Government fails to act on Article 3 Official Complaint

The following people made an official complaint to HM Government on 31 December 2013:

(Leonard) Richard Fulcher
Karen Fulcher
William Freeman
Robert Ecclestone
Violet Ecclestone
John Gawthorp
Elaine Gawthorp.


The above people sent a 76-page document to the National Crime Agency naming many corrupt police constables, lawyers, barristers, judges, Local Authority officers and Fenland District Council, who are all guilty of crimes including misconduct in public office, perverting the course of public justice and other criminal offences.

Naming and shaming:

District Judge Barry Rutland
District Judge Martyn Royall
Barrister Timothy Williams
Solicitor James Morgan (Hayes & Storr)
Solicitor Gordon Dean
Solicitor Jonathan Eales
all 39 Fenland District Councillors
all Norfolk County Councillors
Nick Daubney, Leader of the Borough Council of King's Lynn and West Norfolk
Stephen Bett, Police and Crime Commissioner for Northwest Norfolk
Cathy Twist, Lambeth officer
Barry Gilhooly, Lambeth officer
Dominic Bell, the most corrupt barrister on the planet
Angela Shaw (leslie Franks) a corrupt solicitor
Phyllis Dunipace, OBE, a hugely corrupt former head of children's services in Lambeth
Clare Cobbold, a corrupt council officer at Lambeth

and many, many more. In fact, there is talk in the village that Henry Bellingham 's chauffeur is a convicted paedophile.

Do write to me at Richard Fulcher, Ramblewood Farm, Cliffe-en-Howe Road, Pott Row, Norfolk PE32 1BY if you have further news.

Kind regards ....

Richard

OPEN LETTER TO KEITH BRISTOW, NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY

Keith Bristow

Director-General

National Crime Agency

1-7 Old Queen Street

LONDON

SW1H 9HP

10 October 2013

Dear Mr Bristow,

AN OPEN EXPRESS COMPLAINT TO THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY

DISCLAIMER

This Open Express Complaint has been sent to Keith Bristow, Director-General of the National Crime Agency, in his capacity as a Police Constable and that, by continuing to read this document, he is acting on his Oath of Office and that, by not continuing to read further, he is making a declaration that he is not prepared to act on his Oath of Office.

His Oath of Office reads:

I, Keith Bristow, of the National Crime Agency, do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office, I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully and according to law.

For the avoidance of doubt, the human rights referred to in the Oath are indefeasible human rights which are not capable of being annulled or made void. These are the fundamental human rights of all human beings, including the people named in this letter.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY

Firstly, All Around Justice would like to extend its congratulations to you on your appointment as the first Director-General of the National Crime Agency (hereinafter “the NCA”).  This organisation had been tracking the emergence of the NCA from its genesis to its launch on 07 October 2013 and fully supports the remit of the NCA.

All Around Justice has also noted your curriculum vitae and in particular makes reference to your work around   public protection, criminal use of firearms and as a director of the National Criminal Intelligence Service.

Your experience will be a valuable tool when you consider the enclosed document entitled An Open Letter of       Complaint to Norfolk Constabulary.

All Around Justice draws your attention to crimes perpetrated against Mr & Mrs Fulcher, Brian Pead, Albert Ecclestone, Violet Ecclestone and Robert Ecclestone which are highlighted in the damning document which was sworn before a bona fide solicitor and stands as a true record. There are a number of other similar documents which outline the corruption uncovered by the people named above.

It can be seen from the enclosed document that the Norfolk Constabulary is guilty of failing to record or   investigate crimes, intimidation of innocent victims of crime, and failing to report its own constables who are guilty of crimes including assault and perverting the course of justice.

All Around Justice notes that in your role as Director-General of the NCA, you have the remit to command a Constabulary to act upon your instructions and this organisation is requesting that the people who have perpetrated crimes whilst in positions of power or whilst in public office will be brought to account by the NCA.

All Around Justice refers, for example, to the lead article in Monday’s Independent newspaper in which you stated “...We will have a zero-tolerance approach towards corruption. We’re going to put the public first in everything that we do...”  Those words, we hope, are not mere rhetoric.

