hrpolhar.htm          KEY 

Police Harassment Transcript *Updated 13 Oct 2011*
hrbnrsml.gif (1162 bytes)

 

KEY to Page & Site
Transcript pages - details
Page ISSUES
Introduction to transcript
part 4

PAGES - details / Links
page 1 - rt 1
page 2 - rt 2
page 3 - rt 3
page 4 - rt 1
page 5 - rt 2
page 6 - rt 3
page 7 - rt 4
page 8 - rt 5
page 9 - rt 6
page 10 - t 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6

Page ISSUES
1. The usual practices
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5

SECTION 4
part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6

undercon.gif (286 bytes) Site reconstruction for better navigation

VISITORS ARE URGED to acces and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. You will find it at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that you 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 criminal in intent. We refer to the exclusive Confidentiality between fraudsters page


  • The transcript below is
  • a typical example
  • of the area in which
  • the police,
  • in our country,
  • EXCEL.

Needless to say, they rely on the usual practices from within the legal circles, the professionals (solicitors and barristers when retained in such matters) and the courts, of course, to indulge as covered in the SKELETON ARGUMENT on appeal from the waffle delivered by HH DJ Lethem. Our founder's words 'the self perpetuating cancerous growth industry' were given solid skeleton and plenty of meat - the full substance of the activities through the courts, such as the scenarios proposed and elaborated upon by HH DJ Lethem. Contempt for the law and the evidence, as always shoved in the private closets of and by the Rampant Corruption Jockeys.

Between the two areas of Law Enforcement, Organised, Institutionalised, Fraud flourishes and Corruption runs rampant within the institutions. The offenders have the best supporters in the world, for the promotion of their illustrious and enterprising activities. They have the recruits to 'the fraudsters club' that we cover in our pages. Such persons act as well tutored mischief makers. They act as master deceivers. They act as dishonest in intent stooges and they do so for and in the interest of personal greed and rewards as 'blackmailed into submissions victims', and or as 'willing participants 'in the distribution of the national budget revenue', through the schemes we cover in our pages. At all material times the controllers and managers of CIUKU Enterprises ensuring the public at large is mislead and crime is promoted as  organised by the very circles, centuries ago.

For the present note the attitude of the well trained in contempt for the law,   'officers of law' enforcement'. NOTE the blackmail and in intimidation elements that were brandished about by such persons. Consider WHY crime and criminals have been on the ascent and advancing at the expense of:

  • the victims of crime
  • insurance institutions and
  • the budget that is called upon
  • to meet the ever increasing
  • costs for the theatrical productions
  • in the halls of abducted 'Justice' and
  • the cost of the compensation
  • schemes for and through 'organised institutionalised crime'.

