h-rtitle.gif (7604 bytes)

Crime - Organised - Institutionalised - Corruption - Fraud - Protection Rackets, run and managed by judicial chair occupants, in a free-for-all state of abundance. Note below the arrangements between the administrative, the judiciary and the media; read of the all-embracing guarantee in place, in contempt of all law : the root shall be pointed to.

WHERE IS JUSTICE? Read below:-

"The court has inherent jurisdiction to stay an action which must fail; as, for instance an action brought in respect of an act of State"

*Link from here to founder's tribulations in 1972-75 and marvel at the creativity of allegedly honourable officers of Justice and the Law in the mother of all PSEUDOdemocracies

  • And by extension any act of any public servant who is appointed, retained and maintained by other public servants for all of whom, the state, as employer, is ultimately responsible, including abusers of judicial chair occupancy. Hence, the billions paid out as covered in the affidavit which visitors can link to directly from here [*Link].
  • Link also from here to the founder's conclusions as of 1972-75 when the great Metropolitan police were seen to be nothing but accessories to and abettors of the rampant fraud and corruption through the courts organised and processed to fruition while Members of Parliament were -as they still do- promoting the waffle that amounts to nothing short of:-

'independence of the judiciary to act in contempt of ALL LAW (national and international) in a pseudo-democracy.

*Link from here to proof of the parts the police play in promotion and expansion of the criminal activities instigated, processed and imposed on society by the legal circles. Read of assertions by a typical hypocrite, none other than the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Robert Mark QPM, when he spoke of FALSE RECORDS / FORGERIES by the legal circles while delivering his famous Dimbleby Lecture on BBC-TV in November 1973, 15 months after he received true copy of THE FORGERY advanced and promoted by the licensed criminals : solicitors and barristers for their evil ends in the case that opened Andrew Yiannides' mental eyes to the realities of life in the United Kingdom, a typical PSEUDOdemocracy. Can anyone enlighten Andrew and the millions of victims of the legal circles WHY NO PROSECUTION of the solicitors & the barristers in 1972 or thereafter?.

  • With such a facility in place (the words we point to above) and arrogant abuse of public office, can anyone assert, or argue, that Mr Andrew Yiannides, the founder of human-rights, was not right to determine that Justice has been abducted and that she is held captive in the dungeons maintained by her abductors who rape her daily in their courts? (>Hence the c reation of www.jusaticeraped.org <)
  • ALL Member States of the European Union are subject to the ruling which visitors, readers and researchers can access in the explicit page /yourrights.htm

*Link from here to the realities - in due course also a link to the warning (indirect but nonetheless very clear) for thinkers to recognise 

  • On 3rd March 2008 >someone's birthday< we released a House of Lords PRECEDENT CASE and reveal deliberations by their Lordships in respect of FRAUD - DECEPTION - CONSPIRACY & IMPLIED LIES BY KEEPING SILENT about any wrong imposed on any other.
  • >>> IN THE MEANTIME we have been naming and shaming a number who know of and engage in much more than just approve wrongs imposed on Mr & Mrs Average, the millions of taxpayers, in our allegedly civilised country / state / province / district of the European Union created by politicians, without reference to the taxed for fraud sucker-serfs, allegedly for the benefit of the citizens from FRAUD & CORRUPTION, among other promotions.

Needless to say the case entailed activities and practices by solicitors as Mr Andrew Yiannides was subjected to, decades later, by an old school friend, Mr Kypros Nichola of Nicholas & Co. in London. Mr K. Nichola bluntly abused the trust placed in him and indulged, in tandem with others, in criminal activities intended to cause the damages that were imposed on the targeted 'serf' by accredited - by the Law Society & Bar Council - allegedly Honourable Officers of the Supreme Court, the courts maintained by successive elected governments in the United Kingdom, one of many pseudodemocracies. In due course another revelation relevant to the arrogant 'inherent jurisdiction', through which to deny, obstruct justice & impose all manner of criminally created states on 'the serfs', who are taxed for the cost of maintaining criminals in public office, in pseudo-democracies.

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATE OF AFFAIRS, successive irresponsible Lord Chancellors and Home Secretaries who ignored and ignore all complaints and submissions by victims of the organised crimes we point to and expose in our pages, irrespective of the evidence and the law pointed to, by the victims of it all, the citizens who are called upon to pay taxes for the maintenance of criminals in public office.

[*Link from here to our exclusive page, covering confidential fraud as arranged THROUGH THE BEST KEPT OPEN SECRET in alleged democracies, European States. Elsewhere the foundations and corner stone upon which the operatives built the societies of their making using the bricks and mortar we cover in this and other pages. The visitor should not be under any illusion that the stars in the theatrical productions, covered in our pages were by any stretch of the imagination 'humans' who were / are gifted with any attributes that distinguish 'true humans' (>thinkers<) from animals.

