JOIN the Community On Line and work for and with others in order to challenge and expose the abductors and rapists of Justice & Democracy. Access the exclusive page where your rights are covered and don't moan, ACT.

For full information about the facilities available to victims of authority access the two pages where the value and  the power of the written word is made clear. Citizens world-wide are finding out that RIGHT IS MIGHT. Page 1 covers the Community on Line facility. Page 2 covers the facilities for TRUE & UNADULTERATED reporting of that which the victims fall prey to, and the media gals and guys shove in the family closet as guardians of the rampant free for all in an allegedly civilised society that is founded and rests, allegedly, on principles of law and order.

We urge citizens to BEWARE of charlatans and fraudsters... [*Link 1] [*Link 2) [*Link 3]

VISITORS ARE URGED to access and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. We had no choice but to REPORT THE CRIMES TO THE TREASURY; our observations and knowledge of the constructive frauds made us accessories if we kept quiet, like the alleged victims who work towards the implementation of the schemes created by the abductors and rapists of Justice, the Goddess. Visitors / readers will find the addenda statement at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that all will share with us our concerns and most profound disappointment at and with persons who adopt and promote activities which they know are nothing but downright crimes. We refer to our exclusive page where we expose (as conscientious law abiding citizens) the Confidentiality Between Fraudsters that exists care of the BEST OPEN SECRET. 
Guidelines on Navigating through the extensive material: access instructions. 
As part of the reconstruction process our new pages and pages where changes and additions have been implemented, the improved / amended pages are endorsed with the link 'Page Changes and the date of the last changes. The link takes visitors to a List of the changes implemented in the page. These include new material and links from relevant paragraphs to other or new relevant material in other pages. For further clarification email: webmaster@ <>

These pages are dedicated to complaints and issues barristers are called to address as individuals and as a body who self regulate(s) the actions and the activities of its members. Inclusive of defaults, mistakes and or the wrongs members of the public suffer from and or have been the victims of consequential to and or in the course of such court proceedings as are questioned and/or ARE CHALLENGED accordingly by the citizens through the courts and through these pages because of the fact that such matters DO rest on PUBLIC DOMAIN documents, court Records.

Be not discouraged by anyone. BARRISTERS TOO are liable for the wrongs and the mistakes THEY MAKE when 'acting on behalf of clients the solicitors INSTRUCT THEM for, and or when solicitors acquiesce the wrongs and or mistakes barristers make.

REFER to 'The Guardian' newspaper,  Home News, page 3, of Friday November 3 1978.  Law Lords ruling:- "Barristers liable for negligence".  A classic example, of  DELIBERATE defaults to serve justice?  THE suppression of material facts and evidence by Barrister(s) in the Judith Ward - case*. The victim ended in prison as a result. Many years later she was released and compensated by the state (tax  revenue). Those responsible were never prosecuted. Of such practices and defaults UK Justice marches on unchallenged; for how long and as of when?  Our present government through the Rt. Hon. Paul Boateng, now Minister of State at the Home Office, promised that Labour was to attend to the problem of fraud in the 'legal SYSTEM'*. The first glimmer of positive actions are there, (1)  The Lawrence inquiry*,    (2) the Yard is investigating the untouchables* (lawyers and ...),   (3) Cowboy Lawyers* loose access to Legal Aid funds/facilities. 

TWENTY-FIVE years after the House of Lords   ruling we have as yet to see a body proper, from within the legal circles and or an independent AUTHORITY (a simple violation of Article 13 of the ECoHR) ready, willing, able AND prepared to look into the Maladministration of justice in the theatres of the courts maintained by the United Kingdom.  Within the courts' confines the rights of the citizens, under the LAW,  are treated with contempt and court cases are used as nothing but simple vehicles through which to generate (by design) income for the legal circles via 'abusive conditions imposed by persons holding public office, yet charged to administer and serve Justice, nothing else. Acting in their judicial capacities INJUDICIOUSLY through misconduct in public office; an indictable offence.

Blatant misconduct in public office* IS ignored by one and all irrespective of existing LAW the very courts are meant to administer.  We draw attention to such facts and realities through these pages.   It is the attention of the authorities and the media that WE SEEK; we do expect of them to act in the direction we are pursuing. The citizens to refer such issues to their Members of Parliament and to support our campaign. The MEDIA too, to cease the "let us keep it under wraps; let's throw it in the family closet; let's shove it under the carpets because we have no time to help sweep CLEAN our salons. We are busy attempting to expose alleged corruption in the back gardens of third world countries. Such mentalities as if our citizens rights are really affected by alleged third world country corruption.

