Request for information Thank you for your e-mail of 9th February 2012, in which you asked for the details of the OPG’s indemnity insurance. Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). The OPG does not have indemnity insurance. As an executive office of the Ministry of Justice the OPG is covered by Crown Indemnity. This is because the cost of insuring the Civil Service against all potential liabilities would, in all probabilities, outweigh the actual cost of the claims themselves. Crown Indemnity applies to all civil servants, acting in an official capacity and during official time. You can also find more information about the Freedom of Information Act by reading the full text of the Act (available at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents) and further guidance http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/freedom-of-information.htm. You have the right to appeal our decision if you think it is incorrect. Details can be found in the ‘How to Appeal’ section attached at the end of this letter. Yours sincerely, Paul Pendleton Knowledge & Information Liaison Officer

BOXING DAY night off to work to do some Christmas DJ compere and Karaoke work hope everyone is enjoying the festive period as we are and looking forward to newer and brighter year ahead, all the best to our friends and family, especially those who have dearly supported us through a very trying 2013.

Your message
To: National Crime Agency Programme Inbox
Sent: November 17, 2013 7:50:38 AM (UTC) Greenwich Mean Time: Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London was deleted without being read on December 24, 2013 8:49:54 AM (UTC) Greenwich Mean Time: Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London.

2010- Videos about the serious oppression of HM subjects


READ VOL 1(888pages) & READ VOL 2(932pages)

20 December 2013 at 13:50
Tory MP Douglas Carswell said: ‘We have a serious problem in this country with quality control when it comes to judges.’Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526136/Struck-judges-caught-pocketing-1-5million-legal-aid-handouts-Money-missing-three-years-abuse-detected.html#ixzz2nwztvolr
Kain Knight to host London seminar on Court of Protection cost management
The seminar, which is free of charge, will be held at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in the City of London on Thursday 16 January 2014, with registration from 8.00am http://www.legalfutures.co.uk/associate-news/kain-knight-host-london-seminar-court-protection-cost-management
TRANSPARENCY IN THE FAMILY COURT AND THE COURT OF PROTECTION http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Speeches/pfd-speech-society-editors-11112013.pdf
The Earth Needs Rebels Show Kevin Bull Monday-Friday 1-3 PM ET Sat 9-11 AM ET / Sun 8 AM -12 PM Orion Archive Page www.freethinkingvoice.org theearthneedsrebelsshow@freethinkingvoice.tv Email theearthneedsrebelsshow@freethinkingvoice.tv

Dear (JUDGE)Peter Jackson
Ref CoP Patient WITH capacity -10370284 Ann Clarke
I hear on the grapevine from a friend present, that you, were last night at the London School of economics giving a talk, part of which referred to your salary of £180,000 per year as a Judge.
Can I just say that after 17 years of unpaid care to my mother, we are, as you are aware, currently living in exile from Judicial corruption right at the very top, and your £3000 per week salary all sounds very nice and very cosy... what I would like to do is just place you temporary in more of the real world, just for a little while, for you to see what effect judicial corruption is having on us mere, common mortals.
At present it is one week before christmas in which I wish for you to grasp the seriousness of what is happening at the hands of you & your associates, after being on the run at several different addresses, my mother(73) and me(54) firstly we have no christmas tree, there are no presents, there is no decorations, there is nothing in the fridge but milk & I have no fuel in my car.
THE continued theft, fraud & mal administration with criminal neglect goes on and on, whilst we are trapped in a poverty hole in exile sitting uncomfortably considering, how you ring fenced my mothers property so she could not sell it, is just another added insult to our plight.
You breached the wills Act and you breached article 8 of ECHR.
Can I ask what is your £3000 weekly pay for?? If you are to Judge and are to pass out orders surely they must contain an ounce of common decency for the laws of the land.
You may sit there and say I cannot enter into any correspondence but I can and I will, this will be posted on our website to demonstrate the real crimes being committed in the treasonous acts now becoming the norm in the UK.
sovereign man
mikeclarke: this is judge jackson talking one week ago and in this video he confirms he has no training on family law and thus the court of appeal is noting.. @19mins 45seconds in watch it

READ ALL ABOUT IT where one of the 2 judges concerned still sits as a Judge in the Blackpool courts whilst being a criminal. Tory MP Douglas Carswell said: ‘We have a serious problem in this country with quality control when it comes to judges.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526136/Struck-judges-caught-pocketing-1-5million-legal-aid-handouts-Money-missing-three-years-abuse-detected.html#ixzz2nv9gDJBN Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

You're a sick senior citizen and the government says they are going to sell your house to pay for your nursing care. So what do you do?
Our plan gives anyone 65 years or older a gun and 4 bullets. You are allowed to shoot four Politicians.
Of course, this means you will be sent to prison..... where you will get three meals a day, a roof over your head, central heating, air conditioning and all the health care you need!
Need new teeth? No problem. Need glasses? That’s great. Need a new hip, knees, kidney, lungs or heart? They’re all covered.
As an added bonus, your kids can come and visit you as often as they do now.
And who will be paying for all of this? It’s the same government that just told you that they cannot afford to pay for your nursing care.
And you can get rid of 4 useless politicians while you are at it.
Plus, because you are a prisoner you don't have to pay income tax.
What a truely great country the Uk is !

2013 DEC 15
READ what lawyers and judges will not tell you about juries.



Judge Denzil Lush residence... 3C Pennsylvania Park, Exeter, Devon EX4 6HB. If he decides to block your email as he has mine then drop him a line here as we have.

READ a Lush letter by recorded delivery. Name them and shame them!
They can run but they cannot hide. How much did the porch cost Denzil?, I suppose that's irrelevant eh, as my mother probably paid for it!! Looks like a nice bit of freemasnry/illuminati.

LOOK's like the Judge ain't too keen on receiving his mail?(29/12/2013)

Perhaps we will have to have it hand delivered and certified!

2013 DEC 13 To DENZIL LUSH & CoP & Agents
Under common law
Regarding Patient 10370284 my mother ANN CLARKE who has capacity and myself the carer MIKE CLARKE. 13/12/2013
Dear Sir
We write to advise that we are to embark upon a private prosecution & claim of yourself, inclusive of the Court of Protection & its agents. We hereby attach the basis for our claim of £9 million, a commercial lien outlining our allegations.

We now request full disclosure of all documentation in its entirity! (ie; full detailed accounts, letters emails etc.)

We hereby request your insurers and indemnity policy and also hereby request you notify them of the circumstance that will now lead to a claim.

We have suffered 13 years of hell at your hands.

Regards, Mike & Ann Clarke 31 Cherry Tree Rd Blackpool FY4 4NS
email mike@rake.net mike@opg.me
websites: www.opposepredatoryguardians.com www.opg.me www.courtofprotection.me.uk

2013 DEC 12 EMAILS with a Legend NORMAN SCARTH age 88
On 12/12/2013 17:20, Norman Scarth wrote: > Thank you Mike. > Though your address was in the message as it came to me, I did intend to include you as Bcc, but inadvertently left it in the Cc box as well. Sorry. > Though not having had anything to do with the Mental Capacity Act personally, I HAVE suffered at the hands of the Legal/Judicial Mafia & their tame shrinks. > You may or may not know of me, in which case you might like to go to Youtube & type my name. Also, see www.normanscarth.blogspot.com though it only goes up to July 2012. A technical glitch means I have not been able to record the diabolical happenings since then. > On 23rd January this year, Lord Chief Justice Lord Igor Judge (NO LESS!) imposed two prison sentences on me. Fortunately, I had had the good sense to flee the land of my birth & seek safety in Ireland, so was able to cock a snook at him from over here. > So frustrated was he at not being able to get his hands on me, in his Judgment he let slip that had I been present, rather than prison sentences, he would have 'BEEN KEEN TO GRASP' a 'MEDICAL DISPOSAL', words chillingly reminiscent of the 'Final Solution' (to the 'Jewish Problem') > All the best, > Norman Scarth. READ my blog. FOLLOW up email to LORD HARDIE from Norman SCARTH
On 12/12/2013 13:31, Norman Scarth wrote:
To The Rt Hon Lord Hardie.
Chairman of the House of Lords Committee of Inquiry into the Mental Capacity Act.
Like Mr Hofshroer, I am disturbed by the case of the baby forcibly ripped from its mother's womb without her consent.
Shocked to learn of this grossest assault, occasioning 'Grievous Bodily Harm', I am also worried about the effect this is likely to have on the mental health of the mother, AND for the future of the unfortunate child.
The fact that this can take place in a 'hospital' is terrifying: Thoughts of Dr Mengele come to mind. Will that case (with its evidence) be included among those which your Committee will be publishing before Christmas, or - because it involves 'named individuals' - has the Committee decided it is 'not within your remit'? Sincerely, Norman Scarth (WW2 veteran, born 1925, Proud to be British until the age of 70, when I began to learn that this is a ruthless, lawless, murderous & merciless Police State,just as bad as Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia, but less honest, the victims fewer - AS YET!)
Mike to Norman
Dear Norman I am well aware of you Norman and some of your history of problems have been documented in several places on our campaign website of; www.opg.me Inparticular if you scroll down the left column to March 3rd 2013 you will see an entry http://opg.me/NormanScarth.pdf and also July 13th 2013 http://opg.me/emailsonsectioning.pdf My heart goes out to you in your own fight for justice I too have had an unjust unlawful court impose a prison sentence but we fled into exile from the corruption. Regards, Mike & Ann Clarke
Norman back to Mike
Don't worry about my 'plight' Mike - I have never been happier with my life, better able to fight back from here in Ireland. Having come through 18 years of persecution stronger than ever, I now feel that 'Problems are Opportunities in Reverse'! The fact that Quislings will go to such lengths to silence one little old man is the highest compliment they could pay me. No country & no person was ever perfect, certainly not me, but Britain today is far worse than it should be. I am not so much seeking 'Justice' for myself (even God does not provide perfect justice), but just 'doing my bit' to expose the corruption which is rampant, particularly in the courts. I was only able to open the first page of opg.me, then it froze, but I saw enough to see you are also 'doing your bit'. NIL ILLEGITIMII CARBURUNDUM! Norman.

READ how Lord Hardie of the mental capacity act select committee investigating the abuses of the mental capacity act rejects our submission in another example of fraud cover up of ongoing abuses because he said, 'it contains named individuals'! I have now written back to Lord Hardie to ask is now too late to remove the names so it then becomes a redacted submission in order to re-submit what we consider very valuable and important submissions for consideration and thus await his reply. ALL the people involved that I know of have had their submissions rejected for the same reasons. Its just an entire whitewash and a cover up of evidence probably because LORD HARDIE is a party to the crimes being committed.



England’s most senior family law judge has issued a strongly worded clarification of earlier guidance on the use of prison sentences for contempt of court. Sir James Munby is President of the Family Division of the High Court. In May he issued succinct official guidance on prison sentences in such cases, entitled ‘Committal for contempt of court’. The guidance was firmly focused on the principle of open justice in both family cases and the Court of Protection. The latter makes judgements on behalf of people with learning and similar difficulties.
The guidance declared: “It is a fundamental principle of the administration of justice in England and Wales that applications for committal for contempt should be heard and decided in public, that is, in open court.”
The judge noted that while both the Court of Protection and the family courts, when dealing with children, have the power to hold hearings in private, but he stressed that this should only be done “in exceptional cases where is it is necessary in the interests of justice”. The involvement of children or sensitive material is not sufficient reason in itself to hold hearings behind closed doors, the judge stated.
Paragraphs four and five of the guidance state that closed committal proceedings should always begin in public, and if the court then decides to go behind closed doors, it should give a judgement setting out the reasons for continuing the hearing in private.
When courts do impose prison sentence behind closed doors, they should identify the person, and state their sentence and nature of the person’s contempt in public.
The President wrote: “This is mandatory; there are no exceptions. There are never any circumstances in which any one may be committed to custody without these matters being publicly stated.”
Section 6 of the guidance stated that every case in which a prison sentence or suspended prison sentence is issued for contempt of court, a transcript of the judgement must be made available and published on the BAILII legal judgement website.
In June, Sir James Munby issued supplementary guidance, further emphasising the need to only hear cases in private when doing so in the interests of justice.
Now, the President states, “a question has arisen to “whether paragraph 6 of the original Guidance applies in all committal cases or only in cases to which paragraphs 4 and 5 apply” – ie children’s or Court of Protection cases heard in private.
Sir James in unequivocal: “Paragraph 6 applies in EVERY case in which a committal order or a suspended committal order is made, WITHOUT EXCEPTION.”
The President stressed: “The principle is very clear and MUST be rigorously followed.”
No one must ever be sent to prison without proper details being made publicly available via the BAILII website, he stated.
“We shall be subject to strong and entirely justifiable criticism” if anyone is ever sent to prison without the publication of such details, Sir James declared. In my case the Judgement was not published. WHY? Remedy from private prosecution... READ

Sir James Munby has said family hearings should be held in public, that social workers should be named in court, and that families who feel wronged should be able to speak out publicly, so do it and do not listen to the threats and manacing of the state child stealing agents who should all go to prison including the Judge who made this decission, his own son a drug addict, no wonder with a father who can order this obscenity! Record all dealings with any state agents, all of them for your own protection and to protect your children from this kind of criminal act.

listen to meeting 07.02.2011 Not for the first time in what could be a collusion between our internet server and Pannone we find some files deleted or missing and they appear to be the direct recordings of meetings with HUGH JONES and thus we raise the profile here of a reposted meeting from February 2011 containing a serious insight to events that unfolded at the time. In this meeting you might begin to understand the family fall out through the lack of a proper care payment to me the carer.

READ about laymans view of the court of protection and once accepting the above, a once closed mind might then accept that the abuse of vulnable people has been happening behind closed doors for decades. If it all leaked out there would be a great public outcry. So ‘in the public interest’ kicks in where it states that if the information damages the ‘trust’ in an LA or other authority, it would not be allowed in the public domain, hence the need for secrecy as in family courts. Problem is that most people tend to keep their heads down and not confront certain subjects wrongly believing it could never happen to them. Hence while the cat sleeps the mice will play. But one day it has a good chance of happening to them. They may quite rightly believe they will never end up in a family court. Though it could only take a messy divorce. That person with the head in the sand, could have a breakdown, have a skiing accident, be a car crash or may just end up elderly with Alzeimers, Parkinsons or any other dementia. At some point in anyones life, you will spend a time of being vulnable So ok, lets look at the family courts again. Does anyone really want to ignor the problem, be sold on the idea that some people deserve to lose their children and by secret courts


link coming soon


READ 4 pages about the real truth behind the birth certificate and how to escape Tyranny, Treason and corruption.

READ Michael Adebolajo, reasoning and statement as to WHY? Adebolajo said he was ashamed to be called British because it was associated with the "murder, pillaging and rape of innocent people". Adebolajo told the detectives that British soldiers were being sent to "Muslim lands to commit mass murder". He said: "The reality of Muslim land, it's full of men who, like myself, are soldiers of Allah."
In an earlier interview, the murder suspect told officers the "leaders" of Britain were "wicked, corrupt, selfish and oppressive" and he was "particularly disgusted by David Cameron, the Miliband brothers and what's-his-name, Nick Clegg". He added that people do not realise the "wickedness and corruption" of former prime minister Tony Blair.
Occasionally revealing his face to the camera's view, Adebolajo said: "It's for those people who have not yet understood the nature, the nature of the war that's ongoing and has been on going for some many years between the Muslims and the British people." He went on: "The proof that this war between the people of Britain and the Muslims is that unfortunately it has to be interpreted in this way simply because your leaders, you have leaders who rule over you, unfortunately they rule over you in a very wicked, corrupt, selfish and oppressive manner." Adebolajo discussed politicians gathering in the House of Commons and paying tribute to soldiers killed in Afghanistan "as a disgusting practice".
He said Prime Minister Mr Cameron was "trying to emulate the footsteps of Tony Blair as if he worships him".
Well far be it from me to condone the death of Lee Rigby which I simply do not but the corruption felt by us at home in the UK definately ties in with what the man has said and alot of that makes sense to me. Perhaps this is the sort of justice that should be handed out to the politicians that have in reality caused Lee Rigbys death!!, but not to forget you can also add to it the root paymaster generals of the BANKERS & ultimately where it all leads back to, The root of all evil is politicians/money.

On the 11th October 2013 I wrote an email and a fax to PANNONEs to request their indemnity insurance details to which under SRA(solicitors regulatory authority) RULE 18 they have 7 days to respond and guess what no response! They have a duty to inform their insurance of 'any circumstance' that may lead to a claim! Today we will write to the SRA to make a formal complaint.

More media interest taking place at this minute that hopefully will assist in exposing the CORRUPT BRITISH JUDICIARY whom are persecuting great grand mothers for cash, not to mention KIDS for CASH scandal!! Put that along with non UK visiting persons sedated to have her baby ripped from her womb where when she wakes its no where to be seen and is placed up for adoption!!! We are in a JUDICIAL crisis of TYRANICAL proportions that the UK is getting away with what they are doing!! READ MP John Hemmings blog

READ a defence of interest.

READ Top family judge orders social workers who insisted mother have caesarean... Explain why you snatched baby girl at birth Sir James Munby has demanded answers in extraordinary case The child was taken from the 35-year-old Italian in forced caesarean The case shines light on murky secrecy of Court of Protection Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2517144/Top-family-judge-orders-social-workers-insisted-mother-caesarean--Explain-snatched-baby-girl-birth.html#ixzz2mMpl3xwW Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

2013 DEC 2 The House of Lords Committee
READ about the meeting taking place tomorrow 3rd of December 2013. Having spent the past six months hearing evidence from those directly affected, their carers, doctors, lawyers, care homes, local authorities, regulators and the judiciary, among many others, the Committee will next week challenge Ministers on why widespread non-compliance is going apparently unchecked.
The Committee will ask what the Government is doing to achieve the ‘revolution in public attitudes and practice’ expected as a result of the Act; to fix the failure to apply safeguards to those who may be deprived of their liberty in care homes and hospitals; to improve professional practice, holding to account those who fail; and to ensure that the NHS responds effectively to the MCA and that the Court of Protection is fit for purpose.

Without CONSENTwatch

& Laws Are Frauds? Paul Webster, Casino Money laundering?

2013 DEC 2 Woe unto yea LAWYERS (91 pages)
READ Woe unto yea LAWYERS. The legal trade, in short, is nothing but a high-class racket. The legal racket knows no political or social limitations. The common law is the set of rules that lawyers use to settle any dispute or problem to which no constitution or statute applies.

READ freeman of the land claims.

READ about Michael Doherty and his moves to bring private prosecutions against the police a huge step nearer. Two police officers have appeared in court accused of burglary, kidnap and false imprisonment after a judge granted the alleged victim the right to bring a rare private prosecution. Sergeant Gareth Blackburn, 38, and Detective Constable Stephen MacDonald, 42, were summonsed to appear before Westminster Magistrates Court to face a string of allegations related to an arrest they made on a man suspected of harassing a colleague in September 2008.


SENIOR MASTER JUDGE DENZIL LUSH - in holding the ultimate fudiciary responsibilty to demonstrate there being no fraud or breach of contract of the 1st general order where he stated; “The reasonable fees and expenses of a professional receiver are recoverable from the defendant in the personal injury action as a head of damage. They do not simply fall on the patient’s fund.” & for ignoring the doctors reports stating my mother had capacity from the beginning and then sending his own corrupt doctor whom did not conduct a clinical examination. Also for his collusion with the perpetrator of further crimes, his appointed deputy...

HUGH ADRIAN SCOTT JONES and his failure to account as to what had happened to £1.1 million pounds inclusive of his breach of contract in the 1st general order stating; “the family should rest assured that my costs will not be eroding the capital settlement agreed for their mothers care and other specific needs.” & his 'fraud by false representation' when the patient emigrated outside the jurisdiction of England & Wales losing £100,000 of the client funds in exchange rate losses in a 'neglect of duty'.

MARTIN JOHN - the then chief executive of the Office of the Public Guardian and his failure to provide a proper detailed investigation showing good reasons to show there was no theft fraud mal administration.

CHIEF CONSTABLE PETER FAHY for his failure to investigate a reported white collar crime of Theft Fraud and Mal administration and also provide a crime reference number on the 4 occasions it has been asked for. Further today 30/11/2013 Six out of 10 crimes are not investigated, admits Sir Peter Fahy READ.

JUDGE PETER JACKSON for his failure to take account of the WILL he authorised mums capacity to make where he later then ring fenced her property so that she could not do with it as she pleased with her living will executor breaching the WILLS act.

JUDGE PELLING QC and so called "Nominated COURT OF PROTECTION Judge" whom conducted an administrative statute tribunal without the consent of all parties where he abandoned the court to have our representation thrown out by security after they claimed common law jurisdiction and requested a JURY after which he returned to hand down a 3 month prison sentence to the protected party/CARER of 17 years flying in the face of statute Mental Capacity ACt 2005 section 5 and thus the protection of carers from any civil liability in the connection of the care of a so called patient of the court of protection whom HOLDS CAPACITY! watch the video statement by my representation to a radio station of 7 minutes.

NOV 30 2013 HoLORDS Chairman letter to Yvonne Goder
READ how LORD HARDIE in the letter refuses to accept her serious submission of allegations of abuse of the Mental Capacity ACT because he says persons have been named!! One presumes we too will have the same letter at our home address. Peter Hofshroer wrote; So, er, if you go to the police and name people who have committed crimes against you, the police will not investigate, as you have named the people involved.
I see.
On 30.11.2013 12:00, Yvonne Goder wrote: > Hi all, > > Letter arrived today addressed to me by Lord Hardie, Chairman of the Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005. > > Although the letter plus envelope arrived very creased probably postmen's fault and despite the actual letter not on the usual House of Lords template or letterhead, why bother with me, I am just a victim! They did bother to write me the above letter and state that my submission was declined because of the accusations I made against named individuals. > > Regards, > > Yvonne

2013 NOV 30 60% of crimes NOT INVESTIGATED
READ Six out of 10 crimes are not investigated, admits Sir Peter Fahy


Jim Grant of Radio Lewes interviews Roger Hayes and describes how a Judge & court has ring fenced themselves in protection where there is a memorandum of agreement between the police and the courts. In this video Roger Hayes describes his appearance in my court case on the 14th January 2013 and where all our evidence and representation was thrown out & where JUDGE PELLING should be the one in prison. Published on 26 Jan 2013 (7 mins)
BEYOND THE NEWS 23rd January 2013 - Radio Lewes - In part one of this three part interview series Roger and Jim discuss the lack of due process of law, an update regards the developments since Rogers unlawful arrest and imprisonment in 2012, recent dealings in the High Court (Manchester) with other significant cases and the use of tactical methods, the power of the term - consent. Banks - RBS and its recently announced losses and the collapsing banking sector. The issuance of debt free money and more.

Dear Ms Brooke OF Clerk TO Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 House of Lords London SW1A 0PW, As you can see, I am on the cc list of this thread of e-mails. My submission to the enquiry provided evidence that indicated the then chief executive of the Office of the Public Guardian. Martin John, was party to the systematic fraud of vulnerable people by corrupt police officers and social workers taking advantage of the non-existent checks and controls in implementation of the Mental Capacity Act. Baroness Barker indicated that the reason my submission had been deleted "not read" was that it had been determined that my submission was not relevant without having read it. Your statement appears to indicate that my submission, which was deleted "not read" was actually read. I do hope you appreciate these are conflicting statements, which would confuse any reasonable person. Can you please clarify what the situation is here, preferably by providing an audit trail of what happened to my submission? Thank you! Yours sincerely, Peter Hofschröer

NOV 28 2013 £2 million FRAUD & GUILTY PLEA
READ how Much of the money was taken from living clients but some was also taken from the estates of dead people - including one who suffered as a World War Two prisoner of war. THE IRONY IS, IS THAT THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED CASE... IT IS WIDESPREAD!


Subject: RE: Lords Committee. Letters of Evidence awaiting Acknowledgment Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 19:47:27 +0000
Dear Mr Lawrence
I can confirm that no submissions to the Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 have been deleted. All submissions have been passed to the Chairman of the Committee. The Committee intends to publish submissions accepted as evidence before Christmas. A full report will be published in March 2014.
Kind regards
Judith Brooke Clerk Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 House of Lords London SW1A 0PW


we support such action to the hilt in view of overwhelming corporate government and judicial corruption.

NOV 22 2013 LISTEN TO MATT DAMEN.. shocking
You Think You Know Someone, and Then He Gets on a Stage and Blows Your Mind

Matt Damon isn’t asking you to start a revolution, but when you hear this, you might anyway. If you don’t love what you’re hearing after the first 29 seconds, jump to 3:45 for a nugget of truth that every American can stand behind. MUST LISTEN TO THIS ONE http://vimeo.com/48834336 MUST LISTEN

BARONESS BARKER Yesterday On 21.11.2013 20:18, BARKER, Baroness wrote:
Submissions to the review are dealt with by the clerks, not members of the committee.
After receiving an email from the House of Lords Committee on Mental Capacity Act review to say to Peter Hofshroer that his email of submission was not read and was deleted he wrote back to ask, Can you please explain on whose authorisation the clerks have permission to delete evidence submitted without reading it?
On 21.11.2013 20:18, BARKER, Baroness wrote:
Submissions to the review are dealt with by the clerks, not members of the committee.
LEN LAWRENCE then wrote back....to Baroness Barker, of
House of Lords Committee on the review of the Mental Capacity Act
Submissions to the review are dealt with by the clerks, not members of the committee.
Are the clerks selective in the sourcing of data that they make available to members of the committee ?
I was advised that my submission was to sensitive to be heard in public, and would have to be in a closed room.
I am still available to appear before the committee, unlike Peter, Norman, Mike who have found it necessary to leave United Kingdom as a result of the abuse of psychiatry by some members of the legal profession against them. Also for those like Maggie and Yvonne who have gagging orders against them, I am also happy to speak for them as well.
The video below to Sir James Munby may be of interest


John Brookes November 4 2013 I went to court this morning. And I followed what I believed to be a lawful right. I made a statement that would enter the court room if my God given inalienable human rights were intact and that I would enter the room if they accept that I am claiming common law jurisdiction. They all agreed. I asked to establish if the judges one man and 2 women were acting on their oath. They did not respond I then told them that I was the lay advisor representing the person summoned to the court and the person Mr John C BROOKES, is present in the court room. Again I asked if they were on their oath, again they did not respond I presented to the court the legal fiction (birth certificate) when the clerk asked for Mr John C Brookes. I did not accept that I was Mr John C BROOKES. I asked again and 3 times if they were acting under their oaths.. The judges called for security . then I called the police.. The judges left the court room.. The security 4 of them entered the court tell me to leave the court, and I told them that I would not leave and that I was there under common jurisdiction.. At that point all four of them grabbed me lifted me up and carried out of the room down the stairs and dumped me outside the court. The police came, I explained what happened. One of them went to the judges and came back with a typed order no signature.. and I was taken to Bloxwich police station. And arrested for failing to appear under bail orders.. Later I was taken back to court.. and was bailed to appear on the 13 February 2014. I have just got home about 40 mins ago. Shaking and upset.. I wish there had been someone to witness these events .

Halsburys Law states administrative courts unlawful. The law is absolutely clear on this subject. There is NO authority for administrative courts in this country and no Act can be passed to legitimise them because of the constitutional restraints placed upon her Majesty at Her coronation. The collection of revenue by such means is extortion, and extortion has been found reprehensible since ancient times. Separation of powers Today, in the year 2011, we find for example, that in the council tax regulations, the billing authority, the prosecuting authority and the enforcement authority are all vested in the same body. The same bodies even purport to issue their own legal documents, by tacit agreement with the Courts. In our system of Common Law, the rule of law demands that we have a separation of powers. Today, the powers are not separated. The executive is not a distinct, free-standing leg of the tripod. The executive now emerges directly from within the elected Chamber of the legislature where previously it emanated directly from the Monarch. That leads to constitutional confusion—because the executive has seized and misuses Parliament’s democratic credentials for its own, destructive, purposes. Fortunately, we have something to which we can turn to preserve our ancient laws and freedoms. We have the Oath that Her Majesty The Queen took at her coronation by which she is solemnly bound and from which no one in England, Wales and Scotland has released her. At Her Coronation the Queen swore to govern us, “according to [our] respective laws and customs”. Certainly, among our reputed “customs”, is precisely that invaluable and widely admired tripartite division of the powers. The judiciary is part and parcel of our customary system of internal sovereignty—“the Queen in Parliament”. It is one of the three separate but symbiotic powers, and it is a capricious and self-serving contention that it should not have the power to preserve the authority of the legislature over the executive. It is a constitutional principle that the assent of the Queen & Parliament is prerequisite to the establishment of a Court which can operate a system of administrative law in Her Majesty’s Courts in England. This was confirmed by Lord Denning during the debates on the European Communities Amendment Bill, HL Deb 08 October 1986 vol 480 cc246-95 246 at 250: “There is our judicial system deriving from the Crown as the source and fountain of justice. No court can be set up in England, no court can exist in England, except by the authority of the Queen and Parliament. That has been so ever since the Bill of Rights.


Leonard Lawrence Pilot.


This is the one from the Mirror yesterday Michael!
By James Lyons
John Major blasts the “truly shocking” grip a privately educated elite has over Britain 12 Nov 2013 21:49 The former Conservative Prime Minister's comments have been seen as a swipe at Old Etonian David Cameron and his well-heeled Cabinet Shocked: Sir John Major Shocked: Sir John Major Getty
Sir John Major has condemned the “truly shocking” grip that a privately educated elite has over Britain. The ex-Prime Minister’s blast has been seen as a swipe at Old Etonian David Cameron and his well-heeled Cabinet. Tory grandee Sir John, who grew up in a rented flat in Brixton, South London, and attended a state school, said: “In every single sphere of British influence, the upper echelons of power in 2013 are held overwhelmingly by the privately educated or the affluent middle class.” He went on: “To me, from my background, I find that truly shocking.” More than half of the Cabinet, including Chancellor George Osborne and Deputy PM Nick Clegg, went to exclusive, fee-paying schools.
Sir John, 70, left school aged 16 in 1959 with three O-levels. He went on to gain three more by correspondence course before embarking on a career in banking then politics. David Cameron Old Etonian: David Cameron Getty Lib Dem Treasury minister Danny Alexander, who is Mr Osborne’s deputy and Mr Clegg’s closest ally, backed Sir John.
Writing on Twitter, Mr Alexander, who went to a comprehensive school, said: “Agree with #Major that corridors of power should reflect society.”
Shadow Schools minister Kevin Brennan said the Tory-led Government was consigning young people to the scrapheap instead of helping them. He said: “John Major is telling people what they already knew: David Cameron’s is an out-of-touch government that is staggeringly complacent on the one million unemployed young people.
"The next generation are being locked out of opportunity, blighted by Cameron’s cost of living crisis.” No10 tried to brush off Sir John’s stinging broadside.
Mr Cameron’s spokesman said: “As the Prime Minister said, what counts is not where you come from, it is where you are going.” Sir John, who made his remarks at a Tory constituency dinner, blamed the Labour Party for the “collapse in social mobility”. He previously embarrassed the PM by accusing him of forgetting the poor.