The current position with regard to Richard Fulcher, an innocent man accused of Threats to Kill and     Harassment only after he called into question his solicitor’s handling of a civil claim against Fenland       District Council who committed arson by unlawfully burning down his barns, is that he is being treated abysmally (as is his wife) in that several civil claims are being brought against him when no legitimate claims exist, and his Appeal against Conviction was recently mis-handled by a corrupt judge (this           organisation uses the word advisedly) who refused to allow him to call witnesses as to fact and also        refused him full disclosure when full disclosure would show Mr Fulcher’s innocence.

It is evident that the legal process is being unlawfully and corruptly manipulated in order to maintain a  label of ‘guilt’ against Mr Fulcher in an attempt to (a) further disrupt his life and (b) prevent him from standing as a local counsellor again. The impact of local authority, judicial and police corruption against Mr Fulcher has had a deleterious impact upon him and his wife, who is receiving medical attention for stress caused by police harassment and a malicious prosecution against her husband and his good name.

These human rights abuses must cease forthwith and those responsible for crimes against the        Fulchers must be held accountable and they must face criminal charges.

The current position with regard to Violet Ecclestone, aged 91, is that she is being illegally imprisoned in an old people’s home against her will because she is being prevented from living in her own home (which she owns outright) through the corrupt activities of her local borough council.

Her son, Robert Ecclestone, 61, is also prevented from living in his own home because of fraudulent court documents which bear no Court Seal nor a signature of a Judge.

These human rights abuses must cease forthwith and those responsible for crimes against the        Ecclestones must be held accountable and they must face criminal charges.

The current position with regard to Brian Pead is that he informed King’s Lynn Magistrates’ Court on    Friday 04 October 2013 that both the Crown Prosecution Service and Norfolk police constables were guilty of perverting the course of justice when he was charged with criminal damage. The Magistrates were informed that a husband and wife team of police constables were working together—which is in itself an unlawful act— and that Mr Pead had been arrested by armed police constables who had attended a meter reading of a meter which does not exist on  Ramblewood Farm. It is this organisation’s belief that the two trespassers—who claimed to be working for E.ON—were, in fact, undercover police constables. No doubt you will investigate this to the criminal standard because it is evident that corruption—which you have publicly stated you wish to eradicate—is at play in this matter.

Furthermore, Mr Pead was harassed by two police constables at his home on Sunday 06 October 2013 claiming that they had jurisdiction to enter the property and enter his bedroom. The constables were allegedly from the Public Protection Unit, but they have failed to provide photo evidence. This organisation is aware that the police have often employed tactics including using the names of dead children, so we cannot be certain if the names they are using are bona fide.

For the avoidance of doubt, on 01 August 2013, Mr Pead was charged with an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2006 in that he failed to provide his current address to Norfolk Police. Mr Pead is not a sex offender. He was unlawfully convicted of inciting a child in a corrupt trial at Southwark Crown Court in December 2009 when a Jury was not sworn in, more than 125 exhibits were not adduced in Court, and key witnesses to police corruption were not called.

Furthermore, there never was a victim—no person had been incited. Mr Pead had been unlawfully    arrested, charged and convicted only after he had uncovered child grooming, racism and harassment whilst employed as a Head Teacher at Lambeth Council in 2005-7. His unlawful dismissal was the subject of a book entitled from Hillsborough to Lambeth, and that book is currently the subject of an      unlawful banning order from the High Court.

The accompanying website, <lambethchildabuseandcoverup.com> was taken down by the authorities in a corrupt move.  We use the word ‘corrupt’ advisedly because the website was hosted in Slovakia,   outside of the jurisdiction of England & Wales.

Mr Pead’s trial at Southwark Crown Court in December 2009 is the subject of a book entitled Framed!.  Some commentators have suggested that that book, too, will also be banned by the authorities.

On 27 January 2010, the Metropolitan Police Service took Mr Pead to Court and sought a permanent search warrant on his house.

On 16 July 2013, Caroline Addy of One Brick Court, represented Lambeth Council in an attempt to seek a permanent gagging order against Mr Pead. It is evident that Mr Pead has been “set up” in order to      prevent him from exposing corruption and child grooming and also to defame him through the use of          disinformation, similar to that employed by the police at Hillsborough and elsewhere.

In 2008-2009 Mr Pead’s daughter, Sorrel Birch, was told by Bexley Police and Bexley Social Services that if she had any further contact with her father, she would have her children removed.