Fraud in court  Council staff use Forgeries   Misconduct in Public Office. 2 cases relative to applicable law One Protocol says it ALL It betrays arrogant intentions Law Provides for THEFTS and it covers Judges too Judges' duties   TIME 4 CHANGE   & CHALLENGES Site CONTENTS - Table of Contents & ongoing work Your Rights & OBLIGATIONS to Society SITE SEARCH facility for any specific element / issue of concern to visitors / readers
COURTS : their Facilities Abused For ORGANISED CRIME : FRAUD Solicitor's Perjury & Victim Ignores it all Just like the Law Society always does Blackmailed or is it Just Conditioned & Subjugated Victims who join the club ? We name Lovers of blunt fraud through courts - Users of the facilities 4 illicit gains Local Authorities & FRAUD on 'serfs' the Taxpayers who are kept in the dark Police Party to & Endorsing Criminal Acts, Activities Arrogant Fraud FALSE Records & Contempt of Law by the legal Circles & Public Services The crafty ones & Vexatious Litigant PLOYS for the rewarded silent

* Information FOR victims who wish to co-operate by EXPOSING & CHALLENGING abusers of Public Office *

family.uk-human-rights justiceraped.org dssfraud.htm confraud.htm dadscare.htm contract.htm converts.htm MensAid
solicitorsfromhell.co.uk chancellor.htm theyknow.htm solfraud.htm sheknows.htm 4deceit.htm convicti.htm forward.htm

December 2006 - SUMMONS ISSUED & SERVED IN RESPECT OF FRAUDULENT & RECKLESSLY IRRESPONSIBLE ACTIVITIES & IMPOSITIONS THROUGH THE FAMILY COURTS

*Link from here to evidence. *Link also from here to a case when the abusers of the courts' facilities abandoned their plans for another targeted family

IMPORTANT INFORMATION for all victims of malpractice - misconduct - negligence, etc. TO NOTE

In the civil justice system in England and Wales, a judge presides over the proceedings that are argued by the opposing sides through the adversarial process. The process enables the court, judge, to reach a conclusion as to the truth of the facts in dispute. Thereat it is for the judge to apply the law to the facts proven, established at court.

The system as evolved is covered in the page 'English Legal System' and remains the same after the Woolf reforms.

An explicit Affidavit [*L] plus exhibits and
     letters to a Chief Inspector of Police
[*L],
          one to solicitors
[*L] and another to the Lord Chancellor [*L] evince
               ORGANISED CRIMES
(Access and read the letter to the police in September 2006 [*L])

Access & read from one of a number of letters to the Prime Minister : * I believe that New Labour will deliver us from the wrongs we have been suffering for far too long. Use of our resources in terms of human potential and capabilities can and should be channelled through rights not wrongs, through positives not through negatives. It is our produce and ingenuity we can sell to others not the minefields of corrupt and bankrupt public services. * [*Link from here to the page, note the steps taken to ensure the Prime Minister forwarded / delegated submissions and evidence received at 10 Downing Street to the right Minister / Ministry because the submissions were in respect of ORGANISED CRIMES

3rd March 2011 added link [*L] to the BBC-TV Dimbleby Lecture in 1973 as the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Robert Mark prepared & presented to the sucker-serfs

...

barristers.htm 4 Oct. 2004 KEY Page Changes 

Barristers  *Page first published February 1997*.
hrbnrsml.gif (1162 bytes)

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]

KEY to Page &  Site
Page PERSONS
Page VENUES & Events
Page ISSUES
Page IMAGES - ARTICLES
part 5

Page CHANGES   - List
1.  Page  Reconstruction
2.  Added News Article 2004
part 3

Page IMAGES   - List
The Guardian - 20 July 2000 'UN Scorns UK performance'
'Daily Record' - 28 Sep 2004 'Barristers conduct survey..'
part 3
part 4

Page ARTICLES   - List
Daily Record 28 Sept. 2004
part 2
part 3

Below 'The Guardian' newspaper front page headlines on 20th July 2000
unhrfcom.gif (77513 bytes)
On 28th September 2004, the 'Daily Record' was informing its readers that Advocates in Scotland took part in a survey, the results of which were published by the Legal Magazine, 'The Firm'.
adjucomr.jpg (183000 bytes)
We reproduce the article in this page and beg to draw our visitors attention to the words of the editor (*Link) that reflect the very elements that our founder first raised and spoke of in 1963. [*Link]  