There is a family upon our island who are so incredibly wealthy that it is impossible to quantify their wealth. You can't measure it terms of money in bank accounts, shareholdings in companies, treasures locked away in vaults or luxury palaces. They have all these things, and more, they have land too, but these things are not their wealth, they are mere tools they posses for the purpose of maintaining and guarding their true wealth.
Legions of men and women wearing costumes surround this family, guarding them and their tools day and night, endlessly gathering more of the same inwards like an earthly black hole gobbling whole stars and planets as it's mass increases ever more with each new acquisition of physical matter.
We all know this family, we have always known them, their presence is ubiquitous, I need not name from, their is only so much space left over in a living room that has an elephant within it, that you would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and paralysed not to of noticed it there and identified exactly the family I am referring to from the description above.
Almost 800 years ago the current incarnation of this behemoth this earthly black hole, was forced against his will, without his freely given consent, to enter into a contract with the people, a contract which states that it is binding for all time, and that his heirs and successors shall forever more hold the tangential infinity of wealth that those who came before him had gathered for themselves, upon certain conditions.
The conditions were many, some important, others less so, but among them was article 61, also know as the enforcement clause. All contracts have clauses, binding agreements of what shall be done, by the parties to the contract in the event that the contract is broken, and this contract was no different.
I'm referring of course to the Magna Carta, the foundational document of the British Constitution. It was the beginning which paved the way for everything which was to come after it, the contract between the People and King John at Runnymede, in the year 1215.
I've seen a video of our current Prime Minister Mr David Cameron, openly state that we have no written constitution, and yet at the same time, the direct descendant of King John Queen Elizabeth II, a heir and successor whose claim to the wealth of her ancestors is guaranteed by the people in accordance with the contract the people put before John, openly claims herself to be the Constitutional Monarch of a Constitutional Monarchy.
These two claims are diametrically opposed, the Queen cannot be a Constitutional Monarch, if there is no written constitution.
It is said by some that the Magna Carta is null and void, that since John did not give his consent to the contract, and since he was acting under duress, his later act of reneging on the contract was perfectly legitimate.
Certainly it would seem people like Mr Cameron prefer this interpretation of the facts, for without a written constitution there is no constitutional law to bind his actions, and no constitutional law for the people to defend their rights and freedoms in the courts against those actions.
The Magna Carta states that once the judgement of necessity has been made by the quorum of barons, as happened in 2001, the people may rise up and wage war upon the Sovereign until they have redress and until their rights and freedoms under the constitution have been restored and the Sovereign or the Sovereign's agents (aka the government) is once again bound to obey the law and to uphold the constitutional rights of the people in the courts.
The Magna Carta also states that the person of the Sovereign shall be held safe from harm whilst the people attain their rightfully owed redress as per the contract.
But what if this contract is indeed null and void? In that case all bets are off, there is no Magna Carta and there is no law, there was no reason for the people to wait for the decision of the barons to rise up, for there is no contract in place which either allows or forbids any such action.
In such an eventuality the safety of the person of the Sovereign is not guaranteed by honourable contract with the people, but only with whatever weapons the Sovereign's agents might be foolish enough to try using upon the people in attempt to safeguard it.
I've heard speak of a new Carter being drawn up, the Magna Carta 2015, 800 years since the first, a new offering of peace from the people. A new deal, a new contract which will be presented to the Sovereign to sign.
Will consent be given this time? Or are we going to go around this 800 year long merry go round of bloodshed and misery once again? This is the first time in history that modern man has faced this challenge. We may think we are smart with our internet and space shuttles, but have we learned anything yet?
I mentioned previously that Albert Burgess holds that Monarchs of the British People are elected, and I spoke about how I see just such an election taking place as various characters openly speak of treason, both their own and that of high officials in government.
It cannot be treason for me to suggest that the rightful Sovereign is the individual who would willingly consent to the second version of the Magna Carta, because if the original stands then the action of making the suggestion is authorised by the judgement of the Barons, and if the Magna Carta is null and void then there is no contract binding me or anyone else from speaking such words in the first place.
So now after 12 years of searching the participants of the Lawful Rebellion finally have a concrete plan for a solution. It has been a hard long struggle, and it's not over yet. The matter can be settled and resolved once and for all with the simple consent of the Sovereign to a new Magna Carta contract with the people, and if the Sovereign should refuse to the agreement then we have every right no matter how the matter is sliced, to go ahead and find a new Sovereign who can see their way clearly to doing what is right and signing on that dotted line, instantly restoring the rule of law and the constitutional protections it provides.
And that infinite wealth I mentioned at the start? It's name is freedom, it is the recognised right for an individual to either consent to or refuse any and all contracts placed before them, it is the fundamental principle of all law, and that right, is absolutely priceless. Castles crumble, gold can be melted down and used for electronic circuit boards, and people in costumes take them off the moment they are no longer being paid to wear them. But fully functioning and absolutely upheld constitutional rights and freedoms can not be bought at any price, they can only be agreed upon, consented to and then acknowledged as being good, right and true henceforth.
Chris Newsham I think the royal family do a great job and should be admired and respected
20 hours ago · Like · 2 ..
Michael Clarke... Chris its all about our constitution and whether you believe we have one because the corrupt bastards of UK government backed by a treasonous JUDICIAL system is claiming the Magna Carta 1215 is NULL & VOID which if that is the case affects the monarchy!# br> Michael Clarke.... You cannot claim Chris on the one hand that... here is your constitutional MONARCH.. Queen Elizabeth 11 and then on the other hand Chris.. state .. Oh & by the way we have no Constitution??? HELLO!!! are you getting the picture Chris.. I am not having a personal go at HRH but the monarchy is built around our constitutional rights that have been treasonously removed by a bent government and a bent judiciary which is at the heart of the reason CHRIS why I and my mother are suffering in exile from a politically corrupt bent judicial system born out of FINANCIAL GREED for the ELITE making in effect CHRIS, you, me and my mother, all SLAVES to their own ends. No disrespect but until pure corruption touches yourself YOU like others need to wake up to what is happening around you!
You Chris have displayed the symbol, a POPPY all in the memory of those whom lost their lives to keep us free, but, you do not realise what is currently happening where our soldiers are being used to fights wars that don't exist, that are being made up for financial greed by the ELITE. The bankers are running the show Chris! They are the ones sending innocent lives into battle to protect and fill their own pockets! I placed on here a week ago a picture, a diagram of the BANKERS international aims and which countries were the ones without their financial controls.. there were 8 countries in the year 2000 now there are 4. These so called wars Chris where we are losing soldiers lives are all about money! MONEY the root of all EVIL. THEY certainly are not about FREEDOM!
Gordon Denton you are totally correct mike in recorded meeting yesterday i had inspector from blackpool police here saying the police can do what they want they need no reason to stop you in a car and said acts of parliment is law which i said no they require consent and he said dont understand then in went on to say they dont require consent i asked him to put this in writing which he ignored and i said again are we policed by consent and do acts of parliment require consent which he said im not going to answer the question the police and government are all corrupt and liars
Michael Clarke YES Gordon... Of course they are... I don't need any more convincing after the research I have seen.. its now very clear where the overall agenda is... it really is shameful that our once proud nation is being taken for ride by bankers, where tyranny and evil are showing its face... there is obviously going to have to be blood shed in the UK before JUSTICE again will prevail because these bastards are only going to understand force! It's only the force and coercion anyway that they have been using on us now for some years... SAD really, but unless something is done Gordon its the children whom are going to suffer, growing up into a NEW, ONE world order of TYRANNY dictatorship!
Gordon Denton I know they are I didnt need him to answer yes was just interesting what lies was coming out of the man in costume and an inspector at that. We do all need to wake up some people are happy been slaves of the government and bullied by police
Michael Clarke Its time to start dealing with the bullies.... I just need a fake passport to re enter the country and form an armed revolution probably with RUSSELL BRAND I think, yes he would be a good choice because he makes me laugh, and when the chips are down you need a good laugh.

READ our defence.


READ about more corrupt prison sentences for pensioners by single judge without a fair trial.


Could you trust any public official who has taken this oath to 'Hele, hide & conceal' note hele also means: hide and conceal

READ about the word 'hele'.


Russell Brand makes valid comment on our political disgrace.



READ Patricks Blog.
READ a letter to corruption champion Kenneth Clarke MP



READ about friend Michael Doherty and co campaigner for justice, whom I met at the British Consitution group meetings, and his battle to bring private prosecutions has moved a huge step forward.

JOIN UK Civil disobedience MARCH 5th November 2013. THE revolution is starting.

READ about more freemason corruption via HILLSBOROUGH investigation coverups. The Independent Police Complaints Commission took the unusual move after families of the football fans who died in the disaster demanded that no members of a lodge be involved.

Michael Doherty
People it's time for BOOTS ON THE GROUND
- we see time and time again utter ingrained corruption in every organisation of government.
Corruption that they allow to continue to PERSECUTE individuals, to PERSECUTE families, to PERSECUTE communities. Time to stand up, and put into action all you have learn't through independent self study and information you have gained via these social networks. This is REAL, the system you placed your faith and trust in has betrayed you, time to take back the power you invested in that broken system.
Michael Doherty Have you seen enough? paedophiles protected, workers blacklisted, massive coverup of deaths at hands of the police, Hillsborough, Daniel Morgan, Charles DeMenezes, Ian Tomlinson, Hacking scandals, bank bail outs with public money, zero tax for corporations, Lynette White scandal, unlawful wars, bankers bonus', PPI scandals, pension robberies, attacks on the disabled, ATOS, energy price fixing, council taxes, massive scale of home repossessions, finger printing your kids in schools, privacy invasions - ANPR, CCTV
The lists go on and on and on, you and your very way of life is under attack, it's time to defend your rights, it's time to say enough is enough
Michael Doherty
Look around you people, look at the mass of injustice served up daily to your screens. Injustice that touches each and everyone of you, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, neighbours and strangers.
It is damaging society and blighting lives and futures....

FAO Melanie McGuirk
I write with reference to the perfected claim under common law that I hold against you & YOUR COMPANY.
You are now no doubt aware that I have no intention of taking the route of PURGE a contempt that never existed in the first place.
Under the terms of your insurance it is understood that you are required to notify the insurance of any such 'circumstance' that surrounds any such claim against you and I believe you have not informed your insurance accordingly.
It is also understood that the terms of your policy require that on request details of your insurers will be provided, and I hereby request the details of your insurers to be provided BY RETURN EMAIL within the next 7 days.
It is believed that if you have failed to inform your insurance of any circumstance leading to a claim against you, that, you are in breach of the terms of your indemnity on any such policy, and therefore, operating your business whilst uninsured.
You are aware of the statutory declarations made to the courts showing lawful proof of VOID ORDERS in the use of statute courts and their failure to provide under common law requests, JURY COURTS, leaving their judgements without jurisdiction & therefore VOID.
I am open to negotiate a resolution to rescind the LIEN against you. I require financial compensation and an application to recind the committal against the LEGAL FICTION, MICHAEL CLARKE.
You are aware of my legal fictions effective imprisonment albeit in a foreign country without freedom of movement due to an unlawful committal order and as such, without movement to act to resolve these matters, I intend to file upon all named in the first LIEN, a further monthly LIEN of £1 million pounds per person.
We are looking into the case that the Judge, Pelling, is also not indemnified which will also open him up for a personal claim... which we have established within an additional claim against him. READ

READ the warning to government that, we are the people and we are sovereign. These are the views spreading amongst so called fringe groups that are growing fast outside of the word 'fringe' the reality being that a revolution is underway.>

READ a cross section of emails showing how the Court of Corruption is ruining thousands of lives.


READ the Shining light on the Corruption and Deceit of the Freemasons where the JUDGES all participate where the No 1 sworn allegience is to each other of the BRETHREN and this is where the BIAS in court starts i.e., JUDGE PETER JACKSON speaks with PANNONE and there we have the BIAS, a handshake, a nudge and a wink, not to mention brown envelopes! WHERE is one might ask the IMPARTIALITY and FAIRNESS, it's only in a JURY court of your peers, these perverts of JUSTICE are raping us. READ VOMIT, which was a monthly newsletter issued by someone called James M. Todd, between 1998 and 2003. This circular highlighted a multitude of cases where Freemasons and associated bodies had abused power and authority for their own ends. After publication of this bulletin ceased suddenly, it seems to have mostly disappeared from the Internet, and many issues have since become difficult to find. So, we are therefore making an archive of back issues of this publication available to the public. None of the content has been edited or censored, and whilst the original formatting and layout leaves much to be desired, only adverts and broken links have been removed (if there are still some left, please excuse them). n.b. Many issues contain strong language, as well as views that are not necessarily those held by Falling Masonry. However, we believe that this is a useful resource for identifying turn-of-the-Millennium Masons, and bringing their institutionalized corruption, crime and maladministration to the public's attention.
3 words that go hand in glove

READ a reply today from a LAND REGISTRY EXPERT ON FRAUD.... where the facts are quite alarming!!!

Sept 23 2013 FAO Judge Jackson
Dear Judge Jackson
Ref link below or attached opg.me/LandRegisterLA826609_mergedwithWILLpluscourtorder.pdf
Your order seems to conflict with the statutory wills act? Does this mean that the irregularity of the hearing means the order made is VOID??
It would appear that the court of protection is ring fencing the property?? Ignoring the THE LIVING Will that was sent to you?? Judge JACKSON REPY....
Dear Mr Clarke,
The judge has made his order. The matter is no longer before him and he is unable to enter into correspondence.

READ WILL merged with land registry and COURT ORDER. You will see where in the WILL the court really had no further authority to encompass my mothers house, effectively ringfencing it in a court of protection order overiding statutory wills act and the authority of the LIVING WILL EXECUTOR in which this particular Judge was fully aware of the said WILL and whom authorised my mothers capacity to make it.

Dear Sir
land registry details http://opg.me/LandRegisterLA826609.pdf
living will executor http://www.opposepredatoryguardians.com/will20082012.pdf
I am the LIVING WILL executor if any public authority claims my mother is incapacitated.
The court is aware of this and therefore the restriction place upon my mother s property is illegal and unlawful.
Please remove it.

Sept 23 2013 More representation denied
Good morning
Thank you for your email.
Unfortunately this is not a case that Slater & Gordon Lawyers are able to deal with at the present time. By way of general advice however, it may be worth contacting the Law Society (on 020 7242 1222) or Find-a-Lawyer (on 0800 606 6575) or www.solicitors-online.com) for details of specialists in your local area.
Yours sincerel Enquiries Team Slater & Gordon (UK) LLP

READ Land registry restrictions on my mothers property by PANNONE LLP after knowing I am the EXECUTOR in her LIVING WILL should further incapacity be claimed. This restriction is UNLAWFUL.

... when arrived at your destination pot less, sell you only transport/car to gain the money for a deposit and advance rent..... settle down and breath for a while... establish the facts.. ie your not extraditable... get a job.... open a bank account.... get onto the system for health purposes... pay tax!... ALL THE ABOVE BOXES TCIKED there is now no need to make a statement of lies in an apology of 'purge the contempt' that never existed in the first place!! NOW HAVING RETREATED, REGROUPED AND BREATHING WE WILL GO BACK AGAIN ON A NEW FRONTAL ATTACK..... watch this space...


Whilst gaining 2 contracts of work for me and my partner, in Spain we are actively now persueing legalising our documents to the EUROPEAN standard of the Hague Convention, that the British Courts will no longer be able to ignore, as they have up to now and will soon be released back into the British Courts for them to accept without rejection having been EU legalised!

JOHN HEMMING MP runs with the hare, whilst hunting with the hounds read here in a succession of recent exchange emails where he sees the only option is to purge your contempt in statement of lies that any other route will not work and the reason being, as he openly admits, is a corrupt broken faulty system.

READ about newer and stricter and faster rules on complaints about Judges.

Sept 6 2013 JUDGE declares acceptance of INTERNET ERA
READ Judge calls for more transparency in family courts The most senior family judge in England and Wales has demanded more transparency in the courts after rejecting social workers’ attempts to silence a father whose baby was taken into care against his will. Sir James Munby, president of the Family Division of the High Court, said the public had a right to know “what is being done in their name” and called for the courts to adapt to the internet era


READ As you can see, Mr. McCabe raises issues about various bodies that most of you have had problems with, including the PHSO. You have ALL had problems with lawyers and judges. Here is your chance to enlighten Mr. McCabe a bit more about the full extent of the problem. He may just raise the points in parliament, so please don’t waste this opportunity. Once a point has been raised in parliament, we have some very powerful ammunition for lobbying, as we have it in writing.


READ about how Judges and lawyers will go to jail if a new Police Commissioner has his way. David Gale, UKIP’s candidate to become Derbyshire’s first Police and Crime Commissioner, is setting out his stall to tackle what he says is corruption and criminality within the family justice system. Accusing judges and lawyers of routine involvement in perverting the course of justice, Gale says that where parents are encouraged to fabricate allegations and the court turns a blind-eye, there must be a formal criminal investigation. Gale, who led a ground-breaking project to enable information sharing across agencies to protect vulnerable children, claims to have inside information: “I am shocked that professionals dealing with children are hushing up the wholesale abuse of the family justice system.” Gale said, “I’ve received detailed accounts from professionals and parents both in Derby and further afield that large parts of the family justice system are being run like an organised crime racket. There is an epidemic of mothers being advised by their lawyers that if they make false statements against partners attesting to domestic violence they will be fast-tracked to legal aid, will be able to testify unopposed to gain a Non-Molestation Order, and will not be held to account even if their perjury is uncovered. Women are being advised of this legal mechanism as a means of severing the relationship between a father and his children.” “Judges are routinely turning a blind-eye to uncorroborated, fabricated witness statements made by women seeking to abuse the legal process. The family law industry’s lawyers are milking this for all it’s worth, with judges in some cases allocating completely unnecessary court hearings that ramp up costs, acting like brokers in an insidiously corrupt scam that defrauds the public purse.” Gale continued, “I will make it clear that the current response from police when presented with evidence of perjury ‘that it is a court matter’ will not wash. If evidence of a criminal offence committed within civil proceedings is presented to Derbyshire Constabulary officers, they will investigate it thoroughly. Those guilty of perjury should expect to go to jail, along with lawyers or judges who have participated in perverting the course of justice. It’s been eighteen months since Christopher Booker exposed the reality of the family justice system, citing it as “callous, corrupt and staggeringly expensive”. I see no evidence to suggest that the problems are isolated to just Children’s Services.” “Increasingly, we’re seeing adolescent boys being left fatherless with positive male role-models being replaced in some cases by gang culture. There is a significant on-going cost to the public purse that continues long after unscrupulous legal professionals have dipped their snouts into the legal aid trough.” “It isn’t the politically correct thing to do to identify women as potentially being the instigators of an abuse of domestic violence legislation but telling it like it is is not about being part of a popularity contest. I will have an amnesty for those women who come forward to testify on their lawyers’ illegal advice but I have a duty to the people of Derbyshire to root out this institutionalised corruption once and for all.”

“To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality."
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, 1851
Written in 1851 ... and absolutely NOTHING has changed.

READ the New York times about the paper war on corruption & the flood of commercial liens being used on properties to secure against debts. Exactly what I was trying to achieve with Pannones Properties. If it works in that common law country what is wrong with our common law country? Still to this day niether PANNONES or HUGH JONES have answered the allegations contained in the commercial lien served upon them, allegations that were sworn on oath remember, before a notary, serious fraudulent allegations - so why will they not do something about that regarding libel. Is it not a fact that I am telling the truth and that the authorities do not want to deal with the frauds because there is a cover up of racketeering fraud going on nationally backed by the government. The best shot they could fire was to turn to fraud once again and manipulate the harassment act and make their in-the-pocket judge an accessary in collusion to try and stop this publication and the shear exposure of corruption.

AUG 25 2013
WATCH Mel a lady from OLDHAM whom has degrees in legalese and that it's all rubbish LEGAL is not LAWFUL and LAWFUL is superior.

AUG 23 2013
READ about Supreme Court Validates People's Rights to Establish Common Law Grand Jury. This is already underway in Britain... I have seen the pictures... this is where we the people will start to gain our common law justice back once and for all. The “Powers That Be” are now the “Powers That Were”. READ the opposition to secret courts is gathering pace.

AUG 23 2013 FAMILIES DESTROYED BY CORRUPTION A MUST READ with lots of information about how families are being destroyed by UK state corruption. READ about the Dual system of Justice, a rule for them and a rule for us??

READ about George Osborne having a veto on what frauds get investigated that might be damaging to government?? This does look like the reason why we cannot get any justice? Private Prosecutions are probably the only way. CONFLICT OF INTEREST MAYBE??

I am being advised that my aggression is exuding itself from the website and that I have to play the game to try and win the support of middle England. The trouble is my game is not courts on a scale of grand theft and fraud, my game is pubs clubs and leisure. As for the word, "game" I object to the government and the judiciary playing games with me and my mother whom has been through enough in her life. To commit theft fraud and neglect on me I might be able to play a few games, but, my mother is a different story, like anyone else's mother. Would you put up with that sort of pain infliction upon your mother without a little aggression coming out. In an effort to portray a better picture I stand corrected and will try and curtail the anger felt inside. Changed back to keywords background after 4 days as I believe the story should be told how it really is in it's keywords.

READ a follow up email of complaint at the lack of action from the Police to follow up on FRAUD.


READ our submission to the House of Lords Mental Capacity Act Committee.

AUG 16 2013 HOUSE OF LORDS SUBMISSION fellow victim
READ a submission to the house of lords mental capacity act committee from Yvonne Goder.

AUG 15 2013
READ about The Bill of Rights and article V.
A petition to the Monarch is protected under Article V of the 1688 Bill of Rights.
and Article V states:
Right to petition.
That it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegall.
This is also referred to in the first amendment of the US Constitition which states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It is in fact Article V that means that some court orders do not have a valid jurisdiction (such as court orders that prevent people complaining about crimes - one further one of which was referred to me this week, and those which purport to prevent people talking to MPs or appealing decisions.). In fact that is the basis upon which Wanda Maddocks should win her appeal on imprisonment once it goes in.
In any event a short summary of Mike Clarke's case is that it started with him complaining that the charges made by a solicitor for his mothers' issues and ended up with him being given a 3 month prison sentence in absentia. He is caring for his mother in exile in Spain and cannot return to the UK. Contempt of Court is not a criminal issue and hence he cannot be extradited.


On mother's happy 73rd birthday today she makes a video petition to the Queen, to be released shortly.

Mothers favourite dish at 73 taken today.

2nd POLICE report about FRAUD. Copied to 83 other agencies.

There have been many so-called Magna Cartas.
The first one, and only one that has any validity, was NOT a Statute but a Treaty. It was made on June 15th 1215, at Runnymede, between the Barons & King John. It said, very plainly, that (a) It lasted ‘for ever’ and (b) Anything attempting to supersede was always null & void. Being a TREATY, and not a STATUTE, it could not be ‘repealed’.
The first Parliament didn’t come into existence until 1295 – some 80 YEARS later – thus the Magna Carta 1215 couldn’t have been a Statute enacted by any Parliament. But - as has been said – there have been many attempts to create ‘subsequent’ Magna Cartas. In 1216, in 1225 and in 1297 (the last being the Magna Carta Statute … to which John Hemming is referring). As has been said, above, ALL of these subsequent ‘attempts’ were immediately null & void … by virtue of the TREATY of 1215. That’s why one ALWAYS refers to The Magna Carta 1215” and NOT to simply “The Magna Carta” … the latter allowing those who are ignorant of history to dismiss “The Magna Carta” as ‘a Statute that has been repealed’.
The FACTS are: 1. The TREATY of 1215 ‘repealed’ every attempt - that followed - as null & void anyway.
2. The TREATY of 1215 stands as a backstop to EVERYTHING … INCLUDING the creation of Parliament in 1295 - which was (therefore) created UNDER … and is ALWAYS subservient to – The Magna Carta 1215
3. The TREATY of 1215 is quoted – by Halbury’s Laws of England – as “the founding document of the British Constitution”. Like most Politicians, John Hemming has (therefore) no real knowledge of the British Constitution (as evidenced by his remarks). And therefore no REAL knowledge of this REAL job, and REAL status. There are iron cast arguments, based on logic & reason, that no Parliament has (or could have had) any validity whatsoever … let alone any claim to be ‘sovereign’.
4. Halsbury’s DOES NOT refer – in any way – to the look-alikes that followed … for the reasons (one assumes) given above.
5. For John Hemming’s view to be correct, the year 1297 needs to have come BEFORE the year 1215.
6. The Common Law has been existence since the dawn of man, because it is nothing more than ‘the common sense of man, creating law – for each circumstance - via a jury of 12 people using their innate common sense’.
7. It’s always worth asking “If Politicians & Judges can make Law … then why do we go to the enormous expense of Juries?” Not knowing these fundamentals, and not having them one’s fingertips, will lead someone into serious trouble.

READ it. Plus HIGH TREASON According to the old laws of England which are still in force, many current Britishpoliticians qualify for hanging and their laws are null and void. READ

AUG 7 2013 MP email exchange
READ an exchange of emails & about ANOTHER IN EXILE WITH HIS MOTHER & his FILE Mike, Thanks for your help.
You ask the pertinent question: "WHERE DOES ONE GO FOR REDRESS??"
The answer to that question is very simple: As you will not get redress in the once proud country of Britain, then, as our cases show, you have to flee the country for your life and liberty.
Mum survived the Blitz in London. If we returned to Britain, she would be put on the "care pathway" within minutes and not survive that. I would be arrested on the border, although the police admit there is no evidence of me committing any offence. However, I know too much about the endemic official corruption, so I need to be shut up. I'm a bit too young for the "care pathway", so it is a nut-house for me.
So here we are, living safely in Hitler's homeland, because an 84 year-old, disabled British war veteran cannot possibly live in her own house in Britain so long as police officers and social workers are at large.
That is life in Brave New Britain.
If you are young and vulnerable, the state will kidnap you and sell your body - in every conceivable way you can imagine, and others you probably can't. If you are old and vulnerable, the state will kidnap you and put you in a death camp, while plundering your assets and using them to offset the national debt.
Mum, 84 years-old and wheelchair-bound is one of the very few victims lucky enough to have a son with sufficient strength of character and good enough connections to fight this evil. 99% of the victims are defenceless. That is why the state targets them:
Diddle kiddies for the fun of it, bump them off, earn dosh from the snuff movie and sell of their organs to a harvester. That is good business. Note that childrens homes in Britain are about to be privatised. Good business, eh?
Target isolated old people, have the Court of Protection declare them incapacitated. Seize their assets. Stick them in a home. Don't give them anything to eat or drink. How can they complain?
The evidence is there for anybody that wants to see it.
Regards, Pet

Wednesday, August 07, 2013
READ the blog
Mike Clarke and his mother Ann (on the run in Spain)
Mike Clarke has been on the run in Spain for some time. He was on the run because he was given a 3 month prison sentence for contempt because he failed to remove what he put on the internet relating to a court of protection case. Since that point (and I am not sure when this happened) the judiciary have published a number of judgments relating to his case. There is a court of appeal case:
And a number of COP cases:
[2012] EWHC 2947 (COP)
[2012] EWHC 2714 (COP)
[2012] EWHC 2256 (COP)
What is interesting is that the judgment relating to his imprisonment (which should have been public in any event) has not been published.
Contempt of court is not an extraditable issue. However, at the moment he is a bit stuck in Spain and unable to return to the UK. I do personally think there should be a published judgment explaining why he was imprisoned. The new practice directions require this (I accept the case happened before the issuance of the new PD, but after the imprisonment of Wanda Maddocks). There also needs to be a way forward without public funds being wasted on imprisoning someone where it is difficult to see the public interest in imprisoning him.

Importance: High
ACLU of Florida
Executive Director: Howard Simon
4500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 340 Miami, FL 33137
Phone: (786) 363-2700 Fax: (786) 363-1107
Dear Mr. Simon:
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights.
READ about first amendment
As you can see from the correspondence below, www.web.com is in violation of the First Amendment if they shut down this website based on a request from someone in another country who wants to conceal crimes that are being committed against the British public.
Mr. Clarke is entitled to free speech and, even in the UK, the law upholds free speech. What this Florida based website’s corporate council intends to do will deny citizens the right to expose corrupt activity and be in violation of the law.
If they get away with this, then how will it affect US journalists?
Will you please take some action? We wonder if graft is involved.
Yours sincerely,
From: len lawrence [mailto:bae146@hotmail.co.uk] Sent: August-05-13 7:56 AM To: Mike Clarke; jtenenbaum@web.com; TLam@web.com Cc: peter@hofschroer.com; gollis@btinternet.com; len lawrence; diansmt5@aol.com; aerotoxicangel@gmail.com; Florence Bellone; caul.grant@yahoo.com; sammy12102@yahoo.co.uk; theearthneedsrebelsshow@freethinkingvoice.tv; editor@ukcolumn.org; Kate; truthwars@live.co.uk; neil.barker@neebert.net; yvonnegoder@hotmail.co.uk; bonnie@salem-news.com; fumeevent@gmail.com; baileyd@talktalk.net; againstcorruption@hotmail.co.uk; press@rttv.ru; maxkeiser@rttv.ru; feedback@rttv.ru Subject: RE: OPG.ME
Jonathan D. Tenenbaum, Esq. Corporate Counsel Web.com 12808 Gran Bay Parkway, West | Jacksonville, FL 32258 Office: (904) 251-6291 | Fax: (904) 880-0350
Mr Tenenbaum
Take a close look at what is occuring in the United Kingdom before you decide to take down Mike OPG Website.
I have a order from Mr Justice Adrian Fulford Queens Bench Division that I cannot bring to the attention of any Judge including the Family Division and Court of Protection that the Senior Master Queens Bench Queens Bench Division holds three Court of Protection Medical Certificates that were not disclosed to the Court of Protection.
There is a 70 year old grandparent that faces prision if they disclose that their grandson has been was assaulted whilst under the care of Social Services.
Until very recently people Yvonne Golder and Wander Maddox have been jailed by secret courts in the United Kingdom, this practice has recently been stopped by Sir James Munby, thats to websites like Mike OPG bring these cases to the public attention. Justice: the scandal of secret courts - EU Referendum
There are many other cases like those of Peter Hofschroer and Neil Baker.
I do not understand why Web.com and Network Solutions would wish to hide the above events from the public ?
Yours sincerely
Leonard Lawrence -------- Original Message -------- Subject: OPG.ME Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:39:48 +0000 From: Jonathan Tenenbaum To: Mike Clarke CC: Tom Lam Mr. Clarke:
As you are likely aware I represent Network Solutions. With respect to the website opg.me and related dispute we have received the following notice from the complainant in the matter: “Please find attached Mr Clarke’s notice of appeal (a copy of which we have now secured from the Court of Appeal). As you will see, this is an appeal of the order of Judge Justice Peter Jackson dated 24 October 2012, and is not an appeal of the order of His Honour Judge Pelling QC relating to the imprisonment of Mr Clarke for failure to comply with the injunction to removal material from the website at the domain name www.opg.me.
I also draw your attention to documentation found on the website, which is attached to this email. Posted on the website is correspondence between Mr Clarke and the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (“the Ombudsman”).
A letter from the Ombudsman dated 4th February 2013 states that:
“ It has come to our attention that correspondence we have sent you has been uploaded onto your websites(s). …. I have taken legal advice on this matter and I must inform you that by uploading information … supplied to you by the Ombudsman during her consideration of your complaint, you are in breach of Section 11(2) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967… “
It is therefore clear that Mr Clarke, as registrant of the website, is committing further breaches by posting material. Furthermore, a complaint has now been made by a Parliamentary body appointed by the Crown.
Given that Mr Clarke has not removed content which breaches the final injunction order made by the honourable Mr Justice Foskett on 2nd May 2012 within the deadline of 9th February 2013 and has not removed content which is in breach of an Act of Parliament, I should be grateful if you could update me by return (i.e. by close of business tomorrow) as to when the website will be disabled.”
In light of the above we are compelled to disable the website, which we will do within the next three (3) days unless we receive an authoritative order to the contrary. Thank you in advance for your understanding and please feel free to contact us with any questions.
Jonathan D. Tenenbaum, Esq. Corporate Counsel Web.com 12808 Gran Bay Parkway, West | Jacksonville, FL 32258 Office: (904) 251-6291 | Fax: (904) 880-0350

AUG 5 2013 PETER Hofschröer TO WEB.COM
Dear Mr Tenenbaum,
May I ask you to reconsider your decision here?
I first came across the case of Mike Clarke and his mother Ann a few years ago, when out of sheer frustration at the way the British authorities were refusing to stop the systematic abuse of my then 80 year-old mother, I put up a blog on the internet.
You can see it on:
At that time, I was still naive enough to believe that Britain was a democracy with the rule of law and that somebody in authority would soon step in to stop this case of official corruption. I was a naive 53 year-old at that time.
Mike Clarke and many others then started contacting me. It soon became clear that my mother's case was the smallest tip of a very large, very foul iceberg.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass was kind enough to take up our case in the House of Lords in London. His comments included:
"The Hofschroer case has been on my desk for several years now. A widow in her 80s was dispossessed of her home in a way that implies collusion between certain family members and the Social Services. A son who has come to the rescue has been harried by the North Yorkshire police (that particularly dubious constabulary merits careful investigation) to the extent that he and his aged mother have been pursued through an Interpol warrant to their "refuge" in Austria."
"Does anyone in authority care that social services and police in North Yorkshire have conspired in the persecution of Mrs Hofschroer and her son? Are details of dismissals, forced retirements and other shady and costly measures pertaining to North Yorkshire Police available to legislators in Parliament? "
The government refused to act here to stop social workers and police officers defrauding an 84 year-old invalid of her assets.
If you think this might be an isolated case, then simply google "Wanda Maddox", "Julie Bailey" and "Stafford Hospital".
You will then see terms like "genocide" and "deaths camps" used.
In Britain, the elderly are being systematically targeted, killed off and their assets seized. Part of the proceeds of this crime are being used to fraudulently offset the national debt.
It is not just the elderly, who are being targeted by the British authorities. The state is also systematically targeting children and stealing them. Many thousands have disappeared without trace. It is often the case that the children of visitors to Britain are targeted, particularly when their parents lack sufficient knowledge of English to understand what is happening. This theft of children and their subsequent trafficking has now got to a stage where complaints have been made by the governments of many countries to the British authorities. The one member of the British Parliament trying to do something about this is John Hemming MP. He recently made the following statement:
"That this House notes that 59 people representing the embassies of over 30 different countries attended a meeting in the House to discuss concerns about the perceived failure of courts in England and Wales properly to follow Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights; further notes that previously a number of governments have formally complained to the UK about the failures of the English and Welsh jurisdiction; recognises that international concern about the operation of care proceedings in the UK is growing; and calls for the Government and judiciary to respond to this concern."
Mike Clarke is one of the few people with sufficient courage to speak out against this horrifying state-sponsored crime against the vulnerable and defenceless.
Do you really want to stop him?
Yours sincerely, Peter Hofschröer

AUG 5 2013 website THREAT OF CLOSURE
email to web.com about threat of closure of website.

