Skip Nav | Home | Mobile | Editorial Guidelines | Mission Statement | About Us | Contact | Help | Security | Support Us

World

THE HYPOCRACY OF THE UK LAW SOCIETY [UNION]

ASTONISHING | 12.10.2006 08:11 | Analysis | Indymedia | Repression | World

The Law Society behaves like a monopoly power and attempts to MUZZLE THE PRESS BY STEALTH THROUGH TECHNICAL TACTICS IN COURT !

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND THE LAW SOCIETY OF ENGLAND AND WALES, UK.


The end of the double jeapordy rule came about recently.

However, astonishingly, the Law Society of the United Kingdom is in court, fighting for court papers to be “gagged”.

The Law Society won their injunction which prevents the media from gaining access to documentation of any case .

On 5th October the Law Society won an extention of injunction for another 28 days to 2nd November2006.


The evidence in court documents includes proof by primary evidence and proof by secondary evidence .

The main reason why the public should have access to court documents lies in the fact that documents in possession of third parties might throw light as to full extent of disclosure. It brings transparency to the court system.

Is the Law Society of the United Kingdom muzzling the press, stopping them from conducting investigations into documents which might have been perjured or often compromised?

One reason for this application for an injunction is that the Law Society may be trying to hide the facts of the hundreds of solicitors and barristers in the United Kingdom who have been convicted of fraud and other criminal offences and the Law Society may be attempting to protecting certain cases from being picked over- cases such as

R v Philip John Lewis [2006]; R v Richard Dawson [2006];R v Simon Rutledge [2006]; R v Timothy Miles [2006]; R v Brian Dugan [2006]; R v Stephen Sulston Williams [2006]; R v Angela Baillie [2006]; R v Stephen Sulston [2006]; R v John Martin [2005]; R v Michael Fielding [2005];R v Christopher Savage [2005]; R v Calum Blyth [2005]; R v Nicholas Pounder [2005];
R v Philip Huxtable [2005];R v Carsten Iversen [2005]; R v Susan Davies [2005]; R v Marylena Shuti [2005] ; R v Chris Christodoulides [2005]R v John Ingram [2005]; R v Ricardo Nardi [2005]; R v David Andrew Gatherer [2005]; R v Ricardo Nardi [2005]R v Gary Beales [2005]; R v Nicholas
Pounder [2005]; R v Christopher Savage [2005]; R v Donald Haling [2005];R v Haydn James Dodge [2004]; R v Timothy Robinson [2004]; R v Richard Dighton [2004]; R v Douglas Allan [2004];
R v Gavin David McCarran [2004];R v Richard McCauley [2004]; R v Roan George Sea [2004];
R v Andrew Arsine [2004]; R v Michael Lee [2004]; R v Ricardo Nardi [2004]; R v Andrew Nicholls [2004];R v John Greenwood [2004];R v Peter Lyle Sharp [2004]; R v Ruperella [2004]; R v Harjit Sangha [2004]; R v Timothy Farrant [2004]; R v Jennifer Hampton [2004];R v Paul Winter Morris [2004];R v Jeremy Cave [2003]; R v Shirley Harrison [2003]; R v Jill Radford [2003];R v John Tate [2003]; R v Basin Mohamed [2002]; R v Louis GATT [2001]; R v Miles McNulty [2001]; R v Donald Pirie [2001]; R v Michael James Palmer [1999].

And hundreds more..

Where there is self-standing evidence, the privilege rule is waived , if only we could see the documents.

The United Kingdom is still a class-biased country and the solicitors and barristers of the United Kingdom are mostly still from the middle and upper classes.

It can be argued that they are only protecting themselves, as Dicey, the constitutional lawyer wrote

“Men legislate..not in accordance with their opinion as to what is a good law, but in accordance with their interest, and this..is emphatically true of classes as contrasted with individuals, and therefore of a country like England, where classes exert a far more potent control over the making of laws than can any single person..

So true is this, that from the inspection of the laws of a country it is often possible to conjecture.. what is the class which hold, or has held, predominant power at a given time”







ASTONISHING

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

Good point but

12.10.2006 10:49

this bit:

"solicitors and barristers of the United Kingdom are mostly still from the middle and upper classes"

is not quite right... solicitors and barristers are middle class (even when they're upper middle class) - the real upper class wouldn't dream of working for a living....

pauper


DEVELOPMENTS AS AT 29TH NOVEMBER 2006...

01.12.2006 19:04

"The Law Society HAS WITHDRAWN THE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE CIOURT SERVICE TO BLOCK REFORMS THAT WOULD GIVE THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS FILED IN CIVIL DISPUTES IN ENGLAND AND WALES. THE COMMITTEE WHICH DECIDES PROCEDURAL RULES IN CIVIL CASES HAS AGREED THAT THE CHANGE SHOULD APPLY ONLY TO NEW CLAIMS LODGED AFTER OCTOBER 2ND,"))^. THE RULE CHANGE-MADE BY THE COURT SERVICE, A GOVERNMENT AGENCY THAT CONTROLS THE COURTS- WILL NOW BE BROUGHT INTO FORCE ON DECEMBER 18TH 2006. AND APPLY TO CASES STARTED SINCE OCTOBER.
IT HAD ORIGINALLY BEEN DUE TO COME INTO EFFECT LAST MONTH BUT THE LAW SOCIETY OF ENGLAND AND WALES WON A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION BLOCKING IMPLEMENTATION. THE LAW SOCIETY SAID IT WAS CONCERNED THAT LITIGANTS WHO HAD BROUGHT DISPUTES UNDER THE OLD REGIME WOULD FIND PAPERS LODGED AS PART OF THEIR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
CURRENTLY, PEOPLE ATTENDING SUCH COURT CASES ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS WHEN THEY ARE READ OUT IN COURT, AND IN THE UK, EACG COURT IS A LAW ONTO ITSELF AND EACH COURT INTERPRETS THESE RULES FROM IGNORING THEM TO SUBJECTIVE DECISIONS DEPENDING ON YOUR FACE WHEN YOU ENQUIRE. THE ROYAL COURT OF JUSTICE ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGER WILL NOT LET ANY JOURNALIST OR PUBLIC HAVE ACCESS TO ANYTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ANY CASE WHATSOEVER- THAT IS THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
THE UK IS A COWBOY COUNTRY WHERE THE LAW IS MADE UP AS THEY GO ALONG AND EACH MAN IS A LAW ONTO THEMSELVES. THE CLERKS OF THE UK RULE THE COUNTRY, REALLY.

MILLICENT


Publish

Publish your news

Do you need help with publishing?

/regional publish include --> /regional search include -->

World Topics

Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista

Kollektives

Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World

Other UK IMCs
Bristol/South West
London
Northern Indymedia
Scotland

Server Appeal Radio Page Video Page Indymedia Cinema Offline Newsheet

secure Encrypted Page

You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.

If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

IMCs


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech