rife and flourishing. Hitler used his SS and Gestapo in exactly the same way, but more directly to suppress opposition to his Nazi ideals. The police in Sussex are used in precisely the same way to target would be political activists. Action group members are likely to receive visits at their homes and may suffer arrests. If you pose a really serious threat to the cozy relationships that council officers enjoy, you might be fitted up for a crime that you did not commit. The British justice system is skewed so that it may be used just like the Gestapo, to imprison challenging members of the public that the UK can no longer export to their colonies.
QUASHING REBELLION
Let's no beat about the bush, the British Empire may be dead, but Her Majesty, via her copious civil servants and appointed Governments, is doing her best (their best for her) as head of the Commonwealth to resist giving the masses equal rights as per the international standards adopted by the United Nations and subsequently the European Convention of Human Rights.
While the 16 nations included in the Commonwealth may observe UN protocols to a better standard, the core nation remains obstinate in refusing their citizens a right to a fair trial and subsequently a right to an appeal. Many citizens in the UK are shocked when they finally realise that there is no right of appeal as in other European countries. In the UK a single judge (stooge) vets applications for appeal, refusing those inconvenient to Blunkett Law, for example. In UN law compliant countries there is no single judge, an application for appeal is an automatic right. I.e. there is no filtration system - no eugenics agenda and no concentration camps - as prisons for the wrongly convicted become.
BRITISH CONCENTRATION CAMPS EXIST TODAY
Most readers will not know that if you are convicted of a sexual offence, that you are required to undertake course that are designed to prevent re-offending. The fact that these courses actually increase re-offending is another matter that will be discussed elsewhere.
The point is that mental torture ensues as pressures are applied to inmates (even those wrongly convicted - hence innocent) to undertake correctional course that are likely to bring those without any inclination to commit sexual crimes in close proximity with those who are potentially repeat offenders.
Innocent men are thus liable to come face to face with aspects of sexual crimes that may artificially stimulate a latent urge, or even instill a subconscious seed concerning such issues that is damaging to normal parenting and normal social endeavours.
A privilege system is employed where those maintaining their innocence are deprived of exercise and association that is sure to be harmful in terms of Article 3 mental torture, where the innocent in the system are punished.
Not surprisingly, some men and women who are innocent give in to these pressures and admit guilt even where they committed no offence. Time and again DNA tests have revealed that some prisoners confessing to guilt were in fact innocent.
HMP Bure in Norfolk is just one of the British prisons that operate such agendas. British prisoners are transported to this outpost, regardless of the difficulties such geographical location may present when in comes to visits when it comes to someone with family at the other end of the country.
There is no separation between prisoners who smoke and don't smoke and British prisoners cannot vote. Imagine the pressure on a non-smoker who has devoted his life to keeping healthy, when they are locked up in a prison with a high proportion of smokers and the lack of an effective ventilation system effectively guarantees that they become passive smokers.
Obviously, there should be prisons for non-smokers, or at the very least, wings in prisons for non-smokers and no smoking allowed in exercise yards and other common areas. Nelson Kruschandl was one such prisoner. Complaints about the smoke and violation of the Health Act 2006 were made to the Prison Governors various and prison visitors to no avail. Being forced to inhale tobacco smoke involuntarily is akin to the Nazi laboratory experiments on humans, such as those performed by Joseph Mengele and Ilse Koch. The Governors who run such prisons and who know full well what they are doing, may be seen as fulfilling the role of concentration camp commandants, being every bit as guilty of war crimes as the Nazis during World Way Two.
British Governments do not want you to know about the conditions in Britain's prisons nor to publish anything that reveals what it is like to suffer incarceration for your political convictions rather than an actual crime.
ARTICLES 13 (ECHR) and 8 (UDHR)
One of the problems with the British justice system is that the Criminal Cases Review Commission appear to be part of the subtle eugenics programme that has taken a hold, leading to many convictions that are unsound to say the least. The injustice is perpetuated in some cases by the Courts who are not as independent as they are supposed to be or as you might believe.
Indeed, the CCRC, CPS and High Court Judges are infested with masons who refuse to declare this impediment to impartiality.
Where a brother Judge has steered a trial to gain a conviction for a brother mason and is caught out later by the evidence, or the fact that there was not full disclosure, or that disclosure was prevented because the police failed to secure the crime scene, in some cases deliberately to secure a conviction, the CCRC will look the other way.
The CCRC can do this at the moment because their remit is not Article 14 compliant. Three High Court Judges are quoted as saying that the Commission are: "entitled to take a view." What they were saying then is that the CCRC are exempt from Article 14 discrimination and that they can treat one person differently to another person in near identical circumstances.
In one case that we have information of that person had called off an engagement to the daughter of a mason. The man in question was threatened by his former fiancé and her daughter that if he dared to leave their family that they would get him.............
The Sussex Police did not secure the crime scene, not securing a video collection of The Bill and Casualty episodes that the daughter had built up, nor their computers, and most especially not the work diary of the woman who had been jilted.........
By way of contrast, the Sussex Police did secure the defendant's computer, but having done so in the hope of finding something incrimination, then failed to disclose to the Jury that there was nothing on it other than a profile of the defendant that revealed nothing other than his conservation concerns and battles with his local council.
Several emails between the claimant and her mother and the defendant, that damaged their case were also not revealed by the Sussex Police in their rush to convict a man on no evidence other than the say so of the claimant.
Another flaw in their argument was that the girl had claimed multiple vaginal penetrations, but that her hymen was intact. In this regard the jury were most obviously deceived by the so-called expert that the police called to give evidence at the trial. An authoritative study of marks that were presented the Jury in this case as suspicious, tells that the marks the State's expert relied on were naturally occurring.
The revision of Sex Laws by David Blunkett and Harriet Harman guaranteed higher conviction rates by denying those accused a fair trial and reversing the burden of proof in sex cases. That coupled with the reductions in public funding for defendant's on Legal Aid, ensured that disclosure and other issues related to the sealing of crime scenes and proper investigation, etc., would disadvantage the defence further. From any angle, looking at cases such as this you may care to agree that the British justice system is so far removed from a level playing field as to be a virtual kangaroo court.
THE COMMONWEALTH
The Commonwealth of Nations (formerly the British Commonwealth), also known as simply the Commonwealth, is an intergovernmental organisation of 53 member states that are mostly former territories of the British Empire. The Commonwealth operates by intergovernmental consensus of the member states, organised through the Commonwealth Secretariat and non-governmental organisations, organised through the Commonwealth Foundation.
WHO WE WERE FIGHTING AGAINST FROM 1939 TO 1945
WEALDEN'S OFFICERS FROM 1983 TO 2018
Abbott Trevor - Alcock Charmain - Ditto - Arnold Chris (Christine) - Barakchizadeh Lesley - Paul Barker - Bending Christopher Black Julian - Boakes Beverley - Bradshaw Clifford - 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 Michael. - Whibley David - White, George - Williams Kelvin - Wilson Kenneth - White Steve
LINKS & REFERENCE
https://www.channel4.com/news/legal-aid-cuts-chris-grayling-barristers-strike-protest https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/692542/British-justice-system-barristers-strike-legal-aid-budget http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2569831/Barristers-strike-legal-aid-shake-Justice-Secretary-Chris-Grayling-publishes-final-raft-reforms.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/30/barristers-go-strike-protest-collapsing-criminal-justice-system/
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This site is free of © Copyright except where specifically stated 1997 - 2021. 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.
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. FAIR USE NOTICE
|