FAO Jonathan D. Tenenbaum, Esq. Corporate Counsel Web.com 12808 Gran Bay Parkway, West | Jacksonville, FL 32258 Office: (904) 251-6291 | Fax: (904) 880-0350 Mr Tenenbaum
Take a close look at what is occuring in the United Kingdom before you decide to take down Mike OPG Website.
Reading - Victims Unite! READ
I have a order from Mr Justice Adrian Fulford Queens Bench Division that I cannot bring to the attention of any Judge including the Family Division and Court of Protection that the Senior Master Queens Bench Queens Bench Division holds three Court of Protection Medical Certificates that were not disclosed to the Court of Protection.
There is a 70 year old grandparent that faces prision if they disclose that their grandson has been was assaulted whilst under the care of Social Services.
Until very recently people Yvonne Golder and Wander Maddox have been jailed by secret courts in the United Kingdom, this practice has recently been stopped by Sir James Munby, thats to websites like Mike OPG bring these cases to the public attention. Justice: the scandal of secret courts - EU Referendum
There are many other cases like those of Peter Hofschroer and Neil Baker.
I do not understand why Web.com and Network Solutions would wish to hide the above events from the public ?
Yours sincerely
Leonard Lawrence

AUG 5 2013
from; jtenenbaum@web.com
Mr. Clarke:
As you are likely aware I represent Network Solutions. With respect to the website opg.me and related dispute we have received the following notice from the complainant in the matter: “Please find attached Mr Clarke’s notice of appeal (a copy of which we have now secured from the Court of Appeal). As you will see, this is an appeal of the order of Judge Justice Peter Jackson dated 24 October 2012, and is not an appeal of the order of His Honour Judge Pelling QC relating to the imprisonment of Mr Clarke for failure to comply with the injunction to removal material from the website at the domain name www.opg.me. I also draw your attention to documentation found on the website, which is attached to this email. Posted on the website is correspondence between Mr Clarke and the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (“the Ombudsman”). A letter from the Ombudsman dated 4th February 2013 states that: “ It has come to our attention that correspondence we have sent you has been uploaded onto your websites(s). …. I have taken legal advice on this matter and I must inform you that by uploading information … supplied to you by the Ombudsman during her consideration of your complaint, you are in breach of Section 11(2) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967… “ It is therefore clear that Mr Clarke, as registrant of the website, is committing further breaches by posting material. Furthermore, a complaint has now been made by a Parliamentary body appointed by the Crown. Given that Mr Clarke has not removed content which breaches the final injunction order made by the honourable Mr Justice Foskett on 2nd May 2012 within the deadline of 9th February 2013 and has not removed content which is in breach of an Act of Parliament, I should be grateful if you could update me by return (i.e. by close of business tomorrow) as to when the website will be disabled.” In light of the above we are compelled to disable the website, which we will do within the next three (3) days unless we receive an authoritative order to the contrary. Thank you in advance for your understanding and please feel free to contact us with any questions. Best,
Jonathan D. Tenenbaum, Esq. Corporate Counsel Web.com 12808 Gran Bay Parkway, West | Jacksonville, FL 32258 Office: (904) 251-6291 | Fax: (904) 880-0350

READ about the difference of which law, COMMON, ADMIRALTY OR INTERNATIONAL.

AUG 4 2013 USA Common Law Court Action
WATCH Anthony Williams Foreclosure Defense July 30 2013 & how real justice should operate. Nearly everyone knows how corrupt the judicial system in the UK & America is, but very few people know how to confront it with knowledge, skill, and integrity. Private Attorney General Anthony Williams is one such special authority in this field of law, civil rights, and organized crime. Watching this video makes you want to scream and shout with joy, releasing anger, in great relief. Finally, there is evidence of a solution to the corruption in the legal system, and the unlawful "enterprise" called "The Bar," that has overtaken decency and "civility" in our common law and criminal justice systems by substituting "commercial psychopathology" (called "arrogance" and "greed") for reasonableness and justice.

READ about the birth certificate and the slave trade.

READ about more evidence of a BIAS committal to prison hearing. In my committal to prison hearing in which I requested a trial by JURY for fear of BIAS I enclose a list of nominated court of protection JUDGES and who is no 26??
If you are accusing the court of protection of FRAUD, THEFT, MAL ADMINISTRATION, CRIMINAL NEGLECT amongst a whole host of other things would you believe that an agent JUDGE of their own would be the correct person to judge a matter of committal to prison where the content is all based on the corrupt court? Even if you had a jury where one person was connected to the court of protection they would be excused so why are JUDGES acting so fraudulent, BECAUSE THEY ARE GETTING AWAY WITH IT!

READ the email to John Hemming & copied to House of Lords Mental Capacity Act review committee. Copied to Daily Mail & BBC.

READ about CAMERONS cheque book justice. Perverting the course of justice: Once a crime, now government policy

JULY 29 2013 Accounting For War: Press Conference
READ about Accounting For War: Press Conference 23rd APRIL 2013 including corruption at the top. Paying TAX is unlawful if it is used for unlawful ways such as illegal wars and the funding of such.

JULY 29 2013 The Birth of a Police State
READ about UK government is about to pass legislation which will make any behaviour perceived to potentially ’cause a nuisance or annoyance’ a criminal offence. What it will take for the slumbering British public to awake to the fact that the legal and physical infrastructure of a police state is being built around them?’


Last month, it emerged that during his inquiry, Lord Justice Leveson had been sent an official report which indicated that some of Britain’s most respected industries routinely employ investigators who illicitly obtain personal information on business rivals and members of the public.
The report by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca) revealed that — as a result of a criminal investigation called Operation Millipede — it had known several years ago that law firms, telecoms giants and insurance companies were hiring private investigators who broke the law to further their commercial interests.
Four men were subsequently convicted of conspiracy to make false representations to obtain confidential information.
One key hacker admitted 80 per cent of his client list was taken up by law firms, wealthy individuals and insurance companies. Only 20 per cent was attributed to the media.
Leveson chose not to explore the issue, because it was ‘outside the remit’ of his inquiry.”
“Does Dr Malley accept that some might find it odd that a senior figure at Hacked Off should then join a major law firm which was known to have funded the same controversial practices over which the lobby group had been apparently so exercised?”
Read more: HERE daily mail! Paul Jonson is head of the dispute resolution and regulatory division at Manchester-based Pannone, the law firm which represented David Hughes in his action. He says: ‘I don’t think there is any doubt this sort of behaviour was widespread around 2006, which was when David’s case was being handled by us.’
Early day motion 116
Session: 2013-14
Date tabled: 16.05.2013
Primary sponsor: Hemming, John
That this House notes that the Hacked Off campaign is chaired by Hugh Tomlinson QC; further notes that in a secret hearing Mr Tomlinson argued successfully for the secret imprisonment of Yvonne Goder for, inter alia, writing emails to regulatory bodies complaining about the wrongful transfer of property from an individual whose financial matters were managed by the court of protection; further notes that there is no public judgment about her imprisonment; further notes that Mr Tomlinson in the case CTB v NGN obtained an injunction that prevented the second respondent from obtaining evidence to prove that she was innocent of blackmail; further notes that a similar injunction in the Goodwin case prevented allegations of breaches of the RBS code of conduct being passed to the Financial Services Regulator; recognises that these are secretive legal actions which act against freedom of expression and the rule of law; further notes that Hacked Off has not responded to any questions written in emails or letters by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley; calls for the members of Hacked Off to disassociate themselves from such actions; and further calls for the Government not to include in negotiations about press regulation any persons who do not disassociate themselves from such behaviour.

Dear Mike,
Thank you for your email but I regret that the area of law that you refer to is not one in which we practice, consequently we would not have the expertise required to assist you. Kind regards
Andrew Williams Chief Executive
Sent from my iPad
On 27 Jul 2013, at 12:22, "Mike Clarke" wrote:
> Can you help?
> www.opg.me
> > Above is our website.
> We are in exile from corruption and tyranny in the UK.
> > I am the carer for my mother for 17 years now and she has been a victim of the court of protection.
> As a result of campaigning and trying to gain justice for her I the son and carer have been sentenced to three months in prison for fraudulent harrasment charges.
> > We fled the country in January 2013.
> > Regards,
> Mike & Ann Clarke

JULY 26 2013 At last there is some hope
READ about Representatives of 34 countries have gathered at the House of Commons to voice their concerns to MP John Hemming over the rate that children of foreign families living in the UK are being taken into foster care & Lord Justice Munby has rightly declared his determination to alter the public’s view that these family hearings are ‘a system of unaccountable justice’.

Dear Mr Clark
I am responding to the series of emails you have either sent or copied me in to over the last couple of weeks. I regret I have been unable to reply before now, partly just as John Hemming MP said to you, that he has been very busy so I am afraid have I, with a heavy round of duties at Westminster as well as many other casework issues from current constituents, and partly because I needed time to consider the latest set of materials you have sent. Having done so, I am still less than clear about how your current situation stands
Let me recap. As you are aware myself and my office have raised issues on your behalf and that of your mother over the past several years you have variously been in dispute with the office of the Public Guardian, the Court of Protection and Pannone Solicitors. The latest set of activity involved our correspondence with the Chief Executive of the OPG in May on your behalf last year and subsequently signing your application to request the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to review the supervision of your mother’s affairs by the OPG. After further requests by us to the PHSO on your behalf, they finally informed us (and you) in November last year that they could not consider your complaint further – for which they offered detailed reasons – but would be prepared to do so if you mother Mrs Clarke or another family or personal representative of hers did submit one. It would now appear that no further action has been taken on that front but that you have now found yourself in contempt of the court as part of your ongoing dispute and have left the UK together with your mother to avoid the imposition of a custodial sentence for that contempt.
I cannot advise or make any comment on these latest proceedings – as I have told you before I am not a lawyer or solicitor and even if I were it has been my understanding that it would be improper and in breach of Parliamentary convention for me to do so. So far Mr Hemming has not been able to contact me at a meeting to discuss the complex procedures that are now being suggested – as he said to you he has been extremely busy and Parliament is now in recess. I will consider if I am able to do anything further as and when that discussion is able to take place. On the other matter of the PHSO it seems to me the option of your mother or her personal representative pursuing her complaint still remains open – it might be in her interest to pursue it. Yours sincerly
Gordon Marsden MP
Dear MP Gordon Marsden
23.07.2013 published: www.opg.me
I refer to your recent letter by email on 22.07.2013 & the clarity you need of the current situation is;
1 We fled the Tyranny of the UK which clearly is run by criminals and the common laws that would protect one from such a tyranny are not being upheld by the powers that be, favouring their own rules and acts that are laced in BIAS, UNFAIR & without IMPARTIALITY.
2 This is clearly in breach of our HUMAN RIGHTS the last time I took the time out to understand such rights, leaving my 72 year old mother & me, your purged into exile, constituents that are indeed still CURRENT.
3 With the exception of my prison sentence brought about by corruption & treason we have moved no further on than when we last met, which to my recollection was indeed a trial within itself to attempt to make contact with you as you are well aware. I understand that you are busy but I do believe our situation warrants a lot more attention to it than you are offering to undertake.
4 If this problem was a one off occurrence where we were the only people affected I might be able to give some understanding to your partial brush off letter but this is certainly not the case as you are also fully aware of the problems associated via news and press articles ie DAILY MAIL and the involvement on other constituents fronts from court reformer MP JOHN HEMMING which I personally with many others hold a lot of praise for, in the time, effort and work, where he is attempting to bring about some justice to families.
5 It is not like we are even asking a lot, because John Hemming MP has offered to indeed put the work into the complex procedure of a petition to parliament that requires only, I believe, your delivery.
6 If it had been easy for me and mum to have moved to JOHN HEMMING MPs constituency area, believe me I would, as I have considered it and that is a measure of how desperate things have become that you surely, obviously have no understanding of, or indeed do express no care either to my astonishment.
7 It was Jack Straw and your party whom pushed the implementation of this corrupt body and whom seem to care not about the injustices it is dishing out to innocent elderly whom have capacity and their carers or relatives to imprison and separate from loved ones so as gain access to remaining wealth or property to place for sale.
8 I HAVE NOT BEEN IN CONTEMPT – This is purely a creature of common law and as such demands a jury of my peers where upon if my rights had been met and a jury present this would have been easy to sort out as a jury would not convict. And further - Sir John Donaldson M.R. (Master of the Rolls?): "Mens rea in the law of contempt was something of a minefield. The reason was that it was wholly the creature of the common law and had developed on a case by case basis".
"Wholly the creature of the common law"? Wow!
In Dean v. Dean [1987] F.L.R. 517, C.A. (Civ. Div.), the court said that: "Contempt of court, whether civil or criminal, is a common law misdemeanor and it had long been recognised that proceedings for contempt were criminal or quasi-criminal in nature and that the case against the alleged contemnor must be proved to the standard of criminal proof namely, beyond reasonable doubt"
A misdemeanor? Not even a felony? And had to be proved to criminal standards? Wow!
Until Att-Gen v. Newspaper Publishing plc and others [1988] Ch. 333, C.A. (Civ. Div.), there was widespread acceptance of the classification of contempts as being either civil or criminal. Civil contempt consisted of disobedience to an order of the court in circumstances where the disobedience is principally a matter that affects the parties to the case. Sir John Donaldson (again) later pointed out that the classification was not really relevant, since contempts have to be proved to criminal standards anyway.
Now, get this.
First of all we have Lord Diplock in Att-Gen v. Times Newspapers Ltd. [1974], ante, outlines the various ways which the due administration of justice might be prejudiced: "The due administration of justice requires first that all citizens should have unhindered access to the constitutionally established courts of criminal or civil jurisdiction for the determination of disputes as their legal rights and liabilities; secondly, that they should be able to rely upon obtaining in the courts the arbitrament of a tribunal which is free from bias against any party and whose decision will be based upon those facts only that have been proved in evidence adduced before it in accordance with the procedure adopted in courts of law; and thirdly that, once the dispute has been submitted to a court of law, they should be able to rely upon there being no usurpation by any other person of the function of the court to decide according to law. Conduct which is calculated to prejudice any of these requirements or to undermine public confidence that they will be observed is contempt of court"
"They should be able to rely on freedom from bias"? "They should be able to rely on no usurpation by any other person of the function of the court"? Errr... Judges, Magistrates, Clerks, Ushers, Security Men? Well, they are 'functions of the court'. "Conduct which is calculated to prejudice any of these requirement is contempt of court"? SO WHO IS IN CONTEMPT??
Here's something else:
Buckley J. held that "No contempt had been committed because the case was to be tried by a Judge sitting alone, who would be unaffected"
And, lastly (for now):
At common law, a contempt of court is an act or omission calculated to interfere with the due administration of justice: Att-Gen v. Butterworth Islands, re a special reference from [1893] A.C 138. There is no impediment to a court making a finding of contempt, when it is appropriate to do so, not against the Crown directly but against a government department or a minister of the Crown in his official capacity: M. v. Home Office and another [1993] 3 All E.R. 537, H.L
If you read all those quotations again ... which by the way, can use in Court ... since you will be quoting from Archbold ... then the conclusions you can draw are:
(a. Only Judges, Magistrates and Clerks of the Courts can be held as having been in Contempt of Court if they don't act STRICTLY under their Oaths of Office. Thus, when demanding them to repeat their Oath - and they say that is irrelevant - you can say "It is far from irrelevant, according to what Lord Diplock said, which is quoted in Archbold. Would you like a copy of what he said?". The point is that, IN LAW, mens rea is a crucial factor, i.e. INTENT. When refusing to give your Name, etc. what is your INTENT? The answer is to refuse the deception of acquiescing to Admiralty Law, by virtue of being a Land-dweller and only subject to the Law-of-the-Land. Whereas their INTENT is to deceive you into acquiescing to the Laws-of-Waters (whether they realise it [Judges] or not [Magistrates]!). YOU are attempting to bring the entire Court back to honourable, true, real 'justice' ... whereas they are trying to pervert that course.
(b. You can't be in Contempt of a Court where the Judge is sitting alone ... because s/he is unaffected. You can be in contempt of the other Party ... but NOT of the Judge or the Court. (Fundamentally this saying that a Judge's shoulders should be sufficiently broad as to brush off even direct insults! Assuming, of course, they acted diligently and with integrity, i.e. under their Oaths, etc). Without any shadow of a doubt a Local Council (for example) will be in contempt of you ... otherwise they would not have summonsed you.
(c. And note: "There is no impediment to a court making a finding of contempt, when it is appropriate to do so, not against the Crown directly but against a government department or a minister of the Crown in his official capacity".

9 I have been a victim of LAS legal abuse syndrome facilitated through the Deputy, The Office of the public guardian, The Court of Protection, The PHSO and MPs lack to act.
10 My mother is a victim of fraud, theft, mal administration, criminal neglect and suffering the TORTS that go along with it without being able to secure legal redress where her own funds have been used to defend the very persons committing the acts listed above.
11 Without such access to those funds we turned indeed to common law in which we believe we have a right to.
12 The statute acts and provisions laid out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 is not protecting the people it was put there to protect.
13 It is protecting criminals.
I do hope your clarity is further enhanced on this matter.
We, my mother and I, sincerely hope that as our MP you will assist and liaise to the best of your ability with JOHN HEMMING MP to bring about some peace and security to our lives that have been in upheaval for not just 13 years but the 6 years prior to the settlement, making the total misery lasting some 19 years now, perhaps on the 20th year justice might prevail under common law.
Yours sincerely
Regards, Mike & Ann Clarke
READ the PDF version


When police brazenly protect organised criminals with law degrees, there is a serious global threat to security and human rights alike. This shows that crime has taken over Britain.

READ about more OVERCHARGING http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1693187/Alzheimers-couple-charged-44400.html

On 19/07/2013 00:29, A wrote:
Dear Sir,
Whilst to the untrained observers eye it may look like you are slightly bonkers, I think you are definitely on to something.
I suspect something amiss with freemason named above Judge pelling qc sitting at Manchester.
He has made a very dubious decision in law which severely harms my interests, not related to the CoP which I have read and am only too aware of from The Daily Mail.
They seem predators, exactly like you say.
Obviously your correspondence may be being monitored but I would very much like to hear from you.


Thank you for your email A.
Not sure where you read about me.
I am most definately onto something which is why I have been purged into exile under the threat of prison.
These people are criminals.
Probably through masonic interests, the court BIAS is rife and out of control leaving a man's common law rights in tatters.
The situation is widespread and to be honest gaining a fair and impartial trial is probably next to zero without a jury.
Its a smaller percentage of judges bringing the whole judiciary into disrepute, again possibly through masonic allegiences to the brethren brotherhood, but its whole contradictions are failing to convince me.
I do believe in my rights of Magna Carta the Bill of Rights alongside others that are without doubt OLD but none the less still in force. Statute Acts are based on consent which we withrew along time ago.
Even their own rules ie Mental Capacity Act Section 5 The protection of carers - they are ignoring, glossing over, to bend and shape to what ever they want, UTTER CORRUPT and one or two of these need hanging for TREASON.
Our human rights are not being met.. simple . com PELLING knows it and so do the rest of the chaotic mess calling themselves courts!
Legal Law is not LAWFUL. There is a whole god damn difference and all they are trying to do is force feed it to you, whether you like it or not, using COERCION & BLACKMAIL which I will not concede to.
Sorry to drone on. I have done my homework and I have read more than enough to convince me I am right, they are wrong and CORRUPTION is running rife. THIS IS A TYRANNY.
Mike & Ann Clarke
31 Cherry Tree Rd

A wrote; It's terrible that they are trying to stop you claiming the commercial lien which shows you are most definitely onto something and they know it. I see it's still on your website so my query is did they unlawfully imprision you for 3 months as sought? -- A
It is my sincerely held belief that the commercial lien is the sole reason why they have committed further unlawful acts. On the 14.1.2013 Pelling ignored all that was put forward by me & further by my defence team and I was left defenceless. Representation on a legal basis was sought but refused as legals fighting legals is not possible, apparently, which I have in writing.
The so called "admiralty administrative statute tribunal hearing" could not hear anything but their own - BIAS, UNFAIR & definately not IMPARTIAL it also requires the consent of all parties on its star chamber basis, which was refused and therefore unlawful, where its 'Judge' is without Jurisdiction for a multitude of reasons, not least of all operating not on his oath of office and further without consent from all parties in a room that was not a constitutional court that was applied for, on a conditional basis of acceptance of proceedings, served on the Judge and the High Court prior to proceedings.
After failing to maintain his authority by refusing to answer fundamental questions about PELLINGs lack of jurisdiction & the throwing out of my defence by PELLING the force of G4S security and the POLICE present after 7 minutes where PELLING walked out of the proceedings informing security he was not returning until my defence had been removed from court at which some 23 minutes later PELLING returned to conduct his unlawful acts whilst I remained defenceless, where my witnesses stayed on, to listen to the corrupt remains, ending with a 3 month prison sentence unless I purge my contempt. No prosecution witnesses available to testify their lies - which is lies. Hearsay evidence, all admissable.
Reading about purge and the corruption all becomes even more clear combined with a strong dose of coercion to blackmail. The Commercial Lien is still there on my website and is still a live document against all the parties contained in it. The Commercial Lien stands for 99 years and is not a creature of LEGAL status, it is purely a LAWFUL status COMMON LAWFUL and they know this, any 'so called' Judge without jurisdiction trying to interfere with threats of coercion and blackmail in unlawful environments is actually committing TREASON - FACT!
NOW look at it from a distance and try and get the block picture, the establishment do not want the authority of a commercial lien being given legal acceptance by a JURY as it is the way forward to get remedy without employing corrupt LAWYERS & JUDGES. They will be out of business.

READ about http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Re_Clarke_(2013)_EWCA_Civ_811,_(2013)_MHLO_52 (our case in the APPEAL COURT)

JULY 18 2013

READ about real news from http://akashictimes.co.uk/... & READ about http://akashictimes.co.uk/d-day-for-british-justice-how-mps-have-abolished-the-right-to-a-fair-trial/

Last week, the Justice and Security Bill was voted into law by MPs. The Bill has effectively spelled the end to fair trial in Britain by allowing both government authorities and commercial companies to take out criminal and civil proceedings against an individual without notifying them beforehand. It also gives the government the mandate to prevent suspects from gaining access to a lawyer of their choosing, hearing evidence against them, speaking out about their case or discovering the reason for a sentence being passed against them.

READ about us on http://thesmallplaces.blogspot.com.es/ & WHAT CONSTITUTES NEWS

From the victomised. READ about how the state turns the guns of the Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act onto the very people who are campaigning for justice, attempting to get them incarcerated under the same unlawful acts and then rehabilitate through the use of needles etc and force them into submission. This just demonstrates how they get away with sectioning people under these acts without thorough proper consultation through impartial experts, my own mother has proved beyond reasonable doubt her capacity to take her own decisions through four, in-depth Clinical Nuero-Psychological Expert reports, conducted usually over 4 hour periods each and yet the Court dismissed them for one of their own that lasted 40 minutes!!.

JULY 12 2013 NO WORD from OUR MP
Still no word off our MP but yet MP JOHN HEMMING states he is liaising with MP GORDON MARSDEN about our problems, would one not think that as his constituents he would at least acknowledge our correspondence personally?

A meeting in the House of Commons is due to take place inclusive of my MP GORDON MARSDEN, MP JOHN HEMMING and the DAILY MAIL and others to discuss the current situation. One topic being put forward by John Hemming is to petition parliament. The Daily Mail are interested in going to print on the story but are discussing the legalities.
We are also once again going to write to the HIGH COURT for copies of;
The so called Judge's Notes of PELLING QC
The notes from the Stenographer
The Audio CD recording of events inclusive of when the Judge left court for 23 minutes.
We are currently drawing up all witnesses statements of the events that day.

Roy Jenkins posted to Michael Doherty on Facebook

Michael, a friend of mine has recently been looking through documents for me ready for a court application to be made. He contacted me saying in a really surprised voice "Do you know how many times you have asked to be arrested and who you have asked to have arrest you and for what reason you should be arrested" , I simply replied a few times. Try again he said I have found over 50 requests of yours in a few documents, he then read out a few names, forgive this list you can remove this if you need to. Major, Bliar, Brown, Conmeran, Clegg all at Number Ten, Darling, Osbourne and others at Number Eleven Downing Street, around 20 chief constables of Scotland Yard, SOCA, West Midlands police, Staffordshire police, Warwickshire police. HM Customs CEO's, Serious Fraud Office. Loads of MPs, Flunkett, Reid, Clark, Straw, May of the Home Office. Lord Justices, Mr and Mrs Justices. To many judges to name. City of Westminster Magistrates Court, Royal Courts of Justice, several HHJ's, DJ judges in courts, plus more. He said "how the f--king hell has not one of these people NOT had you arrested, your words are seriously libellous if they are untrue". My reply was very simple "to arrest me they would have to arrest people right up to Number Ten for fraud, criminal acts, corruption, conspiracy". His reply to this was how can they defend what they have done. Simple really that's one of the reasons no banker has ever been arrested, isn't that right Mr Conmeran::) DON'T GIVE UP>

READ about contempt
1. Only Judges, Magistrates and Clerks of the Courts can be held as having been in Contempt of Court if they don't act STRICTLY under their Oaths of Office. Thus, when demanding them to repeat their Oath - and they say that is irrelevant - you can say "It is far from irrelevant, according to what Lord Diplock said, which is quoted in Archbold. Would you like a copy of what he said?". The point is that, IN LAW, mens rea is a crucial factor, i.e. INTENT. When refusing to give your Name, etc. what is your INTENT? The answer is to refuse the deception of acquiescing to Admiralty Law, by virtue of being a Land-dweller and only subject to the Law-of-the-Land. Whereas their INTENT is to deceive you into acquiescing to the Laws-of-Waters (whether they realise it [Judges] or not [Magistrates]!). YOU are attempting to bring the entire Court back to honourable, true, real 'justice' ... whereas they are trying to pervert that course.
2. You can't be in Contempt of a Court where the Judge is sitting alone ... because s/he is unaffected. You can be in contempt of the other Party ... but NOT of the Judge or the Court. (Fundamentally this saying that a Judge's shoulders should be sufficiently broad as to brush off even direct insults! Assuming, of course, they acted diligently and with integrity, i.e. under their Oaths, etc). Without any shadow of a doubt a Local Council (for example) will be in contempt of you ... otherwise they would not have summonsed you.
3. And note: "There is no impediment to a court making a finding of contempt, when it is appropriate to do so, not against the Crown directly but against a government department or a minister of the Crown in his official capacity". This must (in their little world) include Local Councils



Re: Purge your contempt; In history, religion, and political science, a purge is the removal of people who are considered undesirable by those in power from a government, from another organization, from their team owners, or from society as a whole. Purges can be peaceful or violent; many will end with the imprisonment or exile of those purged, but in some cases they will simply be removed from office. Restoring people who have been purged is known as rehabilitation.
Blackmail is an act, often a crime, involving unjustified threats to make a gain or cause loss to another unless a demand is met.[1][2] It may be defined as coercion involving threats of physical harm, threat of criminal prosecution, or threats for the purposes of taking the person's money or property
So, how can a person who so has the sincerest common held belief that his common law rights have been breached in Tribunal administrated admiralty statute courts that were clearly, not consented to and therefore VOID, then concede to an 'act' of coercion/BLACKMAIL!
I may have been PURGED but I will not be coerced to be BLACKMAILED. (catch 22)

A 'statute' is a legislative act of parliament, given the force of LAW, by the consent of the governed.
I cannot be in contempt of an unconsented to administrative tribunal, incidently, laced in BIAS that is not or was NOT FAIR and IMPARTIAL as is my HUMAN RIGHT.
A Civil Contempt Order is an Order of the Court finding that you have not complied with some act that the Court required of you. As a result of the non-compliance, the Court holds you in Civil Contempt and punishes you -- usually monetarily or by jail time, but suspends the punishment for a period of time, giving you the opportunity to "purge" yourself of the contempt by doing what the Court requires of you, for instance, by appearing for deposition. If you do what the court requires of you within the time allotted by the Court, you have "purged" yourself of contempt.
The highlighted bit of the above paragraph is, 'some act', and I refer you back to 'a statute act', black's law dictionary & where there has been no consent there is no force of law that can be associated making the original and or subsequent orders VOID, there is no contempt, it did not exist!
Not only does a statute act need your consent to be given the force of law but so does an administrative statute tribunal hearing. This is usually gained in a certain way, i.e, by entering their DOCK, or by standing when the Judge walks in or by being present helps. None of these things have I ever done, in fact, quite the opposite I have written to each individual court prior to date of hearing to proclaim my dissatifaction and that I do not consent and that a real common law court with Jury on this matter is the only court that can truly uphold the supreme common laws of this land in a FAIR and IMPARTIAL manner.
This of course is being denied, a denial of due process, another breach in my human rights. These parasites that have been sucking up cash from my mother in a fraud do not want all this exposing to the general public, so that they can continue with their ill gotten fraudulent gains against all walks of life for any manner of statute rule they choose to suddenly dream up and enforce against your will by dooping you into consent unknowingly!
This is what the government is trying to hide at all costs, and I believe thats why I have been PURGED into exile or prison. ALL of this is UNLAWFUL. Now, if the powers that be were going to demonstrate that their own made up rules and laws were supreme then they had the opportunity to address this in where it was shown to the court that their own MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 section 5, protecting carers from any civil liability in connection with the care and well being of any person coming under this act, but yet IGNORED - swept under the carpet. CLEARLY demonstrating what these people are prepared to do, BEND their own rules, to suit their own pockets. The vulnerable elderly or incapacitated, which lets not forget my mother can prove her capacity, are more vulnerable than ever at the expense of the government using words like PROTECTION and PRIVACY.
A tribunal in the general sense is any person or institution with the authority to judge, adjudicate on, or determine claims or disputes—whether or not it is called a tribunal in its title.[1] For example, an advocate appearing before a court on which a single judge was sitting could describe that judge as 'their tribunal'. Many governmental bodies that are titled 'tribunals' are so described to emphasize the fact that they are not courts of normal jurisdiction. Consent by all parties needed.
A place where you can be heard and not have your representation thrown out, where a right of audience is for everyone, not just the legal community, BIAS - UNLAWFUL.
Administrative law, which is the law of government agencies not common law not supreme law but bias law in favour of government agents.

