State funded Criminal Justice System gravy train is out of control and
hurtling towards a collision with natural justice and basic Human Rights.
All pretense at providing a system where defendants can have a fair trial has been dropped. The State now has so innumerable laws which have striped citizens of their rights and exposed a despotic and cruel State agenda of total control. The guilty elite are protected from prosecution whilst the innocent are hounded stripped of their assets and jailed.
| Leon Brittan former Home Secretary and well know peodophile protected by the State and the whole criminal justice system which jailed his victims to silence them |
The Courts and their entourage of barristers and lawyers now preside over an inherently corrupt system encompassing both the criminal and civil courts.
Judges can now be bought or blackmailed and are being recruited from a cache of QC's who obtained their privaleged positons by distorting the truth and hiding evidence. The best lairs in the system now win again and again.
Legal professionals with integrety are being expurged from the system as the
balance of justice is weighted heavily in favour of the State and away from the people. The deception that Justice is for all has been dis-guarded by the privileged few and their professional legal henchmen.
But Justice still lingers on within the corrupt system as the decision on 1 May by Judge Leonard QC at Southwark Crown Court demonstrates.
Conor Gearty a Professor of Human Rights Law and Director of the Institute of Public Affairs at the London School of Economics and Political Science wrote
"Judge Leanard ordered a stop to a complex fraud case on common law and human rights grounds and this ruling is of the very highest significance. The evidence in the case (against five defendants with three more to come) was complex, over 46,000 pages. This was to have been an early example of such proceedings taking place under a new Ministry of Justice dispensation which is intended to deliver such litigation for 30% less fees than legally-aided counsel had hitherto received. This might sound good on the floor of the House of Commons and at Tory party conference, but we do not have a nationalised legal service, and nor do we live in an open authoritarian state where professionals can be relied on to do as they are told. Many corrupt professional do but they have not yet taken over the whole system.
"Judge Leanard ordered a stop to a complex fraud case on common law and human rights grounds and this ruling is of the very highest significance. The evidence in the case (against five defendants with three more to come) was complex, over 46,000 pages. This was to have been an early example of such proceedings taking place under a new Ministry of Justice dispensation which is intended to deliver such litigation for 30% less fees than legally-aided counsel had hitherto received. This might sound good on the floor of the House of Commons and at Tory party conference, but we do not have a nationalised legal service, and nor do we live in an open authoritarian state where professionals can be relied on to do as they are told. Many corrupt professional do but they have not yet taken over the whole system.
Solicitors for these defendants tried over 100 sets of barristers, a public defenders’ service and some ninety solicitors’ firms that have lawyers who can argue in court. None were willing to act. Moreover, try as he did, the judge could not work out how the case could ever be heard, and there being no realistic prospect of this, a full stay on the proceedings rather than an adjournment was what was called for.
The legal basis for the decision is rooted in English common law which is determinedly committed to a fair trial, and this is reinforced by the Human Rights Act 1998 which expresses the same idea in terms of a right to a fair trial (in Article 6) and in particular through the guarantee each person has (in Article 6(3)(c)) ‘to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require.’ The effect of the stay on proceedings is likely to be that they will never go ahead since Article 6 also requires trials to be held within a reasonable time"
Of course the system has been subverting the right to a fair trial by more devious means for some time by using Restraint Orders against defendants which prevent then for using their own money to pay for legal representation of their choice.But the overt cuts to Lea agl Aid now show the States determination to remove all semablance of justice from its cisitzens. They, the paedophiles and organised gangsters mascarading as a democratic State, have determined let thier victims know they have no chance of fighting the despotic rule they live under.
By Andrea Davison
David Camerons brother and Judge agree British people accused of fraud can not have a fair trial http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2617829/David-Camerons-legal-aid-cuts-thrown-chaos-Prime-Ministers-brother-wins-court-case-against-them.html and http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2014/05/06/serious-fraud-trial-abandoned-because-of-cuts-to-legal-aid-for-defence-representation/
Pro Bono helpers are subject to pay the States costs http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10775631/Costs-ruling-in-family-court-penalises-those-helping-wronged-parents.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
We welcome all points of view but do not publish malicious comments. We would love to hear from you if you want to e-mail us with tips, information or just chat e-mail talkingtous@hotmail.co.uk