The following is Honest comment - It is a matter of Public Interest - It is Lawful:
Documents scanned by Scandals
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 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
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 that 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
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://taxiridetocensorship.faithweb.com/
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 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 who, 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,
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 Minister.
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.
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 & appeal hearings: http://www.100megsfree.com/sonny ...[Abandoned her principles]
Mrs. West .........Fabricated evidence & Perjury] - Evidence of her perjury
Treasury Solicitor ......................................................[Unlawful representation of a civilian
Mr. 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]
John Prescott MP ..............................................[Not at all helplful]
Lord Justice Saville's phoney Judgement
Links to other sites relevant to the exposure of the corrupt Circuit Judge Alan Simpson, who incited the shorthand writer: Mrs. Sheila Margaret West to tamper with police evidence out of a criminal trial and the subsequent conspiracy by high-powered people, right up to the Lord Chancellor, for Judge Simpson's protection.:
Summary by Journalist @ http://taxiridetocensorship.faithweb.com
Story so far @ http://www.geocities.com/judicialcorruptionuk
Transcripts: Appeals @ http://www.100megsfree.com/sonny
Unlawful disposal of action against Simpson & West @ http://ukjudiciary.faithweb.com
My trial transcripts @ http://www.100megspop2.com/tranny/index.html
Relevant newsgroup messages @ http://www.geocities.com/politicalbombshell
Abusive UK Lawyers @ http://uklegal.250x.com
Contact Author: Jim Hulbert email@example.com