Dear Sue Reid (Daily Mail)
I just wondered Sue what is your position on this matter and at what point might you might be interested in publishing our plight.
We do not have a lawyer on this matter, you may have gathered in correspondence that we could not get legal representation.
Our overall brief synopsis is,
Denied legal representation
Common laws rights dismissed
What representation offered was deemed no right of audience and thrown out
Hearsay evidence admitted
No prosecution witnesses
Tribunal Admiralty Hearings denied consent but ignored
Mothers finances stripped of uncapped charges that were promised to be capped in 2001
Failure to deliver requested detailed accounts and quite the opposite the hiding of them
Whilst in emigration for 4 years forced to live from pound sterling in a devaluing pound to some £100,000
During that emigration outside England & Wales jurisdiction - Fraud by false representation
The prevarication and deliberate obstruction to my mother securing a property exchange abroad, twice.
The deliberate devaluing of her UK property to try and escalate a quick sale of her home
The failure to provide to my mother her own funds to use for representation whilst the deputy was paid to represent himself from mums own funds
The courts own rules and acts laid out ie Mental Capacity act section 5 to protect carers - IGNORED
After the deputy told my mother his charges are unlikely to exceed £2000 per year he took in year 1 £26,377
Year 2 £14,000 and then proceeded to hide the fact.
He paid mum £200 weekly to live off whilst he took £507 weekly still unaccounted
The overall handling of mums finances to over £1.1 million pounds gone and unaccounted to mum whom...
Mum has 4 confirmed specialist doctors reports confirming that she HAS capacity!!
All complaints and investigations came to nothing - WOULD YOU TURN TO COMMON LAW??
In short the OFFICE of the PUBLIC GUARDIAN and the Court of Protection have facilitated FRAUD against my mother and to try and cover that fraud from being exposed they have used harassment acts in tribunal courts to gain a VOID comittal order against the CARER to,

Mike & Ann Clarke
31 Cherry Tree Rd

PS the above is a partial picture of the overall full nightmare lasting 12 years!!

READ another letter to MP GORDON MARSDEN copied to Daily Mail & MP JOHN HEMMING.

Having just expressed an email of complaint about the lack of response from our MP Gordon Marsden to leader of the labour party ED MILLIBAND I now re enter what I wrote 2 years ago....
Ed Milliband Ed Milliband

Labour talk about eradicating the "fast buck" culture but yet in our eyes it was them that created it, via Jack Straw with the initial COURT OF PROTECTION and all the fast buck's being made, were being delivered into the hands of the elite from the pockets of the vulnerable on the pretense of protection. Such lies and hypocrisy is tantamount to treason of the vulnerable british minority of elderly and incapacitated which are easy pickings for governments when their own pockets are virtually bankrupt. They do talk some shite! Link to Jack Straw 2009 thefts!!

Dear Gordon Marsden
I have faxed your office in BLACKPOOL with a copy of some emails between myself and John Hemming. He has indicated that he is happy to submit a petition to parliament on ours and your behalf with regard to our severe problems of a failure to get JUSTICE &
any legal representation
any full investigation by police
any investigation by the public guardian
any investigation by the PHSO

Having turned as you are aware to common law and issued a claim we now find ourselves on the run from a prison sentence for fraudulent harassment charges and corrupt contempt of court charges.
I have written to you many many times and the only response we get, meaning my mother and I, is an acknowledgement by electronic automated response.
Considering the deep problems associated with the OFFICE OF PUBLIC GUARDIAN and COURT OF PROTECTION that we publicly are not alone in, I would of expected to be truthful more involvement from yourself as your constituents, me and my mother.
The matter is now more urgent than ever. I forwarded to you the PHSO's recent response and their lack of being able to get on with the task to hand and your last comments to me in person where that failing the PHSO's completed investigation you may be able to do more.
I trust this is the suggestion that MP John Hemming is making or can I ask with urgency do you have any other ideas to put forward. If you feel it would be easier to liaise with John Hemming please feel free to do and he then in turn can advise us. full letter 603005

JUNE 30 2013 SOLD

Castle for corrupt politicians to hide in, bankers, multi-national companies, the owners of our national utilities, gas, water, electricity, knighthoods for owners of asda and the others.602976

JUNE 29 2013 Law reform minister’s firm paid £200,000 from legal aid
READ about HELEN GRANT with her hand in the gravy train.
The minister in charge of legal reform is disclosed to be an indirect beneficiary of the legal-aid “gravy train”. Her situation has led to officials privately demanding that she be excluded from decisions on the system.
READ about my letter to her about COURT OF PROTECTION reform with the OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC GUARDIAN that did not even get a reply.

WATCH FELLOW CAMPAIGNER Len Lawrence on COURT of Protection corruption.

READ about judges taking decisions over the phone in one sided vague submissions of evidence.


Still campaigning after sending this card to several in January 2012 but now still free from a prison sentence we carry on from abroad in a country that takes care of their elderly where we are out of arms reach from JUDICIAL CORRUPTION as POLITICAL PRISONERS.

That this House notes that the Judicial Executive Board (JEB) recently decided that it would no longer be possible to listen to official recordings of court hearings; further notes that the JEB has not given a reason for this decision or a date of the meeting at which this decision was taken; further notes that no minutes of the JEB are published on the internet; believes that reasons should be given for such a material shift in the transparency and accountability of the judicial system; and calls for those reasons to be given and for the JEB to publish the minutes of its meetings on the internet save where Freedom of Information exemptions would apply.

READ a partial extract from Mr Justice Peter Jackson Court of Protection “Start Quote [The law is] completely inaccessible to those for whose benefit the legislation has been devised” End Quote. Robert Watts, Senior Partner, Ratcliffe Duce & Gammer Solicitors alleged to the Law Society that the reason Slough County Court would not allow Leonard Lawrence access to the Court of Protection, when Mr Lawrence was a patient and subject to the Court of Protection, was that it would have caused a delay in legal proceeding. 75% of those like Leonard Lawrence with acquired brain injury are divorced by their spouse, sadly Mr Justice Peter Jackson and the Court of Protection can afford no protection to extremely vulnerable adults.

JUNE 27 2013 Parliamentary reply 4 months later
READ a reply from the PHSO Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman that has taken them 4 months.
READ the original exchange.

READ about fellow campaigner and his description of what's happening to 'our' courts. The UK holds itself up as a paragon of virtue around the world, criticising other countries for having political prisoners, and abusing peoples human rights, when in fact we have political prisioners here in the UK. The English Legal system is absolutly terrible. I cannot imagine how awful the government is being by ignoring the law and cheating the citzen to gain an advantage. Comment by another:- They must be sick by using our money to ridicule us and take the piss by setting up organizations to protect government. I do not know what the hell we can do about it because no one can do anything. All i can do is try to prosecute those judges responsible to try and get some sense into them. The legal fraternity with the criminal justice system needs serious counselling.

READ a letter from PANNONE LLP showing their contempt for what they have done and are party to, no matter how they continually try to distance themselves from the corruption that they are at the centre of. Needless to say that their barrister is in fact a witness to what transpired in the courtroom and will undoubtedly be summoned at some later date to state what he saw and witnessed. It was all Pannone's doing in this matter to formulate it's conspiracy kangaroo court where there where no prosecution witnesses to testify their lies, where heresay evidence was allowed to be used and where the whole content was laced in bias in which they are fully aware of in order to gain their ill gotten committal order of a VOID nature from a facist corrupt Justice system serving not the people but themselves. Ultimately of course, to stop, silence, gagg - pervert the course of trying to obtain justice to what can only be described as a fraud committed upon my pensioner mother.

How admiralty law is operating as statute law and denying the use of common laws, unless you can grasp the overall operation of these courts and then reserve all your rights without prejudice under these commercial uniform codes UCC(1-308(old 1-207).9). We are, of course, all equal under the law but that's providing you know the law and of course, we do not, otherwise we'd all be lawyers! The games that are being forced upon us are nothing short of despicable by governments and judicial agents stripping lay persons of their common law rights to do as they please within UCC's heading toward a one world government and a one world court. Read The UCC connection.pdf
Read UCC 1 and 3.pdf

Re: parliamentary ombudsman. COURT OF PROTECTION 16.06.2013

FAO MP John Hemming copied to MP Gordon Marsden & DAILY MAIL & BBC

Dear John Hemming MP
You may recall I wrote to you many moons ago on May 29 2012 regarding the involvement of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
The PHSO dragged and dragged and dragged some more till finally nothing came from them and our patience exhausted.

We turned to common law and when a claim was issued it resulted in a claim of harassment against me. The courts involved, I claimed were unconstitutional therefore invalid by bias and by refusing judgement by my peers.
This was ignored and so I considered them VOID orders.

It eventually came to an additional unconstitutional court of committal which I refused to attend but did send in representation.
The representation was thrown out and police were called, the court continued in my absence then undefended and they issued a 3 month prison sentence.

I and my mother fled the country on the 13th January 2013 the day before the court case 2MA90015 fearing the worst.
We having been living in exile abroad on the run ever since.
We have been unable to get legal representation.

The court would not send the transcripts. The transcript finally arrived this week some 6 months later via the prosecuting company solicitors PANNONE LLP and the transcripts did not match several witness accounts in the courtroom events.

I have requested on several occasions the audio CD copy of the court room events but to no avail. I have also requested the JUDGES notes but to no avail. I have requested the stenographers notes but to no avail.

Because the legal system would be fighting the legal system apparently you cannot get legal representation. So without any defence, with representation being thrown out and the courtroom corruption running rife we reside in exile in fear of our own countries lack of a credible Justice system.

If in the event my mother and me are captured, we will claim POLITICAL ASYLUM due to breaches in our human rights.
What I ask can be done??
How did WANDA MADDOCKS gain justice, HOW was she vindicated??

Consequences of abuse [edit]Although the primary consequence of unaddressed legal-system abuse for victims is injustice, abuses of the legal system inflict harm in many other ways. Civil litigation and criminal defense of the innocent impose psychological stress, often severe, upon the parties involved. Often such stress will affect physical health as well. When the system is abused and justice is denied as a result, stress and its effects can be exacerbated enormously.[1][unreliable source?] Karin P. Huffer, M.S., M.F.T. hypothesized the condition Legal Abuse Syndrome (LAS) as a form of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) caused by ethical violation, legal abuse, betrayal, abuse of power, abuse of authority, lack of accountability and fraud.[3][4] Chronic and high-profile legal abuse have societal effects as well, including distrust of the law, law enforcement and the legal system, rationalization of small crimes by ordinarily honest citizens, and psychological stress.[citation needed]

Since the 14th January 2013 and the start of our insecure position, it has resulted in moving home 5 times. On one occasion where we had no option but to sleep in the car as the position had become dire. Throughout our ordeal of being persecuted by an unethical corrupt legal and judicial system operating with impunity in the UK my mother remains resiliant in her own stance on this matter of corruption against her and I. She repeatedly states that though I have given her all the options to return to the UK whether it be to her own home or to her daughters care she refuses point blank to do so without me. Her sole desired aim is to stay with me her son and carer of 17 years regardless. My partner of 5 years also is resolute in all this, that he continues to protect her and me no matter what. We are currently settled, but yet still traumatised by our experiences and we will continue to fight this matter until some sort of justice comes our way hopefully, amongst the sea of injustices that have been forced upon us. The property mum owns in the UK has been systematically raided by police in the early hours of mornings which has inturn led to the income from its lodgers to be lost as they had become sick and tired of early morning raids by the police and so left. Our income diminished substantially we have sold possessions to maintain our existence whilst abroad and are now looking for work to feed us and sustain our living. All of this takes its toll on the so called protected party of the court of protection where infact they have exploited her, abused her and used her, failing to give any such protection in a wreckless manner to try and protect the exposure of the frauds against her that we continue to attempt to expose even with all the risks being associated with it.

JUNE 13 2013
13/06/2013 PENDING APPEAL to the committal Case 2MA90015 Manchester High Court
Melanie McGuirk of PANNONE LLP Solicitors
I wrote to you over a week ago and have not received a reply.
After a six month wait I finally received your transcript of the 14th January Court hearing.

The transcript did not match witness events.
I requested the cd audio copy of the transcript.
I also requested a copy of the Judges Notes.
I also requested a copy of the stenographers notes of the events.
You have failed to send even an acknowledgement.
I now ask why?
Mike Clarke

Dear Melanie
My representation would also like a copy not just of the CD audio recording transcript but,
1. The Judges notes
2. The stenographers record of events
Mike Clarke
From: Melanie McGuirk
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:51 PM
To: mike@opg.me ; mike@rake.net
Cc: Melanie McGuirk
Subject: Pannone LLP
Dear Sir
We write further to your email dated 5th June 20 We attach
1 a transcript (in three parts) of the hearing on 14th January 2013
2 a letter from Pannone LLP sent to mike@rake.net dated 30th January 2013 which enclosed transcripts of all the previous hearings in the proceedings
Yours faithfully
Pannone LLP

A STATEMENT of appeal was sent in to the court and no reply was ever received. This court operated without any defence and without any prosecution witnesses with its findings of hearsay all accepted. It does'nt take a rocket scientist to work out that we are a world of corruption in the UK where if you come up against the legal world you will be denied any representation and where Judges will operate outside common law to conduct themselves above the law in a treasonous manner to attain what they want. The justice being dished out by the Court of Protection and its cronies aint justice at all, its abuse of power with impunity extending to the highest of levels bringing the judiciary into disrepute. The upheaval and ferrocity of the chaos placed upon my mother's remaining life in her late years will no doubt hasten her to her death faster than being where she desired to be and with whom she wanted to be with & the award intact, that was promised by the first general order of THE COURT OF PROTECTION, its senior Judge Denzil Lush and his agent HUGH JONES of PANNONE LLP. They have lied, plundered by mal practice and stole hundreds of thousands to suit their needs without accountability except to themselves. The Judiciary appears to scared to speak out against their own opting essentially to protect each other based probably on MASONIC brotherhood oaths to each other and to continue to break age old laws of judgement by peers to rid out bias and impartiality where even written in todays Human Rights they care not about either. Is this not a state of TYRANNY that needs to be dealt with?
Read the notice that was served upon the judge prior to the case that in the transcript he admits he read all that was served on him.

LISTEN to an application to appeal the costs refused.

Michael Clarke Case 2MA90015 14.01.2013 linked to Ann Clarke’s case of FRAUD case B4 2013/0087 6th June 2013 10am
Ref COURT of Protection
FAO HUGH JONES of Hugh Jones Solicitors and LUCY NICOL of Pannones
Dear Hugh Jones and Lucy Nicol
On the 14th of January 2013 the legal fiction Michael Clarke was sentenced to 3 months in prison in a corrupt court room. unconstitutionally formed and operating outside common laws, by a corrupt Judge, breaching the Magna Carta, the Bill of rights and Human rights acts.
I requested to the court by letter an appeal but no reply was ever received. I have requested several times a copy of the transcripts of that hearing to which again no replies have been received.
I hereby request the transcript of that hearing sent to me, ideally today, by return email for the addition to our court of appeal hearing tomorrow at 10 am by telephone conference call to our place of exile from the fraud and corruption that you both are associated with via your companies.
Kind regards
Mike Clarke
Ann Clarke

Watch RUSSIAN TV of the places, reporting on British Corrupt injustices!

MAY 2013
Sign the petition to stop secret courts = http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/the-secrecy-of-the-family-courts-should-be-lifted-now/sign.html#se

Read yet another letter to appeal courts for full disclosure via an interim order and assurances to our safety. Hello Mike of the family Clarke , Your fax to FAO A SMITH REF B4/2013/0087 (+44 20 79476621) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

MAY 9 2013 Let me tell you this.pdf
Read further follow up mail to GRAYLING from disgruntled public about in-justice rife in the justice system.

Read yesterdays correspondence from fellow campaigner for an investigation into endemic corruption within the ministry of Justice.

MAY 08 2013
Read about HUGH JONES SOLICITORS and the team/statement... "We do not charge exorbitant fees, as these are assessed by the courts, so you can be sure that they are above board and fair." Now Read 1st general order 20.03.2001 pdf and his statement back then in 2001 where his fees he told the judge, the court, the family and his client, my mother, that his fees would not eradicate the capital heads of damages awarded and where his fees were predicted at £2000 per year amounting to over 10 years not exceeding £20,000. In his first year he took £26,377 and proceeded to hide the fact from his client with his second year at £14,000. His total fees exceeded over £150,000 and then he fraudulently maladministered another £100,000 and still to this day has refused to supply any detailed accounts, backed up by the office of the public guardian and court of protection fraudsters. HUGH JONES solicitors have been built off the backs of vulnerable little old ladies whom indeed have capacity, assisted and facilitated by the organised criminal elite working within the Court of Protection and its collection of fraudulent, treasonous, "so-called" JUDGES, bending laws and rules to suit their own criminal pockets. On top of all that, anyone, seeking justice and accountability is being sent to prison under the guise of "Contempt of Court" in fraudulent courts, unrepresented, or representation being thrown out of court, without any jury being given, even if requested, flagrantly breaching The Magna Carta, The Bill of Rights & The Human Rights Act with impunity, amounting to a TYRANNY.
Forcing people out of their homes and in cases like ours forcing them out of their own country to flea the TYRANNY(arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority).

MAY 7 2013 Email to Daily Mail
Read an email sent to Daily Mail...

Read CHRIS Gayling MP orders a review of Court of Protection.

Read it published on Baili website

Read Daily Mail article about new instructions for Judges...

Read the article...

Read an article in the GUARDIAN newspaper.

Read APPEAL COURT date for new hearing ...

Read article 1
Read article 2

APRIL 10 2013
watch video

Read davidcameron08042013.pdf
Read helengrantletter11022013.pdf
Read BP Collins FINAL REPORT 20 July 2009.pdf

APRIL 7 2013
Read more fraud... http://anajinn.blogspot.ca/2010/10/letter-to-british-prime-minister-and.html

Phone call to the court of appeal this lunchtime today confirmed there is of yet no movement as the case is still before progression lawyers to consider its content.

APRIL 3 2013
Read about HUGH JONES quits PANNONES.
The head of court of protection at Pannone’s Manchester office has left the firm to set up his own court of protection outfit with former Pannone partner Rachel Dobson.
According to a source close to the situation Hugh Jones is taking a “considerable amount” of clients from Pannone to his firm, Hugh Jones Solicitors, as well as up to 10 staff members, including administrators and solicitors, from the department.
However, a spokesperson for Pannone said the only person leaving the department was Jones, who they admitted had “acquired some Court of Protection business from Pannone since he left the firm in March. Following Jones’s departure Lucy Nicol has been promoted to lead the department. Any support staff expected to join Hugh Jones Solicitors are not understood to have been impacted by last year’s redundancies, when 12 fee-earner and support staff roles were made redundant in the firm’s construction, road traffic accident and family teams in Manchester (10 January 2012). The firm was then set to make its second round of redundancies last year with 16 lawyer and support staff positions facing the axe (12 November 2012). According to a press statement Jones was advised by Frank Shepherd at DWF and Nigel Barratt at Hursts on the launch. He did not respond to requests for comment at the time of writing.

MARCH 26 2013 Phone call to APPEAL COURT
[14:52:00] *** Call to APPEAL COURT LONDON, duration 01:04. *** whom said that the case has gone before lawyers to consider the next course of action and that the reply may take up to another week.

Telephone to them for an update to which they said they had created a mini bundle they required the full judgement on costs to which I faxed the following Read. Hello, Your fax to Case progression MANAGER Rita Downes 2013/0087 (+44 20 79476810) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Read Dunhill v Burgin (No 2).pdf on VOID ORDERS

Read davidcameroncourtreply.pdf

MARCH 8 2013 MoJustice Memo with Official Solicitor
Read the Memorandum of Understanding between The Ministry Of Justice and the Official Solicitor and the related freedom of information request LINK.
Read FOI 80758 Ms Lucy Series 06 03 13.pdf
Read MOU MOJ OS 050510.pdf
Read AP ARK 250213.pdf

JUDGEMENT against HIS HONOUR JUDGE MARK PELLING QC for failing to pay an interim payment requested off his £1,000,000 contract of debt ...
Read the STAT DEC contract served
Read the skeleton argument served
Read the NOTICE to HIGH COURT served
Read the summons served
Proving the fact that they believe they are above the LAW!!
Read JUDGEMENT07022013_merged.pdf ALL 24 Pages
[14:49:54] PamFax: Hello, Your fax to VOID case 2MA90015 FAO PELLING QC (+44 161 2405050) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

MARCH 7 2013
Read transcript2ndrequest07032013.pdf ... Hello, Your fax to VOID case 2MA90015 FAO Rose Shaw (+44 161 2405050) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Read david cameron court summons issued.pdf Read CONTRACT

MARCH 6 2013 from Len Lawrence
Read a letter from Len Lawrence.

Read about the persecuted NormanScarth.pdf when I read this it made all of my own problems fall right into perspective.

Read the reply to the PHSO Parliamentary Health & Service Ombudsman.

MARCH 2 2013 Leonard Lawrence the PILOT
Read about Leonard Lawrence the PILOT. Rt Hon Sir James Munby.pdf

Read This needs to be sent far and wide.pdf

Read the letter from Blackpool police denying responsibilty for harassment and trespass of mums property.

Read the letter from PHSO Parliamentary health and Service Ombudsman now released into the public domain where they are more concerned with investigating whats on my transparent website than investigating the cause of the overall problem.

Read a Reply to the LONDON COURT of APPEAL about understanding that without FULL DISCLOSURE of all files by the respondents this case cannot proceed.
Hello, Your fax to Case progression MANAGER Rita Downes 2013/0087 (+44 20 79476810) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Hello, Your fax to FAO NO OTHER PERSON THAN MR CAMERON (+44 20 79250918 ) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT. 25.02.2013@11am

Dear Ms Clarke, The office requires a bundle of core documents before the application can progress.
These documents have already been provided by you and therefore for your assistance the office will compile a mini bundle on your behalf. This will include the sealed appellants notice, order and judgment under appeal, and the grounds and skeleton argument.
Please ensure that any further documents you wish to add to the bundle are provided within 7 days. After which the application will proceed to be listed/referred to a judge.
As you already have copies of these documents we will not be sending you a copy of the mini bundle.
Yours faithfully
Mrs Rita Downes
Case Management Section B (Room E314)
Civil Appeals Office, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
0207 947 6426 - Fax 0207 947 6810

FEBRUARY 18 2013 WEBFUSION finally reply
Read about the suspension of domain www.opg.me.uk by WEBFUSION LTD and their reply posted today.

FEBRUARY 14 2013
Read CameronContractUPDATED14022013.pdf Hello, Your fax to FAO NO OTHER PERSON THAN MR CAMERON (+44 20 79250918 ) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

CONTRACT issued to David Cameron as the person holding ultimate responsibilty to protect citizens of the UK. [12:25:44] PamFax: Hello, Your fax to FAO NO OTHER PERSON THAN MR CAMERON (+44 20 79250918 ) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Read the contract served upon WEBFUSION LTD in response to the illegal closure of web domain www.opg.me.uk Hello, Your fax to fao LEGAL TEAM 123 reg www.opg.me.uk FAO CEO (+44 845 8590021) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Read about video conferencing for parties overseas.



We have the same problem in the UK and the majority of people are in oblivion to it over here it’s call the Court of protection sounds pretty impressive don’t it. Run by a bunch of crooks. You cannot afford to even have a major accident and demand justice because your solicitor will claim you do not have? the mental capacity to make that decision, my own mother has had capacity throughout her 12 year ordeal but yet they have stolen, mal administered and committed fraud against her to a minimum figure not less than £250,000. Additionally as in this video me the son whom wants to present and publish the evidence surrounding this has been by a fraudulent court and judge found in contempt and sentenced to prison?

Read [16:29:39] PamFax: Hello, Your fax to FAO M LAYTON & Mrs DOWNS case 2013/0087 (+44 20 79477679) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT to LONDON CIVIL APPEALS OFFICE & also sent to Manchester courts & American service provider of the website THE WEB/NETWORK SOLUTIONS.

FEBRUARY 8 2013 opg.me.uk 123REG LETTER
Read Hello, Your fax to www.opg.me.uk 123-reg LEGAL (+44 870 9126612) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT 12.02.2013. Hello, Your fax to fao LEGAL TEAM 123 reg www.opg.me.uk (+44 845 8590021) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT 12.02.2013

JOIN on facebook & checkout http://www.uglyjudge.com/stop-unethical-lawyers-judges-and-family-members-by-capping-fees/

I Leonard Lawrence Pilot have also been following the case of Mr Michael Clarke. Mike Clarke is not alone Google Leonard Lawrence Pilot
How the Mental Health Act is used in the United Kingdom Family Courts and the Court of Protection.
a) Mr. Lawrence discovered that BP Collins Solicitors Gerrards Cross, Bucks, had been asked to hide assets from the court. Thereafter, BP Collins Solicitors and Dominic Brazil 1 Kings Bench Walk were able to have Leonard Lawrence certified by Dr Royds, Cygnet Health Care, Godden Green, under Part V11 Mental Health Act 1983 without a medical. The Official Solicitors office was also able to have Leonard Lawrence certified by Dr Royds under Part V11 Mental Health Act 1983 without a medical.
b) Helen Clift Official Solicitors office, BP Collins Solicitors and Mr. Dominic Brazil 1 Kings Bench Walk, aided by Nicholas Allen 29 Bedford Row, Sarah Benfield Ratcliffe Duce and Gammer Solicitors and Caroline Wilbourne 1 Garden Court Chambers by not disclosing Court of Protection Medical Certificates CP3 were then able to generate substantial legal fees and asset strip Leonard Lawrence.
c) This practice continues today, the case of Lee Gilliland Bristol also demonstrates this.
d)No comfort can be gained when in can be shown that Mehrunnisa Lanai, Director of Inclusion, Solicitors Regulatory Authority had also failed to disclose to a senior police officer at Devon & Cornwall Police copies of the three Court of Protection Medical Certificates CP3 that the Solicitors Regulatory Authority held and the findings of the SRA investigating solicitor Ms Anderson who directs liability at the Official Solicitor and barristers for Leonard Lawrence non registration with the Court of Protection.
The Law Society investigating Solicitor report disclosed in 2011 The Official Solicitor was acting as Mr. Lawrence’s representative and Guardian and as such had the greater duty to protect him. I consider that the majority of the steps that Mr. Lawrence feel should have been taken to protect him should have been taken by the Official Solicitor rather than the firm including the decision and action necessary to invoke the Court of Protection.
Counsel advice on Leonard Lawrence, funded by the Legal Services Commission Special Cases Unit, Mr. Lawrence had the protection of the Official Solicitor but was not registered as a protected party should be in the Court of Protection. Left financially vulnerable at both point of trial and order of sale.
Disclosure of Leonard Lawrence case file by May Maughan, Deputy Official Solicitor on the 20 March 2012 revealed many pages having been torn out. 20 December 2012 May Maughan refuse to discuss why these pages have been remove prior to her sending the files to Simpson Millar Solicitors. The remaining case files identified that during the period Leonard Lawrence had been under the jurisdiction of the Official Solicitor Ms Helen Clift knew on at least four occasions it was necessary to have involve the Court of Protection.
Google Leonard Lawrence Pilot http://www.ministryofjustice.info/leonard-lawrence-pilot-and-the-official-s..http://www.ministryofjustice.info/leonard-lawrence-pilot-and-the-official-s... Leonard Lawrence Pilot

Extension time allowed by court of appeal is no more than 5 days to sort out bundles of documents when we have not received the relevant transcripts & notice they will not refer to the case as it is labelled

Subject: Pannone Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:32:52 +0100 From: Peter Hofschröer To: abuse@web.com, NWheeler@web.com CC: mike@opg.me Dear Sir or Madam, The attached letter send to you by British lawyers Pannone, which I have seen posted on the internet, causes me considerable concern. I have been following the case of Mr Michael Clarke and his disabled mother, for whom he is the carer, for some years now. We have a common interest, as we are both full time carers for our disabled mothers, both of whom are the subjects of horrific abuse and crime undertaken by corrupt officials. lawyers and politicians in Britain. So that you understand the situation and the legal background to this case, may I outline a few facts for your information? In Britain, there is a judicial body known as the Court of Protection. This court decides about making provisions for people deemed to lack mental capacity. Most courts on this planet are open to the public. In most countries on this planet, the assessments of two qualified psychiatrists are required to determine capacity. This is not the case in Britain. In Britain, the Court of Protection meets in secret, the accused do not have to be told about this and it is deemed sufficient for one unqualified social worker to claim they think a person might be incapacitated for an attorney to be appointed to run the finances of a wealthy, old person. What then happens is that the lawyer making the claim for incapacity, who is usually acting on behalf of relatives or other persons determined to seize those assets, can then make unlimited charges against the estate, while the relatives pick up the balance, leaving a person who may well have capacity, stripped of their assets. There is also no limit on the amount the court may charge in costs. All in all, a very lucrative business for the perpetrators, while the victims, who are deemed incapacitated, are stripped of their assets. One of the judges running this dubious court is a certain Denzil Lush. He is known in the legal profession as Denzil Slush Fund. One, and just one British Member of Parliament has spoken out against this legalised crime. His name is John Hemming. You my like to google his name. Mr Clarke is a determined man. He has given up his life, business and career to care for his mother. He is doing his best to stop her being robbed blind by the corrupt British authorities. In doing so, he has made many enemies. While a British court may have decided his statements of fact made in the public domain are defamatory, he is merely exercising his freedom of speech. Let us also not forgot that the British libel laws are notorious the world over and are designed to stop the victims of the rich and powerful from complaining about being victims of the crime they commit. This is precisely what is going on here. In 1776, America took a stand against British tyranny and gained its freedom. This case is an opportunity for you to make that expression of freedom again. Please do so here. Yours faithfully, Peter Hofschröer P.S. If you want to read about my mother's case, please google: "The Abuse of Grandma B"

Dear Mike, Thank you for contacting 123-reg on the 5th February 2013. We have checked and your domain is currently suspended for legal reasons. For further queries regarding this issue, please send an email to our legal department: legal@webfusion.com If we can be of any further help with regard to this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Kind Regards Bogdan 123-reg

read Pannone letter to website service provider in AMERICA requesting the website shut down. Registrant Network Solutions LLC., receive the attached court documents and/or related notice. Please review the documents and respond to us within 5 days confirming that you have removed the offending material as directed by the order. Please respond by Feb 9, 2013 with your removal confirmation otherwise we will be forced to disable your website site in compliance with the documents. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and please contact the undersigned with any questions. Tom Lam Manager: Abuse, Fraud and Executive Escalations Register.com, a Web.com service Maritime Center, 2nd Floor, 1505 Barrington St | Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3K5 Canada Office/FAX: (902) 749-2746

Appeal statement faxed to court today. Receipt - Hello, Your fax to APPEAL APPLICATION case 2MA90015 (+44 161 2405050) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Summons issued in county court to Judge MARK PELLING QC for failure to pay interim payment requested off his debt of £1,000,000 for his failure in his duty to protect my common law rights in wilful neglect of his duty of care becoming dishevelled of his corporate shield. IS THIS WHAT THE JUDGE TRYED TO PREVENT BY THIS MORNINGS DAWN RAID ON MRS CLARKES BUSINESS RESIDENCE!