THE TRANSCRIPT

---- P.1 --------------------------
A                          Transcript of conversation between
                                        Mr Roffey
                                            and
                        two police officers. PC Crane and WPC King
                                        16 August
B     WPC KING: We have come round to speak to you about matters in HSBC Bank. Right?
            Allegations have been made to us from them, from the original office stating that
            you've got an ongoing battle with them, that it's getting more than that now, it's
            getting out of hand, because you are now sending letters and videos, not only to the
            Bank, but to managers that work there, to their personal houses.
       MR ROFFEY: That's not -
C     WPC KING: I am just telling you what the allegation is, yeah? Basically, an allegation
            has been made to us of that. I am coming round here to warn you under the
            Harassment Act that if you continue to do that, you will be arrested.
       MR ROFFEY: Right. Which is the allegation and which house, please?
       PC CRANE: We are not at liberty to give you anything else.
       MR ROFFEY: No, no. Let's have my side. It's no good you walking in here and saying
D          that `I'm alleging, I'm sending something', without telling me who it is.
       WPC KING: We cannot tell you what house has been complaining obviously because -
       MR ROFFEY:  So, are we saying then, as far as the law is concerned, you come and
            accuse me of something and then turn around and say `we can't tell you who it is'?
       WPC KING: What I am saying is that I'm warning you under the Harassment Act. If
E          you are doing anything that continues, you will be arrested and you will then have
            a chance to be interviewed, when you would have a chance to put your side of the
            story across.
       MR ROFFEY: Right.
       WPC KING: Okay?
       MR ROFFEY: So what they are actually saying is that they can make their allegation like
F          that then?
       WPC KING: Yes.
       PC CRANE: They feel they have enough evidence, and our Inspector spoke to their
            regional manager, and they feel they have enough evidence. Initially, they
            obviously didn't tell us enough, but we said it might be a civil matter.
G     MR ROFFEY:  That's what I was told when I was trying to contact the police about
            fraud, that it's a civil matter, and they don't want to know about that.
       PC CRANE: When we were told that managers were receiving material at their home
            addresses, it actually came a criminal act under the Harassment Act. So what my
            colleague has done is given you a warning. If you chose to heed that warning, and
            you no longer you are obviously quite within your rights to have it out with the
            bank, HSBC Bank, because obviously they are a large organisation
H
                                           - 1 -
---- P.2 --------------------------
A     MR ROFFEY:   But what is the actual - you're saying there's an allegation, but not
             prepared to tell me what it is.
       PC CRANE: I'm not going to give you any personal addresses; that's confidential.
       MR ROFFEY: I don't want that, I don't want that.
       WPC KING:   It is letters and videos being received by two or three managers at their
             home addresses that they feel are threatening
B
       MR ROFFEY:  Then that's a lie. That's a lie. Let's put this down on record. Do you
             want to make a note of that, please? There's no videos or letters been sent to two
             or three addresses.
       WPC KING: I'm not here to get your side of the story.
       MR ROFFEY: No, you're accusing, or you come here to warn me about something that
C           I'm supposed to have done. I'm making a comment now that that is a lie. Would
             you make a note of that, please?
       PC CRANE: If you wish to I take it you've got solicitors that are acting on your behalf,
             do you?
       MR ROFFEY:  I'm not prepared to say anything about solicitors at the moment, because I
             don't know what you're going to say to them.  What I am saying is that what
D           they've said is a lie, if they're saying two or three addresses.
       PC CRANE: That's obviously - We sit on the fence, we don't know what's happened.
       MR ROFFEY: I appreciate that.
       PC CRANE: If you had made an allegation
       MR ROFFEY:  At this moment in time, you've come up and warned me about sending
             material to two or three addresses. That is a lie. Would you make a note of that,
E           please, that I've made that comment now.
       PC CRANE:  You've made a note of it.
       MR ROFFEY:  I know I've got a note here, but that might not be held. I know from this
             conversation, that's my record. Would you now make your record that I've said
             so.
F     PC CRANE: When we write, we have to fill out an official record which we log with our
             controller on our computer. We will log
       MR ROFFEY: I know it might sound as if I'm perhaps having a go at you, and I know
             you've got a job to do and you've got to act on it, but you just made a comment to
             me that I sent material to two or three addresses, which I haven't. So, that is a pure
             false accusation, so would you please make a note of that.
G     PC CRANE: Right. At the moment, it's alleged.
       MR ROFFEY: That's right.
       PC CRANE: Nothing's proven at the moment, but it's alleged.
       MR ROFFEY: That's something - could I just say something? Half of my problem with
             this Bank is the fact that I've got documentation here that they've forged what's
             the word, Carol?
H
       MRS ROFFEY: Fabricated.
                                              - 2 -

 ---- P.3 --------------------------

A     MR ROFFEY:    Fabricated, and now we're at it again. The accusation, you've come to
            my door, police car outside, accusing me of sending material to two or three
            addresses. That was your comment. It's not true. Take a note, please.  It's that
            simple
      PC CRANE: Okay. A note will be made.
      MR ROFFEY: Can you do it in front of me, then, so at least you can say that I've denied --
B      WPC KING:   Because I haven't got the relevant forms with me, they're back at the police
            station.
      MR ROFFEY:     You've got a notebook, haven't you?   Every police officer carries a
            notebook.
      WPC KING: It's not in that that it gets recorded. It gets recorded on our special
C
      MR ROFFEY: What gets recorded is that you've been here, making a so-called allegation
            that I've sent material to two or three addresses. I'm saying to you that that is a lie.
            I'd like that down on record now, because this is what I've put up with
      PC CRANE:   We're not going to put it down on record. That's obviously on your tape.
            We're not putting in our pocket notebooks. We are not here to argue the fact
            we're not here to argue the history of what's happened. We're warning you that
D           harassment is a serious offence if you don't heed our advice. If they receive any
            more material, any more material whatsoever you can deal with the Bank, that's
            fine, but if any employees receive any more material and they then put pen to
            paper and make statements, it is a criminal act, and we will come and arrest you.
      MR ROFFEY: So is it on that side then that they can say what they like from now on, and
            I'm left wide open
E     PC CRANE: They have to have evidence
      MR ROFFEY:    Excuse me one second   and I can be left wide open.  When you say
            evidence, I've got evidence here where they fabricated letters. If they can fabricate
            letters to me and I'm the person that knows what the story is, they can certainly
            fabricate letters to you, and I'm left wide open.
      PC CRANE: Obviously, you've got this all on tape, as you say. But, are you not dealing
F           with the Banking Ombudsman?
      MR ROFFEY:    No, it's a waste of time. There's no point in dealing with people like that.
            I'm dealing with a load of crooks at this Bank. I don't mind saying it. I'm dealing
            with a load of crooks, liars, cheats, thieves, drunks.
      PC CRANE:   Surely, unless you get an official organisation with you, you're one man
            against a huge organisation.
G
      MR ROFFEY: I know I am, and that's what they've come up against, one man prepared
            not to sit down and let them fight me. Do you know me at all?
      PC CRANE: Are you connected with the coach
      MR ROFFEY: It used to be my business, a million pound business.  I was put out of
            business overnight by an alcoholic. I had a ã³µ0,000 house that we were forced to
H          move out in six days. This girl's been crippled through it. There it is over there,
            look? [Demonstrating]  It is all down to a direct result of what this Bank done and
                                         - 3 -