On 01 November 2011, Mr Pead was taken from Belmarsh Prison (where he was unlawfully held on the charge of the witness intimidation of his 12 year old grand-daughter, Emily Birch, when she had never been a witness in any trial or hearing whatsoever) to Bexley Magistrates’ Court when he was found ‘guilty’ of the alleged harassment of his daughter and grand-daughter even though neither had made a statement alleging harassment and neither had attended the court. The case was held in camera, and is thus wholly illegal in itself. The unlawful incarceration of Mr Pead was a bullying tactic employed by corrupt police officers, local authority and court officials.

Mr Pead is not a sex offender. That label has been used against him by corrupt police and local authority officers in an effort to cover their own corrupt activities.

On 27 January 2010, Mr Pead was made the subject of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order by Southwark Crown Court, but it was made illegally and is thus void ab initio.

This organisation believes that you will be conversant with the legislation around void orders, but in the event that you are not, further information can be obtained from The Middleton Private Trust, Educational Division, c/o Ramblewood Farm at the address below.   

For the avoidance of doubt, Mr Pead is an innocent man and the State’s unwarranted interference in his life—and of those he cares about—is a direct breach of his (and their) Article 3 Rights         conferred upon him by the Human Rights Act 1998 and of his (and their) indefeasible human rights.

These human rights abuses must cease forthwith and those responsible for crimes against Brian Pead must be held accountable and they must face criminal charges.

This organisation believes that you will be conversant with the legislation around Article 3, but in the event that you are not, further information can be obtained from The Middleton Private Trust, Educational Division,c/o Ramblewood Farm at the address below.   

However, it is necessary for All Around Justice to provide you with a précis of Article 3, since we believe that it is of fundamental import to your role:

Article 3 European Convention on Human Rights

‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.’

Article 3 is an absolute right; there are no possible derogations. Many ECHR rights can be over-ridden (i.e. derogated) in the public interest (e.g. in time of war, where there is a threat to public safety and so on); not so with Article 3. There is no possible excuse or justification for a breach of Article 3 along the lines of, for example, ‘an aggressive cross-examination of a rape victim is part of the adversarial system of justice and is in the public interest’. The ECHR cases below show that under Article 3, the government has:

1. a positive obligation to protect people from inhuman and degrading treatment (i.e. not just a negative obligation not to inflict inhuman and degrading treatment), including inhuman and degrading treatment by state officials and private persons (i.e. people who are not state officials);

2. a duty to carry out effective and independent (in practical terms) official investigations into allegations or indications of such treatment;

3. a duty to carry out such investigations in response to complaints or where no complaint is made but where there are sufficiently clear indications of inhuman and degrading treatment;

4. a duty to carry out such investigations with ‘promptness and reasonable expedition’;

5. a duty to carry out investigations that are capable of identifying and punishing those responsible (i.e. an official investigation which is not allowed to allocate blame – a common tactic – does not fulfil the government’s legal obligations under Article 3);

6. a duty to allow the victim ‘to participate effectively in the investigation in one form or another’.

For the avoidance of doubt, All Around Justice is calling upon the National Crime Agency to fulfil its duty and legal obligations to thoroughly investigate the crimes which have been perpetrated against Mr & Mrs Fulcher, Albert Ecclestone, Violet Ecclestone, Robert Ecclestone and Brian Pead. These crimes—both historical and current—were perpetrated in breach of their Article 3 (and other) rights.

Article 3 of the Convention gives rise to a positive obligation to conduct an official investigation (see     Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3290, § 102). Such a positive obligation cannot be considered in principle to be limited solely to cases of ill-treatment by State agents (see M.C. v. Bulgaria, cited above, § 151). Thus, the authorities have an obligation to take action as soon as an official complaint has been lodged. Even in the absence of an express complaint, an investigation should be undertaken if there are other sufficiently clear indications that torture or ill-treatment might have occurred. A requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is implicit in this context. A prompt response by the authorities in investigating allegations of ill-treatment may generally be regarded as essential in maintaining public confidence in their maintenance of the rule of law and in       preventing any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts. Tolerance by the authorities      towards such acts cannot but undermine public confidence in the principle of lawfulness and the State’s maintenance of the rule of law.