Letters TO   - List
1. Editor of The Times - 1996
2. Lord Chancellor Aug. 1998
3. Home Secretary 12 / 1998
4. Prime Minister - 11 / 1999
5. Prime Minister - 12 / 1999
6. Frank Field MP - 4 / 2003
7. Haringey Council CROOKS
8. Fraudsters Club Recruit 01
9. Lap-dog -  LIPS Fraudster
10. Prime Minister - 2 / 2002
11. The Treasury - 2 / 2002
12. Home Secretary- 2 / 2002
13. Hackney Council CROOKS
14. Editor LEStandard 2/2002
15. ECoHR August 2003

In the NEWS   - List
1. Prime Minister -  1 / 2002
2. Home Secretary - 4 / 2002
3. Sir Paul Condon - QPM
4. J Stephens Dep. Com 1998
5. Sir John Stevens - QPM
6. Home Secretary - 5 / 2003
part 7
<>

Letters FROM   - List
1. Gov. Opposition - 1995
2. Prime Minister - 11 / 1999
<>

Page ISSUES - List
1. Barristers LIABLE, too.
2. Advocates SPEAK out.
3. Public Servants to account
4. Citizens have a CHOICE...
part 5
part 6

Page VENUES - Events
part 1
part 2

Page PERSONS - List
We are to include in our pages the names of persons who acted in breach of the law, public office and of the trust of the serfs who relied upon them to secure their rights in and at law [*Link to the page corruptcourts.htm & note what conditioned victims engage in care of the facilities in place that corrupt morons]

 

undercon.gif (1065 bytes) Page Revised: August 04, 2012 Layout changes, material from 'The Brotherhood' added
Site re-construction for better navigation.

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.

And on 28th September 2004, the Daily Record, informs its readers that a group of advocates, in Scotland, conducted their own survey about 'their' favourite(!) judges. Their contribution was initially published in the legal magazine 'The Firm'. The barristers initiative (!) could pave the way towards open discussion on the issues we have been raising for far too long. It is refreshing to note that there is activity from within the very circles who have been treating the citizens as of no relevance, in alleged democracies that allegedly rest and are founded in law and order, wherein the administrators act in contempt o al principles of law and morals (*Link to four explicit quotes on the issues).

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.

/ends

Copyright Daily Record, September 2004

dpphr95r.jpg (170761 bytes)

From 'The Brotherhood' by Stephen Knight

From the chapter on ‘The Law – Barristers and Judges’

