JUDICIAL CORRUPTION IN THE UNITED
KINGDOM
Honest comment on a matter of Public Interest is held to be lawful in the United Kingdom.
The following is Honest comment - It is a matter of Public Interest - It is Lawful:
Documents scanned by Scandals
in Justice
LORD IRVINE OF LAIRG
Question: Has he joined in the conspiracy by refusing to act?
My original webpages complaining of conspiracy within the
Lord Chancellor's
department for the protection of the corrupt trial Circuit
Judge Alan Simpson who with
his civilian accomplice: shorthand writer Sheila Margaret
West, falsified evidence
purportedly given by police witnesses, out of a criminal
trial, was shut down by my ISP
upon receipt of a complaint from that department. It took that
one mere complaint to
make Kingston Internet Ltd. panic.
ISPs cannot be expected to act as Judge, Jury and Censor.
They cannot be expected
to determine the truth of the content of webpages, but they
should and usually do
adhere to the principle of freedom of speech.
It was unlawfully shut down for one very simple reason: the
Lord Chancellor's
department knows that every word published is "GODS"
truth. It has the copy
evidence, for which I hold the originals, scanned here, Documentary Evidence that
support every alleged fact and it clear to me that the trial
Judge has made his
corruption known to the department.
It would have been a simple matter for the Lord
Chancellor's department to have
acted in a lawful manner by taking me to Court to have me
remove the pages under
threat of imprisonment, however, it chose to bypass all legal
procedures so to do and
the adverse inference is crystal clear.
Links that demonstrate the furor aroused by the insidious
political censorship are:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,32520,00.html
Wired News Article
and http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/1999/45/ns-11409.html
ZDNews Article
Two extremely important questions emerge require answers. -
1. Does the corruption of the below named Judges'
invalidate their judgements made
after they joined the conspiracy to protect a colleague? -
2. Does their corruption invalidate their judgements made
before they became
involved in the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice?
If the answer is "yes" to either question, it leads to another. -
3. Is it really surprising that the Lord Chancellor's
Department, in the name of Lord
Irvine, are hell bent upon gagging me contrary to
Article 10: European Convention on
Human Rights: Freedom of Expression?
If these matters are investigated by a parliamentary
sub-committee it would inevitably
open up a can of worms.
The Wired News Article confirms that it has been reported
in the media that Peter Farr:
spokesman for the L.C.Department did request Kingston Internet
Ltd. to remove the
pages.
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK), a civil liberties
orginization in the UK has
issued a statement on closure of my original website found at:
http://www.cyber-rights.org/documents/hulbert.htm
The outrage at the Government interference was sparked off
after I posted a
newsgroup message warning other UK citizens of what could
happen to their supposed
right to freedom of expression. The message is found at: http://www.deja.com/[LBURL=_LBHTwww.openpgp.net_LBFS,LBT=Take%20Notice]/threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=544763569
The above notice resulted in many mirrors of my webpages, including one put up by Jeffrey Goldberg, a UK. citizen, curtesy of a UK. Sevice Provider: Freeserve and it is significant that Lord Irvine's department, despite knowing of it, have made no attempt to put pressure on either Mr. Goldberg, or Freeserve. A statement by Mr. Goodberg is at URL: http://www.markgold.freeserve.co.uk/censorship
See Taxi Ride to Censoship at: http://www.scandals.org/articles/sr000326a.html
The true facts.
Open letter sent by myself to Lord
Irvine the Lord Chancellor at the House of Lords
on the 15th September 1998.
My Lord, I call upon you to ask for resignation of the
following members' of the
judiciary who, having acted corruptly and therefore outside of
their judicial capacity,
are no longer fit to sit in judgement of others.
1. Circuit Judge Alan Simpson , who acted corruptly and
therefore outside of his
judicial function, by conspiring with a shorthand writer and
did falsify evidence,
purportedly given by witnesses, out of a criminal trial, at
Hull Combined Court Centre,
for the protection of the said Police witnesses, after I was
unanimously acquitted, on
the 13th December 1991, at which trial I acted in person.
2.District Judge D.J.R. Weston who, on the 13th February
96, unlawfully disposed of,
by striking out, my civil action against Judge Simpson and the
shorthand writer, on the
manifestly false ground that the claim disclosed no reasonable
cause of action, in the
absolute knowledge that the Statement of Claim plainly alleged
the well proven causes
of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and falsifying
evidence, out of a criminal
trial. He did in the guise of acting within his judicial
capacity, wilfully enter into the
conspiracy for the protection of a colleague.