DECLARATION

By making this express complaint, the Complainants have been placed by the State in fear of reprisals from the judiciary, local authorities and the police.

The Complainants fear for their lives, their wellbeing and their liberty, having been assaulted, having had three properties destroyed by fire and having been unlawfully incarcerated.

If anything should happen to the Complainants, their families or friends because of these Facts of Truth being made public, they have appointed three former Army and RAF officers to expose all the evidence they have gathered in these matters.

The Complainants shall now devote the rest of their lives to exposing miscarriages of justice and           corruption and look forward to participating effectively in the investigation in one form or another. 

Yours sincerely,

Leonard Richard Vernon Fulcher                                                                                           

William B. Freeman                                                                                                                             

Robert Ecclestone

Violet Ecclestone

Enclosure:               AN OPEN LETTER OF COMPLAINT AGAINST NORFOLK CONSTABULARY

                                REPORTING CRIMES: DEMAND FOR INVESTIGATIONS, ARRESTS AND CONVICTIONS AGAINST NAMED                                                          PERPETRATORS OF CRIMES

Richard Fulcher and Brian Pead - victims of a miscarriage of justice

Dear Henry

As you know, you mentioned in your previous email to us that you would be willing to help mediate with Fenland in order to draw a line under the ever-increasing problem.

As you will know, we have not heard back from you at present, so thought it wise to provide you with an update on the Fenland situation.

1)      Fenland District Council

In January of this year, a Judge in Cambridgeshire dismissed Fenland’s claim to strike out our Judgment against them in the sum of £270k.

As you will know, their claim is for burning down our barn (some £18k), a mere trifling sum in the context, apart from the idiocy involved in that claim, which we believe is being made vexatiously and which is, in itself, an abuse of process.

The following chronology may be helpful to you:

Date	Court	Comments
08 November 2012	Northampton County	Default Judgment obtained in the sum of £270k No defence; no acknowledgement to original claim No set aside requested after default judgment obtained
January 2013	Cambridge County	FDC muddy waters; bring their own claim for £18k; application to strike out Judgment Application dismissed Put on multi-track to be heard 23/24 October 2013; trial bundles to be in no later than 7 days before
	KL County	Lead case (Fulchers) replaced with FDC becoming lead case unilaterally transferred to Norwich County
04 September 2013	KL County	Richard (but not Karen) Fulcher illegally made bankrupt by DJ Barry Rutland on the same day he had the Judgment for £270k in his hand in the FDC case and he transferred the case re FDC from KL County to Norwich County [information corroborated by the Court]
17 October 2013		no trial bundle received from FDC
23/24 October 2013	Norwich County	trial vacated by FDC;
31 October 2013		the Fulchers issue a Statutory Demand against FDC
18 November 2013		E.ON finally admit Z meter not on farm and send a bill against the K meter. This renders the bankruptcy a nullity. The debt is transferred from the Z meter to the K meter – another fraudulent move by E.ON
21 November 2013		Richard Fulcher calls the Court; is told that the Hearing of 23/24 October had been vacated because he is “bankrupt”; RF informs the Court in a taped conversation that (i)                 he is not bankrupt (ii)               that the Judge in that matter has had a private criminal prosecution [pcp] taken out against hum (iii)             that the Chief Executive of FDC has also had a pcp taken out against him, (iv)             that he, Richard Fulcher, has made an official complaint to Government that his Article 3 rights (and those of his wife) are being breached and that an Official Investigation must be initiated forthwith. RF asked to put this in writing for tomorrow’s Hearing
22 November 2013	Norwich County	Hearing of Application to Strike Out original Judgment of 08/11/12
All of the Court dates above, except the original Judgment, are an abuse of process by FDC and their lawyers, Weightmans, in a scurrilous attempt to further pervert the course of justice and cover up arson (a criminal act) by an FDC officer. The entire FDC Council Body is in Contempt of Court for refusing to comply with the bona fide Judgment of 08 November 2012.

 

As you will see from the above, there is little doubt that someone is pulling strings in this matter to ensure that Karen and I are not paid out by FDC. We are reliably informed that FDC are accruing a compounded debt of some £141 on a daily basis, let alone digging themselves into a much deeper hole.

