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.

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.

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 - Turner Claire -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/

 

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION  OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 

EUROPEAN CONVENTION  OF HUMAN RIGHTS