---- P.4 --------------------------

A           the way they did it, make her a drug addict. Walk out that door, have a look at this.
             Look there. [Demonstrating]   That's morphine, a pint every two days. They're
             thieving, a load of liars, cheats, thieves, drunks and bullies, and the only way I've
             been waiting for you to come.  I knew this would be their next move. But what
             they're doing is making false allegations.
       PC CRANE: Unless you get a solicitor involved, or unless you get someone to back you,
B           you're going to be fighting that forever, aren't you, because they're a huge
             organisation.
       MR ROFFEY:    I know they are, same as British Leyland, and I beat them. Same sort of
             system. Liars, cheats, thieves. I beat them. The point is you've told me quite
             clearly that I wrote letters to two or three bank managers at their homes.
       WPC KING: No, an allegation has been made.
C     MR ROFFEY: I know it has. But that's what I'm saying, and that's a false allegation.
       `MPG KING:    We've come out here, we've warned you that if you are doing it and it
             continues, you will be arrested. End of story.
       PC CRANE:   If it's to the Bank as a whole, a corporate organisation, not to any more
             employees. I'm not saying you have, but there is -
       MR ROFFEY:    But are you saying that I can't write to an employee in my investigation?
D
       WPC KING: At their home address.
       MR ROFFEY: So they know they've left the Bank then?
       PC CRANE: No, because their responsibility as an employee of the Bank is finished.
       MR ROFFEY: That's it. They've still got information
E     PC CRANE: That is deemed as harassment.
       MR ROFFEY: What? That I write a letter. If you ?repeat this, and I want to call you as a
             witness, I'll write to you and that's harassment, is it?
       PC CRANE: You write through the organisation.
       MR ROFFEY: What organisation?
       PC CRANE:   The Bank. You write through the Bank.     If this goes to court I don't
F           know at what stage or what you're doing - your solicitor -
       MR ROFFEY: I'm not interested in solicitors; I'm doing it myself
       PC CRANE: That's up to you. You can no longer write to employees, either current or
             retired. If you do it again, it's harassment, it's a criminal act, and if you keep
             doing it, you'll be banged up.
G     MR ROFFEY: Oh well, we'll have to do that then. If that's what it means, I'll never get
             out. So what you're saying - what Act are we talking about that you're saying that
             if I write a letter to an actual employee asking for information
       PC CRANE: That's harassment, under the Harassment Act.
       MR ROFFEY:    What Act is that?
       PC CRANE:   I don't know what the actual official
H     WPC KING:   The Harassment Act 1997.
                                             - 4 -

---- P.5 --------------------------

A     MR ROFFEY: What you're actually saying is that if I write a letter to a Midland Bank
            employee that I consider was involved in my account, I want information from
            him, just because I'm writing that letter, that's harassment.
       PC CRANE: That's harassment.
       MR ROFFEY: Just because I wrote one letter asking for information.
       WPC KING:  If you write any more letters, it will be harassment.
B
       PC CRANE:  You can write to Mr J Bloggs, current Area Manager of HSBC, current
            employee, current responsibility for certain areas, but Mr J Bloggs, retired, or ex-
            employee, you cannot write to him.
       MR ROFFEY: Are you sure on that?
       WPC KING: Yes, we are.
C     PC CRANE: Definitely.
       MR ROFFEY: That I can't write and ask the question.
       PC CRANE: No, one hundred per cent.
       WPC KING: If you do, you know the score.
       MR ROFFEY: Are you absolutely sure that I can't write a letter?
D     PC CRANE: We know the law.
       MR ROFFEY:  I understand, but can you tell me again.
       WPC KING: We have, we've just told you that.
       PC CRANE: The Harassment Act was bought out mainly -
       MR ROFFEY: In 1997.
E
       PC CRANE: - because of all the problems with stalkers. Part of this Act deals with this
            area.
       MR ROFFEY:  I'm not a stalker.
       PC CRANE: That's why it was brought out, because lots and lots of women were being
            harassed and stalked. So they brought out an Act to cover it
F     MR ROFFEY: I know they're acting like a load of old women.
       PC CRANE: Well, at the end of the day, what we've done is that we've just told you. If
            you chose to ignore our advice, then obviously the next visit will be, once we have
            statements, then we will be arresting you. If you want to go down that route, that's
            up to you.
       MR ROFFEY:  Let me get this clear. As far as you're concerned, I cannot write a letter
G          to an ex-Midland Bank employee asking him questions.
       PC CRANE: That's correct.
       MR ROFFEY: That's harassment, just asking a question.
       PC CRANE: That's harassment.
       WPC KING: Okay.
H     MR ROFFEY: Can I have your names, then please?
                                     - 5 -