At mums property at 4am this morning stealing keys to enter rooms without a search warrant asking questions of tenants clearly distressed. The matter was recorded on video and will be available shortly. The police would not clearly show to the occupant a warrant that was asked for. Today mum will be filing harassment complaints upon the police for disruption to her business. The police have again breached the trespass signs of removal of right of access where a new bill/invoice will be drawn up for an additional £5000 adding to the existing bill lodged with Blackpool Police for £10,000. Break in House 1 & 2 videos below & 3 days ago police sitting outside...

Appeal statement to be updated.

JANUARY 31 2013 Transcript reply from PANNONE
Read the transcript reply with a denial of our accusation of trying to silence me and pervert the course of justice in their bogus court committal order to prison.

Read [11:27:43] PamFax: Hello, Your fax to HUGH JONES EMMA HOLT PAUL JONSON (+44 161 9094444) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Read fax TO civil appeals AND fax no update plus proof of postage. Hello, Your fax to Mr M LAYTON Case progression MANAGER B6 section (+44 20 79476810) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT.

Read IT where our case is now featured highlighted in yellow to demonstrate the corruption.

From: Michael 29 December 2012 Dear High Court of the Justiciary,
Dear Honourable Sirs
When a person has requested a jury court of his peers to judge a matter he deems as a conflict of interests where 'the bar' maybe judging 'the bar', and that this request has been turned down, is such a person being denied due process & under Article 6 of Human Rights access to a fair and impartial hearing.
If that person subsequently deems that the order issued by that judge 'flawed' and he subsequently makes a statutory declaration, declaring it void, is the order VOID??
Yours faithfully,
Mr Clarke Link to this From: Michael
Dear High Court of the Justiciary,
Dear Honourable Sirs
When a person has requested a jury court of his peers to judge a matter he deems as a conflict of interests where 'the bar' maybe judging 'the bar', and that this request has been turned down, is such a person being denied due process & under Article 6 of Human Rights access to a fair and impartial hearing.
If that person subsequently deems that the order issued by that judge 'flawed' and he subsequently makes a statutory declaration, declaring it void, is the order VOID??
Yours faithfully,
Mr Clarke

EXTENSION of time requested to civil appeals office faxed today and emailed. Receipt - Hello Mike of the family Clarke , Your fax to Mr M LAYTON Case progression MANAGER B6 section (+44 20 79476810) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT. More information is available in the PamFax Portal 29/01/2013 Regards, PamFax Team @ Scendix

In an effort to get legal representation and legal aid ie barrister representation on these matters an email to a solicitor gained this reply today....
Dear Mike
Thank you for the documentation supplied. I know you will not be happy when I say to you that much of the documentation would not have any relevance In deciding the case. Indeed I cannot actually see any coherent argument put fotward by you or those advising you. I can say that you would not be able to apply for public funding or at least any application would fail the merits test. In any event the matter involves action with Pannones and we are part of their “Connect to Law “ network and would not wish to become involved In a matter of this nature against them. I have noted with interest your invoice to the judge and ufortunately have to say that this shows how little you and anyone assisting understands in these matters. I am sorry to write to anyone in these terms but I often have to tell people unpleasant truths and unfortuneately this is one of those occasions. I cannot legally advise you in these matters nor can I engage in any further correspondence or communication with you. Please accept my apologies for the typing errors.
John xxxxx

JANUARY 28 2013 email to PANNONE
Read requests.

INVOICE for £1,000,000 sent to Judge PELLING QC with interim payment request for £500 immediate. Delivery receipt by fax; Hello Mike Clarke . . ., Your fax to FAO PELLING QC URGENT CASE 2MA90015 (+44 161 2405050) was SUCCESSFULLY SENT. More information is available in the Portal at https://?????? Regards, Fax Team @ Scendix


Upon leaving the property one of our friends was approached upon the drive by police, our friend turned and said have you read the sign that states IMPLIED RIGHT OF ACCESS removal, to which the policeman then duely moved back onto the public pavement and said "do you live here?" Our friend said, "I am not obliged to answer any of your questions" to which the policeman got back in his vehicle and after a brief stint on his radio, left.

JANUARY 25 2013 MORE OBSTRUCTION BY COURT STAFF LISTEN to the phonecall to court staff and how you cannot seem to get consistency where sometime you get the recordings and other times they refuse?

As the hours and days countdown with regard to any actions of appeal time etc Court staff continue to assist with the overall corruption and fraud going on by giving out differing information each day in regard to reqests for the order, the judgement and CD copy of digital hearings for our common law defence team.
FAXED DELIVERY to 01612405000 Case No. 2MA90015 2pm 14.1.2013
Manager of Specialist Listings, Manchester Mercantile
Dear Ms Rose Shaw
Despite your statement in your email dated the 17th January 2013 you are aware that Mr Michael Clarke, as he has already requested is entitled to a free of charge copy of any hand written record of the proceedings and a CD copy of the digital audio recording of the hearing during which Pannone solicitors successfully obtained a committal order against him.
In cases connected with the Court of Protection and its national network of probate practitioners evidence shows that an individual or individuals within HM Courts Service can hinder the course of justice by obstructing the disclosure of the recordings of those court proceeding’s when it is known there are time limits to appeal the decision.
1. You are yet again advised you must provide to Mr Michael Clarke without any further delay CD copy of the digital audio recording of the hearing as fixed by the court clerk.
2. If you are not going to supply a copy you need to obtain an order from “His Honour Judge” Pelling denying disclosure along with his reasons.
3. We further require two sealed copies of the judgement, as these have still not arrived.
4. We also require copy of the judge’s notes.
5. We also require signed copy of the arrest warrant.
6. We understand there was also a stenographer present at the hearing we also require this record of the proceedings.
Regards By: Michael of the family Clarke
Caution:- You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you fail to mention, when questioned, something which you may later rely on in court. Anything you do say, may be given in evidence.

JANUARY 20 2013 Email to REVIEW TEAM of PHSO
Dear Head of the Review Team, Suzannah Beazley
Is there any update from the email below please.
My legal fiction has been sentenced to prison in a court that had no jurisdiction.
My mother and I have had to flee for our safety.
All details are published on our website. Mike & Ann of the family Clarke www.opg.me ----- Original Message ----- From: Complaintsphso To: 'Mike Clarke' Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:42 AM Subject: Your complaint about PHSO PROTECT - SENSITIVE Dear Mr Clarke Thank you for your email of 13 December 2012. I can advise that your request for review is awaiting consideration by the Head of the Review Team, Suzannah Beazley. We will respond as soon as possible to let you know whether we intend to take your case forward. I apologise for the delay in responding to you. Yours sincerely Laura Lansiquot-Piper Business Support Officer to the Review Team Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman 19th Floor Millbank Tower Millbank London SW1P 4QP

PELLING QC appears to be a judge of the court of protection and so should be well aware of the Mental Capacity Act Section 5, it clearly demonstrates the entire bias in this matter where a fair and impartial hearing is impossible to achieve without a jury of peers and having requested such and been denied NULLIFIES the order that is VOID. To enlarge this item right click on it and click on zoom in.

JONES appellant receipt. LUSH appellant receipt. Appellant notices served for Court of APPEAL LONDON for fraud.

Read order.

The high court was requested today to release the CD copy of the transcript of the hearing and the reply was that you need to tell us which transcriber you are using to which we said no we have our own programs to do this ourselves and they then said oh well in that case you need to write a letter in to be put before the judge to see if he will release you a copy?? WHY is that I wonder? Is it just more effort to pervert the course of justice?? No wonder they instruct everyone to turn off their phones or any recording devices? What are they afraid of? Read our faxed request sent to court today. Further emails; Dear Sir Can you please explain why I cannot have a copy because in 2 previous hearings I have had cd copies sent to my home no problem and no charge so what has changed Mr Clarke ----- Original Message ----- From: Manchester QB To: 'Mike Clarke' Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:56 PM Subject: RE: Transcript Dear Sir If you wish to obtain a transcript of the hearing you will need to complete the appropriate form which is an EX 107, available on the HMCTS web page. Please note the transcript can only be done by one of the approved list of transcibers. A list is available on the HMCTS web page. The court is unable to send a CD of the hearing direct to the parties. Rose Shaw Queens Bench Listing Officer Manchester Civil Justice Centre 1 Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ 0161 240 5305 email: Mercantile claims: - manchester.mercantile@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk QB Claims:- manchester.qb@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk TCC Claims:- manchester.tcc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Clarke [mailto:mike@rake.net] Sent: 17 January 2013 13:23 To: Manchester QB Subject: Transcript Dear Sirs We request with some urgency the transcript CD copy of the court hearing on the 14th January 2013 with PELLING QC as Judge ref case 2MA90015 This is very urgent matter. Please send to: Mike of the family Clarke 31 Cherry Tree Rd Blackpool FY4 4NS

A journalist Jerome Taylor from the Independent was restricted from writing about a case on Monday 14 January 2013 and served documents an hour before the hearing.
I notice he made the following statement on his twitter: 'Nice. Just received a reporting restriction notice for Court of Protection case 1hr before court was due to sit. #stilllongwaytogo''.
There were two known cases arising out of Court of Protection issues on Monday
1. The one that involved Mike Clarke (See Mike OPG website) was in the High Court in Manchester
2. The one in the High Court, Queens Bench Division, London involving Leonard Lawrence, the Official Solicitor of the Senior Court Alistair Pitbaldo, May Maughan Deputy Official Solicitor and the Court of Protection. The Law Society, Solicitors Regulatory Authority internal report having placed liability at the Official Solicitor for failing to protect Leonard Lawrence. Richard Anelay QC a Deputy High Court Family Judge and Head of Chambers 1 Kings Bench Walk establised in September 2012 that Leonard Lawrence had been a patient subject to the Court of Protection Court in 2004/4/6. Records show that Barrister Dominic Brazil 1 Kings Bech Walk had held a medical certicate issued to protect Leonard Lawrence but did not notify the Court of Protection and then proceeded to asset strip Leonard Lawrence assisted by BP Collins Solicitors and Helen Clift from within the Official Solicitors office who also failed to disclose medical certificates of mental incapacity to the court. (Google Leonard Lawrence Pilot organophosphate poisoning) It is known that May Maughan, Deputy Official Solicitor had been in contact with the Court of Protection prior to the hearing. There was a press release for this case, the press were present for Leonard Lawrence, but were stopped from attend the hearing. The hearing was before Master Yoxall in private Leonard Lawrence Pilot -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A journalist Jerome Taylor from the Independent was restricted from writing about a case on Monday and served documents an hour before the hearing. I notice he made the following statement on his twitter: 'Nice. Just received a reporting restriction notice for Court of Protection case 1hr before court was due to sit. #stilllongwaytogo''. Thanks,

Under review

NOTICE TO COURT handed to the administrator/"Judge" 2 hours before hearing this document of 7 pages fully outlined the team of common law advocates and their lawful stance. 1 hour before trial my own skeleton 1 page document was handed to the administrator/judge SKELETON case from the man, the human. VOID ORDER DECLARATION being made with a private prosecution to be served upon the Judge shortly after him dismissing my lawful represntation within minutes and leaving the court room refusing to return until my representation had left and then he proceeded his corrupt trial with bent barrister from PANNONE ending with a 3 month PRISON sentence handed down. The man remains at large,

Read our appeal now lodged ref no 20130087 in London against the court of protection for fraud naming the master Denzil lush and Hugh Jones of PANNONES LLP.

JANUARY 12 2013
Read At War with the legal profession2.pdf

Contract tendered to the administrator 'so called judge'.

Scanned document from PANNONE LLP 77 pages of skeleton arguement. ARRIVED at 4pm today by email.

Another partner resigns at PANNONE LLP, Andrew Gosnay.

In the London courts Listen to the Phone call to court of appeal in LONDON where the application has been accepted upon our Statement of case. REF NO 20130087 email to Pannone LLPs FAO PANNONES LLPs Hugh Jones Paul Jonson Simon HEAPY
Dear Sirs
We put you hereby on notice that our APPEAL APPLICATION to London courts upon our statement of case; www.opg.me/STATEMENTofCASE4COURTofAPPEAL17122012.doc has now been accepted under reference number 20130087
Mike of the family Clarke

Now get this, the process server arrives & is a lovely chap, he is only doing is job, so it aint any fault of he's but in the process of trying to recruit representation I am told that I must have all the documents to recruit emergency barrister representation and so on the 2 January I wrote to PANNONEs head of resolutions email, PAUL JONSON and said, "Dear Sir Please find attached a stat dec sent to the court. We ask what other documents are we currently waiting for you to serve today and when can we expect all documents to have been deemed served by you Mike Clarke" NO REPLY... on the 4th JANUARY I wrote again by email to PAUL JONSON copied to EMMA HOLT and said, "THIS IS THE SECOND REQUEST OR ARE YOU JUST INTENT TO BE YOUR USUAL SELF AND SERVE DOCUMENTS ON THE LAST MINUTE" NO REPLY... again!!! but here we are on the last day before the weekend they serve the final documents before trial on Monday??? Would you say they are trying to pervert the course of justice one way or another???? Oh and by the way these are their scanned costs attached by email this morning of £36,095.80!!! Such a lovely morning as well... All have a nice weekend! WE WILL.Costs for pannone
FACEBOOK OBSERVER Roy Jenkins Michael they can't do that as i found out, the court manager informed me "any documents either you or the defendants intend to use in court must be served no later than 7 days before the hearing date as required by law" further if they drop documents after the 7 lay limit you can refuse to have them used at the hearing. This is typical Bradford and Bingley shit. They handed both myself and the judge a bundle of 32 documents in the court room itself. Even Lord Justice Ward commented this disturbed him. Write and tell them you refuse to accept them. FAO PANNONE PAUL JONSON & EMMA HOLT Dear Sirs documents just arrived this morning in connection with court case on Monday 14th January 2013 we are led to believe must be served 7 days before the hearing and therefore cannot now be relied upon. Mike of the family clarke
The documents are being returned unopened by courier

The court system is corrupt
In times of war people do desperate things to survive. In times of peace desperation seems an unwarranted claim on which to justify extreme actions but this is precisely the claim being laid at the feet of the judiciary now for actions being considered against them. Too many people have fallen victim to the corruption within the court system for it to be allowed to continue it is only a matter of time before a critical mass will be able to bring about a backlash, that backlash has started albeit still early days but with every passing day an ever increasing number of disillusioned and angry people are waking up to just how corrupt the judicial process has become from the magistrates courts and their cosy relationship with councils and corporations through to the secretive courts of protection and the family courts which destroy families and steal property.
People in search of a solution to this endemic corruption have at last found a direction within the lawful rebellion movement, across the country the lawful rebellion movement is building momentum its target is the judiciary which has with its collusion with colleagues in the legal profession the political establishment the banking fraternity & the hierarchy of the police force created a system of control that has systematically undermined our constitution the rule of law & our inalienable rights.
The Lawful Rebellion Movement is both peaceful and lawful the dove in our logo is the symbol of peaceful intent but it is a fool that thinks we lack the determination or the ability to think about our aims regardless of the forces rained against us, because ultimately we are the many and judiciary are the few.
It is now only a matter of time before retribution will be at hand for those whom think they can act like criminals in our courts with impunity our leaders are emerging and our numbers grow daily and we have you in our sights.
The Judiciary are at the fore front of the attacks on our freedoms have much to answer for. It is they that steam roller over our rights, ignore our constitution and turn a blind eye to the corruption in their ranks they imagine that if they have the strong arm of the law to protect them and they do for now, but that changes are underway and this protection will not last.
Volunteers are being signed up currently to serve as our own peace keepers whose duty it will be to arrest those whom will be summoned to appear before our courts to face our justice and there will be no hiding behind the skirts of the corrupt senior police network then, because their actions to protect you will expose to us who they are and we as keen to put them behind bars as we are to inflict our justice upon you.
We acknowledge that there are good judges but where are they, they do not appear in courts labelled good judges or bad judge, unless we are entitled to believe that each judge we encounter is corrupt until such time as the corruption is exposed and removed.
The corruption is self-evident by the perversity of judgements of which a jury is unlikely to be hood winked corruption in the judicial process represents the high crime of treason for which we will extract the utmost penalty be certain therefore in your mind that the pay you receive for your corruption is worth it because payback will carry a very high price for it.
The judicial racket that is allowing to reward their colleagues in the legal profession of absurdly high fees makes the use of the words of corruption and criminal quite tame and inappropriate bearing in mind that the consequence of these rewards where people lose their businesses and their homes and are often made bankrupt or commit suicide.
There is no future in brown envelope judiciary. The writing is on the court room wall.
Worse than the self-serving money making racket of costs is your blatant refusal to recognise our common law rights and the provisions of our constitution that protect us from Tyranny your denial of our rights places us at risk of incursions into our lives which our for fathers died to protect and at which we defending now.
Desperation may seem to stronger word when there is no war but in our current eyes we are indeed at war with a judiciary when it plays the role of TYRANT. The subversion of our constitution and the denial of our common law rights are the hallmark of today’s judiciary and you have failed in your duty to defend protect and to serve the people and soon it will be time for the chickens to come home to roost.
Be mindful of your judgements every day because these will be the evidence brought against you there will be no behind the doors arrangement and no quiet words in ears to assist, you will be exposed to the raw elements of truth and truth can hurt.
Lawful rebellion is a movement that gives direction to the frustration and anger throughout the UK with an array of grievances across the full spectrum.
Mike of the family Clarke

JANUARY 8 2013 Invoice to M6 POLICE for £10,000
Invoice to M6 POLICE for £10,000 for unlawful arrest kidnap and 6 hours detention.

Invoice for £10,000 sent to Blackpool Police for trespass.

"Any attempt at holding the Claimant liable to statute will be construed as force and shall be void. Any demand for compliance will be construed as force and shall be void". check Theresa May@2.32 seconds in & conformation that in this country we police by consent A PRELIMINARY NOTICE BEFORE CLAIM will be Served by Special delivery upon the Chief Constable of the relevant Constabulary.
That document along with included evidence, establishes as a legal argument, the following:
that the UK is policed by consent; and
that the bearer does not consent to be policed; and
that there is no business between the parties at that point; and
that the term ‘force’ has been defined; and
that the term ‘ultra vires’ has been defined; and
that the term ‘void order’ has been defined; and
that the document contains a valid and legally enforceable contract; and
that penalties apply should the constabulary use statutory rules or force against the bearer and
that the bearer has withdrawn any implied right of access to their person and property; and
that the constabulary appears to be criminally complicit according to the Rome Statute of the Criminal Court, Article 25(3); and
that an opportunity to discuss matters outside of court has been offered; and
that the constabulary is required to acknowledge receipt of the Preliminary Notice within 21 days of receiving it.



STEVEN RICHARD GRANT DOB 18/11/1959 a company secratary from 2001 for PANNONE LLP 3 Kingston Avenue, Didsbury, Manchester M20 2SP alongside a DIRECTOR of PANNONE LLP's, also from 2001,

CHARLES SOREN ROBERT TATTAM D.o.B. 14.07.1953, of "The Ranch House", Gore Lane, Alderley Edge, Cheshire. SK9 7SF.

Read 2001 directors / Read 2001 accounts / Read 2002 / Read 2003 / Read 2004 / Read 2005 / Read 2006 / Read 2007 / Read 2008 / Read 2009 / Read 2010 / Read 2011

Read a letter toM6police04012013.pdf

Read a letter toBlackpoolpolice04012013.pdf

JANUARY 2 2013 STAT DEC to 2MA90015
Read statdec02012013.pdf sent to Court for hearing 2MA90015@10.30am 14.01.2013

JANUARY 2 2013
Read appeal court request.

JANUARY 2 2013
Read a reply from the land registry landregistryreply21122012.pdf. And our reply ....
Dear Rosalind Taylor
Ref Attached letter
We wish to remind you that as a corporate employee you have a ‘duty of care’. Failure to perform on that duty leaves you open to neglection which under common law is a TORT.
Neglection of the duty of care providing a tort removes your personal private corporate shield. You can be sued personally under common law by a ‘Commercial lien/claim’.
Which mark my words, I will serve upon you if you have not dotted the ‘i’s and crossed the ‘t’s.
I have explained and provided proof to you of my position of my mother’s living will executorship that bestows upon me ultimate power to act in her best interests.
For example the solicitor PANNONEs Hugh Jones has placed upon the register a UNI lateral Notice and we submit to you that he has no court order to do just that.
He has an order to place a charge for a set amount of fees, so why have you allowed him to place what is a unilateral notice when he has no authority to do so.
Please explain what exactly you have done. Mike ANN CLARKE

JANUARY 1 2013 Order from Judge Stewart
Read orderjudgestewart28122012.pdf

JANUARY 1 2013 Copy of Arrest Warrant
Arrest Warrant 17th December 2012

READ 2010 to 2012 plus

Back to top

CONTACTS - mike@opg.me
Mob: SPAIN:+34618999708
Mobile UK: +447523287267
SKYPE: mrmikeclarke

Visitor No: hit counters hits

Mp3 recorded meeting of 1HOUR 18.07.11 that clearly shows the start of the process to steal my mothers home
06.10.11 OPG Rep: Meeting Recorded - LISTEN to it.(2HRS)

This is the website of an OPG patient
Happier times 2008 brieflyand her son - carer.

A few words about us, our website and its slogan
"He who cares, wins!"

In June 1995 my mother Ann was 55 - After a long period of depression tried to end her life but tragically it ended her as we knew her & she only awoke from her coma 11 months later to find her new existance as a disabled woman needing 24hr care. Mike was from a Entreprenaur backround of Nightclubs Pubs, Tourism and Hotel life suddenly found himself to be that very carer at the age of 37.

After the obvious glaring failures committed by the ROYAL OLDHAM HOSPITAL a lawsuit case against them was launched in 1995 and some 6 years later in 2001 a compromised out of court settlement of damages was awarded in excess of £775,000. Mum, after 11months in hospital was discharged to a nursing home but the pain to the family of seeing her in there of only a few weeks brought about the decision to care for her at our own homes initially shared for a short period by my sister and I. In 1997 I took on the roll of full time carer and have done so to date, a period of 16 years.

The Website History -

us trying to enjoy life nowThis site has been launched because we emigrated permanent(March 2008) but find that mums estate is still trapped in the UK and as such our security back up when things are not right, of referring to our MP will be removed and thus our spanish option leaves us with a language barrior problem.
Therefore we decided to place the correspondence in the public domain to be judged by all. These link files to the left in column 1 are being documented in reverse order from whatever is todays date, in other words the latest current documents are on the top of the list and because the launch date of this site was only the 3rd April 2010 more and more information will be added over time as its our intention to expose the fundamental misgivings of the original intentions of the COURT OF PROTECTION / NEGLECTION / CORRUPTION!
Anyone can see clearly if pouring over these documents an understanding of the where the name change came from with reference to NEGLECTION / CORRUPTION. We hope this website can also help others whom have serious problems with the OPG and its affiliated deputy's. Its my personal experience in many cases that money is horded away from the patient only to serve as inheritance to relatives whom played little or no role in the care of the affected patient ensuring the best possible existance to the end of their days. My own mother's award was predicted to have only lasted 10 years and her award was based on that prediction and its a testament to good care that her life expectancy is exceeding this prediction by far but that it would not do if constricted by the narrow brush approach of deputies hording vast sums of money away only to protect their long term fees and charges which are vastly in excess usually of what was supposed to have been laid down guidelines from the OPG.

We spent 6 years fighting a court case to get the award and then only to spend then next 10 years fighting the receiver to get it off him. Our lives are permanently blighted by the ongoing struggle in which the original award was supposed to solve. We cannot understand how, in 2010, a little known about corrupt UK government body can continue doing what they do in an unaccountable secret fashion, with lack of transparency and openness that the Cameron/Clegg government is currently promoting.

Though there is today (110410) still alot to resolve we do have a level of life to enjoy where we now live, in the Costa Del Sol, never to return again to the corrupt country from where we were born, THE UK unless of course its by the intimidatory way they are handling our finances and effectively continually trying to blackmail us into returning to the UK.


A testament to good care mum is still going strong at 70 years of age recently on the 9th August 2010 taken during a birthday meal in Benalmedina, Spain.


Born in Middleton, Manchester in 1940 the eldest one of seven mum fast grew up having to learn the rigors of life & at the age 16 she found love married and moved in with her new husband a journey the would last 36 years.

Mum never knew her real father he was missing at war presumed dead, when at the end of the war he returned only to find my mums mum, Grandma pregnant with another mans child whom then decided to leave. Mums real father also left and never returned, he went on to become a Director on the board of British Aerospace a person whom never came to see, find or even acknowledge his own 2 daughters.

With three children and now alone my mums mum, Grandma eventually found another love whom fathered a further four more children with her. My mother being the eldest of seven was very soon helping at an early tender age to look after and bring up her siblings virtually as an additional mother to them

After marriage at 16 mum at 19 gave birth to me, 3 years later my sister and one year later my brother. 3ofusOur family was VERY close. My sister and I bonded more and more over time. I remember all going out at night to our local for evenings all as one close family for many happy times. When I reached 16 I knew I was Gay I confided in my sister, mother and father but chose to pacify them all by saying I was bisexual and dating girls until the age of 26. For ten whole years I struggled to accept that I was never really bisexual at all and the pain that brought resulted in relentless up and down depressive symptoms, which on reflection were burdened on to my mother. She carried them times for me very much where suicide was a frequent consideration and she helped me thro to better times. This was a debt to my mother for which it became easier to repay when she needed me after her life changing accident in 1995.

At the age of 26 I suddenly became concious of the fact that I am what I am and that was the end of my relationships with women that tormented me from being the person I really was. From this point on depression for me became a thing of the past and I personally believe it was my mother whom helped carry me thro that ten year period in my life.

Our upbringing was of a working class family background on predominantly a council estate but that my father thro his business ideas directed several businesses giving me a true insight to that side of life. We were if you like, "bigger fish" in a small pond, respected by the neighbours and life was relatively good though there were lean times especially when my father went bankrupt, a period in his life I swore I'd never go thro.

In 1994 whilst I was directing my own four independant small businesses it became very apparent that my parents marriage was suffering and it was evident on their faces, eventually leading to divorce papers and seperation. It was at this point that mum started a period of depression that would lead up to her near fatal suicide attempt on 23rd June 1995 whilst in my presence in front of my house. I was 36. I only started to enjoy my life from the age of 26, 10 years I held dear, a very good and happy 10 years, but it was over!

Mum had deliberately ran under a 32 ton truck with an extra trailor attached at the rear, I really don't know how but she went under the middle section and only one of it's 18 wheels caught her left foot and caused some damage but unfortunately her skull was fractured. She then had continuous brain swelling over 24 hrs. Her coma lasted months and months, her prognosis was very poor and she was expected to die but her fighting spirit and prayers kept her alive.

I on the other hand lost all fighting spirit, I tryed to continue with my businesses for months but eventually it got to me with flashbacks and depression. Caring for mother slowly over time became the top priority not by choice but by nesseccity. Lives had changed for ever at a stroke June 1995.

I went on to spend an inordinate amount of time energy and fighting spirit to help mum to learn how to talk again and walk again against all odds given by doctors whom had given up. You can clearly see the results 15 years on by the pictures above of mum now 70. All this though has ruined my own life and existence as an entreprenaur and has robbed me of my dignity where personal wealth is concerned. If mum suddenly died I will be left homeless and destitute with nothing but yet I will of created lots of fat cat lawyers fees over the years with an inheritance bonus for waiting relatives. Is this right? I don't think so! Thus I now am hated and dispised by relatives and the courts because I am here fighting my corner for what I believe to be right, some justice for RELATIVE CARERS IN PRIVATE DAMAGES AWARDS.

Some peace at THE MOMENT in our new home, September 2010 but how long for? Back to top

Our VillaWhere would you rather live, be honest! Should mum be put in a old folks home, should she be in her rainy home town of Oldham, forced to live in her daughters back bedroom or do you just believe she's in the right place? This is what I am fighting to maintain for mum, what she truely deserves. Its her money to spend on how she wants to live, its not there for others to run up solicitors bills squabbling and it certainly ain't there for inheritance! How long our life will exist we do not know as the background currently is a concotion of corrupt statements trying to discredit my care for mum on a welfare and financial basis in order to deprive mum of her liberty living and cared for by me, her son abroad where she has capacity to choose where and with whom she wants to live with.

Golfing spectator ANN Taken today at the golf course 161210 mum wanted a taste of what the golfing fuss is all about would she get this sort of treatment in a home - I doubt it extremely.

JUST A NOTE FOR THE WEEK 09.06.2011 The money I now receive personally each week that is classed as expenses and as such mums deputy will not pay it as a wage because he said it would cost more for mum as she would pay tax on it. Well interesting that isn't it. Whilst normal folk whom do a job get a wage slip I don't and when I go to open a bank account they say well Mr Clarke where is your income and when I point to it they say thats not proper income Mr Clarke. Likewise how can one proceed proper with one's life for example how does one get a mortgage so as to have your own property over your head. If my mother lacks the capacity to recognise these things then why is it that she wants to display her concern by trying to gift her pproperty by way of JOINT BENEFICIAL TENANTS IN EQUITY & why can't the British government along with its corrupt establishment see it all, or can they?. Its very obvious really whom the theives are in all this mess but who'd of thought that in 2011 in Britain, this would be going on, but it is!

The court of protection say well if your abroad you can apply to take charge of your mother affairs in that country and when you have done it apply to the UK courts to have the assets and cash released to you but they fail to recognise that in reality my mother has nothing to prove in another country why should she demonstrate to the UK government her capacity or lack of when they hold no jurisdiction in the country of her residence. They are in reality extending their jurisdiction without it being legal in any way. In the meantime their corrupt deputies do there dirty work whilst your outside of the UK. My god, so corrupt its unreal. I spoke to lawyers here in Spain they advised that the cost of an application would possibly exceed £3000 and only have a 50/50 chance of success. So where does one start? Not very nice to think that your own country is effectively screwing you over and taking advantage of the elderly whom clearly have the capacity to manage their own finances.

mums idea of a HOME!Taken today 9.06.11 this is what mum sees to be the type of "home" she wants to reside in till she dies. This is our current rented property in Spain that we have been negotiating to swap with mums UK property but as soon as mums deputy got wind of it he tried to sell her UK property for figures approaching £100,000 less than its value and this is the type of thing your up against!