On 20th July 2000, 'The Guardian' front page headlines simply  "UN report scorns UK human rights record".  We now know that we ARE not alone in proclaiming THE FACTS of life in our country. Interestingly criticism is concentrated on the effects of 'The Official secrets Act' that is used to stifle debate and to penalise writers and journalists who refuse to reveal their sources'.  'The Guardian' and all other newspapers should do well to read the letters exchanged between Mr Geoffrey H Scriven and the Defence and Advisory Committee; also our fair comment that arose consequential to the Court of Appeal ruling in 'The Downing Street Years'.

Now is the time for all MEDIA barons and editors to consider their duties to the electorate, to the public at large and to put an end to the suppression of material facts and hard evidence that is referred to them only to be ignored and or to be shoved in the family closet.  Now is the time for our newspapers to consider the activities in our salons and to let be the muck and rubbish in the back gardens of far away lands.  As promised in other pages we are to publish documented evidence in support of our statements. It will then be for the public servants who are retained and charged to administer 'The LAW' to cease ignoring the evidence and to deal with the criminal activities that the documented evidence covers.

Most interesting that the editor of 'The Firm' should come up with words that reflect our founders definition FOR TRUE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE (*Link). We reproduce the 'Daily Record' below, for the benefit of our visitors.

Scots advocates vote for their favourite Lords

By Michael Christie
m.christie@dailyrecord.co.uk

THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE AVERAGE

THIS is the judge voted Scotland's worst by the country's advocates. 
Lord Mancroft got bottom marks from advocates asked to rate the country's 32 full-time judges on a range of qualities.
And they singled out his bad manners for special mention, rating him only 2.7 out of 10 for courtesy and 3.05 for attitude.
Marnoch born Michael Stewart Rae Bruce, only made it above the halfway mark for legal ability, with 5.4 out of 10, and efficiency, with 5.05, but those rankings were still below most of his colleagues.
The survey was compiled by the legal magazine 'The Firm' and 22 advocates submitted marks. They each rated only those judges they had appeared before.
Their favourite judge was Lord Macfayden, who scored double the marks given to Marnoch.
The judges were rated out of 10 for attitude, courtesy, legal ability, efficiency, compassion and clarity.

HEROIN

Aberdeen University graduate Marnoch was appointed a judge of the Supreme Court in 1990.
He was criticised three years ago when he allowed Michael Scott, a former pupil of exclusive George Watson's College in Edinburgh, to walk free when caught with £16,000 worth of heroin, a 9mm pistol and six bullets.
Richard Draycott, editor of 'The Firm', said yesterday he believed such surveys were the best way to hold judges to account until the Executive imposed their own checks.(*F1)
He said: "At the moment they are seen as a law unto themselves. These guys hold very senior public offices and make important decisions."
"Our view is that anyone who holds public office and is ultimately paid by the taxpayer should be publicly reviewed of assessed in a regular basis".
"Politicians are - and we get our chance to have our say about them at election time".
"So we feel it is important and an issue that the justice department should take a look at".
Draycott added: "Our aim is that some of these guys will modify their behaviour. You hear about some judges who act quite unreasonably and unprofessionally in court".
"Perhaps this will make them modify their behaviour and that would make things run more smoothly in court".
But Paul McBride QC, vice-chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, dismissed the survey as more than "an amusing distraction".
He said: "They are in no way of any benefit to the profession. And nor is it to be assumed they are accurate".
Ranked second from bottom was former Lord Advocate Lord Mackay of Drumadoon, appointed in March 2000.
Just above him was former solicitor general Lord Dawson, who last month was revealed to be the judge with most convictions overturned.
At the other end of the table, Lord Macfayden's marks were near the top in every category, although he did not win any of them.
A Glasgow University graduate, he was appointed a judge in 1995. Before that, he advised the inquiry into the ritual sex abuse allegations on the Orkney island of South Ronaldsay in 1991-92.
Second in the table is controversial Lord Reed, who was criticised after sentencing a man to just five years in prison for raping a baby girl.
Welder James Taylor, 44, from Grangemouth, had his term increased to eight years by the Court of Appeal last week.
The Faculty of Advocates and the Executive refused to comment on the survey last night.

Copyright Daily Record, September 2004