FYI, Karen has now issued a Letter Before Claim against FDC in her own right. After seeking further legal advice, we were told that SHE has a huge claim against FDC in her own right, since she was badly affected by those and subsequent events. She is currently under the doctor for the emotional distress that these combined proceedings have caused. We have been told that her claim is in the region of £0.5-1million for the stress, distress, loss of her property and the continued harassment of her by FDC.

Since you have been asked by us to mediate, after you offered your services, you might like to inform all of the councillors of this new claim against them.

On the subject of claims, we were told by a friend in the village that the reason FDC are sitting on our money is so that they want to prevent us from bringing claims against the perpetrators of crimes against us. Do you think there is any truth in that?

2)      The Planners

We are also being ill-treated by the Planners, who keep moving the date for that Hearing, and who are threatening to throw us off the land we have farmed since 2005. As previously explained to you, at all times Karen and I have farmed here in Pott Row by following Government guidelines with respect to farming and also to planning. The Borough Council have agreed that there is a need for an agricultural worker(s) on the land because of the animals. Now, after illegally making me (but not Karen) bankrupt, the Planners are trying to claim that the farm is not viable. This is nonsense. Hence our calling for a complete investigation into all matters relating to us.

3)      Invitation to the Farm

You continue to be invited to the farm to see for yourself the enormous improvements we have made to the land since it was used as a scrapyard for cars and lorries. We have also been responsible for a significant reduction in crime due to the large number of thefts that were occurring when we initially arrived.

We do hope that you can offer practical solutions to the FDC and the Planning problems, since the time for mere words has long since passed.

4)      Home Secretary and Article 3 – Right to an Investigation

Karen has asked me to remind you that we have written to the Home Secretary informing her that our Article 3 Rights are consistently being abused and that we have insisted upon an Official Investigation. The Law states that an investigation must take place ‘expeditiously’, but to date we have not even heard back from Mrs May. Can you please write to her on our behalf and also on Brian Freeman’s behalf and ask her why we have not been contacted to assist in the investigation, which forms part of the redress available to us (and Brian) when the State has persecuted its citizens.

5)      Brian Freeman

Karen and I wanted you to see the following email, so that you can be in doubt that Brian, just like me, is the victim of a miscarriage of justice which the State continues to persecute him for.

EMAIL FROM HUMAN RIGHTS REPORTER

ALASDAIR PALMER,

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH

Alasdair Palmer <alasdair.palmer@telegraph.co.uk>

August 20, 2012

to Brian Pead <brianpead@googlemail.com>

Dear Brian,

First, I must apologise for taking so long to get back to you. I have a lot of excuses, but none of them are any good, so the best thing I can do is just say sorry.

 Second, I found your material extremely interesting. It is clear to me that you were indeed the victim of an injustice, as you maintain. The trouble is: I have been unable to interest the editor. As I am sure you know, it is enormously difficult to get people fired up about cases of alleged paedophilia which turn out to be based on nothing, or mistakes or inventions. The "no smoke without fire" principle, though fallacious, has a very strong hold on people, including many newspaper editors. I do not say that the editor does not accept you are innocent: I merely report that he does not think the story will interest the newspaper's readers.

 I am sorry I cannot be more helpful. I can't remember whether or not you contacted the solicitor Chris Saltrese, who specialises in these cases and has an impressive record in over-turning wrong convictions in cases of alleged sexual offences involving minors. If you have not done so, you should, because he may be able to help you.

 Thank you again for sharing your material with me.

With best wishes,

Alasdair

As you know, Brian was unlawfully arrested at Ramblewood Farm on 1^st August 2013 and mistreated in handcuffs, in the police van to the PIC and then pulled out of his cell at 4.30am to give an interview about criminal damage to the car allegedly being driven by E.ON meter readers, but who were no doubt undercover police. He was charged with criminal damage 5 hours AFTER I had called 999 and reported criminal damage to my farm gate through the reckless driving of the female in the car as they made a hasty retreat, having been asked to provide, but failing to do so, identification.

Whilst in his cell, the police also charged him with obstructing a police officer in his duty, by saying his name is Brian Freeman, which it is. I have seen his Statutory Declaration and his new driving licence in the name of Brian Freeman and Brian offered to show the police this when he was arrested, but they didn’t bother to accept his invitation.