F.A.C.T Families Against Court of Protection Theft is an organisation of those who have had problems dealing with the Court of Protection (CoP) and Office of Public Guardian (OPG) and are based in the UK. There has been 15,735 recorded complaints of abuse, fraud and corruption from Dec 2001- Dec 2010 (9 years) of the CoP and OPG in the UK.

There are over 50,000 people plus their families affected by these abuses of the Court of Protection, Office of Public Guardian and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) jurisdiction which is also part of the Court of Protection and many young adults who may have autism or aspergers have been wrongfully put under this jurisdiction depriving them from their liberties. Some people would most definitely dispute that these disorders should not even come under Mental Health and whether these young adults are even a threat to anyone.

The Court of Protection and the Office of Public Guardian are a Government run Court based in Archway Tower, Archway, London. It deals with property, financial affairs and personal welfare of people who lack mental capacity or who are unable to make decisions for themselves. Those deemed to lack capacity are many Elderly people who may suffer from Dementia, Alzheimer's Disease, Disabled People, Road Accident victims awarded compensation and even young adults who maybe Autistic or suffer from Asperger's Syndrome.

The Court of Protection and Office of Public Guardian are responsible for determining disputes as to the registration of Enduring Powers of Attorney, and Lasting Powers of Attorney, appointing new trustees, authorising certain gifts and making statutory wills.

However we are very concerned with the way it is run and from recent press such as

1.Daily Mail talks about abuses within the CoP and

2.Guardian 2005 talks about mishandling finances and 97 people having to be compensated for "bad investments and lost cash", they mean FRAUD, it shows how the CoP has been open to corruption, fraud> and abuse in legal terms understood as embezzlement.

As well as police corruption shown by Hoddesdon/Hertford police force as they protect the corrupt, accept bribes and even come to court and lie on Oath. Not to also mention corruption by all those we have reported to and are doing absolutely nothing. This includes SRA, Legal Ombudsman, Parliamentary Ombudsman, all our MPs, House of Lords and all our police forces. It is beyond a national DISGRACE!

Further articles to show Court of Protection and Office of Public Guardian Corruption:

3.National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse (NASGA)

4.National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse Blog

5.Canadian Public Guardian worker imprisoned for Fraud

6.Another Canadian Public Guardian worker imprisoned for Fraud for embezzling $1.2 million in 12 years

7.UK Court of Protection Forum for Victims claiming CoP abuse and fraud

8.UK Court of Protection being investigated

9.UK Court of Protection involved in Mass Fraud

10.Estate of Denial website claim UK CoP involved in Mass Fraud

11.UK Mass Fraud Anajinn Blog Concerns

12.UK Elderly man embezzled £549,000 by Deputy Solicitors Firm, Judkins Solicitors and Judge Henderson cover up fraud

13.Why would Judge Launcelot Henderson also known as Henderson J cover up the fraud? Because he is part of the Court of Protection

14.UK Mark Neary 20 year old autistic son abuse under Deprivation of
Liberty Order of the Court of Protection

15.Anna Raccoon concerns over Steven Neary case

16.UK Families Against Court of Protection Blog

17.UK Families Against Court of Protection on Facebook

18.National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse also on Facebook

19.Ellee Seymour talks about UK Government plans for a Review

20.UK Mark Reeves Case-Road Accident Victim awarded £2.5 million compensation goes to Court fees! They mean SFA (Solicitors Fraud Association)

21.Daily Mail Low IQ woman case

22.Anna Raccoon previous CoP Employee concerns

23.More Anna Raccoon

24.UK Carer for his mother concerns-moved to Spain to escape corruption

25.BBC File on 4

26.BBC File on 4 Documentary

27.Demanding new Prime Minister to Investigate on Your Freedom Forum

28.Telegraph reports

29.The Independent reports

30.Telegraph reports on Autistic Pianist

31.BBC Tips for Power of Attorneys/Lasting Power of Attorneys to avoid the Court of Protection although CoP can overrule these. We did say they are CORRUPT!

32.UK Human Rights Blog Concerns

33.Ellee Seymour Concerns

34.UK Indigo Jo Blogs

35.Advocates for National Guardian Reform (ANGR) Victims and their Stories

36.CBS News catch onto Mass Fraud in Public Guardian America

37.The National Organization to End Guardianship Abuse (NOTEGA)

38.Another Public Guardian worker in America imprisoned for Fraud. When will the UK Government start arresting those involved in the UK Mass CoP Fraud?

39.FACT are very aware of Will and Property Deed Forgery! NHS Yvette Adams Abuse

40.NHS Fraud Louise Tomkins Case

41.NHS Fraud Angolia Dephew Case

42.Directors of Will making firm imprisoned for Fraud-Nicholas Butcher and David Nash Case

43.Corrupt UK Government only change legislation if they receive payment!

44.Lee Gilliland case concern reported by the Telegraph

45.This is Bristol also talks about Lee Gilliland case

46.David Cameron and Parliaments concerns over Privacy Laws ie secretive Court of Protection

47.Daily Mail talks about relationship of gagging orders, injunctions being abused in the Courts especially by the Court of Protection

48.John Hemming MP Court of Protection must be reformed reported by The Telegraph

49.Three Cheers for John Hemming MP by Alex Massie

50.Journalists have Gagging orders banning them reporting/investigating Court of Protection victims cases otherwise will be imprisoned for Contempt of Court

51.Neil Barker's Case

52.Ellee Seymour mentions protest on Fri 29th April 2011

Flaws in the Court of Protection (CoP) were highlighted in a negative press campaign last autumn 2010. The CoP and the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) shared more than 4,000 complaints about its operations over the last two years. It is still being accused of mismanaging £2.7 billion it controls and which is held on behalf of those who no longer have capacity (Ps). Critics claim that it holds the money in a Bank of England account paying 0.5% a year rather than at High Street banks which would provide rates of three per cent. As inflation takes hold it leaves families with an income deficit needing to dig into the capital set aside for a lifetime of care.

The newspapers' campaign An eye catching headline in the Mail on Sunday described the CoP as "The Secret Court of Living Hell". Case histories investigated in the newspaper's campaign included: •An application to the CoP for money to pay fees for residential care taking too long to be processed. P's house sale proceeds were paid into an account held by the court. The money took five months to come through and was £10,000 short of the £35,000 which was required. The aggrieved relative said he was never able to speak to the same person twice about the matter. •P was awarded £1.6 million. When her father died an application was made by her mother to take over from him as the person authorised to run P's financial affairs. The fees came to around £42,000 for solicitors, barristers and accountants. •P's house sale proceeds were transferred into the wrong account. The mistake was only discovered when there was a request to pay P's care home fees. •An administration charge of £4,100 to access £5,800 out of the £90,000 held by the CoP. P, a former solicitor suffering from bi polar disorder, complained requests for money which were supposed to take six weeks were taking five months and that the payments received were less than asked for. •The father of an eight year old boy who had been awarded £4.2 million as a result of medical negligence was accused of being abusive to an official from the CoP on a home visit although nobody had visited him at their home.

There were complaints in particular about delays, expense, the long and obscure court forms, inefficiency and that the court was a remote entity serving itself. These were accelerated by the press attaching links to the articles censuring the Court. In The Mail alone 450 further accusations of incompetence followed on from one article. Internet forums posted comments that it sent bullying letters and treated relations like criminals. Saga magazine quoted children's author Helen Bateman whose husband was in a coma after an accident: "It is an alien, intrusive, time consuming and costly institution which was completely out of tune with what we were going through".

Court of Protection Rules Committee's Review In November the then Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, responded to the concerted attacks by the press. A General Election was on the horizon and the Court was being described as an unresponsive Labour monolith working in secret and grinding its users down. Mr Straw asked Sir Mark Potter, the then President of the Family Division, to appoint a Rules Committee to investigate and recommend changes. The committee was chaired by Mr Justice Charles and Mrs Justice Proudman.

The committee met four times in the spring of 2010 and published a report in July 2010. There was recognition of the need for new court forms to be available as quickly as possible. They were to be custom made for the different types of application to avoid containing the lengthy screeds of unnecessary information the original universal forms require. Better explanatory notes are recommended to be attached to the forms as the current ones have led to confusion. Clearer forms would lower the 80% refusal rate for applications received between January 2008 and December 2009 to deal with property and welfare decisions on behalf of the mentally vulnerable. Forty per cent of applications are made by people without professional support. This is a failure in communication and assists those who fear the Court is composed of civil servants and lawyers busy talking to themselves while failing to provide a simple application process. Fortunately the new forms will be road tested in pilot schemes. Their success will depend on using simple English aimed at non-professionals.

A further recommendation is that court officers, rather than judges, should deal with applications concerning non-contentious property and affairs. Previously nominated officers were trained to deal with routine applications and there was lobbying for their return. There is provision for judges to review those decisions and it will make running the Court easier. Other recommendations of the Rules Committee address speeding up and simplifying procedure in response to the complaints of delay.

A key recommendation is that there should be no change in the rules concerning access to proceedings by the public. When and whether the Court should sit in public or permit its proceedings to be made public will be decided in each case by the judge. In March 2010 the Court of Appeal had already handed down a judgement on the application by the press to be permitted access to a hearing concerning Derek Paravicini, described as a human iPod. He is an autistic, high earning pianist living in sheltered accommodation, needing 24 hour care and unable to manage his finances. The press had been agitating against the Court's closed hearings in a high profile campaign. It was held that article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights covered access to information at a court hearing and there could be no blanket exclusions. The Court of Appeal held that decisions on press access should be within the discretion of the judge hearing the case. The Rules Committee followed the case law but decided against blanket open access.

Scrutiny by the public In May 2010 an open judgment was handed down by Sir Nicholas Wall in DH NHS Foundation Trust v PS [2010] EWHC 1217 concerning a woman aged 55 who had learning difficulties and an overwhelming fear of hospitals and medical treatment. She was deemed not to have mental capacity and unable to make a decision about her treatment. The President ruled that she could be given a drug in a glass of Ribena at her home and detained afterwards on a ward for treatment of cancer of the uterus. Fair reporting in this case though did include Mencap's support for the court's life sustaining decision This re-opened the continuing debate in the press about the court having sweeping powers handed to it by the Labour government that were not open to scrutiny and openness. Previously decisions about life and death , sterilisations and abortions were made in public and could be reported by the media. Profound questions as to when the State can intervene in private life were aired. Fears were voiced that paternalistic doctors would combine with judges to make vital decisions behind closed doors, thus eroding the rights of the individual. The media continue to oppose blocked access on the basis that it more appropriate for countries whose leaders do not like their authority to be questioned.

Another press campaign led to the naming of a local authority which had treated a vulnerable person and their relations in a high handed manner without authority. The latest judgement released to the press concerned "birth control by force". Mr Jusice Bodey in August 2010 criticised a Midlands council who wanted a married woman aged 29 with an IQ of 53 to be sedated, taken from her home and have birth control imposed on her against her will. The plan to prevent her having children he held had shades of social engineering. There would need to be police involvement and contraception under restraint which he could not authorise under the circumstances The Court does not have to handle these types of cases often. Public decision making should be encouraged. Ethical life changing decisions ought to reflect current social, rather than legal, values. Keeping people informed reassures them that judges are in tune with the current moral climate and not remote elderly beings living in a world of their own.

Court of Protection's First Report In June 2010 the Court published its first report, covering its performance between October 2007 and January 2010. The target for an oral hearing within 6 weeks was met in 53% of applications compared with the target of 75%. The Senior Judge explains the shortfall in performance by insufficient Judges. He hoped the appointment of three full time judges in 2010 would help meet targets. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 which created the new Court of Protection did not provide for deputies (part time judges). Full time judges had to be brought in from the regions to cover the London work. The five regional centres were designed to take the hearing centres to the client .This had an impact of the regions that deal with 60% of the work. A more flexible system would be to amend the statute to provide for deputies. They could be drafted in to help with the work flow and be a pool of experienced potential permanent judges.

Applications were analysed. There were 40,000 applications concerning property and affairs and 95% of them did not require court attendance. Forms to apply for a power of attorney had been reduced from 25 pages to 12. There were 2,800 personal and welfare applications with a refusal rate of 80%. There were 13 Deprivation of liberty applications over an eight month period. The general rate of applications was averaging at 1600 per month.

Complaints were addressed. There were 1,672 complaints made about the Court (excluding ones about the OPG taking combined complaints to 4000). These divided into 25% about judicial decisions, 15% about the cost of proceedings, 15% about administrative errors, and 30% about the length of the process and delays. The rate of complaints reduced in the last 6 months and the Senior Judge credits the Court being integrated into HMCS in April 2009 as having had a positive effect.

Performance indicators were divided into three periods of time. There was an improvement in the proportion of applicants contacted within 20 days of receipt of the application (92%), and of those applications meeting the target for paper directions within 16 weeks (77%) but for those within 20 weeks underperforming by 14%. 59% of applications were heard within 6 weeks, a poor performance the Senior Judge hopes will be improved upon. Replies to correspondence within 10 working days were off target by 20% and down to 75%.

Continuing criticisms The report did not stem criticism. BBC's File on Four, broadcast on 27th of July, focused on new complaints. Parents of disabled children who became 18 had to apply at great expense to be deputies to manage their children's meagre finances and thought their particular situation had been overlooked. A compensation award invested at 0.5% interest instead of 4.5%, the Halifax rate of interest at the time, was bitterly attacked by an accident victim who estimated he had lost £50,000. Another accident victim was awarded £1.5 million and wanted to know the number of hours charged for by her deputy and after 3 months had not been told. The charity Elder Abuse was receiving constant calls to its helpline about fees for unnecessary work and the Court approving too many bills in excess of the £1100 capped rate. Delay in preventing financial abuse was highlighted. The niece of a hospital patient with dementia had taken £300,000 out of P's accounts and conveyed P's home into joint names. It took 3 months to cut off the niece's access to the accounts and no sanctions were taken against her. The Court was attacked for being slow and lenient. The programme concluded that lobbyists like the Court and the public do not.

It is worth remembering the previous Court was also vilified. A Parliamentary Ombudsman Report in 2005 noted poor staff training, high staff turnover, and serious mistakes in managing clients' money. There were poor investments and lost cash leading to compensation claims. Staff often never replied to letters and took months to sort anything out. When complaints mounted up internal memos were written which were "staggering in their arrogance". Overall the Court is trying to improve. It does have a challenging client base and a large volume of work. Some of the delays maybe due to lawyers not using its emergency provisions (see Urgent Applications in the Court of Protection, Pierce and Jackson (Jordans)). It is admitting shortcomings and attempting to adapt quickly. There are now 2,000 applications per month. Previously the four judges based at Archway could not keep up with the volume of work. Although three new judges were appointed in Spring 2010 none of them had sat as judges before their appointment. Meanwhile two experienced Judges will be leaving by spring 2011. It is likely the Senior Judges optimism for future efficiency is misplaced and there will be more delay.

The media have a grievance about removing its right of access, at time when the culture is towards more open justice and will continue with criticism campaigning to get into the hearings. The pressure group Families Against Court of Protection Theft set up by relations who were unhappy with the CoP is also a vocal critic but has a limited ability to solve the problems of others. Website content such as the OPG's pledge to acknowledge a complaint within two working days, unless it does so, will fuel the flames.

It is hoped the new forms, produced with the benefit of the HMCS's drafting experience, will be an improvement on the OPG's previous efforts and will be comprehensible and user friendly. It has been a very bumpy start. The basement interest rates need to be addressed. The tenor of past complaints has been of faceless bureaucrats making incomprehensible decisions, then failing to communicate about them. Focus should be on running an efficient, responsive, problem solving service for the most vulnerable. For many, the Court is still not serving the most vulnerable but adding to their problems.

Back to top

Mother/patient - Ann Clarke The Patient

Having emigrated to Spain in March 2008 I just want to feel free, normal & happy. Not overshadowed by the british government. Human again & not repressed. My son would like his dignity restored not to be discriminated against as a relative carer but to be treated with equality and be paid fair like others. My money should not be in pounds but in euros and because of this its value since moving to Spain has devalued by 80,000 Euro. I should not be forced to live off an exchange rate by the British Government. My liberty and freedom of choice should be respected.

I suffer from dysphasia

People with dysphasia may have difficulty talking, understanding "not me", listening "not me", writing "not me" or doing numeral calculations "not me". They may be mildly or severely affected "not me". Everyday tasks, such as shopping or answering the phone "not me", may be impossible.
People with the condition can

"think clearly and know what they're feeling, and their intellect is maintained."

They're often mistakenly thought to be drunk or mentally confused "not me". Read 2010 The CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY ASSESSMENT report on me thats just been delivered and its the second report in 10 years that confirms my capacity. So why am I being treated like a dog by the British Government?
A 4 page report by
Dr Hana Al-Hamar 22.05.2001 that was the result of a 4hour examination.
Listen to Dr Hana's comments June 2001.
Dr Khan from the Lord Chancellors Office, 1 hour recording that is unbelievable as to why they keep mum in the Court of Protection 05.09.2001
The latest report in November 2011 Read 31 pages

& Mike
The Son Carer & Author-51

Carer Son - Mike Clarke Read CV

Michael's RANT!

The carer's work is never done and neither is it paid for!. Discriminated against as a relative carer there is no equality! It's also a 24hr attention span thats needed. I think sometimes, "I'd like to go to the beach for a day but there is'nt enough free time!" We think we'd like a weekend alone visit Morroco or Gibralter but again the tie is there and you can't. When family visit they think they're on holiday so not only are you still waiting on the patient you are also waiting on the family. I sometimes wish they'd say "hey Mike!" we're here you get off for the weekend and enjoy yourselves but "no!".

Treated like hired help but without pay, by your own family is sometimes how it feels. You also feel you have no home, no place of your own and people say well it was your choice but really it were'nt. My mother asked for my care and attention, how could I refuse. My life has been blighted overshadowed, not my own and for what, where is my salary for what I do. Not a wage in sight. Discriminated CARER! Family carer, so you get a benefit that amounts to nothin, but yet outside care can demand £12 an hour. WHY? When a patient is awarded so much money "FOR CARE", why is the family carer not paid his due's. Why is he/she paid a benefit below minimum wage and yet the government allow it to go on.

Whilst fat cat Lawyers, Judges and Courts take their own fat cat fees and wages for their intervention but yet the carer is treated like shit on the end of their shoes! TRUE.

There's something wrong with the system. I calculate for my care over 14 years I am owed £12 per hour for at the very least 14 hours a day 365 days a year 14 years, work that out? £800,000! But if you were just recognised as a working person on minimum wage of £6 that alone would of been £400,000? Whilst other family have built up their worth in property I have not been able to. Its been a mission just trying to work out what I can sell or scrape together each year for an annual holiday but who really gives a shit?

Well I can tell you absolutely no one, accept the people who are in the same boat watching others steal from their relatives estates without transparency, only in secret, accounting to no-one but themselves.

IT HAS TO STOP! The UK government needs to address this with urgency. Someone, somewhere, someday will lose it, mind wise, and someone will die, probably from the pure frustrations that must be building in these people, listened to by no one and I mean no one, or caring about "THE CARERS". Probably because we are a small insignificant minority, but we are gathering strength.

An investigation into a complaint I made on the 4th February 2010 lasted 7 long months, what on earth is going on? I'm sure a murder investigation don't take that long! - Investigation completed the day after I published this statement read the 3 lines Then upon asking for a complete full copy of the investigation passed to legal department whom refused a copy on the grounds of section 40 of the data protection act protecting others.

If I had my time over again knowing what I know now I would have had to refuse my mothers request even though that would of broken my heart. It's took its toll on me over the years but I really blame the UK government for this not my mother whom with all her "so-called" lack of capacity seems to be fully intact to me of which I hold Clinical Neuropsycologists reports to confirm her capacity that have been largely ignored. One day I do believe someone will do something about it and stop this barbarrick inhumane treatment of the people whom CARE the most about the patients.

Back to top


Damages were awarded for the patients care but its that very standard of care that drops when families become involved because the system is that busy trying to stop famalies having any involvement with the care and money or at least them are the grounds they operate on yet in reality they are protecting their own long term fees whilst under that cover.

The carer whom is caring has no real access and no real say usually because other family whom are protecting their inheritance tend to side with the receivers or courts or worse won't get involved.

There was to my recollection, no money awarded for inheritance and there also was no money awarded for exorbitant fees and charges, so whats gone wrong with the system?

CARE and carers PAY was what the money was awarded for!

In our case one can take note that I personally did the first care of over 5 years before any money was awarded, living off benefits in a 1 bedroomed flat with me sleeping on a sofa! I sometimes think, and my mother the patient also agrees, I should sue her in the courts for back pay. I wonder?

Its ironic when we go out to a restaurant that the patient can order fillet steak but the carer can only afford beans on toast unless the patient issue's a handout. That's how its fealt for me over 15 years just living off handouts, no respect, no dignity, no nothing, treated like dirt when we should be rewarded better than the fat cat lawyers, judges & inheritance hunters etc.

I recently pointed out to the receiver HUGH JONES about the fact there is no wage and he said yes there is its paid in the account and I said its never been pointed out to me its a wage and if it ever was really a wage why has it not been taxed. Fiddling the state out of a tax paid wage I accused him off, with all the cuts that the government are making why are they not stopping carers from claiming benefits when high damages awards have been made to pay for care where that carer can then pay TAX! There has been a constant inbalance in the living standard of the patient to the carer whom as I pointed out that at the time of mums accident in 1995 I was living off an income of £1100 a week from one of my four businesses at that time which was all thrown away in the ensueing disaster in order to prioritise care for mum for free!.

So whats been the point in of it all salvaging the care of one life to ruin your own whilst FAT CAT lawyers and inheritence hunters all get the richer over time. Who is going to take notice of this corrupt system and the discriminatory inequalitys that are blatantly evident today in 2011 for private care damages that were awarded to pay for just that? CARERS! I recently complained to the EHRC The Equality and Human Rights helpline about this very matter and here you read their reply, "The issue that you have regarding care for your mother without payment is not likely to fall within the remit of the Equality Act. It appears that the fact that you are a relative means that you are not entitled to any of the payment award that your mother received to assist with her care.

This is not an equality issue and therefore, we cannot provide any further advice. " Now I ask you? does that not stink of discrimination and where I ask is the equality in that? Its obviously legal in the UK to discriminate against relative carers, no problem at all!

Manchester / Munby Judgement R v MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL, EX PARTE L & ORS : R v MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL, EX PARTE R & ANOR (2001) QBD (Admin) (Munby J) 26/9/2001 LOCAL GOVERNMENT - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - FAMILY LAW - HUMAN RIGHTS JUDICIAL REVIEW : FOSTER CARERS : RELATIVES : FRIENDS : SHORT TERM : LONG TERM : BOARDING-OUT ALLOWANCE : PAYMENTS : FINANCIAL DISCRIMINATION : DEPENDENCY : S.8, S.17, S.22, S.23 AND S.26 CHILDREN ACT 1989 : ACCOMMODATION : PLACEMENTS : RESIDENCE ORDERS : LOOKED AFTER : LOCAL AUTHORITY : FOSTER PLACEMENT (CHILDREN) REGULATIONS 1991 SI 1991/;910 : FINANCIAL REPORTS : FOSTERING ALLOWANCES : NATIONAL FOSTER CARE ASSOCIATION : NFCA : FOSTER CARE FINANCE : FCF : CARE PROCEEDINGS : WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS : IRRATIONALITY : HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 : EUROPEAN CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS 1950 : EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS : ECHR : ART.8 : RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE : ART.14 : PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION : LEGITIMATE AIMS : PRESSING SOCIAL NEED : PROPORTIONALITY : NECESSITY A local authority’s policy that financially discriminated against foster carers who were related to the children they fostered was unlawful. Two joined applications for judicial review of the respondent council’s policy to pay those short-term foster carers who were friends or relatives of a fostered child at a significantly lower rate than other foster carers. Both applications concerned children who were looked after within the meaning of ss.22 and 23 Children Act 1989. In the first application, the maternal grandparents of three children were the children’s long-term foster carers and the children remained with the grandparents after full care orders were made. In the second application, the children were placed with their older half-sister when full care orders were made after an independent social work assessment. The issue was the legality of the policy. The applicants submitted: (i) the council’s policy was a financial disincentive to family members being foster carers and used their sense of moral obligation to compel them to accept a grossly inadequate level of financial support which was lower than the level determined by the council as necessary for the maintenance of other foster children of like age; (ii) the policy was an attempt to apply financial pressure on family members to move away from local authority support; (iii) the policy was discriminatory within Art.14 European Convention on Human Rights and failed adequately to implement the council’s obligation to promote the right to respect for family life guaranteed by Art.8 of the Convention; (iv) the policy was an attempt to transfer the financial burden of looked-after children away from the council and was an abuse of the council’s dominant position in relation to foster parents and children; and (v) the policy excluded any flexibility to allow payment of the normal fostering allowances to relative foster carers in appropriate cases. HELD: (1) Section 23(2)(a) of the Act left the framework for providing for fostering allowances to the council’s discretion. That discretion had to be: (a) formulated and implemented to allow flexibility according to the needs of the individual children concerned; (b) exercised in light of the aim of the statutory framework without reliance on irrelevant considerations, without disregarding relevant principles, without being perverse and without conflicting with any duties within the framework; and (c) formulated and exercised to safeguard adequately the right to respect for family life in Art.8 of the Convention and to avoid discrimination in breach of Art.14 of the Convention. (2) The applicants’ submissions that imputed less than worthy motives to the council were not accepted. (3) The council’s policy was driven by the principle that it was undesirable to create a financial dependency on it if that would disincline a friend or relative to apply for a s.8 residence order. That was an entirely legitimate consideration and was entirely in accordance with the key principle in s.26(3) of the Act, namely that all appropriate steps should be taken to ensure that children were placed with their families as far as possible. (4) The council’s policy was unlawful for four reasons: (i) it imposed an arbitrary and inflexible cash limit on the amounts that could be paid to relative foster carers; (ii) it fixed the level of payments to relative foster carers at such a low level that there was an inevitable a conflict with the welfare principle and the council’s statutory duty; (iii) it was Wednesbury unreasonable; and (iv) it fundamentally discriminated against short-term relative foster carers and the children in their care. None of those objections were met by the legitimacy of the council’s objective. (5) The council’s obligation under both the Act and the Convention was to take all appropriate positive steps to ensure that children should live with their families. Differential treatment based on family relationships or which had an additional impact on family members could only be justified by counterbalancing factors of a compelling nature. If the council’s policy failed when tested against classic public law principles, it inevitably followed that it would fail to pass muster under the Convention. In any event, the policy failed to meet the key Convention tests of necessity and proportionality, thereby breaching Arts.8 and 14 of the Convention. Application allowed. Roger McCarthy QC instructed by Green & Co for the applicants. Ernest Ryder QC and Yvonne Coppel instructed by and for the council. LTL 26/10/2001 : (2002) 1 FLR 43 : (2002) ACD 284 : Times, December 10, 2001 Judgment: Approved subject to editorial corrections - 39 pages Document No.: AC0101975
Reference link
Solicitors link
Full Judgement link

Meet Michael on You Tube
click here

HE WHO CARES, SHOULD WIN, and eventually will! There's a saying in spain, "poco en poco", little by little.

Home is where the heart is and in 2011 this is our home

Great Grandson Jack

Thro all the family trauma a new addtion, JACK meets great grandma on 031010. The family get together at a pub for the afternoon was nothing short of a very tense situation.

My sister Angela wants to force her mother back to the UK to live at her house against her mothers consent and after failing to gain her consent and some very derrogatory exchange of texts published here, the following statements were made by the Angela CLAN.

Received 150910 Read A statement made by my sister Angela and my brother Kevin

Received 150910 Read A statement made by my sister's husband David Platt

Received 150910 Read A statement made by my sister's daughter Danielle Jones

Received 150910 Read A statement made by my sister's daughter Sarah Jones

Received 150910 Read A statement made by my sister's daughter Sarah's, boyfriend Paul Collins

Received 150910 Read A statement made by my brother's wife Tracey Clarke

In defence of the above I and others made the following statements:-

Response 091010 Read A statement made by Michael 6 pages

Response 031010 Read A statement made by family friend Cheryl Cavanagh 5 pages

Response 031010 Read A statement made by family friend of 35 years Stephen Power

Response 031010 Read A statement made by ex partner of 6 years Paul Moorby

Response 220910 Read A statement made by family friend of 3 years David Owen-Scott

Response 220910 Read A statement made by family friend of 3 years Jonathon Goulding

Response 230910 Read A statement made by family friend of 3 years Brenda Swain

Response 230910 Read A statement made by family friend of 3 years Margaret Davies 3 pages

golfing lunch 161210Out in golfers company for lunch mum wanted to sample some of what the golfers get up to.



