FORGERIES freely used

	Sign In Sign-Up

This web-site is dedicated to the memory of the niece of our founder; a fine young lady who was caused to take her own life because of her father's, and his clan's, cruel attitude to her needs. Read about the circumstances that lead to the tragic loss of that life. Consider that it was all because of GREED. Precisely what our legal system serves for the operatives through ILL legal services care of our legal experts and the modus operandi from within. (access.... /summons.htm)

SIX months before taking her own life that fine young lady proclaimed to our founder :- "I can't understand it uncle everyone thinks of bricks mortar and money NO ONE CARES ABOUT PEOPLE".

All underlined text with an asterisk indicates a LINK at the bottom of the page

We publish a list of citizens who came forward with the evidence the Law Enforcement Agencies ignored and or endorsed while criminals were benefiting. The solicitors as promoters and accessories during and or after the introduction of the FORGERIES, and or as aidors and abettors thereafter WERE and still ARE JUST AS GUILTY of the offence. The judges, in each and every instance (we report and publish) simply rewarded the legal Mafiosi for and because of their joint intended purposes which Mr Geoffrey Harold Scriven deposes of succinctly and clearly in a MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST.*

The Legal/Judicial Mafia operating freely through the much revered independence of the judiciary* . The judges acting injudiciously in their judicial chairs, while the investigative branch of the law* was doing nothing for years. FORGERIES* as blatant as the forgeries our founder, Andrew, was the victim of, were ignored by the police and the Courts. The instruments were never referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions by any party from within the Law Enforcement Agencies. All the while the lawyers and the barristers were silver lining their pockets through alleged civil proceedings proper. At least one solicitor, on OATH declared A SPECIFIC (document) INSTRUMENT precisely what it was (link next line). Simply, A BLATANT FORGERY. By definition in law it was nothing else*; it did not exist at the time of the events that gave rise to the High Court action. THREE years later it was 'procured' but the criminals made a mistake, and 'their instrument' was endorsed with a date as of the year of the high court writ and not as of the year of the events that lead to the issue of the high court Writ. The date on THE INSTRUMENT, thereafter was AMENDED to the previous year, the year of the events. That amendment and the simple fact as to WHY it was 'procured', USED and relied upon by the legal experts established INTENT TO DEFRAUD, and or to prejudice the proceedings through deception and use of the instrument. In that instance, as in many others, THE METROPOLITAN POLICE defaulted to act as the law provides. Thereafter themselves accessories and abettors after the fact; just as the 'judicial persons' sitting in their chairs turning a blind eye to the obvious, the amendment on the document before them; an instrument, which in any event the fraudsters had admitted in letters AT THE TIME OF THE EVENTS (that lead to the institution of proceedings) DID NOT EXIST.

British Justice, BLIND DEAF AND DUMB* declared the Daily Mirror on 12 May 1993. Deaf to the statements of at least one of the solicitors who declared on affidavit the fact that the INSTRUMENT born years later, indeed WAS a forgery. All legal 'experts' were incapable of referring A BLATANT CRIMINAL activity (intended to mislead and to defraud) to the Director of Public Prosecutions. It was only natural, of course, because THEY WERE ALL UP TO THEIR NECKS IN FRAUDULENT COURT PROCEEDINGS. And those who rose to public office 'in judicial chairs' KNEW IT. Why should ANY of them refer THEIR OWN CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES to their colleagues in arms? The legal professions? To the relevant Public servants who should AND MUST PROSECUTE them, even now, because CRIME is not statute barred. All were busy milking the cow; their intended victims; the litigants; at least one of them because the beneficiary of the FRAUD in the course of alleged legitimate legal proceedings could OUTLAST FINANCIALLY the intended victim of all. And the solicitors who actually procured and PROMOTED THE FORGERY dared declare the intentions of all on affidavit. Thus confirming the adage "... the law grinds the poor(er) to a halt ...." and we add "....or to an early grave, as many victims of the violations of sections 134, 135, 136 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, inevitably do".

Our courts are simply there to create conditions through which to generate income for the circles* from within which our judges arise to 'judicial chairs'; most certainly not to judicious positions. The C.o.A ruling and the 'directions on the occasion of the injunction application in "The Downing Street Years"* case established that issue in the most profound manner. We repeat our observation and FAIR comments below; we are entitled to such under International Law; never mind the authority of the 'demigods' sitting in their justice halls, the theatres the revenue providers meet the cost of along with their high salaries.

WE all know how such cases are conducted and how long they take! HOW DOES ONE ESTIMATE OR QUANTIFY DAMAGES IN SUCH AN INSTANCE? Better still HOW MUCH DO LEGAL BOFFINS MAKE OUT OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS? ("Best theatre I have been to..." (court) Richard Branson after the Camelot, libel/slander action).

Copyright subsists on all material on our web-site, owned by the authors of same.