Then he was charged with failing to report his whereabouts to the Police, but I have a tape recording which proves he told Police exactly where he was living and they said “We have no issues with not knowing where you live.”

Karen and I have seen all the police evidence against Brian in his trial at Southwark Crown Court for the alleged incitement of a child who did not exist. No victim. No CAD Report. No record of the trial. No Unique Reference Numbers on evidence. No witnesses against him.Then, when he complained to Scotland Yard about police corruption, they created three new offences against him including the alleged witness intimidation of his 12 year old grand -daughter (who has never been a witness in any trial or Hearing),. Whilst being kept in prison unlawfully for 7 weeks, he was taken out one morning and found guilty of the harassment of his daughter and grand-children when there was no evidence against him, no witnesses against him, no trial bundle and clearly no case. It was all done to try to psychologically destroy a man who has blown the whistle on child grooming. I will arrange for a copy of FROM HILLSBOROUGH TO LAMBETH to be sent to you, so that you can have all the facts of his innocence. As you know, you have received a copy of FRAMED! which also highlights the corrupt trial at Southwark.

To be honest, Henry, the Government has persecuted Brian even more than Karen and me and it’s all wrong. He is a constituent of yours, and as such needs protection from the State’s agencies, since they continue to interfere with his basic inalienable rights.

Brian has told me that if he is not re-united with his daughter and grand-children by this Christmas, he has arranged for a full expose on his cases and trials and the abuse of children to be made. You have a son, so I am sure you can understand how he feels.

Karen and I are inviting you to meet with Brian at our farm so that he can lay all the evidence before you.

6)      Brian and Lambeth Council

On 16 July 2013, I attended the High Court at the Royal Courts of Justice in London when Master Yoxall attempted to hear 5 cases against Brian brought about by Lambeth Council. They tried to obtain a permanent gagging order on him. Then they claimed that HE was harassing THE ENTIRE COUNCIL. In short, Yoxall did NOT hear the 5 cases.

We reported him to the National Crime Agency on 13 October 2013 for fraud and misconduct in public office.

On 14 November, Brian learnt that his £5m claim against Lambeth for wrongful dismissal had been struck out on the basis that it had ‘no merit’. I have read the 100-page Particulars of Claim and it’s certain that the claim is meritorious. As a barrister, you are invited to read it. If the Claim had no merit, why did Lambeth seek to:

(i)                 Imprison him (but not co-author Michael Bird) for alleged contempt of court?

(ii)               Seek to ban the book FROM HILLSBOROUGH TO LAMBETH?

(iii)             Take down the website <lambethchildabuseandcoverup.com> which was hosted outside of the Jurisdiction of England & Wales?

(iv)             Take down the website www.allaroundjustice.com?

Alex Passman, an award-winning employment lawyer, had told Brian in writing that he had been “set up by Lambeth” and that comment was posted on the LambethChildAbuseAndCoverUp website. If an award-winning employment lawyer had seen that Brian had been “set up” why did his meritorious claim against Lambeth Council get struck out? It is obvious to all those who have seen the paperwork and the book that his claim is genuine. 

7)      RIPA and communications

Through a number of tests, it has become obvious to Karen and me that our communications are being intercepted. By communications, we refer to telephone calls, internet, regular mail and email. Brian is using this address as a postal address and his communications are also being interfered with. In particular, he wrote to Kenny Dalglish, a Director of Liverpool FC, and that communication was intercepted. Please write to Mr Dalglish to check that he did not receive Brian’s letter to him about a post that was uploaded to the Liverpool FC website calling Brian a “convicted sex offender”. He is nothing of the sort.

Karen and I are asking you to write to the Home Secretary about our communications. We have to know if anyone has asked for a RIPA notice on us and on Brian and whether it (they) have been granted.

8)      Stephen Bett

As you will probably know, Mr Bett was on the BBC last week about how he is going to hold the Acting Chief Constable of Norfolk accountable for his actions and those deployed by him. Could you kindly write to him and ask why he is failing to hold the ACC accountable for his persistent refusal to provide the CAD reports for 10 July 2012, 14 August 2012, and two CAD reports for 01 August 2013?

Please also see (9) below.

9)      Private Criminal Prosecutions

We have initiated a number of private criminal prosecutions at the Kings Lynn Magistrates Court.

Without fail, these have all been returned to us without recourse to law.