---- P.6 --------------------------

A     PC CRANE: DC Crane 9572.
       WPC KING: WPC King 10032.
       PC CRANE: We are both from Tunbridge Wells Police Station.
       MR ROFFEY:   Now that you are here then, what about if I say that they've been
            fabricating letters? What do we call that?
B     DC CRANE:   If they are fabricating letters, when you say `fabricating letters', what do
            you mean?
       MR ROFFEY:   I am asking for documentation, reference my account, and I've got the
            originals which they're not aware of, and they're fabricating letters of the originals
            to justify what they've done.
       DC CRANE:   If you can prove, if you've got an original letter stating, for argument's
C          sake, on 10 January you had ãµ°0 in your account, you're a good customer, and
            they're now saying that same letter on 10 January, you were ãµ°0 overdrawn and
            you were a bad customer, and you can prove that, then you've got to go to a
            solicitor and go through the civil courts.
       MR ROFFEY:  That's not fraud, then, they're not committing any sort of fraud then,
            altering documentation?
D     PC CRANE: First and foremost, you need to get a solicitor behind you, alright?
       MR ROFFEY:  I've made two complaints to the police now, one at Crawly, and one at
            the Head Office at Maidstone. They're not prepared to do anything.
       PC CRANE: Alright. So do you have actual evidence? You have the original letters
       MR ROFFEY:  I've got various letters here, where they've fabricated letters. I believe
            they have even altered bank statements to justify what they've done.
E     PC CRANE: If you feel the Bank has been fraudulent, then we're the wrong people to
            deal with that. What we are are PCs out on patrol. You need to talk to our fraud
            department.
       MR ROFFEY:  That's what I've tried to do, but they won't have them, so could you
            recommend they talk to me? They say they don't want to know about - you see,
            I've been on to the Department of Trade & Industry this morning, and like you say,
F          I'm a small cog fighting a big company, and a small cog, nobody wants to know
            about. You come here to say I'm committing an offence if I write somebody a
            letter, but if I want to say to you `I'm complaining about committing fraud', you're
            almost saying, we're not interested.
       PC CRANE: We will put on our computer records what we've done anyway.  We'll
            mark it up that obviously you are making allegations as to fraud -
G     MR ROFFEY: Fabricating letters.
       PC CRANE: Okay. At the end of the day they're trying to be fraudulent in terms of, if
            they know at the end of the day they've got to pay you ãµ°0, and they think `well,
            we're going to try and get away it', fabricate letters and pay you a tenner, that sort
            of thing, if they're trying to do that, then obviously we'll mark it up and tag it for
            our Fraud Department to look at it, but we're the wrong people to talk to. Alright?
H     MR ROFFEY: So, can you recommend one of your officers come up here and have a chat
            with me, then.
                                    - 6 -