3. Mrs. Justice Smith , on the 22nd May 1996, upon appeal,
from District Judge
Weston's order striking out the action, on the patently false
ground, held:
a) that the Statement of Claim plainly disclosed an alleged
cause of action;
b) that as a remedy to anyone damaged, he would be entitled to
sue;
c) that judicial immunity did not apply;
d) that the allegation is worse than fraud;
e) that if there was any basis for the case, it must be
litigated;
f) that it must never be asserted that any of us (judiciary)
have indulged in any kind of
protection of a colleague, however eminent they may be:
My Lord, despite Mrs. Justice Smith's fine words and
principles, spoken on the 22nd
May and despite her holding that the Statement of Claim
plainly alleged a cause of
action, she adjourned the hearing when, after a period of
nearly six months: on the
12th November, she demonstrated that she had abandoned her
principles, by
dismissing the appeal against the District Judge's unlawful
order. and in so doing she
wrongly exercised her discretion, by allowing the unlawful
order, striking out the
action, on a false ground, to remain, as if valid, on the
Court record.
Mrs. Justice Smith failed to dispense justice without fear,
or favour, and she also
entered into the conspiracy to protect a colleague.
4. LORD JUSTICES SAVILLE, AND MORRILL who, on the 5th March
1997,
refused me leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal, from the
orders of the District, and
High Court Judges', in the sure knowledge that the Statement
of Claim plainly
disclosed an alleged and well proven, cause of action and
therefore in the certain
knowledge that Mrs. Justice Smith, having held that fact to be
true in the High Court,
should have allowed the appeal and also knowing that the
unlawful order remained, as
if valid, on the Court record. Lord Justices' Saville and
Morrill refused me leave to
appeal for no other reason than to protect a colleague, and
therefore they both wilfully
entered into the conspiracy.
The conspiracy to pervert he course of justice widened,
before you took Office, to
include those of your own Department and also includes
Mr. Shepheard : a legal
officer, formally in the employ of the Treasury Solicitor. I
make the following specific
allegations of unlawful acts against them, that demonstrate
their strong desire and
determination, to maintain the silence of , to obstruct
justice for the protection of , that
resulted in a gross miscarriage of justice and further
judicial corruption, referred to in
1,2,3, and 4, of this letter:-
a) That upon instructions from your Department, the Office
of the Treasury Solicitor
acknowledged service of the Writ on behalf of n, and
(significantly) at the same time,
acknowledged on behalf of , without instructions from her to
do so, despite the fact
that she had acknowledged its service on her own behalf: eight
days earlier, stating
her intention of acting in person and putting herself on
lawful Court record as so
doing;
b) that Mrs. West did not give consent to, or instruct the
Treasury Solicitor, to
unlawfully acknowledge service on her behalf, nor at all, nor
could she lawfully do so;
c) that Mrs. West, being a private citizen, was,
(significantly) unlawfully afforded the
privilege of legal representation, by a Government Department,
out of public funds.
d) that because Mr. Shepheard's purpose was to protect
Judge Simpson, he did not
request any material from Mrs. West for the preparation of her
purported
'DEFENCE', in the knowledge that any material provided by her,
would (inevitably)
expose the Judge, nor did she provide material, nor did she
approve her purported
'DEFENCE' before it was served;
e) that in an attempt to regularize the filing of the
impotent 'Acknowledgement of
Service', Mr. Shepheard served an impotent 'Notice of Change
of Solicitor' upon
myself and Mrs. West, dated 22nd September 1995, to draw her
attention to the fact
that conduct of the case had been taken from her, and to dupe
me into believing that
he was on lawful Court record as acting for her. It was served
unsealed, and it remains
unsealed by the Court;
f) that the 'Notice of Change', dated 22nd September,
purports to take effect from the
date that the ineffective 'Acknowledgement of Service' was
filed, 24 days earlier: the
29th August, contrary to the rule of the Supreme Court, Order
67, rule 1, (1).
g) that the 'Notice of Change' was served by Mr. Shepheard,
contrary to RSC. O, 67,
rule 1,(3), it not being indorsed with a memorandum that it
had been filed with the
Court. I filed it myself, in order to bring the unlawful
document to the attention of the
Court;
h) that the Treasury Solicitor was not and never has been,
on lawful Court record as
acting for Mrs. West;
i) that on the 1st December 1995, Mr. Shepheard perjured
himself, by swearing a
false affidavit, which is now the subject of a Metropolitan
Police investigation.
My Lord, I have persistently endeavoured to provide you
with documentary evidence,
that supports and corroborates all of the allegations, but to
no avail, because my
understanding is that : the Chief Executive of the Court
Services, has intercepted
them and has not brought them to your attention. It is
evident, from the
correspondence between the Court Services of your Department
and myself, that
these serious corrupt matters are, if not actually being
orchestrated by Mr. Huebner,
are being condoned by him.