As you will know, the law allows private citizens to bring private criminal prosecutions and Karen and I and Brian want to do this. We write to the Court with details of those we wish to prosecute, and ask for a date to lay information before Magistrates, but they fail to uphold legal process. Since we have a common law right to prosecute those who have done us harm, can you please write to the Court and ask why our prosecutions are not being dealt with in accordance with the law. We are bringing these Prosecutions under Rule 7.2 of the Criminal Procedures Rules (Crim.P.R.), so it’s not as if we are acting outside of the law (unlike those who have transgressed against us).

10)  Brian at Norwich Crown Court

I went with Brian to the Court last Thursday. He politely asked the Judge (HOLT) if he was acting on his Oath of Office, and the Judge threatened to send him to prison for asking that question! Can you believe it! We would be grateful if you write to the Judge and ask him why he felt he had the authority to act in that way, because he clearly does not. He has the authority to act according to law, but not outside the law. (Those are not my words, but those of Lord Denning.) If he acts outside of the law he is acting outside of his jurisdiction and any decision he/she makes is void ab initio. We’re sure you know all this any way, as a barrister, but we are learning a lot about the law now, too, after we were completely naive before.

11)  Void orders

Speaking of void orders, both Brian and I have informed the Court system that all of its orders against us are void ab initio. That means Brian’s for alleged incitement and the alleged harassment of his daughter and grand-daughter and also mine for the alleged Threats to Kill and the alleged Harassment of Amanda Nudds. On that issue, can you please write to James Morgan and obtain a copy of the telephone conversation I had with Amanda on 14 August 2012? I know that Solicitors record all their calls (for obvious reasons) so we’d appreciate a copy of that conversation.

12)  Brian’s daughter and grand-daughter

 Karen and I have taken a great interest in Brian’s trials, since it is obvious that they are fabricated. In January 2012, he was forced to act as his own barrister and he won his case for an alleged breach of the sexual offences order illegally obtained against him. The case was dropped after a day and a half because the Judge stated on the record that the police had lied and fabricated evidence against him.

Can you kindly write to Brian’s daughter, Sorrel Birch, of 14 Melville Road, Sidcup, Kent DA14 4LX and verify – for the record- that she has never brought a prosecution against her own father?  And that her daughter, Emily Birch, has also not brought a prosecution against her grand-father?

13)  The CPS

Can you also please write to the Director of Public Prosecutions and ask why they have broken their Code for Prosecutors in bringing the bogus cases against Brian (all three current cases) and against me?

Only today I have received information that I am being taken to Court for an alleged Road Traffic Accident which I have never had. It is clearly another distraction created by someone who wants to keep me and Karen busy fighting to clear our names when we really should be fighting those who have committed crimes against us.

Henry, this persecution of me and Karen and Brian must stop now. The Conservatives in Fenland are in potential disarray over their handling of our Judgment legally obtained against them, and the Conservatives in Norfolk are decreasing in numbers on the full Council body in favour of UKIP. All these matters cannot be helping because if nothing else, the taxpayers of both Counties will want to know – and have a right to know – why so many funds and people have been allocated to bringing false claims against Karen, me and Brian.

We understand that there a number of letters you will need to write. Please provide copies of all correspondence for our records.

We look forward to your response.

Regards

Karen and Richard

Children Screaming to be Heard asking questions re Lambeth Council's refusal to provide information

1/ Why is another case of child abuse by a council being allowed to be covered up

 

2/ Why is the British Government protecting Lambeth council  

 

3/  Brian Pead has spoken out to protect children from being groomed in readiness for the paedophiles and yet Governments continue to sentence Brian Pead to prison, are they using Brian Pead to stop other whistle blowers "YES" if people such as Brian Pead are not allowed to whistle blow and Governments continually ignore the truth as they did with Jimmy Savile Cyril Smith Ted Heath and how many 100s more we will never know remember money talks,  then no child is or will ever be safe in the UK in what is known as a multibillion pound industry "In a child's best interest"  

 

4/ For the past three years the charity children screaming to be heard has researched 24/7 into the child abuse in the UK and of the research it would become a best selling film of the corruption of our poor little abused children screaming to be heard just because the Governments do not listen to the whistle blowers and for his reason we have thousands of kids from past abused in care living on the streets begging with 49% in prisons with many who have committed suicide and for the hundreds of kids from care who do try to speak out many are victimised such as Brian Pead.