---- P.7 --------------------------

A     PC CRANE:  What happens in the Fraud Department is that it goes on front of their DS
            who will look at it, and it'll be up to him to decide whether he pursues it or not.
       MR ROFFEY: You see, it might appear to you as if I'm being up against you two, and
            Fm not.  You've come over to do a job and I appreciate that, all right, and I
            appreciate you're working on a mistake, but there again, what I'm saying to you
            now is that they have lied already to you, which falls in line with everything what
B          they're doing.
       PC CRANE:  All I advise you is just deal with the Bank, and an employee whose
            responsibility it is to deal with these things at the Bank. Don't write to any more
            ex-employees, whether retired or whether working for another Bank. At the end of
            the day, you're not going to do yourself any favours at all. Alright?
       MR ROFFEY:    I appreciate what you're saying, but it doesn't strike me that writing a
            letter to an ex-employee, even if it was you doing your job, and I want to write a
C
            letter to you being a witness to me up against something, if that considered
            harassment is that what you're saying? Even as a policeman?
       PC CRANE:  If that person turns round and says `no, I don't like this' and makes a
            complaint, that's harassment. If that person writes back to you and without
            making any complaints, says `I'm quite happy to give you this information' -
       MR ROFFEY: When you said that person at the moment     let's get it right because, you
D          know, we're talking about right and wrong here, which at the moment I'm in the
            wrong in your eyes, so let's get it right when you say `that person', are we talking
            about the Bank now doesn't want me to write to ex-employees, or are we talking
            about a complaint from the Bank?
       PC CRANE: The Bank has identified all the employees that have dealt with your account,
            current and past
E     MR ROFFEY: Have any of these employees made a complaint?
       PC CRANE: I don't know whether we've got 20 or 30 statements. All that we've been
            told, because we're foot soldiers at the end of the day
       MR ROFFEY: I respect that you're doing your job.
       PC CRANE:  - is that officers have spoken to the Bank, and have spoken to the said
F          employees, and for us to be round here, statements must have been taken.
       MR ROFFEY: They have actually spoken to employees?
       PC CRANE: Yes. The Bank has now said that if you contact we're saying -
       MR ROFFEY: Does the Bank say that, not the employees saying that?
       PC CRANE: The Bank has informed us, and now we are saying that if you contact any
G          employee, past, present, whatever, retired -
       MR ROFFEY: So you're working for the Bank now?
       PC CRANE: No, we're not working for the Bank.
       MR ROFFEY: Well, you are if you're saying you're acting on behalf of the Bank.
       PC CRANE: Well, they've made the complaint, haven't they? They're complaining.
H     MR ROFFEY: Yes, but excuse me. I don't want an argument with you because I'm not
            trying to twist you up or anything else to try and beat you at words, but what I'm
                                          - 7 -

---- P.8 --------------------------

A          saying is, I'm fighting the Bank at the moment. Has the employee made a
            complaint to you, any of these employees? There's a difference. If the Bank is
            making a complaint to you, `don't contact our employees', I don't see that that's
            anything whatsoever to do with the Bank.
       PC CRANE: The employees have made complaints to the Bank
       MR ROFFEY:   Well, they shouldn't be making complaints to the Bank; they should be
B          making
       WPC KING: And to the police.
       MR ROFFEY:    Right, so now we've go it that there is the employees making the
            complaints.
       WPC KING: Right, we don't have to divulge this to you.
C     MR ROFFEY: You do, because you are accusing me
       PC CRANE: No, we don't.
       MR ROFFEY: Excuse me, I don't want an argument here, and I'm trying to keep on the
            right side of the law for obvious reasons. What I'm trying to say is, is it the Bank
            that's saying if I contact their employees, you're going to come round and arrest
            me, or is it an employee that is putting in the complaints?
D     PC CRANE:  We can stand here all day and argue. What I am going to say to you, and
            that's all I've said to you and I'm not going to say to you any more, we are not at
            liberty to divulge anything to you.
       MR ROFFEY: No, but you've come here -
       WPC KING: You have been warned, we have done our job, and we are going.
E     PC CRANE: We're going.
       MR ROFFEY:   In other words, you're walking away from something where I think I'm
            entitled -
       PC CRANE: There's no more for us to be saying.
       MR ROFFEY: You're shutting me up, like everyone wants to shut
       WPC KING: We're going round in circles.
F
       MR ROFFEY: You think you are, but I don't think I am. What I'm trying to say is, has
            an employee made a complaint about me?
       WPC KING: We have said we are not going to divulge that information.
       MR ROFFEY: So, what are you doing here then? Tell me who has made the complaint,
            please? I don't want to know the name and address. I just want to know, has the
G          employee made the complaint, or has the Bank
       PC CRANE: Employees have made a complaint.
       MR ROFFEY: Employees have.
       PC CRANE:  Employees have made a complaint to us, and obviously to the Bank, and
            that are retired.
H     MR ROFFEY: Are we saying I can't even write to the Bank now.
                                    - 8 -