    In England, the rank of barrister-at-law is conferred exclusively by four unincorporated bodies in London, known collectively as the Inns of Court. The four Inns, established between 1310 and 1357, are Lincoln’s Inn, Gray’s Inn, Middle Temple and the Inner Temple. Prior to the establishment of the latter two Inns, the Temple which lies between Fleet Street and the river Thames, was the headquarters of the Knights Temporal, declared heretics by King Phillip IV of France and wiped out during the early fourteenth century. There is a modern-day Order of Knights Templar within British Freemasonry which claims direct descent from the medieval order. From the beginning the men of law were linked with Freemasonry.
    Each Inn has its own library, dining hall and chapel. Thousands of barristers’ chambers are crammed into the large impressive eighteenth- and nineteenth- century houses. There are cobbled alleys, covered passages Gothic arches and winding stairs. There are gardens, swards, opulent residences and courtyards. All turning their backs on the outside world and looking into their own small world, redolent of dusty ledgers, moth eaten wigs, public school mores, black gowns, scarlet robes and all the ponderous unchanging majesty of the law of old England.
    Each Inn is owned by its Honourable Society and is governed by its senior members – barristers and judges – who are known as Benchers. The Benchers decide which students will be called to the Bar (that is, made barristers) and which will not. Their decision is final. As with so much else in British law, ancient customs attend the passage of students to their final examinations and admission. Candidates must of course pass examinations, which are set by the Council for Legal Education. But in addition they must ‘keep twelve terms’, which in everyday language means that on a set number of occasions in each legal term (Hilary, Easter, Trinity and Michaelmas) for three years, candidates must dine at their Inn. If they do so without fail, pass their exams and pay their fees they will then be called, and the degree, or rank, of barrister-at-law will be bestowed upon them.
    The Scottish equivalent of a barrister is an advocate, and the Scottish equivalent of the Inns of Court is the Faculty of Advocates in Edinburgh. King’s Inn, Dublin, is the Irish counterpart of the English Inns.
    In 1966 a Senate of the Inns of Court was set up as an overall governing body. Its first president was, not unexpectedly, a Freemason of grand rank: Mr Justice Widgery. Widgery had been Junior Grand Warden in the United Grand Lodge in 1961. In Masonry he went on to become Senior Grand Warden in 1972, and in the non-secret world to become the first Lord Chief Justice of England to have been a solicitor as well as a barrister.
    The Senate itself was superseded in 1974 by a new body which combined the functions of the Senate with the General Council of the Bar. This was given the name of Senate of the Inns of Court and the Bar and to its ninety-four members including six Benchers from each Inn devolved the duty to oversee the conditions of admission, legal education and welfare, and the authority to discipline and disbar, which was previously vested in each Honourable Society. The presidents since 1974 have been Lord Justice Templeman, Lord Scarman, Lord Justice Willer, Lord Justice Ackner and Lord Justice Griffiths. Of these, Waller is a Freemason of grand rank; Templeman did not respond to letters of enquiry; Ackner asked if he was a Mason, could 'give.... no information at all concerning Freemasonry; Griffiths in reply to the same question, regretted that he was unable to enter into correspondence on the matter raised; and Scarman did not reply.
    Gray's Inn has its own Craft Lodge - No 4938 - which has its own Royal Arch Chapter and which meets at Freemasons Hall on the third Monday of January, March, and October (its yearly installation meeting) and on the first Monday in December.
    Some specialized sections of the Bar have their own Lodges, such as the Chancery Bar Lodge (No 2456), constituted in 1892, whose membership comprises barristers dealing mainly in chancery matters and judges of the Chancery Division of the High Court. The Lodge meets in Lincoln's Inn Hall. Masonic barristers are among the hardest Masons of all to persuade to talk, or even admit to being Masons of the Brotherhood. Take, for example, the barrister with chambers in Gray's Inn who, unable in truth to deny membership, told me, 'I don't know in what circumstances you may or may not have been told and I am not in a position to discuss the matter with you in any shape or form.' While the Bar remains a masonic stronghold, there is not such a high proportion of masonic barristers as masonic solicitors, who are looked at in Chapter 21.
    One reason there was always less need for a barrister to join the Brotherhood is that barristers traditionally had the compensation of circuit life. One barrister told me: 'We are already a brotherhood in a sense. We are a small profession and are thereby very close to each other in any event, and don't really need the additional qualification of being Freemasons in order to be known among ourselves.' Despite this, Masonry remains strong. Why?
    The Bar is a strange profession in many ways, not least because most of the very top people do not want preferment, thus creating great opportunities for second-raters. I was first given insight into this phenomenon by an experienced barrister, a non-Mason, who had excellent contacts in Masonry. He told me, 'A top silk can earn between a quarter and a half million pounds a year. He will not thank you if he is promoted to being a High Court judge, because his income will drop by ninety per cent.* And with the prestige and respect in which he is already held, the automatic knighthood that goes with the appointment to the High Court would be neither here nor there. This applies to half a dozen, perhaps a dozen of the really household names.
    'And there has been considerable evidence, certainly since the war, that the appointments to High Court bench have been - with a few notable exceptions - if not second eleven members, at least the first rank of the first division. PARAGRAPH 'This was underlined with the appointment of Henry Fisher to the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court in 1968. Fisher had been an absolute top practitioner in City matters - commercial law and the like. He accepted the appointment to the High Court Bench, then two years later made legal history by resigning to go back into commercial life. He couldn't return to the Bar of course, but he went into the City as a company director. In 1973 he became Vice-President of the Bar Association for Commerce, Finance and Industry, and he has conducted several important enquiries, notably into the operations at Lloyd's. It has been said by his friends, although he hasn't said it, that it was just the loss of financial income that led him to resign, it was the horror at suddenly moving away from the most eminent businessmen  in the country and their really intellectually stimulating problems, and just sitting there trying criminals and listening to old ladies who get hit by motor cycles and claim a couple of thousand pounds' damages. Her didn't even have the patience to wait for promotion to the Court of Appeal as he was bound to get. And even if had got to the Court of Appeal, only one case in twenty is of any intellectual stimulation.'
    The top lawyers who don't want preferment are the specialists, those with outstanding ability and long experience in specialized branches of the law like patent law, Common Market law, restrictive practices, Revenue, Chancery, shipping and so on. These are the first rank of specialists, and for the most part have no ambitions to become judges.
    There are therefore never enough people of ability to fill all of the posts such as circuit judges, stipendiary magistrates, chairmen of employment tribunals, National Health Service commissions, and so on. First, the pay is is a fraction of what people of outstanding ability can command; secondly, they are often soul-destroying occupations. That of circuit judge was described to me thus:
    Can you imagine sitting there for eleven months of the year listening to people repeating that same old excuses as to why they have committed crimes? And then you can't even make a decision for yourself - you sum up to the jury, then the jury makes the decision guilty or not guilty. Even when it comes to your discretion on passing sentence, it's all on a scale, and if you exceed the scale you're either going to be reversed by the Court of Appeal or the Home Secretary is going to say that judges are not doing what they are told.** .... NOTE: We recommend persons who hare not read 'The Brotherhood to do so