Another brick in the wall

Michael Clarke
Halsburys Law states administrative courts unlawful.
The law is absolutely clear on this subject. There is NO authority for administrative courts in this country and no Act can be passed to legitimise them because of the constitutional restraints placed upon her Majesty at Her coronation.
The collection of revenue by such means is extortion, and extortion has been found reprehensible since ancient times. Separation of powers Today, in the year 2011, we find for example, that in the council tax regulations, the billing authority, the prosecuting authority and the enforcement authority are all vested in the same body. The same bodies even purport to issue their own legal documents, by tacit agreement with the Courts.
In our system of Common Law, the rule of law demands that we have a separation of powers. Today, the powers are not separated. The executive is not a distinct, free-standing leg of the tripod. The executive now emerges directly from within the elected Chamber of the legislature where previously it emanated directly from the Monarch. That leads to constitutional confusion—because the executive has seized and misuses Parliament’s democratic credentials for its own, destructive, purposes.
Fortunately, we have something to which we can turn to preserve our ancient laws and freedoms. We have the Oath that Her Majesty The Queen took at her coronation by which she is solemnly bound and from which no one in England, Wales and Scotland has released her. At Her Coronation the Queen swore to govern us, “according to [our] respective laws and customs”. Certainly, among our reputed “customs”, is precisely that invaluable and widely admired tripartite division of the powers.
The judiciary is part and parcel of our customary system of internal sovereignty—“the Queen in Parliament”. It is one of the three separate but symbiotic powers, and it is a capricious and self-serving contention that it should not have the power to preserve the authority of the legislature over the executive. It is a constitutional principle that the assent of the Queen & Parliament is prerequisite to the establishment of a Court which can operate a system of administrative law in Her Majesty’s Courts in England.
This was confirmed by Lord Denning during the debates on the European Communities Amendment Bill, HL Deb 08 October 1986 vol 480 cc246-95 246 at 250: “There is our judicial system deriving from the Crown as the source and fountain of justice. No court can be set up in England, no court can exist in England, except by the authority of the Queen and Parliament. That has been so ever since the Bill of Rights.
Like · · Share · Unfollow Post · 19 November at 14:15
Seen by 8 Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh, Peter Hofschröer and 2 others like this. ..
Tatiana Ladislas von Montegatz Michael Clarke could you please explain if this information could be referred to the Court of Protection and be used? 20 November at 03:58 via mobile · Unlike · 1 ..
Michael Clarke yes IT can but in practice the courts have an habit of ignoring you as in my case 20 November at 08:18 · Like ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh fraud courts, corrupt system. Corrupt Queen who really don't care about us. More interested in donating money abroad but will watch her own people, elderly, disabled abused in this way and do nothing. 59 minutes ago via mobile · Unlike · 2 ..
Michael Clarke Absolute agreement on that 57 minutes ago · Like ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh It's about time we had no Queen if she cannot do anything for her country or her people. What is she there for? For us to fund and pay her bills! 56 minutes ago via mobile · Unlike · 1 ..
Michael Clarke EXACTLY it is... SHE IS a waste of time and money 55 minutes ago · Like ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh So are MPs! what have they done for us victims? We are their constituents! They don't care about us! Waste of our money too! 52 minutes ago via mobile · Edited · Unlike · 1 ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh Also police what they are there for if they can't arrest criminals and can't deal with our cases. We do not need them if the corrupt pay them to not investigate, same with IPCC, Law Society, SRA, Ombudsmen, all waste of taxpeyers money. None do their jobs. A disgraceful country this is! 50 minutes ago via mobile · Like · 1 ..
Michael Clarke MY MP GORDON MARSDEN is a complete waste of space the number of run in s I ve had with him and that was just to get an appointment... he has done nothing he I believe is scared of the corrupt lot and prefers to sweep it under the carpet.... 47 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh Exactly same as me with my MP Robert Halfon. The abuse I had from his secretary just to get an appointment. First he was dealing with the case, then went silent, then wouldn't talk to me and I had abuse. He even ran to John Hemming MP to make false stories about me. Even sweep it under the carpet like they all do or more likely bribed by the corrupt! 40 minutes ago via mobile · Unlike · 1 ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh Whilst MPs are getting second homes, our homes and goods are being stolen. They don't care about us! 38 minutes ago via mobile · Unlike · 1 ..
Michael Clarke bribed by the corrupt! NOW THAT RINGS TRUE to me in every sense.... as time has gone on and on the more and more corrupt the entire state is uncovered... I've got to the stage where I NOW BELIEVE THERE IS NO JUSTICE ON OFFER. 38 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Michael Clarke there is only the OPTION OF REVOLUTION... 37 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Michael Clarke SO I PERSONALLY have joined the anti government protesting and rallies groups associated with bringing down the state as the only option to us... these bastards need to pay the ultimate price for their GREED. 35 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh All victims are having the same problems with their MPs, not just you and me. They do nothing for any of us! How many more victims do we need for them to ever do anything?!! Therefore if our MPs can't do anything for you and me and other of their constituents. What are they there for? 34 minutes ago via mobile · Unlike · 1 ..
Michael Clarke THAT IS WHY I USED THE COMMERCIAL LIEN AGAINST OUR SOLICITORS PANNONES AND HUGH JONES... if it were not worth the paper its written on then why did they spend £70,000 on corrupt bent courts and bent barristers and bent judges to try and stop me with false harassment charges to gain fraudulent injunctions??? 30 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Michael Clarke The judicial system is out of CONTROL just like the identical GOVERNMENT with its BENT banking system built to rob and steal from the poor SLAVES... US! We got to put a stop to it all for the sake of CHILDREN. 27 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh Exactly my suffering has paid for corrupt solicitors Amber Melville-Brown, Hugh Tomlinson QC, Lorna Skinner's lovely homes and many more corrupt ...See More 6 minutes ago via mobile · Edited · Unlike · 1 ..
Michael Clarke SOMETIME's you have got to fight fire with FIRE so in other words if they condone robbery, theft fraud and violence in the form of coercion to corrupt courts with forced prison, then it is only right fair and equal that this should be matched by equal forces i.e., VIOLENCE! 9 minutes ago · Like · 1 ..
Efi Anastasiou Goder-Marsh Agreed it's about time we took corrupt solicitors, judges and police homes and stole all their goods and see if nothing happens to us like them and for Law Society, SRA to see nothing is wrong & concluded at looking at all victims evidence 'they cannot see anything wrong, case closed, file closed on this matter' 3 minutes ago via mobile · Unlike · 1 ..
Michael Clarke

. 22 November 2013 at 16:12 Dear Mr. Alderman: The email exchange below is self-explanatory. If you were not aware of ACPO's Memorandum of Understanding with the Law Society, I shall be pleased to provide you with a copy of it. You may find it interesting to follow the internet links provided in the correspondence below. I can also provide you with information on fraud and corruption which has never been investigated by police. One reason for this (besides the agreement with the Law Society) is that, in some cases, police are party to racketeering or cover-ups, and another reason may be that police authorities are not staffed with personnel trained to a high enough standard in forensic accounting to be able to do the job of investigating white collar crime. For example, Greater Manchester Police - the second largest force in the UK - only has one officer trained and experienced enough to investigate white collar fraud. Obviously, serious organized crime affects all UN nations, and the UK is party to a legally binding UN convention to fight corruption. However, perhaps for the above reasons, this is not being done sufficiently, and therefore warrants serious and immediate attention. From what I have experienced, alleged responsiblity for crime, policing and justice in the UK seems to be spread across many ministries and ministers, and also be divided up among police, including ACPO, Sir Paul Stephenson, the Special Crime Unit, and various police authorities. When approached with the very serious matter of organized white collar crime, all parties refuse to investigate or intervene. Most just ignore the public and do not respond at all. I am wondering if the Serious Fraud Office, like the government itself, is dictated to by ACPO, and if it will therefore also refuse to investigate white collar crime and corruption? Referring a complainant back to their own police authority does not work because these authorities have already refused to log complaints of fraud, which is why complainants have attempted to escalate the matters - to no avail. There is absolutely nowhere that a person can go to get police to act. It is not possible to escalate the problem because there is absolutely no accountability by anyone in government. I am aware that an arrest of six solicitors was made recently, but there are many more involved in crimes such as fraudulent land title transfer, insurance fraud, and racketeering through the Court of Protection, and the Office of the Public Guardian, among other things. It is unfortunate that you are answerable to The Rt. Hon. Dominic Grieve, as he has never responded to these concerns at all. I wonder why the government is organized in such a way. Perhaps it is to spread the responsiblity so widely that nobody can be held accountable. This would seem to me to be the reason for it. The Rt. Hon. Nick Herbert talks about establishing a new Economic Crime Agency, but his department has written to say they will not intervene in individual cases, when they have already been advised of crime and corruption among police, and that nobody will investigate. Nobody can escalate a complaint to anyone as everything goes down a dead end street. There is absolutely no accountability by any public authority in the UK. At least, perhaps with Police Commissioners, someone will exert some authority over police and make them accountable to government and the people. There is a brick wall at every ministry and agency door in the UK, which is why there is now pressure on Europe to intervene. It would seem, from the press, that Europol will be involving themselves in British policing. It is unfortunate, but the country has brought it on itself by not adhering to the UN convention. Her Majesty's government is fragmented and not one person, with the exception of a handful of MPs and Lords shows any concern, or takes any action against the corruption that exists and is fostered among legal professionals, police, and the judiciary.. All are in denial. The Rt. Hon. Kenneth Clarke has been invited to ask for evidence of judicial corruption, and he does not. I wonder why. I don't know what the purpose of the British Prime Minister is. He should be taking the lead, instead of hobnobbing with media monopoly players. Nobody has any accountability to anyone. No doubt it won't be long before the British join Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Yemen, and the rest, and take to the streets. The British have become a seriously oppressed nation because of all the do-nothings in government. It is no wonder that the government has been buying riot gear for the military. Perhaps they are expecting the Storming of the Bastille. I look forward to receiving your comments, and your request for information on the crimes and corruption. Yours sincerely, Bernard Jenkin, MP Public Administration Committee Westminster, UK Dear Mr Jenkin As you can see from the information following this email, I have been alerting authorities since at least 2011 about the police's fraudulent crime figures. Heaven knows how long others have been alerting them. You will also find reference to police fudging figures in two new books by ex police officer, Stephen Hayes: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fifty-Shades-Black-Blue-revelations-ebook/dp/B00G8OB XD0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385045105&sr=8-1&keywords=fifty+shades+of+black+ %27n+blue Jil Matheson is the National Statistician. I believe she has been concerned since I advised her, but nothing has been done by government, with the exception of your own efforts, despite the matter being mentioned in parliament, and despite there also being several newspaper articles about police dereliction of duty since 2011, indicating that police only selectively investigate reported crimes, and most often refuse to record them and issue a crime log number. The financial bonus culture for any public servant makes Britain a laughing stock, but it is worse, when we think that it takes place within police. ACPO is behind all of this nonsense, and is a self-serving old boys' club that should be disbanded. Why on earth would the government not broaden the scope of HM Inspector of Constabularies? Wouldn't that be the most logical move? Obviously, something smells rotten. You should be aware of the fact that many MPs, including those on select committees, are deleting emails from the public, which are respectful and contain intelligence, WITHOUT READING THEM. They are doing it to many, many people, and Ministers are doing it too. It is every bit as serious a corruption problem as police ignoring reports of crime. I know of two people who have tried to report MURDERS and are being ignored by West Yorkshire Police - one of the worst police forces in the country for alleged corruption. They have approached oversight bodies and central government, and are similarly ignored. They have been fighting for justice in the matter for many years. May I emphasise that there are thousands of Britons who have been fighting for justice and police investigations into serious crimes, most notably sophisticated white collar, and yet both police and government ministers ignore them. We have reached the conclusion that police and government are part of the organised crime ring. What other conclusion would a person draw? Something is seriously wrong and, if Mr. Maude is concerned about public servants giving service, he should first examine who is blocking and deleting emails throughout government and public service, and under whose authority they are doing so. The problem of MPs and ministers deleting emails without reading them has been reported to select committees but, unfortunately, several select committee members, including Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee, Margaret Hodge, are culprits themselves. The Public Accounts committee has acknowledged the concern but has no intention of doing anything about it, despite the fact that the culprits obviously do not represent good value for money for the British taxpayer. Perhaps we should have drawn this matter to your attention? Actually, I think some of us may have. The situation involving officials ignoring intelligence (particularly about organised crime) from the public is so bad that concerned citizens now broadcast this matter widely to officials in Europe and beyond, because it is corruption, and this corruption belies the fact that the UK is signatory to international conventions against transnational serious organised crime and against corruption. We feel that many MPs and ministers are fraudulently holding office, when they simply either block emails from the public or delete them without reading them, besides which they do nothing about the problems, even after reading the emails. Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg obviously couldn't care less, and it will be their undoing. Theresa May is even worse. The people have had enough. Britain is the weak link in international crime fighting. As you know, police had received information from Toronto Police eighteen months ago regarding Operation Spade, and did nothing with it. No arrests were made in the UK. Britain let the team down, as usual. Britain does not deserve to be a G20 or G8 member, and Kenneth Clarke is surely only jokingly be called the "Anti-Corruption Champion", as we have not seen any action from him ever. In fact, he has been part of the problem. As you can see, police also have an agreement NOT TO INVESTIGATE lawyers. It is shocking that this Memorandum of Agreement could ever have been set up. Please keep up the good work. It looks like you are the only one in the UK with any intelligence to realise how police are supporting serious transnational organised crime by their failure to record and investigate reports. I should also point out that many victims have presented their cases in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and yet nobody has taken any action to help them. This can only be due to institutionalised corruption on a grand scale and, until some action is taken to help these people, then we will continue to believe this. Yours sincerely, ATTENTION: MS. JIL MATHESON - REGARDING INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF CRIME STATISTICS Ms. Jil Matheson UK Statistics Authority Statistics House Tredegar Park Newport South Wales NP10 8XG Dear Ms. Matheson: I was interested to read in the newspaper that you will be working with ACPO and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary on an independent review of national crime statistics. You may be interested to know that, as a result of the attached Memorandum of Understanding between ACPO and the Law Society, white collar crimes involving members of the legal profession are never logged or investigated by police. As you can see, the Memorandum of Understanding is an agreement between two private, non-governmental organizations to obstruct justice. National crime statistics, therefore, can never be accurate; they never were, and never will be, unless police start recording incidents. This state of affairs is a national shame. As a result, I understand that Europe is about to step in and do Britain's policing for them. http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/224895/EU-bureaucrats-win-power-to- probe-UK-crime Police have openly refused, and continue to refuse, to investigage fraud, perjury or forgery, if a legal professional is involved, telling the general public that it is a civil matter. If you have a moment to watch this video, you will hear a policeman telling the gentleman that fraud is a civil matter. This is standard practice. Complaints from the public are simply ignored. No action is taken, not even a report. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeI1xO4luPg Of course, fraud. perjury and forgery are crimes the world over, except if they take place in the UK and involve a legal professional. One must remember that most complex white collar crime involves a legal professional......and yet it goes unreported because police will not log the crimes, much less investigate them. There are currently hundreds, if not thousands, of victims of white collar crime up and down the country, whose cases have never been logged or investigated by police. Personally, I can attest to the fact that Lancashire police have refused me, nine times to date, a log or incident number, so that I may report a crime. The refusal includes a member of the Professional Standards Branch. Not one officer has ever asked me what crime I wish to report. It could be a murder; it could be anything. However, I believe that they are afraid because I have knowledge of corruption in that constabulary, which is why they refuse to take my report. I will gladly supply the details to anyone who might feel it is their duty to act. The Home Office has already said that they don't want to involve themselves, so I can only think that, as Mr. Cameron doesn't show any interest either, nobody in the UK cares. So crimes in the UK are going unreported and uninvestigated; therefore, your statistics will always be flawed. Your review is a complete waste of government money and effort because, as long as ACPO continues to run the country with its corrupt hidden agenda, and its Memorandae of Understanding with whomever it sees fit, reports will be a complete sham. You don't have, and will never have, true statistics. Crimes committed by the police are never logged, and there are many cases of police harrassment and brutality, such as that of South Wales Police continually harrassing Mr. Maurice Kirk, and Lancashire Constabulary continually harrassing Ms. Carol Woods - no log numbers for either issues - just police harrassment in a very serious and ongoing manner, including imprisonment without due process, and attempts to section these individuals under the Mental Health Act. I would be delighted to supply information so that the government might investigate, but it appears that it does not feel it has any authority over ACPO. It seems that ACPO runs the whole country, including the Home Office, which seems to condones everything they do, and which says it has no authority to invervene in any matters whatsoever. I always thought the Prime Minister would have some power if he should choose to use it. Baroness Neville-Jones offers no apology for the attached Memorandum of Understanding, and simply stated, while addressing the House of Commons, that the Memorandum of Understanding was decommissioned in 2007. It most certainly was not, as you can see from the video. What's more, it should never have existed in the first place, as it is an agreement between two private, non-governmental organizations to obstruct justice, and ACPO has been doing so for a long time, and still continue to do so. That, coupled with the outright refusal by police in every single authority to write up incident reports and issue log numbers, is a culpable offence for police officers in most other country except corrupt Britain. It is corruption not to allow people to report crimes. Perhaps this matter should be taken to higher authorities before you waste your time? It seems like someone has already told Europe about it. If I can offer any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me by email or phone. Yours sincerelyDear xxxxxx Thank you for your e-mail to Jil Matheson. I will pass to colleagues working on the review of crime statistics and we will respond properly as soon as we are able. Kind regards Alex Elton-Wall Private Secretary National Statistician's Office UK Statistics Authority Tel: 01633 455306 Mob: 07795 800089 E-mail: alex.elton-wall@statistics.gsi.gov.uk


FRAUDULENT USE OF EU TAXPAYERS' MONEY - AUDIT . 15 December 2013 at 13:29 Dear Sirs The British public would like you to be aware of the fraudulent manner in which the British civil servants are operating, and to take action. Civil servants are denying Freedom of Information requests to the public, but what is worse is that Ministers and/or their staff simply delete emails from members of the public without reading them. On several occasions, I have sent information to Francis Maude, Cabinet Minister, about this problem as he purports to be conducting civil service reform. I am far from being the only member of the public to experience it blocking from almost all ministries. The two examples I give today are just two of many from right across all government departments, and also from local governments. My purpose, when writing to Mr. Maude, was to advise him that this is happening in all public departments, as I innocently presumed that he did not know that parliamentary correspondence clerks often simply delete emails without reading them, and many of them contain intelligence to help them do their jobs. His own private secretary/parliamentary assistant deleted at least some of them without reading them, along with other emails, and yet the very subject of the emails was about civil servants deleting emails! She provided the proof of it below. As you will see from my email further down the page, civil servants in the UK are not providing service and are, therefore, every bit of a problem as those Palestinian civil servants who were audited by the EU. http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Civil+servants+paid+stay+home+audit/9277305/story.html Members of the public are denied service, even by select committee members of parliament, who also either delete their emails without reading them, and ALWAYS ignore the information provided. Here are some comments from other people regarding the matter. I have removed their identifiers: From: martin brighton Date: 12 December 2013 21:30:35 GMTTo: david pidcock Subject: Re: SOMEONE IS MAKING A FOOL OF FRANCIS MAUDE Dear David, The blocking of emails to ministers by civil servants had been going on for years. The practice has several advantages: a) The civil servants are controlling the flow of information, so control the game b) The Minister is provided with the excuse of 'plausible deniability' when bad or sabotaged policies inevitably go t***-up c) The Minister is then 'owned' by the civil servant d) The civil servant can thus make or break any minister, who would be cut loose and blamed for not knowing what is going on e) When the civil servant is controlled by a third party to which there is primacy of loyalty, that third party effectively becomes the de facto government - this is the crucial point. There is such a third party that is riddled throughout the civil service, from Cabinet Office, down through every tier of governance, to local authorities and even street level. Kerslake (Sir Bob) is inextricably entangled with that organisation, and publicly supports it. Despite Eric Pickles saying 'No more spending by local authorities', they show him nothing but contempt. Because Francis Maude and the Prime Minister support this insurrectionist and corrupt organisation, both Maude and Cameron are showing sheer and Utter contempt for Pickles, whilst the organisation (COMMON PURPOSE) shows contempt for them all. In Sheffield, from 1997 to 2005, the Chief Executive Officer presided over multi-million pound fraud and corruption, whilst pandering to political whims, thus assuring promotion and teflon coating. Of course, even according to government's own records, things got worse, despite the hundreds of millions of money poured in. All the while, every project turned out to be an abysmal failure whilst the crocodile tears from the top whinged about the intransigence of public servants to culture change - exactly the same message we hear today from the Cabinet Civil Servant. And who was that CEO ? None other than Sheffield's former Chief Executive Sir Robert (Bob) Kerslake (AKA KERSNAKE) an extremely Uncivil Serpent!And what is this organisation ? Yes, you guessed it -its Common Purpose Of course, in terms that would embarrass Orwellian Newspeak, each failure is a sugar-coated triumph. Of course there will be an Inquiry, but: The Inquiry will not take place unless and until the outcome is already assured in keeping with the pre-set agenda. The civil servants will control all the input to the Inquiry. In Sheffield, the council's tactic to unwanted truths is to simply put an electronic block on the target's emails, then apply the policies of Deny and Lie, coupled with Control or Destroy. Just like the Cabinet Office today. Any continuity ? Meanwhile, via the Cabinet Office civil servants, they refuse to be open, honest and transparent about Common Purpose membership within government, which is directly contrary to Civil Service rules. Given the real agenda that is being played out by the back-door/back-room boys, Kerslake (KerSnake) is right to say that the Whitehall machine is performing remarkably well - but only if you consider that the Whitehall agenda does not reflect the manifesto of any elected government, but that of the clandestine, insurrectionist, corrupt, kerslake-supported organisation, Common Purpose. Happy times ahead, Dear Peter and friends who have suffered likewise from Secret Court abuses, Thank you for making this point about the inhumane Italian case. Everyone that I have spoken to is shocked but not surprised by the savagery demonstrated by lead Essex Social services/ health partnership professionals. We have been observing and experiencing their brutal ways for years. I'm advised by the local clergy that they have received reports of several other horror services about how badly the social services and NHS health partnerships have behaved over the years. The bad behaviour is usually driven by the individual's search for promotion or money and in the case of the COP (note: COURT OF PROTECTION) and it's associates, power and money. In our own case we had evidence of when a social services introduced/corrupt solicitor (Ms J. Pleass) instructed a psychiatrist (Dr. S Mann) to sign a COP form in order to obtain control and our family's money. It was done in a carefully timed way, so as to maximise control by social services and the solicitor who were working together with COP et al assistance. (The second corrupt solicitor working alongside the first corrupt solicitor was brother & sister owned Giles Wilson- calling themselves the Official Receiver and then Official Solicitor, in order to maximise their theft from our family under the guise of legitimate decisions carried out by a Secret Court, to whom we were disallowed an appeal) We have seen that the people who did wrong were promoted up and up the structures as a consequence of their taking risks with us and with other people's lives too. They have been upsetting whole families and the rest of the course of their lives in a routine way for decades. The model of mental terrorism that Essex employs is echoed throughout the UK in those counties that like to follow Essex's model. The Essex Deputy Social Services officer is also responsible as a leading National UK figure for the General Society for Social Workers organisation. Unusually, the Non Essex MP John Hemmings seems to have taken the case up. He is one of the few that tries to do the right thing on this issue. There has been silence from Eric Pickles who is the Essex MP who may have been responsible for looking after this particular issue involving the Italian lady and her unborn child. COP matters seem to be readily sidestepped by many MPs . These types of MP seem determined not to find answers when requests or concerns are raised about COP matters. The SoS minister Lamb was giving evidence in the House of Lords on 3rd Dec 2013 in front of a committee re. the COP, but I felt that many twists were interwoven into the evidence given. The witnesses were often not answering the question. They often seemed incapable of listening to what was being said to them. They sat side by side as they masked the seriousness of what has continued to take place under the Coalition, and Labour before that. Real evidence shows how poorly the COP has acted. But the real evidence is frequently buried. And even when it is briefly aired, it is soon forgotten by those politicians who choose to ignore it. Few in politics seem concerned about how badly the COP et al continues to perform. Even fewer have admitted that this is organised criminal activity carried out by our own UK secret courts and the personnel who attend. Lack of transparency pervades more and more of our so called public affairs. Meanwhile, the Secret courts are the root of much on going corruption. And the public are extremely worn down and upset by the lack of response shown when they raise this fact as evidence, again and again. We are tired of the fact that when evidence is called for, and we respond, having only just head about the call, we are suddenly stopped short. The receiving of evidence is suddenly curtailed. And the politicians are protected once more by the civil servants, from feeling the full scale wrath of the public. The public who object to secret courts need to have their complaints fully heard. Various groups have experienced such poor management and performance by the COP and it's associates who work together most effectively to destroy so many lives. The Secret court corruption is on such a widescale that we feel that the evidence committee should sit again and receive a further 2 reports from the ministers following the many questions that they failed to answer. And there should be at least two more sessions of evidence taking to hear from the focus group leaders who have experienced the non performance of the COP et al, often at first hand. There should be no attempt to put only the polished representatives before the House. The House of Lords Committee deserves to hear direct from the man & woman on the street who has suffered as a consequence of the COP et al's masked inhumanity and poor performance. Regards, ************************* NOTE: The House of Lords Parliamentary Committee on the Mental Capacity Act refused to hear evidence of crime and corruption involving mentally incapacitated or vulnerable persons on the bais that people were named. So they evidence has simply been thrown into the garbage by the very committee that should be protecting these people. Mike Clark and several others received a letter from the Chairman of the Committee, Lord Hardie, after submitting evidence that should be investigated, and having been advised that MPs, police, and ministers have refused to either investigate and/or respond to allegations of very serious fraud taking place within the courts and/or facilitated by the Official Solicitor’s office. http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/mental-capacity-act-2005/ This denial of service is mass fraud – they are being paid public monies to do a job that they are simply not doing. Furthermore, these Lords are concealing allegations of criminality instead of investigating them, and they will receive an EU PENSION at the end of their working life. ********************** True to form, they all turn a blind eye when confronted with allegations of official corruption. There is not one person in the UK, including the Prime Minister, willing to address these allegations. Some of the victims of serious white collar crimes have presented their cases, on several occasions, to Members of the House of Commons, and Members of the House of Lords. Some are recorded on video. There has been no offer of help for them, and the crimes are uninvestigated because British police refuse to record or investigate the allegations, and nobody in government cares. Will you please be kind enough to read on. At the end of this page, you will see the evidence of Libby Dewdney-Herbert, Mr. Maude’s personal assistant, deleting emails without reading them. It shows a total disdain for the public. As a result, I wrote the email highlighted in green, using information in the public domain, which highlights the fraudulent use of EU monies by British public servants, ministers and MPs. They are not doing the job that the taxpayers expect them to do, especially when they don’t even read correspondence from concerned citizens about the corruption of both parliament and police. The items highlighted in yellow show how public servants are deleting emails addressed to ministers without reading them. As you will see, the new National Crime Agency is also deleting emails containing criminal intelligence. It is no wonder that the UK is unable to prosecute criminals operating at a high level of serious organised crime. Evidence may be lost, due to lazy civil servants who simply don’t want to have to deal with correspondence. You will see from some of the newspaper reports that they now do not deal with emails on Thursdays, and many take Fridays off. Many work from home, where there is no supervision. These are ONLY TWO examples. Britain is a threat to world security, and something needs to be done about both its abysmally corrupt policing, and its abysmal public servants and parliamentarians who allow them to block information, and who do nothing at all to investigate allegations of serious corruption and cover ups involving criminals with law degrees, judges, lawyers and police. This may also be of interest to you: http://www.ukcolumn.org/blogs/behavioural-change-common-purpose . Like CommentShare 2 Shares . You and 2 others like this. . Yvonne Stewart-Taylor https://www.facebook.com/.../response-to.../637761266286613 RESPONSE TO SOMEONE IS MAKING A FOOL OF FRANCIS MAUDE “Decision FS50435121 The Cabinet Office carefully interpret a request about cont...See more by: Yvonne Stewart-Taylor about an hour ago · Like .. Mike Clarke IT IS TIME to start to name them with dates of birth and photos of their properties with addresses as we are doing and to shame them publicly to publish it all.. www.opg.me

Back to top

Working by ARCHAngel Michael
In this section you will find some information about Archangel Michael. Archangel Michael is a prince of the Angels, prince of light, regent prince of the seraphim, regent prince of the virtues, an angel of deliverance and a prince of the divine presence. His name is in a form of a rhetorical question, meaning “ who is like God?”. Archangel Michael is the angel of protection,strength and truth. He gives you courage to face the truth and overcome any obstacles and fears that you have about your future. He helps us to find increased clarity in what we think,do and say, and helps us to be more assertive and have more self - belief and self - assurance. He helps us to work with the theme of personal will, showing and encouraging us to bring our own will into harmony with Divine will (“Thy will, not mine”). As we become more aware of our personal power and will, our capacity to be gentle and loving members of humanity increases. When we are fearful, Archangel Michael comes to dissolve doubt and fear, and gently teaches us how to understand and work with the basic theme of this world - that of duality and the battle between darkness and light. Archangel Michael is one of the Guardians of karma, and can help us to work with and clear any karma or karmic entanglements we have with each other. In his work with us on the First Ray he wants us to develop our own strength and willpower and to both recognise, accept and integrate our shadow aspects. In our daily and spiritual lives he gives us the strength to stand up and fight for what is right and light, and to recognise our own truths and stand up for them.

Michael is the Archangel of power, desire and action. He is often pictured carrying a sword which symbolises the power of love and which may cut us free of all that binds us or holds us prisoner. His sword is surrounded by a silvery - blue flame, which we interpret as the Magdalenen flame containing the innocent and pure energy of the love of Divine Source - the flame from the great central sun at the heart of our universe. Blue is also the colour of his protective cloaking energy, which we may invoke at any time we need protection. Michael’s primary task is to cleanse Earth’s atmosphere and the auras of all humankind of all lower thought - forms, dissolving all that is not perfect or of the highest vibrations. He wants to show all sentient beings the path back To God when they have strayed. Archangel Michael has also taken on the role of Protector and Guardian of mankind, and he is relentless in his protection and defence of those who wish to live in the light. He is committed to help all souls who call on him and will always assist in whatever action is necessary to bring about justice and resolution. Another symbol representative of his energies is a scale of balance, representing Justice. He also carries the gold Ray of Source, which may sometimes be seen blazing from his solar plexus, or surrounding him.

Name meaning “He who is as God”
Virtues Health, Organization, Power
Colour of Aura Blue, Gold
Guards this day Wednesday, Sunday
Ray Works with the First Ray of Divine will, Power and Protection
Element Fire
Relevant Chakra 5th ( Throat) and 3rd ( Solar Plexus)
Related to number 6
Related to Crystals blue crystals: sapphire, blue topaz: for peacefulness, and healing
Yellow / gold crystals: yellow topaz, citrine: to initiate positive action,
Improve communications. Other crystals are Ruby, Tigers Eye, Amber, Turquoise and Lapis, Chrysolite
Aromatherapy oils Myrrh, Eucalyptus and Lemon
Herbs Chamomile, Rosemary, St John’s Wort, Mistletoe, Melissa, Eyebright
Incense Frankinscense, myrrh, Copal, Cinnamon, Bergamot
Colour Gold, Yellow
Symbols Sword, Blue Cloak, Sun, Gold, Metal Colour, Scale of balance
The Function of Archangel Michael
Archangel Michael is the guardian of the house of spirit and dreams, and is the archangel working for cooperation and reconciliation. Now is the time for us to learn to live in peace and harmony with others, to break down the barriers that have separated nations, political parties, religious sects, families, and individuals due to differences of opinion, fear. All of us are citizens of Earth, regardless of our diversity. In the movement toward this level of cooperation, Michael is the being to invoke.
When to ask Archangel Michael for help
You may want to invoke Archangel Michael when
• you are faced with changes that you are uncertain about
• have a person or situation you are having difficulty confronting
• need help with clarity of communication
• when you need physical strength
• when you wish to cut ties that bind you to a thing, person or situation
• when you need spiritual protection
How to Invoke Archangel Michael
Michael protect me
The sword of Michael and his truth protects me
His cloak of blue covers me
Michael give me the strength as I courageously face this situation
Michael cut away all falseness with your sword so that I may be myself
I courageously claim my power
The energies of the Angels and the Stars strengthen me
Righteousness, truth and love is my path
Visualize the sword as metal or a living flame helping you to cut away fear

Archangel Michael is the warrior Archangel associated with Life Mission and Divine Purpose.
We are currently in a time known as 'The Age Of Michael', so-called because Michael is working with SO many people right now.
This powerful and mighty Angel comes through frequently in my Consultations because it is vital that we all stand up and claim our Divine Right Purpose; the work we came here to do.
It is also imperative that we have the courage to let go of situations and patterns that are blocking this. Michael lends his Sword Of Truth and Light to cut away all that does not serve us.
Archangel Michael is working consistently from the Upper Realms this year to guide you onto your Highest Path; that which will most highly serve yourself and the entire planet, and will bring you the deepest fulfillment, joy and love.
If you have not yet consciously connected with this magnificent warrior-like Archangel, perhaps this message is a clear sign from him that you take steps to do so!
Even if you regularly make contact with him in your own way, today Michael has a specific message, which I have channeled for you. Just reading the words given from High Beings such as Michael creates changes in your personal vibration, and will open your Heart to accept more Love into your life.
"Dear All Bringers Of the Light upon the Earth,
I am deeply honoured to make my connections with you at this critical time in your beloved planet's evolution.
Many of you are familiar with my vibration and words - having sought me out in times of intense change and doubt, many fears for your future purpose being the first thing on your mind when you call upon me.
What is important to know is that any time you activate my Light within your Soul, simply by calling me in, the profound vibrational shifts and micro-cellular activity within your energy field is begun. This spiritual medicine works upon your whole being; physical, mental, emotional and within the Chakra energy system.
Without conscious awareness, you are then strongly guided to make life choices and changes that you may have been avoiding through misguided fear. Everything I guide and direct you to do is through my all-encompassing Love for you and your contribution to peace in the Universe.
Now is the time when I make myself known to you with a renewed vigour!
For a new time has commenced - this I must impress upon you now. A new time wherein all Souls who have elected to be the harbingers of real, positive and electrifying change are called up for active service to the Divine.
This means YOU, Dear Child of Holiness.
Believe my words as I speak, that I am directing you with haste and speed towards a life that is your truest and most Heavenly function. If life seems to speed up a little forthwith, make no mistakes in your thinking - it is MY work!
I am swelled with Love and pride for you, my Blessed children of Light,
Lord and Messenger of Truth, Honour and Holy Purpose."