---- P.9 --------------------------

A      PC CRANE:   No, I said you can write to the Bank. That is a corporate body. You can
            write to a corporate body with regards to any matters you are dealing with, so for
            argument's sake, an Area Manager, Mr Smith, for argument's sake, who you know
            is in charge of everything in regards to your complaint, you write to him. But you
            don't write to Mr Bloggs who you dealt with five years ago, who is now retired
            living down on the coast or somewhere. Right? That it. That's what we are going
            to do. We have other calls to go to.
B      MR ROFFEY:   I appreciate that. So we've got it said straight, you have had an employee
            of the Bank made the complaint.  It isn't the Bank complaining to you on their
            behalf
       PC CRANE:   We have had employees complain to us and obviously we have had the
            Bank because they have complained to us as well.  Joint complaints have been
            received and dealt with and that's why we're here.
C      MR ROFFEY:   That's all I wanted. My main point that I was trying to make there was
            that when you are fighting the Bank, I don't want the Bank using the police -
       PC CRANE: We are not fighting with anyone, you understand?
       MR ROFFEY:  No, but you start off by coming in by saying the Bank's made a complaint
            I'm contacting their employees. The difference there as I see it is the fact that I'm
D           fighting the Bank, and it's all very well the Bank utilising you, because they don't
            me contacting their ex-employees.
       PC CRANE: The Bank is quite within their rights, whether statements have been taken or
            not from employees.      As a corporate body responsible for current and ex-
            employees' welfare and with regards to the confidentiality of their addresses, they
            are well within their rights to say `leave our employees alone, will that person
            leave them alone'. Again, that all comes under the Harassment Act.
E      MR ROFFEY:   I appreciate what you're saying. I can't see it's anything to do with the
            Bank if it's an ex-employee, because an ex-employee is an ex-employee. I can't
            see that the Bank can utilise the police
       PC CRANE: You have to ask how you got ex-employees' addresses, and whether they
            actually dealt with you personally at home when you
       MR ROFFEY: I've got earlier addresses for obvious reasons because I need them for my
F           case.
       PC CRANE: So, the point has to be asked how you got those addresses, and whether data
            protection is breached, so we're getting into other areas.
       MR ROFFEY: I found them by being like you are -
       PC CRANE: We are not prepared to discuss it any more because we do have other calls
            to go to.
G       MR ROFFEY: All right. As I said, it's the same old story. The power is pushing down the
            little person.   I've got this one hundred per cent right? It's the employees who
            made the complaint.
       PC CRANE: It doesn't make any difference.
       MR ROFFEY:  It does to me
H
       PC CRANE: Goodbye, sir.

                                 - 9 -

---- P.10 --------------------------
A    MR ROFFEY: Thank you.
          This tape was made on 16 August, and you heard the two police officers who
          arrived here telling me their names and numbers.
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
                                - 10 -

bbbb

 
FOOTNOTE:-
Footnote eXtra: In October 2010, the coalition's Attorney General, in an interview published by 'COUNSEL' specifically spoke of the police distancing themselves from cases of (small-fry) fraud and asserted that he was making that element his department's priority. IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN, WHAT the coalition of the Con-LibDems, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY, WILL IN FACT ATTEND TO THE RAMPANT FRAUD. IF IT WILL DEAL APPROPRIATELY with the criminals who abuse public office, especially when faced with appropriate submissions and claims that will be delivered in due course. Visitors/readers are urged to read the article published in the London Evening Standard, as settled by the Rt. Hon. David Blunkett, Home Secretary in 2003 [*Link from here to the article we reproduce in another webpage and consider "Why tolerate the arrogance of the legal circles who had and have the audacity to assert to the lawmakers that the lawmakers have nothing to do with the law"]. While there, above it, the explicit letter to ex-Minister, the Rt. Hon. Frank Field MP, delivered a few days earlier. ALL alleged victim-challengers who contacted Andrew Yiannides, by the time the letter was sent to the Minister, received copy of the letter just as they received copies of other letters submitted to government maintained Ministers and other official appointees to public office. Accessing the material pointed to from the letter (URLs) is of utmost importance. It should assist 'recognition of the citizen's rights at work', when called upon properly in truly democratic states. The above in 2003; there were other 'submissions' and among such civilised and, within the law, approaches by citizens that led to the right actions by governments, the explicit challenges when we set about exposing one of the most evil of alleged victims of the legal circles to have ever contacted us [*Link to our explicit submissions to (a)  the Prime Minister, (b) the Chancellor / Treasury, (c) the Home Secretary. WE acted so after we had secured more than enough evidence about the parts of an alleged victim whose only interests were (i) the rewards under the table FOR KEEPING QUIET about the ORGANISED FRAUD THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES and (ii) her parts in blunt attempts that were intended to discredit the person she was sent along to mess about with, Mr Andrew Yiannides]. Access please the letter to the Home Secretary, the Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, in December 1998 [*Link* [*L] from here to the letter] and note the results evinced in the newspaper article (Hornsey Journal) also within days of the letter reaching its destination. Many the charlatans and stooges -lovers and 'promoters of the system as is'- on the job for decades; one and all acting as sold souls always do [*Link [*L] from here to the evidence we point to relative to the parts of one of a number of sold to the system fraudsters who were sent along / introduced to Andrew Yiannides by the managers / organisers of the LIPS crowd / mob].
   1.