FOOTNOTE to Chapter 20 - Barrister and Judges
    *   The annual salary of a High Court judge in 1982-3 was £42,500.
    **   Under the separation of powers, of course, the judges are not supposed to do what politicians tell them. (NOTE from human-rights:- BUT they are supposed to apply The LAW the elected representatives of the citizens HAVE PUT ON THE STATUTE)

*Link to a page where we publish revelations resting on the late Stephen Wright's research / investigations in respect of the connection of the legal circles to the Freemasons. 

FOOTNOTE common to most web-pages at this website
MOST IMPORTANT:- In October 2010, the coalition Government's Attorney General, in an interview published by 'COUNSEL' the mothly legal banter magazine, specifically spoke of the police distancing themselves from cases of (small-fry) fraud and he asserted that he was making that element his department's priority*

*Link from here to the evidence.

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, and IF IT WILL DEAL 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 they, 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 from here to our explicit submissions to (a) the Prime Minister, (b) the Chancellor / Treasury, (c) and, 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 from here to the letter

& 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 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..

PAGE FOOTNOTES:-

    1.   It is obvious that Richard Darycott has not been pointed to the arrangements ebwteen the Executive & the Adminstrative. On the other hand we are just faced with another half-baked potato and or dust in your eyes sucker-serfs. The arrogant declaration by the judiciary that they DO OBSRUCT ACCESS TO JUSTICE when the offending party is the state / the government; in effect any public servant. WE POINT TO & EXPOSE, at the top of most if not all webpages, the judges' declaration that is as clear as can be; yet no Government Official, NO MINISTER and worse NO REPORTER / NO NTELLECTUAL PROSTITUTE who has been pointed to 'the arrangermnst in place' has ever addressed the issue. EVERYONE  BURIED THE INFORMATION they benefited from in the dark corners of the caves they congregate in as followers of the teachings by examples stated in the most vile of works ever to have been misrepresented to mankind. *Link from here to just one of the vile scenarios from the vile owrk and after 'digesting' the evil act, consider the fact that the victim Veronica Beryl Foden engaged in far too many questionable activities and failed to cahhlenge and or expose the abuers of the courts facilitiwes for fraud aplenty.
    2.   xx
.
    3.   xxx
.
    4.   xxxx. 
    5.   xxxxx

    6.   xxxxxx

...

Links to:- Fraud in the Legal System   'The LAW'   Most relevant House of Lords* ruling COVERS reckless solicitors [*L] VERY IMPORTANT Precedent case*
Links to:- Your RIGHTS in Law    Misconduct in Public Office    The CAMILA Project          
Links to:  Lawrence Inquiry    Yard Investigates   Cowboy Lawyers    Judith Ward-case 
Revised:  August 04, 2012.    To HomePage    to Site Pages List    

...

The creator of this website was inviting victims to access URrights & join him there with other victims to expose & challenge abusers of trust & public office until the providers of the facilities >ning.com< introduced new terms and conditions for the provision of the facilities. Access from here and read of the imposed states by the brains behind ning.com and consider only one element "WHY OBSTRUCT & HINDER THE DOWNLOAD of the existing material at URrights.ning.com >the intellectual properties of the creator of that presence on the Internet and those who joined him there? Read below of the unacceptable conduct and behaviour by the reckless abusers of trust, who set out to obstruct and blackmail the creator of URrights.ning

Persons who are genuinely concerned and object to the ways they were / are being treated by alleged servants of the publicand the law >in any PSEUDOdemocracy, or whatever states / conditions they are subjected to< by abusers of public facilities and public office >as we cover in our web-pages< should contact webmaster@human-rights.org for information relevant to the creation of similar facilities for INFOrmation on URrights, for facilities for URrights EUrope and for a NETwork of URrights activists.

  • APOLOGIES to friends and persons who could not access URrights following the recent changes by the providers of the facility (ning.com) Andrew Yiannides created and used the portal to create the presence on the Internet for the group of victims / challengers who joined with him to expose and challenge the arrogant and blunt abuse of public services in all 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 servers THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL, were contemptuously 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 allegdely 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!
鼯font> 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
...