I refer to a copy letter, the original of which is in the
possession of the Deputy Prime
Minister, which I must assume was sent to him by yourself
personally, because it
purports to bear your signature. It is dated the 26th January
1998, and in the second
paragraph, you purportedly, informed John Prescott, that upon
appeal in Leeds in
May 1996, the Honourable Justice Smith held that the Statement
of Claimdid not
disclose an alleged causeof action, and that statement
ismanifestly untrue, because, as
the certified transcript of those proceedings reveal, she held
exactly the opposite, as
already mentioned, she held that the Statement of Claim
plainly disclosed an alleged
cause. In the absence of any explanation for your undeniably
untrue, purported
statement to , I must infer that you have been deliberately
misinformed. in line with
the conspiracy, for Judge Simpson's protection and that you
have inadvertently,
passed on the false evidence to the Deputy Prime Minisrter.
My Lord, there is a most urgent: serious matter, that, I
submit, requires immediate
attention, in order to prevent another obstruction of justice,
on the 7th October 1998,
when an application to strike out my current action against
Mrs. West, (case number
1997-H-0085) will be heard at the Hull Combined Court Centre,
the cause being
perjury by swearing a false affidavit. Because of my
experience with regard to the
action that has been struck out for Judge Simpson's
protection, on the obvious false
ground, I have no reason to believe that there will not be a
repetition, on the 7th
October, again as part of the conspiracy, so that Mrs. West's
silence is maintained.
Mrs. West's current Solicitor, who acted on her
behalf, as agent for the Treasury
Solicitor, in the earlier action that was unlawfully struck
out, has again abused the
process of the Court by making application for this action
(against Mrs. West) to be
struck out, on what he knows without doubt, to be a false
ground and in the knowledge
that perjury is clearly alleged in the claim.
There is no doubt that the Court is being abused, because
to ask a District Judge to
strike out an action, on a clearly stated and well proven
cause of action is, (as you
know) but I make the point, to ask the Court to to deny the
undeniable, because to ask
the Court hold that the clearly stated causes of perjury and
conspiracy, are not
reasonable ones, is to ask it to hold that every criminal and
civil prosecution that ever
was, was unreasonable and I respectfully submit that such a
ruling would be utterly
ridiculous. It is a monstrous abuse of the Court and there is
no pretence about it. A
District Judge is again going to be asked to abandon his
principles and his
independence, to dispense justice without fear, or favour, in
order to maintain Mrs.
West's silence, for the protection of a Judge. The abuse of
the Court is continuing
within your Department. I respectfully, and urgently ask, that
it be stopped.
Respectfully and sincerely,
J. F. Hulbert.
NOTE - The abuse, and the conspiracy did not stop. On the
7th October 98, my
separate action against Mrs. West was struck out as disclosing
no cause by District
Judge Hill, at Hull Combined Court Centre, when he refused
point blank, to allow me
to read off my submissions in opposition to the application to
strike out the action and
why wouldn't he refuse, when he knew that there could be no
lawful answer to the
objections, that he knew I would inevitably submit?
My appeal against the unlawful order, was heard by Mr.
Justice Moses who
dismissed it, which is in line with the conspiracy within Lord
Irvine's department, for the
protection of a corrupt colleague.
Be it noted that the shorthand writer Mrs. S. M. West has
never been permitted to
put her side of the story.
Links to the conspirators:
Circuit Judge Alan Simpson ..................[Fabricated
Evidence]
District Judge Weston
..........................[Struck out civil action unlawfully]
Mrs. Justice Smith .................................[Abandoned
her principles]
Mrs. S. M. West
....................................[Fabricated evidence &
Perjury]
Treasury Solicitor...................................[Unlawful
representation of a civilian
Mr. Huw Shepheard
..............................[Perjury & other unlawful acts]
Mr. Huebner
..........................................[Lied to Lord Irvine]
District Judge R. N. Hill .......................[Struck
out 2nd action]
Mr. J. Swales
.........................................[Unlawful representation
of a civilian]
Mr. Justice Moses
...............................[If he had any principles, he
abandoned them]
My MP.
Deputy Prime Minister
.........................[Not at all helplful]
Links to overseas sites that carry the pages:
http://qwikpages.com/rockyroad/corruption
http://www.angelfire.com/ab2/irvine
http://www.openpgp.net/censorship.html
http://www.angelfire.com/al2/lordirvine
http://internettrash.com/users/[email protected]
Contact Author: Jim Hulbert mailto: [email protected]