<>

<>

mm

<>

..

Back to HomePage  Back to Page Issues  Back to Page KEY

New page released in October 2011 resting on a FAX many fraudsters-club-recruits received in 1999 >IMPORTANT WARNING / HINT <Access www.justiceraped.org & follow the articles by Diogenis searching for 'humans' >THINKERS< 2400 years on

APOLOGIES to friends and persons who could not access URrights following the recent changes by the providers of the facility (ning.com) Andrew Yiannides used to create the presence on the Internet for the group of victims / challengers of abused public services in allegedly civilised societies > PSEUDODEMOCRACIES <.
The changes related to the introduction of charges for the facilities, included the facility for ning.com to archive the material at URrights; also the facility to download the archived material to the creator's system (computer) while the creator and his group of friends considered which of the level of charges and service the group was to adopt.
HOWEVER the creator, Andrew Yiannides, WAS UNABLE TO DOWNLOAD THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL and all attempts to engage the providers and their staff in reasonable explanation as to WHY THE FAILURES TO CONNECT / DOWNLOAD from the ning.com system THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL, were ignored.
Emails to the Publicity, to the Promotion, to the Public Relations, also to the Chief Executive's Office merited no response whatsoever from anyone acting for ning.com
In the circumstances Andrew will appreciate any information related to the problems covered above. Andrew will also appreciate any information relative to exchanges with or email postings, from ning.com to existing members.
EXISTING URrights members, victims of the legal system, victims of solicitors and the courts should access the updated pages at .org/solicitors.htm and .org/solfraud.htm by using the links from the list below.
Below pages where we expose known lovers of it all, users and maintenance engineers of the system as is
.org/1999dfax.htm .org/1ofmany.htm .org/2lipstalk.htm .org/4deceit.htm .org/absolute.htm .org/abusers.htm
.org/account4.htm .org/actors.htm .org/actors2.htm .org/adoko.htm .org/bankers.htm .org/beware.htm
.org/blunket1.htm .org/chaldep1.htm .org/confraud.htm .org/contract.htm .org/convicti.htm .org/courts.htm
.org/corruptcourts.htm .org/crimesin.htm .org/dreamers.htm .org/evesused.htm .org/evilones.htm .org/famfraud.htm
.org/govolso.htm .org/guesswhy.htm .org/len.htm .org/mauricek.htm .org/media.htm .org/solfraud.htm
.org/solicitors.htm .org/someplan.htm .org/someploy.htm .org/thefacts.htm .org/theproof.htm .org/thenerve.htm
.org/twisted.htm .org/uaccount.htm .org/ukmm.htm .org/uwatchit.htm .org/watchit1.htm .org/yourtax.htm
Every single person we name and expose in the above pages elected to ignore THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO REPORT (to 'the serfs' = 'the taxpayers'), THE ABUSERS OF PUBLIC OFFICE & PUBLIC FACILITIES. All were/are relying on the Intellectual Prostitutes, from within the media, to keep it all in the family closet.
All, as typical twin-tongue hypocrites carry on complaining about the media for failing to report & for suppressing the facts and the realities they allegedly reported to the hard of hearing, to the otherwise committed angels blowing their silent trumpets for decades, all ready and gearing to welcome the expansion of the New World Order.
Of such parts the contributions from and failings of the persons we name and expose, AS IF THEIR OWN SILENCE, THEIR FAILURES  & THEIR BLUNT OBSTRUCTIONS to the work and other actions by the creator of this website, Andrew Yiannides, treated by one and all as if non-existent with the exception when the wily Norman Scarth, set off to abuse the trust he was allowed to benefit from, while his parts and questionable activities / performance were under scrutiny, specifically after HE FAILED to publish the full transcript of the Court of Appeal hearing HE WAS ALLOWED TO RECORD* [*Link from here to the food for thought page created by Andrew Yiannides, in the first instance].
Not one ever bothered to address the issues we expose in the explicit page, despite the fact that we have been pointing all of our contacts, since May 1992, to it all.
Visitors, readers and researchers are urged / invited to access and read the letter which the Hon. Secretary of the Litigants In Person Society, Mr. Norman Scarth sent to the founder of human-rights, Mr. Andrew Yiannides, reproduced in the page .org/4deceit.htm* [*L]
The author's statements, such as 'what for and why seek additional assistance', thereby spelling out his parts as a lover of it all.
Common sense dictates, that he should have directed his request to his partners in deceptions aplenty, one & all engaging in fraudulent misrepresentations AND NOTED TO HAVE, WILFULLY, BEEN SUPPRESSING, FROM THE TAXPAYERS, THE FACTS OF LIFE RELATIVE TO THE RAMPANT ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES as the failure of all to co-operate as covered and pointed to at:- [*L]. One and all fallen to the facilities for fraud aplenty on the taxpayers and the corruption of illiterates in law, the conditioned victims of the legal circles & courts who fall to the blackmail element attached to the REWARD for keeping the realities away from the taxpayers; just like the media and the Ministers responsible for the application of long existing law to the criminal activities we cover in our pages, do.
All the while one and all were / are engaging in the scenarios we cover in the exclusive page, which page the author of the letter which Mr Norman Scarth sent to Andrew Yiannides, afforded us the opportunity to address the issue of the contributions of his partners and affiliates in fraud aplenty on the taxpayers; despite the reminder one and all, named in the new page simply shoved it all in the dark corners of their devoid of grey matter skulls, their perverted / corrupted mind(s)