Maggie Tuttle

www.childrenscreamingtobeheard.com 

The silent witnesses here lies the truth 

LAMBETH COUNCIL BREAKING THE LAW ON FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUESTS

Lambeth Borough Council are long overdue.

They have not replied to your FOI request Permanent Gagging Order,
as required by law.

Click on the link below to send a message to Lambeth Borough Council telling them to reply to your request. You might like to ask for an internal
review, asking them to find out why response to the request has been so slow.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/c/939woa0z4lj03v4omkg

-- the WhatDoTheyKnow team

Further human rights abuses of Brian Pead

You have got to hand it to the police ... the bullies just don't care how they operate as long as they can conceal their own corrupt little ways and if that includes taking blood samples from the dead and dying at Hillsborough to forcibly removing little old ladies like Violet Ecclestone (aged 91) from her own home then stealing more than £1.5m in antiques, to their latest little trick of intimidating a woman called Barbara (in her 70s) and threatening her in their attempts to prevent Brian Pead from exposing their corruption.

They have no shame.

Thank God we are policed BY CONSENT in this country and THANK GOD mature, intelligent people are now saying WE DO NOT CONSENT TO BEING POLICED BY CORRUPT INDIVIDUALS whose actions are then supported by corrupt courts.

Violet, we are working hard to get you justice.

Barbara, we will do the same for you.

The families at Hillsborough obtained justice ... so will we!

Human Rights Lawyer "betrays her calling" says Violet Ecclestone

CAROLINE ADDY

Misconduct in Public Office

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, wilfully neglected to perform her duty and wilfully misconducted herself to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder without reasonable excuse or justification.

Perverting the Course of Justice

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, with intent to pervert the course of public justice, did a series of acts which had a tendency to pervert the course of public justice in that she:

1        conducted an unlawful committal proceedings to incarcerate Brian Pead on 27 March 2013 when she knew that he was not in Contempt of Court

2        unlawfully applied for an injunction preventing the publication of from Hillsborough to Lambeth when she knew that the book highlighted child abuse, racism and bullying which went unreported

3        conspired with others to unlawfully obtain an injunction without merit

4        deceived the High Court on 31 January 2013 when applying for an injunction

5        deceived the High Court in the Committal Proceedings

6        deceived the High Court on 16 July 2013 when applying for a permanent gagging order which she knew to be in breach of the Human Rights Act and the laws of England & Wales

7        conspired with others to harass Brian Pead and his daughter and grand-children

8        harassed Brian Pead between January 2013 and September 2013

9        failed to report demonstrable criminal offences after reading from Hillsborough to Lambeth

Harassment

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, did pursue a course of conduct amounting to the harassment of Brian Pead and did cause him and his daughter and grand-children alarm and distress contrary to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and that in June and July 2013.

Fraud by failing to disclose information

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, did commit fraud by deliberately failing to disclose documents to Brian Pead, to the police, to the High Court, and that she failed to report child grooming, racism, bullying, assault, false imprisonment, theft, and breaches of the Computer Misuse Act 1990, contrary to the Fraud Act 2006.

Fraud by abuse of position

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, did abuse her position as a Barrister in that she (and others) perpetrated a series of crimes against Brian Pead during corrupt Hearings at the High Court in London and pursued a course of conduct amounting to the harassment of Brian Pead which he knew, or ought to have known, would cause him and his daughter and grand-children alarm and distress, contrary to the Fraud Act 2006 and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Fraud by false representation

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, did knowingly make false representations and submissions to the High Court and did provide false documents to the High Court in relation to Brian Pead, contrary to the Fraud Act 2006.

Misuse of Public Funds

That Caroline ADDY, a barrister with One Brick Court Chambers, on dates between 01 January 2013 and 25 September 2013, did misuse public funds in perpetrating crimes against Brian Pead and in allowing crimes and human rights abuses to be perpetrated against Brian Pead. She extracted monies from the public purse in the form of funding for Court Hearings and funding for her salary and misappropriated those funds by running Applications and Committal Proceedings which she knew to be contrary to law and in that she also allowed others to participate in unlawful Hearings and the cover-up of significant crimes.