Page Revised: June 20, 2012.
Note, please that all underlined text with an asterisk indicates a LINK at the bottom of the page
The Frank Cunningham - case (C.A.P)
We draw attention to another true case - reported in the Daily Mirror of May, 29 1997. Let it be a lesson to all who criticise and ALL who adopt patronising and or 'know-all roles' when they wish to deny, obstruct and VIOLATE RIGHTS in law of the citizens because of other ulterior motives. We invite those from within the Media, who elect to scorn the LIP (Litigant In Person - often branded Loonies In Person by licensed criminals) to browse this web-site and then let them justify WHY they elect to remain silent and or act as misinformed and prejudiced promoters of the wrongs and '....the sometimes corrupt.... corrupted justice...' as the Daily Mirror reasoned on 12 May 1992 when reporting 'the Judith Ward - case'*. Citizens abandoned as Mr Frank Cunningham; citizens denied their rights in law; Justice obstructed by and through the practices of the manipulators, those who abuser the legal system; a system tuned only to and for the greed of the legal 'experts'; the experts who target selected victims in pursuit of their very own ulterior motives and goals, as Mr Geoffrey Scriven deposes*.
The facts of life ARE inherent in the very real case of Frank Cunningham, the victim of the legal experts. He was DENIED LEGAL AID BECAUSE SOLICITORS REFUSED TO REPRESENT HIM. Social Security fraudsters, securing representation on Legal Aid (refer as to how to Daily Mail issue of 30 June 1997*) because the abusers of our legal system target the owners of private properties as in our Local Authorities pages we expose; do access Housing Scams*; read of those facts of life the United Kingdom.
Legal experts determined that Mr Cunningham's case was hopeless. Mr Cunningham stated in 1997, " There were times when I nearly gave up. But I carried on and have showed that, if you are not afraid, ordinary people can have a voice. Now I am thinking of doing a law degree". We publish below the page, from the Daily Mirror, with the article by Paul Byrne. Let the title and the heading be a lighthouse to all battling LIPs whose rights have been denied and violated by the manipulators of a system gone haywire, through the much revered independence of the judiciary and persons who misconduct in public office; particularly those whose priorities are how best to generate income for the circles from within which they arose to judicial chairs; do access and read our fair comment in the injunction application case, 'The Downing Street Years*.
We have recently been contacted by another 'accident victim'; abandoned by the legal experts for no apparent reason, safe the denial of proper representation against an insurance company that had already admitted liability, as the victim alleged to us; we are presently awaiting for documented evidence to publish on this page. The need for the public, and the world at large, to recognise the practices within the confines of our judicial theatres is very real. Blind, deaf and dumb Justice needs help*; manipulated by the experts in the puppet theatres, Justice commands attention. Another lady recently had her hands tied behind her, as Mr Scarth states in his case*. Forced to fight on his own through inequality of arms with his McKenzie friend gagged, unable to help.
We stated above that the media elect to scorn those who are caused to act as Frank Cunningham had to do. And in the process evidence related and given to them is ignored; it is shoved in the family closets; no one cares that the closet is bursting open because it can hold no more. Others brush the documented evidence under the carpets and never mind the fact the carpet is ceiling high and no more can be brushed under. We publish below two damning letters from two upright and honourable victims of a legal system hell bent to serve only the greed of the legal professions. The two letters were prompted by the article DIY Rampoles.... by Sophie Goodchild published in the Independent on Sunday, as we publish below. In the article references to G H Scriven and his case. Mr Scriven has no right of access to the presses of the Independent on Sunday or any of the other papers who received copies of his affidavits, his Statement of facts and COURT rulings and Orders; such documents must be suppressed by the Media serving the establishment; the citizens are still treated as serfs of the middle ages. Invariably reporters, their editors and the media barons have only one aim in mind.... and it simply is HOW BEST to preserve the status quo through disinformation and misinformation. All are attuned to the state of affairs and it suits their purposes, hence they wish not to stir the murky waters.
The latest damning report from the Legal Services Ombudsman* means and indicates nothing to the "Lets keep things as they are" brigade within. When they ignore the damning evidence, what use supplying them with oil lanterns to go in search of the truth in broad daylight? Knocking on a deaf person's door is but a wasted effort and exercise; one has to burst in especially if one has to save the very person from fire; like our Justice the person is also blind and cannot see or even feel the fire. OSTRICH ACTS and looking over the fences into the neighbours gardens as the references by Paul Johnson to other countries in the Daily Mail on 6th November 1998*.
Below the Independent on Sunday article on ignores articles the daily Mail published in 'YOU' magazine telling a different story about the citizens forced to act for themselves. For the time we simply point to the Frank Cunningham case above; we let you, the world Jury to decide about the quality of the Media and the dis-service they provide to the citizens in our alleged Democracy.
HAVOC Miss Goodchild ? WHAT ABOUT THE CHANGES in our judicial halls because of their determination to fight all the way to Strasbourg? Always following the systematic violations of their rights by the manipulators of our legal system! Why ignore their successes at Strasbourg against the state that is the second worst offender on Human Rights Violations in Europe? All thanks to the endemic misconduct in public office by persons who should know 'The Law' but choose to serve other interests instead of Justice. WHY not refer to the FACTS of life as pleaded by Mr G H Scriven* and let the readers of the Independent on Sunday decide? WHY treat your readers as persons who have no right to determine for themselves in an alleged Democracy? Why not refer to the Scarth cases all the way to Strasbourg* and the changes in the law and the court practices thanks to his determination?
Recognise the implications suggested in the title. The authoress knows not of explicit articles over the recent years in other publications. We do not propose to waste our efforts to 'educate the indoctrinated'. We publish below TWO responses from citizens who were disillusioned by the legal experts and these suffice. They know of the practices and that the 'milking the cow' is endemic in our legal system; it is the very cornerstone of the professional practices, entertained and instigated within our judicial halls as of the 'Bleak House' days; we pointed to the practice in our fair comment following the |Court of Appeal ruling in the Downing Street Years Injunction application*, when their Lordships ignored the Copyright Law for the occasion.
We let you decide which of the two responses we publish below never made it to the press. The other was chopped and edited by the manipulators and the experts at misinformation and dis-information. The media barons and editors serving pre-determined purposes in an alleged Democracy!
The letter below from Mr John R Jeffrey represents his views as a person who has been forced to act by and for himself against the giant Barclays Bank for the last eight years.
The two page letter below is from none other than Mr Norman Scarth. His tribulations have taken him all the way to Strasbourg. You read it; you decide about the calibre of people scorned by the illiterate of the realities of life in our judicial halls. Miss Goodchild and her editor should consider the implications of the words of Mr Richard Branson after his experiences in the Camelot High Court action in a matter of the libel. No sooner had he won the case and he proclaimed outside the High Court we believe, "BEST THEATRE I HAVE BEEN TO". We say no more except that Miss Goodchild should perhaps request of Mr Scarth to send her a transcript or two* of his cases within our courts AFTER ACCESSING AND READING his letter which we publish below, for the benefit of those with open minds, those who wish to be informed of the facts of life in our courts..
page 1 of Mr Scarth's response to the article in the Independent on Sunday
page 2 of Mr Scarth's letter in response
Page Revised: June 20, 2012.
Copyright subsists on all material on our web-site, owned by the authors of same.