> MOST IMPORTANT <
On Sunday morning, the 19th September 2010, the Deputy Prime Minister, leader of the Liberal-Democrats in the course of the BBC TV politics programme, spoke of the coalition government's commitment to address the element of waste and fraud through the public services sector. We trust and hope that the elements we expose in our pages and the parts adopted by the conditioned victims of the legal circles, the persons who engage in PROMOTING & EXPANDING THE ONGOING CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD ON THE TAXPAYERS, THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES, will be on the top of the list of government priorities.
Visitors, readers & researchers are urged to access the letters to Minister Frank Field [*L] after he had been directed by the Prime Minister to think/do the unthinkable.
Link also from here [*L] to the explicit letter to the Home Secretary in December 1998 with submissions arising out of the RAMPANT HOUSING BENEFIT FRAUD
On Tuesday 23rd November 2010, 'the Guardian' in its Comment&Debate page carried an article by Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister. In the evening of the same day the Deputy Prime Minister addressed a large audience at Kings place in respect of the government's changes on university students fees / loans.
Access from here the page where we reproduce an image of 'the Guardian' article & consider the simple fact that we, alone, have been asserting and proclaiming our objections to the theft of funds from the national budget leading to the ever-increasing annual deficit in the state's balance of payments.

ACCESS:  http://www.justice-uk.human-rights.org/ (For an important message at this Community-on-Line web-site) & thereafter,
Access also http://www.law.society.complaints.and.human-rights.org/ (Judge instigates Fraud On Tax Payers - he knows not the difference between 'imposed' & 'no undue influence'). APOLOGIES FOR THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THIS WEBSITE.It appears that the beneficiary of the work, both for applications to the courts in the United Kingdom and the submissions to the European Court for Human Rights* [*Link from here to the Statement of Facts submitted to the ECoHR], arranged with the providers of the free web space to erase the Intellectual Property of Andrew Yiannides, the founder of the human-rights Community-on-Line, without any reference to the creator of the website and owner of the Intellectual Property!
NOTE: The human rights Community on Line facility is no longer available by NorthSky.Com because the owner of the domain >human-rights.org< took steps to put an end to the abuse of the trust the officers and the staff of NorthSky.Com engaged in, in breach of the corporation's agreement with Andrew Yiannides the owner of the domain and the person whose concept was put to all victims of the abused courts facilities as far back as 1997 when the need to produce video documentaries for submissions to the media was also acted upon, by the proponent, Andrew Yiannides. Andrew acted after the managers/controllers of the LIPS crowd/mob endorsed the proposition. However, the allegedly concerned 'organisers of the LIPS mob, failed to co-operate and act as their false tongues allegedly endorsed. ALL victims of abused public facilities, especially the courts services should access [*Link] the page where we publish evidence most relevant in the SUPPRESSION OF THE TRUTH & REALITIES from the taxpayers.
© Copyright subsists on all material in our web-site, owned by the authors of same.
Visitors can refer to these pages in any non commercial activity, so long as attribution is given as to source. License to use, for commercial or other specific use of the material, shall have been secured in writing first, from the owners of any property and material from these pages. No material shall be reproduced in any form and by any means without prior agreement and or license in writing from the copyright owners. The Press are invited to contact us if they wish to publish material in the Public Interest, As We Do.
For any problems or questions regarding this web-site contact:  webmaster

Last modified: October 13, 2011