The judiciary of England & Wales is guilty of the most severe perversion of justice imaginable and have been aided and abetted by other Public Authorities, Media Organizations, Downing Street and several Members of Parliament.
In an attempt to cover-up the death and circumstances leading up to the death of a 14 month old baby, the judiciary have engaged in the criminal act of false imprisonment and attempts to section and silence the victim of their criminality.
Subjected to many years of abuse and violations of his rights guaranteed by law at the hands of the Metropolitan Police Force and the Judiciary, the father of the baby (Mr. Caul Grant) acting under duress and self defence (when all the abuse became too much) imported 45 Kilos of Cannabis into the UK, in hope he could bring the issues before twelve ordinary members of the public.
However, at his trial in December 2003, the trial judge, Judge Pratt deliberately misdirected the jury by telling them that Mr Grant’s motives were completely irrelevant and that “there is no defence of justification in English law”. This is despite the fact that the Defence of Justification (Lawful Excuse) had been successfully used before in the UK by Greenpeace activist as far back as 1999.
More contradictory is the fact that in September 2008, at Maidstone Crown Court, the jury cleared six Greenpeace activist using the same defence of Justification again (See Micheal McCarthy, Enviornment Editor, Independent 11/09/2008).
Even more alarming, Judge Pratt further went on to tell the jury, that if they acquit Mr. Grant “no other court or jury could stop him or convict him of anything”.
Now Mr. Caul Grant, has remained unlawfully locked up in prison for over five years without having had the right of appeal against being wrongfully convicted for the importation of 45 Kilos of Cannabis.
He is now being detained for a further 18 months for not being able to pay a confiscation order in the sum of £85,000.00.
The judiciary has become judges in its own cause and therefore can not offer the necessary level of fairness, impartiality and independence for justice to be done. Until or unless issues of judicial lawbreaking and corruption are resolved and judicial integrity restored, beyond a reasonable doubt, all matters conducted before the judiciary of England and Wales, whether civil or criminal, will be unlawful, because a lawbreaker cannot be a law enforcer.
Subjected to many years of abuse and violations of his rights guaranteed by law at the hands of the Metropolitan Police Force and the Judiciary, the father of the baby (Mr. Caul Grant) acting under duress and self defence (when all the abuse became too much) imported 45 Kilos of Cannabis into the UK, in hope he could bring the issues before twelve ordinary members of the public.
However, at his trial in December 2003, the trial judge, Judge Pratt deliberately misdirected the jury by telling them that Mr Grant’s motives were completely irrelevant and that “there is no defence of justification in English law”. This is despite the fact that the Defence of Justification (Lawful Excuse) had been successfully used before in the UK by Greenpeace activist as far back as 1999.
More contradictory is the fact that in September 2008, at Maidstone Crown Court, the jury cleared six Greenpeace activist using the same defence of Justification again (See Micheal McCarthy, Enviornment Editor, Independent 11/09/2008).
Even more alarming, Judge Pratt further went on to tell the jury, that if they acquit Mr. Grant “no other court or jury could stop him or convict him of anything”.
Now Mr. Caul Grant, has remained unlawfully locked up in prison for over five years without having had the right of appeal against being wrongfully convicted for the importation of 45 Kilos of Cannabis.
He is now being detained for a further 18 months for not being able to pay a confiscation order in the sum of £85,000.00.
The judiciary has become judges in its own cause and therefore can not offer the necessary level of fairness, impartiality and independence for justice to be done. Until or unless issues of judicial lawbreaking and corruption are resolved and judicial integrity restored, beyond a reasonable doubt, all matters conducted before the judiciary of England and Wales, whether civil or criminal, will be unlawful, because a lawbreaker cannot be a law enforcer.
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
not sure
17.01.2009 00:17
I strongly urge anyone thinking of getting involved to read it its very enlightening.
In his own account he blames everone (except for himself) for the fact he got nicked for "spray painting" a window, er thats a confesion of criminal damage if ever I heard it, and so he got nicked, quel suprise!
He then goes on about "trying to stay awake because of all the deaths in custody" and then found a cop "creaping" into his cell, well I have been in cells, if they CANT see you breathing they come in and check, they HAVE to, its in the rules and they have to write it down in a record that is open to scrutiny.(it's in PACE or chat with the gaoler next time your in)
In one wonderfull line he shows that those who disagree or judge against him are part of a huge conspiricy, but those that agree with him or have to look into the matter further are obviously not corrupted yet.
I find this version of events both askew and biased, with no evidence presented to back the claims further than a rather childish "there not on my side" ranting.
please look it up and make you OWN opinion.
Harry Purvis
Beware of Potential State Agents and Anchors!!!
17.01.2009 09:00
But why if you are neutral on the issue and not coming from either the corrupt authority or related party's perspectives, why did n't you simply paste, link or reference the relevant material for all to see for themselves so as to form their own informed opinion rather than having to rely on your interpretation.
I would say do everybody a favour and paste the material so that we can have a good laugh if all Mr. Grant's claim of Unlawful Imprisonment affected by Justice Toulson on behalf of his brother/brother's law Firm interest were untrue.
The public is no longer gullible and settling for potential (paid or unpaid) agents and advocates of the state planted to disinform and confuse matters both wittingly and unwittingly.
A. Balogun