WOOLWICH CROWN COURT –
January 2012
1.
From
the evidence that I have seen, I believe that PC John Brown of Bexleyheath
Police, committed perjury during a trial involving Mr Pead and that he also
entered demonstrably false evidence into court.
2.
I
believe this because the trial Judge mentioned these facts.
3.
I
believe that PC John Brown must answer a charge of committing perjury and
perverting the course of justice.
4.
From
evidence that I have seen (including witness statements), I believe that Mr
Michael Bird acted as Mr Pead’s McKenzie Friend during the trial.
5.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Mr Bird is a co-author of the book from Hillsborough to Lambeth.
6.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the book is currently the subject of
a banning order from the High Court.
7.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the Court Order was issued unlawfully
and is therefore void ab initio.
ARREST BY SOUTHEND POLICE
1 February 2012
8.
I
believe from evidence that I have seen that Mr Pead was unlawfully arrested and
falsely imprisoned by Southend Police on 1 February 2012.
9.
Essex
Police claimed that Mr Pead had breached the terms of a Sexual Offences
Prevention Order, but it is evident that the order is a Void Order because it
was void ab initio because it was
made by a court which had acted illegally and therefore it had acted ultra vires – beyond its powers.
10.
I
believe that Lord Denning has said that “...a tribunal which falls into an
error [...] does exceed its jurisdiction and I am quite clear that at the same
time it falls into an error of law too: for the simple reason that it has ‘not
determined according to law’...”
11.
I
believe that Lord Denning also said that “...If it went wrong in law, it went
outside the jurisdiction conferred on it. Its decision was therefore void. It
had jurisdiction to decide rightly but no jurisdiction to decide wrongly...”
12.
I
believe that Lord Denning also said that “...It is beyond doubt that, if a
tribunal fails to observe the rules of natural justice, or is biased – its
decision is a nullity and void; and it can be quashed on certiorari; or
declared void by a declaration to that effect...”
13.
I
believe that Lord Denning was a highly qualified judge and that he knew the
law.
14.
I
believe that he would say that Mr Pead’s conviction was a nullity based on all
the evidence, and that because it is a nullity, the Order against Mr Pead is
completely invalid.
15.
I
believe that Essex Police should not have arrested Mr Pead.
16.
I
believe that Essex Police should not have falsely imprisoned Mr Pead.
17.
I
believe that Essex Police should not have assaulted Mr Pead.
CREATION AND SUBSEQUENT REMOVAL OF
WEBSITE KNOWN AS <www.allaroundjustice.com>
August 2012
18.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Brian Pead and Michael Bird created a
website known as www.allaroundjustice.com.
19.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the website exposed the unlawful
trials in which Brian Pead had been the victim of.
20.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the website drew the public’s
attention to corruption within the police and judiciary.
21.
From evidence that I have seen, I believe
that on 27 July 2012, AllAroundJustice received an email
from its webhosts, UK2Net, claiming that a Mr Paul Birch of Sidcup had been
libelled on the website and that, as a result, the web hosts were withdrawing
the service and taking the website down.
22.
I believe that AllAroundJustice asked for a copy
of the alleged complaint. None was
forthcoming. I believe that Scotland Yard had a hand in this communication.
23.
From evidence that I have seen, I believe
that Mr Paul Birch is Brian Pead’s son-in-law. He is a director in a garage
known as Foxberry Garages and other related ventures.
24.
The Metropolitan Police Service has been the
largest customer of the garage for a number of years.
25.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Paul Birch of Melville Road, Sidcup
had never made a complaint about the website.
PUBLICATION
OF FROM HILLSBOROUGH TO LAMBETH
12
November 2012
26.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Brian Pead co-wrote a book entitled from Hillsborough to Lambeth with
Michael Bird and that it was officially published on 12 October 2012 by
Invenire Press.
27.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the book exposed unlawful activity in
Lambeth Council which included the wrongful dismissal of Brian Pead and the
exposure of child abuse in Lambeth, which went unreported by Council officers.
28.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that former pupils at the Pupil Referral
Unit run by Brian Pead (known as the Open Learning Centre for Vocational
Studies) have stated that the book is an accurate record of events.
29.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that parents of former pupils at the Pupil
Referral Unit run by Brian Pead have stated that the book is an accurate record
of events.
31.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the book was unlawfully removed from
that website by the authorities.
BRIAN PEAD’S
CLAIM –v- LAMBETH COUNCIL
8 January 2013
32.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Brian Pead initiated a claim against
Lambeth Council on the following grounds: The Tort of Negligence; Defamation;
Unlawful dismissal; Breaches of Employment Law; Breaches of the Human Rights
Act 1998; Breaches of the Freedom of Information Act 2000; Breaches of the Data
Protection Act 1998; Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice; Breaches of
the Theft Act 1968; Breaches of the Computer Misuse Act 1990, Misconduct in
Public Office, Perverting the Course of Justice; Perjury, Fraudulent
Misrepresentation.
33.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Mr Pead’s claim against Lambeth
Council and its officers consisted of more than 100 pages of incontrovertible
evidence of negligence and other torts and even crimes.
34.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the claim is a genuine claim based on
bona fide evidence, including the
witness statements of former pupils and parents of former pupils, together with
a statement made by an Employment Law specialist, Alex Passman.
DEFAMATION
CLAIM AGAINST BRIAN PEAD
January
2013
35.
On
10 January 2013, Brian Pead and Michael Bird received a letter from Pinsent
Masons, a law firm purporting to represent Lambeth Council and its officers.
36.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Pinsent Masons failed to provide a
Form of Authority (or Instruction) which would prove that Cathy Twist and
Phyllis Dunipace had, in fact, instructed Pinsent Masons to act on their
behalf.
37.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that this evidence does not exist.
Disclosure was sought – disclosure has been rejected.
38.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Pinsent Masons failed to inform the
publishers, Invenire Press, that they were bringing a claim of Defamation and
in such instances it is my belief that the Publisher, not the Author, will be
the recipient of any law suit against it.
39.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that this was a ruse by the authorities to
create a reason to later send Mr Pead to prison for Contempt of Court.
40.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the letter threatened legal action
against both authors for defamation against Cathy Twist (an officer of Lambeth
Council) and Phyllis Dunipace, OBE (a former Head of Children’s Services in
Lambeth).
41.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that the authors strenuously denied the
allegation of defamation.
42.
From
evidence that I have seen, I believe that Michael Bird wanted a trial at the
High Court before a jury on the grounds of Defamation.
No comments:
Post a Comment