Make a LIVING WILL now!! SEE mum's HERE
to protect you &...

"Predatory Guardian" The PREDATORY GUARDIAN

In the FRAME is
Hugh Jones DO YOU

He has took control of 300 clients money and spends it, mainly upon himself.

Pannone LLP & the £9 million

Commercial Lien/Claim to Read

A claim made under common law, a claim made under GOD, a claim that GOD is my witness to the truth!! A claim made without any rebuttal! Read the debt & read LIENS RECOGNISED BY PANNONES & where it is clear that PANNONE s partner Richard Drinkwater, whom is one of our endebted partners within our own Commercial Lien above, against themselves at PANNONE s and his recognition of holders of liens where creditors such as us, "are authentic", where PANNONE s have openly claimed no recognition of "our commercial lien" against them or the Commercial Affidavit Process claiming its of no value. Can one clearly see the contradictions that are riddled in the company Pannone s, that is so called award winning, are the awards for contradiction. see the picture! Isn't it funny the minute a commercial lien is served upon them that they do not recognise it, so why did they fraudulently use harassement laws to try to curtail it! Probably spending, according to them in excess of £50,000. Was this action in effect recognition, of a perfected commercial lien? Seeing as this is turning out to be a trial by internet we will let you the public be the judge of this!

Appointed by judge DENZIL LUSH, against the direct wishes of the patient, Hugh Jones of PANNONE & Co solicitors Manchester took his position in charge of mums damages awarded to pay for care in 2001 the sum of £775,000, as her deputy/receiver. It has to be said and noted that his first years charges, expected to be £2500 as laid down by judge Denzil LUSH, actually came out at £26,371.77p! Take note that in his first year of office whilst he gave me and my mother £200 per week to live off he deducted from the damages £507 per week charges just to say NO! every time his phone rang. The problems, having been astronomic to the point of writing a book, started from day 1 with the words from Mr Hugh Jones's "broad brush approach" that suddenly turned very narrow! Since that first year of 2001 he has refused to supply any details of the subsequent 9 years of charges that remain a secret to this day ON 311011. If it was your relative would you consider this theft!

Judge Denzil Lush
The Judge

Whom in our opinion, has no idea of the family decimation that he is causing or if he does he is certainly turning a blind eye to the reality of the lies, ignorance, discrimination, corruption, theft, absolute breaches in human rights and the complete lack of equality that is the cornerstone of THE COURT OF PROTECTION / NEGLECTION / CORRUPTION!

We are members of the
British Constitution Group of
Lawfull Rebellion

Back to top

Blackpool MP - Gordon Marsden
MP Gordon Marsden

Our Labour MP representative for Blackpool South area, Mr Gordon Marsden. upon writing my concerns to him in November 09 it took him 3 months to send an unsatisfactory reply. I then wrote to the party office. On the 29th November 2010 I wrote to Gordon Marsden but to date no reply! Today 14.01.2011 I wrote to his party office complaining and sent a copy of the email back to Gordon of the 29th Nov 2010.

OPG- Chief - Alan Eccles

link1 & link2 To Martin John Ex: Chief Executive of the OPG. Five statutory principles that underpin the MCA 2005: • it should be assumed that everyone over 16 has the capacity to make their own decision, unless it can be shown they lack capacity • a patient should not be regarded as unable to make a decision until all practicable steps to help them make it have been taken, without success • a person should not viewed as someone lacking the capacity to make a decision, simply because the decision is unwise • practitioners must ensure that any act done or decision made on behalf of a person who lacks capacity must be in their best interests • any decision made must also be the least restrictive of their basic rights and freedoms.

So, what is lawful rebellion? (or being a freemen on the land)
I’ll try to give a little basic background to it.
(Please note it’s not comprehensive it’s just a rough guide)
In the year 1215 the first of our constitutional rights were set down on paper, it was called the Magna Carta, this was basically an oath from the crown (King or Queen) to uphold the rights of the people set down in it and to look after the peoples best interests, in return for the crowns promise to the people they agreed to be ruled by the crown, so it was a contract between crown and people basically, and it became the law.
The crown had to uphold the rights and common law as did the people, not to cause death, harm, or loss to another, or be fraudulent in your contracts (in other words be honest and true).
In 1689 the bill of rights was set down on paper, this basically sealed all the rights given in the Magna Carta plus a few more, both documents contain our UK common law written down and formed our law.
These two documents are the main fundamental parts of our UK constitution, yes we do actually have one, many claim that the UK has no written constitution, this is not true. We have the most respected constitution in the world, it is the basis of the constitutions of the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India.
Rather than being one written document we have several that make up the UK constitution, the primary of which is the Magna Carta and the 1689 bill of rights. (the freeman movement in Canada seems to be gaining respect from some Canadian policemen) Part of both the Magna Carta and the 1689 bill of rights states that they cannot be repealed because they are such well-made laws and rights!
“”Lord Justice Laws on 18th February 2002: "The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights 1689…Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not…." “
Now our ancestors were not daft, they knew there could be a problem one day if the crown became unjust, or turned into some sort of dictatorship, or parliament was acting against the people, or was full of corruption, or was not allowing the crown to keep its oath.
So in article 61 of the Magna Carta it was written that if this ever happened you could petition the crown to sort out the crowns problem (or parliaments if it was them), the crown had 40 days to fix it or dissolve parliament. If in the 40 days nothing was fixed the petitioner could go into rebellion against the crown and parliament lawfully until the problem was resolved.
Because this was lawful and the petitioner had a right to do it he would go into “lawful rebellion”, he would no longer have allegiance to the crown or parliament because they had become corrupt etc, he would be a hindrance and a rebel, and fight to end the corruption or injustice within the system, it was law that he could do this, and he was actually obeying the law by doing it, because it is the peoples duty to fight corruption and uphold the law.
So that’s the basics of it.

Because our constitution cannot be repealed it is still valid law.
Now, to do this today you first send an affidavit (a sworn oath of truth, the most powerful lawful and legal document you can get) to our Queen, stating that the crown or in this case our government acting for the crown and its MPs are breaking the constitutional contract (and they really are breaking it), and ask for it to be fixed within 40 days, this is witnessed and counter signed and sealed by a credible witness (I used a solicitor).
I did not make my oath lightly, I took an oath to defend the crown when I joined the army, I was now withdrawing my oath of allegiance, it may sound strange to some but I had a lump in my throat doing it, it was made in good faith.
It is then sent to the queen, then if in 40 days the problem is not fixed a second affidavit is then sent to the Queen, this time saying that the problem is not fixed and therefore the crown or government acting for the crown has broken the contract with the people, and you are therefore no longer going to obey or be ruled by a corrupt crown or government, you are now in lawful rebellion.
Now contrary to what any government officials may tell you this is lawful, and it is a binding oath sworn before God (and the witness), it is my right, your right, everyone’s right to do this, but only if there is a genuine breach of the contract.
The powers that be want you to believe that we have no constitution and anything we do have has been repealed, or 90% of it anyway, it’s in their interests to have you believe this so they can get away with anything they want without the people stopping them.
As you can see from the statement by Lord Justice Laws it is our constitution and cannot just be scrapped by parliament or our self-serving MPs and politicians, it is still valid law no matter what our politicians say, they have never ever had the right to repeal any of it.
Some of the breaches we are using for entering lawful rebellion are, corruption in parliament and our government, we all know this is happening, It’s not just one party its them all.
Our past and present government has allowed and is allowing foreign powers (the EU) to rule over us. The European Union, this is a hugely corrupt system and its not working in anyone’s best interests except the EU politicians and their powerful business associates, the EU is a dictatorship, run by un elected leaders, look into it and you will see this is true.
When our government handed over our sovereignty to the EU they committed treason!
This is 100% true, they really have committed treason, take a look at the Ukip website for some very interesting facts and figures etc., it is beyond belief what the EU gets up to (I’m just using Ukip as they have collected a lot of info, not because they are the exception to any other party).
The EU is our peoples greatest enemy, second to that is our own government and most of the mainstream parties, I know that the police are supposed to be non-political but you all have freedom of thought and I am sure you must realise what a corrupt bunch of leaders we have (done worry I’m not looking for comments on this! lol)
When our government does something wrong they just pretend they haven’t done it, if it gets to hot a subject they stick a gagging order on it (D notice I think is the correct term?).
Lawful and Legal? What's the difference?
There’s lots of talk on the freeman sites (and other sites) about being Lawful and legal and the difference between the two, but there’s not much in the way of a basic guide so it ends up confusing, some will know the difference but for those who don’t here we go. Basically anything in our constitution including common law is lawful (true law).
Any acts that parliament have passed are legal, these will be in the form of acts or statute laws, these “legal” acts should not contradict common law or what’s in our constitution, some of them do but we won’t go into that.
We had a system in place that could not be changed (common law and our constitution), so if parliament wanted to pass new legal acts etc. it had to find a way of doing it and making it enforceable. The Royal navy already used a legal system called Admiral law to keep its sailors in check and make sure its members obeyed officers and the navy rules, all navy members had to swear an oath to obey it etc. it became a legal contract and so it was enforceable. It was only used on ships and within the navy but it worked and was ready made so parliament adopted it (or a version of it), now parliament had a system to use to make new “legal” laws.
For it to work people had to think it was lawful, we did not know any different so we just took it as being right and obeyed, but none of us have ever sworn an oath to parliament or the crown to be in the navy and obey admiralty law (unless you have been in the navy I guess), so there is no binding contract between legal acts or statutes and the people, we have been getting duped into obeying them.
A statute law or act is in legal terms is defined as “ an act given the force of law by the consent of the governed”, note it says consent, so if you don’t consent to it and there is no contract between yourself and the other party it is not law. So now you see why freemen (and those claiming to be freemen) will say I do not consent, and there is no contract between us, I have broken no law when you are going to arrest them or make them obey an act or statute legislation.
I have served my lawful affidavits to the crown and I am not in the Navy or under admiralty law, so I am a freeman on the land.
When the queen made her coronation oath it was to uphold the people’s rights and common law and do her duty for our country and its people.
When you made your oaths to the queen it was to her so she could uphold her oaths and the law.
When I swore my oath I did it lawfully and honourably in good faith, and for the right reasons, so please don’t write us all off as nutters, I urge you all to please give us the benefit of the doubt when dealing with freemen.
If the person you are dealing with has filed their affidavits and is genuinely in lawful rebellion under article 61 of the Magna Carta (they should be able to show you proof), I urge you to please follow common law when dealing with them, they are truly under the jurisdiction of common law only, not acts of parliament or statue law.
By trying to hold a genuine freeman on anything other than a breach of common law you would truly be breaking common law yourself, and your oaths were to uphold our queen and common law.
I genuinely hope this has given you a little better understanding of what we are doing and why.
Thanks go to Rebel Leader http://www.freedomrebels.co.uk for allowing me to use this article to explain what a freeman/woman on the land is.





DECEMBER 5 2012 594808

DECEMBER 6 2012 594888 80

DECEMBER 7 2012 595001 113

DECEMBER 14 2012 595361 113

DECEMBER 10 2012
Read my affidavit to the Queen


A court of equity is a court which can apply equitable remedies to disputes. Courts of equity operate within the legal system, but rather than focusing on the application of law, they look at cases and determine outcomes based on fairness. Also known as chancery courts, courts of equity can be found in many regions of the world. In some areas, they operate entirely separately from courts of law, and in others, a court of law is empowered to handle both legal and equitable remedies.
The concept of a chancery court arose in England when citizens began to express dissatisfaction with legal judgments handed down by the courts. They argued that the law was sometimes unfair, and that some situations were not covered by the law, making it impossible for the courts to respond. Courts of equity arose to handle legal situations in which people might want damages beyond monetary damages, with the judge empowered to act on discretion, rather than following the rule of the law.
A court of equity still has some legal responsibilities, but it has more leeway when it comes to judging cases. It can hand down a judgment which includes an equitable remedy such as an injunction, as opposed to simple monetary damages. Courts of equity can be used for things like specific performance, for example, in which someone is asked to make good on a breach of contract.
Notice to the High Court: Delivered by hand – at the Manchester Justice Centre: 14th January 2013. CASE 2MA90015 Notice is given to ‘the court’ of the following: - In the matter of MICHAEL CLARKE (legal fiction). · Challenge of jurisdiction: · Challenge of the legitimacy of the judge: · The Queen is no longer sovereign: · All prior orders are void: · There is no case to answer: This notice is delivered in writing prior to the commencement of any hearing in recognition of the fact that in the past when reasonable approach has been made to ‘the court’ to deal with the issues presented below… the court has adopted a position of abandonment – and has resorted to secret hearings to declare judgment in an effort to retain its authority… we can no longer tolerate avoidance of the facts and we thus challenge the court to address these issue or be condemned by its own acquiescence through silence. No court can make judgment in its own cause… it is anathema to justice. We claim that the High Court has no legitimacy… because it fails to uphold the rule-of-law and has resorted instead to the rule-of-force (coercion) to impose its claimed authority. Legitimate authority derives from consent not coercion. The court must address the issues raised or the authority of the court evaporates. The issues are not going to go away and more and more people will challenge the court until addressed. Challenging the authority of government and the legitimacy of the judiciary is a democratic right where questions of propriety arise Challenge to Jurisdiction: In the matter of MICHAEL CLARKE (legal fiction): MICHAEL CLARKE is a legal fiction - summonsed by High Court order to ‘appear’ today and is presented to the court as ordered – in recognition of the authority of the court and its jurisdiction over the legal fiction The legal fiction appears by way of a copy of the birth certificate… as the ‘original’ certificate is not available. MICHALE CLARKE as referred to in the High court document is not a living sentient being… i.e. a man – this is self-evident - as no man is subject to the authority of any other without his consent - we are all born equal. This is not a romantic notion it is a statement of cold hard fact. Neither the denial or bluster of the legal profession in any capacity will suppress the authority of logic – and we present to the court the logic that ‘no man has authority over any other without their consent’ – if the court claims so to have… show the law. The authority of statutes are imposed legally upon ‘persons’ which are corporations. The legal fiction MICHAEL CLARKE is a corporate entity. ‘Person’ is not defined in statute law as ‘a man’ and therefore it isn’t ‘a man.’ The authority imposed upon the legal fiction the ‘person’ transfers to the man upon consent – upon using ‘the name’ of ‘the person.’ No consent = no authority. Imposed authority is coercion. Coercion is unlawful. The name MICHEAL CLARKE does not attach itself to a man as a compulsion… is happens only by consent. No authority exist that permits one man to impose his will on another man without his consent… this is unlawful. The government can however claim authority over the legal fiction, created by government. The court repeatedly avoids this issue… because the legal fiction is the foundation of its authority and with this revealed… the true authority of the court i.e. ‘the consent of the people’ is exposed. The courts paranoia – that it will lose its authority if the legal fiction is exposed is unfounded… the reverse is now the case… the legal fiction (115 million pages on Google) is well and truly established as a fact and the continued denial by the High Court only serves to diminish its authority… by diminishing trust in it. It must surely be the case that Judges who continue to deny the legal fiction will attract cynicism and distrust to all judgments of the court, thus bringing it into disrepute. No group of men can write regulations (Acts of parliament) to subject other men to their arbitrary authority – we are governed by consent – this is not a hollow claim – it is a maxim and is the very foundation of our governance. Statutes have only equal authority of government, they do not exceed that authority – thus statutes must also be subject to our consent and the withdrawal of same. We know fully how that consent has been secured through the legal fiction… High Court judges know how consent is secured through the legal fiction and through presumptions, in the absence of the denial of consent. Let it be made clear… consent is and has been denied consistently – all presumptions and assumptions are denied. The jurisdiction of the court is subject to the consent of all parties to a dispute. If the ‘High Court’ insists on asserting that it has authority beyond consent over the man (not the legal fiction) then show the law that authorises it. If the court insists on imposing its claimed authority - in the face of the denial of consent then a claim is raised that a tort has been committed against the man and the liability falls to the administrator of the court. If the High Court will not give way to the demands of the people that it respect and uphold our laws - then its authority evaporates… and its relevance diminished to nought. All that remains is tyranny. The jurisdiction of the court is challenged on several levels… even under its own rules. No case to answer: There is no subject matter. Late delivery by the Pannone. Hearsay (written affidavits) inadmissible – due to ‘Notice of intention to rely on such evidence’ not given. The court claims to control who can and cannot address the court. ‘No right of audience’ this is a patently bias in favour of the legal profession – bias is unlawful. A judge who imposes the restriction of ‘No right of audience’ must recuse themselves for bias. [Barristers are servants of the court – this is a conflict of interest where the ‘defendant’ is challenging the authority of the court.] Representation in court by individuals who are not servants of the court will be more robust in their challenges of the court. The exposure of the legal fiction is testament to this. Challenge to the legitimacy of the judge: · The authority of the High Court judge is challenged - where there is no evidence of the authority so claimed then none exists. We have moved beyond ‘authority by assumption.’ Authority by one can only be imposed on another with their consent… if no consent is given then the imposition of authority implies a master slave relationship… slavery is repugnant and goes against the basic principles of a civil society – those who insist on the imposition of their authority without consent are tyrants – and tyrants are a threat to the peaceful coexistence of all free people – they must be vanquished. · Tyrants have been dealt with before – Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights is the legacy of that struggle and these laws are at our disposal today to strike down any new attempts at tyranny – even when it comes dressed up as law. · Acts of Parliament are not laws… if they were, they would be called Laws of Parliament. Acts of Parliament are merely statutes, they are referred to as statutes … and statutes gain the authority of law when they are consented to. We are not adverse to consenting to statutes – but those designed to impose overbearing control will be opposed – and rightly so. · The constant imposition of unreasonable statutes is the flint to the dry grass… and the judiciary may be the first bale to burn. · The authority of the judge derives from the sovereignty of the people on whose behalf they administer justice… they do not impose their decisions on their own created authority. The people’s authority is represented by our Sovereign Monarch… to whom the judiciary give sworn allegiance that they will uphold our laws. · If there is any diminishment of the standing of the Monarch then the authority of the judge fails because he/she too would lose standing. · Where the Monarch’s authority fails… the people’s authority remains intact… because the people’s sovereignty is supreme. · Where the Monarch’s authority fails – so does the judges – who must then seek a new authority from the people… not from politician’s as this would destroy the fundamental principle of the separation of powers – and judges cannot create their own arbitrary authority. · The Monarch’s authority has failed… brought about by the duplicity of parliament which has surrendered its own authority contrary to our constitution. Her majesty did not prevent the surrender of parliament to a foreign power by refusing the Royal Assent – despite over a million signatories in petition. Parliament may well have surrendered its sovereignty to a foreign power… but the people’s sovereignty remains intact. · The people’s sovereignty is secure and our constitution defends it through its various elements such as Magna Carta. · Magna Carta is the law and judges of the High Court must submit to it – or suffer the consequences of the law. · Nobody is above the law – and that includes High Court judges. · Lord Scarman said… “A government above the law is a menace to be defeated” · It is undeniably the case that a judiciary above the law is a tyranny to be defeated………. our law is unequivocal and it is this: - “No man shall be imprisoned without a jury of his peers” · It seems that today’s judges have been ‘trained’ beyond the capacity to understand this basic and simple logic. · Those judges who step over that mark and act in defiance of our law must be held to account and striped of their duties – and their pensions. · If this court does not concede to the demand of a trial by jury then that demand will go to the highest court in the land… the people’s grand jury – to settle this matter once and for all. · If it is necessary for the people’s grand jury to be called upon… and it finds in favour of trial by jury as it surely will because it is the unquestionable right of the people, then the full body of High Court judges will have to be dismissed and replaced. It is not beyond the powers of the people to do this. NO SOVEREIGNTY: · The sovereignty of the people is not in question – but the sovereignty of Her Majesty must be seen to be in doubt – if the claim made by John Major (Ex Premier) has any validity. Major said of the Queen “ The Queen is a citizen of the European Union” – this claim is to imagine the death of the Queen. The Prime Minister would not make that statement without legal advice because of the constitutional significance. · The implications are that the Queen has accepted mediatisation. i.e. she is no longer sovereign. · If the Queen is no longer sovereign – where do the courts and judges claim to have secured their authority? · The political establishment have devised a wheeze to avoid this vital question… they obfuscate with the phrase ‘shared sovereignty’ which is an oxymoron and can be discounted as nonsense. · We either have sovereignty or we do not. If we have sovereignty then the authority of the court is not in question… only its actions. Its actions to deny trial by jury are unlawful. There may be some ‘legal’ provision to deny a trial by jury (it is doubtful) but even if there were -‘legal’ is not ‘lawful’ and where they are in conflict then ‘the legal’ provision would not stand because it would be defeated by our common law (supreme law). · If the Queen is no longer sovereign, then the authority of the High Court falls on this reality. If the Queen is still Sovereign then there should be no problem getting confirmation of this fact from Her Majesty… there are channels to secure this written confirmation by Her Majesty’s Private Secretary. This is not beyond the capability of the High Court for Her Majesty’s Sovereignty to be confirmed in writing. Silence will tell all. Re: Constitutional Monarchy · The United Kingdom is defined as a constitutional monarchy because we have both a constitution and our Head of State is a Monarch. Our constitution defines our form of government – the government does not define our form of constitution – in recent times this principle has been unlawfully reversed without the consent of the people and has been carried out by unscrupulous politicians, aided and abetted by members of the legal profession. The courts to date have made no contribution to stopping this process of change that has diminished the people’s sovereignty whilst enhancing authority elsewhere including with foreign institutions. · If the sovereignty of the people has been compromised and the reversal is not challenged, then we are clearly culpable through our own apathy. · The constitution is the foundation of our freedoms and our liberties and MUST be upheld by the courts… or the courts must be abandoned. · We now have a government that seeks to rewrite our constitution and by so doing empower itself – at our expense. · A demand for jury trial is exercising our constitutional rights, which if denied gives evidence of collusion by the courts with unlawful governance – we cannot be allowed to stand. This is treason. Void Orders. · No order made by a court that lacks jurisdiction has any authority – it is void. · A void order cannot be breached – the order does not exist. Does the court claim that MICHAEL CLARKE is a man? – then let the court provide the proof. The evidence of logic to the contrary overrides any such claim. Does the court claim authority over the man? – Then Let the court provide the proof. Can ‘the judge’ give evidence of his authority… his oath of office? His Warrant from the Queen? Is the Queen still Sovereign? The evidence suggest not. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. We understand that the judiciary take oath amongst themselves not to engage in any discussion in court re the legal fiction entity and under pressure to do so they are instructed to abandon the court… suppression of the fact re the legal fiction being paramount. There is recurring evidence to support this claim… the judiciary will not discuss this matter – which gives rise to the certainly of the legal fiction. There are in excess of 115 million web sites on Google which overwhelming support the concept of the legal fiction… this is quite staggering - there is random but sparse opposition to the idea… logic dominates. To reinforce the position… the judiciary will not engage. If the judiciary serve another master… then they must recuse themselves. We understand that the court order stipulated that MICHEAL CLARKE should appear before the court – and this order has been complied with. If the court dissents – then the court should give evidence as to who the name is. A judicial determination. The man is prepared to present himself to a court of law… he is not adverse to justifying his actions… but he will not respond to coercion and the threat of violence against him made BY THE COURT – coercion is unlawful – the courts themselves are not above the law. The man will make himself available to a common law court. Show the law where the court claims the authority to imprison a man without a jury of his peers. We present Magna Carta as the law – well established… that says he must have a jury trial. The CPR may not provide for a jury trial – but nor does it provide for its exclusion. Nor does it claim the right to suppress our constitution… it seems to leave this to individual judges… if they are bold enough to do so. Surely the CPR rules are a trap for unwitting judges. The matter to hand: Contempt of Court. · Honestly held belief: Freemen have an honestly held belief that they have a right to a fair trial… which means a jury trial – and that statute courts are subject to consent. Where there is no jury trial facilitated by the court and no consent given by the man then there is a legitimate challenge that orders of the court are void. · The denial of a jury trial is bias. · No contempt of court can be claimed to exist where no jurisdiction exists… and where no order has been breached because the order is void. · If the court does not have jurisdiction… on subject matter… then its order is void… and ignoring those orders is therefore not a contempt of the court. · Any denial of due process would warrant a claim of a void order. The rule-of-force. · The threat of force is coercion: · THE JUDGE may take it upon himself to engage force to demonstrate his unproven authority… this would be deemed a criminal act in the eyes of the man - the man reserves the right to use all lawful means to defend his rights, freedoms and liberties… and he reserves the right to pursue justice beyond the court system if this fails in its duty to preserve impartiality. · The people’s authority must prevail – through the rule of law – not the rule-of-force. · If the ‘High Court’ threatens us with violence to secure its claimed authority – we have no option but to concede under duress. But there should be no doubt about the dynamics of the situation thus created. Our concession should not be construed as an act of weakness – we will be pragmatic in the face of adversity – and bide our time. Lawful Rebellion: The people of Britain have a right to rebel against arbitrary and unjust governance… that this exists is demonstrable. The Lawful Rebellion movement gathers momentum and the underlying demand is that the government and the judiciary respect our common law right of which Magna Carta is a foundation. Where the judiciary will not recognise Magna Carta… we will not recognise them. The ball is in the court. What game shall we play? The Real issue- The real purpose of the harassment claim – it is an attempt to gag. The man has claimed that ‘in his view’ one of the partners, also a plaintiff - Hugh Jones - is a crook who has stolen his mother’s money. He has called on the partners in Pannones to investigate and provide a thorough and transparent investigation… which they have refused to do. Pannones defer their responsibility to an external body… the secretive ‘Court of Protection’ which according to the accounts of many… is protecting criminality, not vulnerable people. The man has good cause to claim that there is collusion between Hugh Jones, the Court of Protection and their ombudsman… again these impressive sounding ‘bodies’ of so called authority are always represented by a single individual, all of whom hail from the same profession… the opportunity for collusion and corruption is not unimaginable… and hence why the man has pursued the common law process of a commercial lien. The man has a lawfully obtained and fully perfected commercial lien against the Pannone Partners to the value of Nine Million pounds. The man has every right to pursue payment of this debt and no court has the right to deny this. Another single member of the legal profession (a judge) tried to declare this illegal… which is fine because the commercial lien process claims no ‘legal’ status… it is entirely an animal of the common law process and is thus ‘lawful’ and derives it legitimacy through common law and irrefutable logic. It is telling that Pannones have done everything in their power to avoid the simple process of an internal inquiry into the allegations of corruption of one of their partners… it raises serious questions as to WHY? What have they got to hide. Pannones get their business from the Court of Protection… the Court of Protection have appointed Hugh Jones… and the Court of Protection cannot be investigated. Hugh Jones and Pannones could ‘thank’ the Court of Protection and nobody would know…. The ‘set-up’ is protected… this is probably why it is called the Court of Protection Pannones are desperate to gag the man… using the harassment Act and the man is determined to expose the alleged corruption, using the pressure of persistence – because there is no remedy in the legal system. The man has a duty to prevent crime when he sees it happening… and this is precisely what he is doing. The man has declared war on Pannones… despite all the pressure he has brought to bear, they have still not investigated Hugh Jones – ONE HAS TO ASK – WHY? On the balance of probability… it seems that there is more to Pannone’s refusal to provide a proper and meaningful explanation of where the man’s mother’s money has gone… in their robustness to avoid answering some simple questions Pannones have preferred to subjected themselves to a ‘sustained pressure’ to expose the truth. Pannones would obviously like the pressure to stop… and it is so easily achieved. Provide the answers re the alleged corruption by Hugh Jones and the problem will disappear. Sustained pressure… is not harassment. It is a legitimate method to prevent crime when the ‘appropriate bodies’ refuse to do so. The Great Irony. One of the plaintiffs in this matter a Mr Paul Jonson –titles himself as HEAD OF CORPORATE RESOLUTIONS - an offer was made to Paul Jonson for mediation in an attempt to ‘resolve’ the matter – which was declined by him. It seems that the Pannones crew are a strange bunch - simple not what they claim to be… with a resolutions department that avoids resolution and a protection department allegedly not protecting - and with some very important issues about alleged corruption in their ranks to still to address. The claim of harassment is a gagging ploy. The exposure of Pannones as a direct consequence of the man’s probing may reveal that there is more to this than meets the eye. We should applaud the man for his persistence – and condemn Pannones for their evasion of the truth.T Pannones had the choice of going the very easy route - by providing transparency and answers to easy questions… or the enormously hard route of prevarication and dodging the issue - subjecting themselves to a barrage of pressure (all is fair in love and war… and it is Pannones after all who declared war on the man). Why did they choose the hard route if they had nothing to hide? This issue is not going to go away… Pannones need to face up to the reality that they will either settle this matter by resolution or they are going to spend the next few years fighting more claims… the commercial lien of nine million pounds is lawfully enforceable… no Statute judge has the authority to defeat a common law process. They are acting beyond their authority – probably due to ignorance. Conclusion: The man has made a statutory declaration that he is NOT the legal fiction Michael Clarke. The court order that MICHAEL CLARKE appear – has been complied with. The order if it is claimed to be against the man – is void.

Hi, Anyone got a friend who works for a National paper.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: The silent majority
This letter says it all......
Subject: The silent majority
Its sad but true, It is difficult not to agree with the 72 year old man who wrote this letter, I notice there isnt a reply.
This is one of the best letters I have read for a long time, it puts it ALL into perspective. PLEASE PASS IT ON to everyone you can, its time BOTH parties stood up and listened.
This is our country and its being destroyed.
To David Cameron (Prime Minister) & Ed Milliband (Leader of the Opposition) ...
You BOTH Worry me ! ( In fact both of your Political parties worry the hell out of me !!!)
Over the last three years, I find myself becoming more and more fearful of the pair of you, and between you, you are turning this country into a place that I no longer feel at home in, or feel a part of! I watch you in parliament, and no, not just the two of you, but every politician that I see, stand up in parliament sneering at each other, and acting like children !!! (..and if you were my children, I would be ashamed of you all ... What an example to set!)
Although you would like us all to believe that you are putting the needs of this country at the forefront, NEITHER of you are doing that, you seem more interested in "one-up-manship ", in scoring off each other, & denigrating each other, to the detriment of this country & its people !!! It seems to be all about YOU as individuals, and not about what you can DO for this country ! It is fast becoming a place that I do not recognize, as the place I always thought, was the best place in the world to be !!! But no longer !!!
You are not listening to the people of this country !!! I am watching the deterioration of living standards in this country, (and according to you, on a world stage we are doing better than most countries ... REALLY ???) ... And yet the gap is widening between the "haves" and the "have-nots" . I see our homeless on the streets, our hospitals under-funded, and understaffed, our health system is an absolute mess and a disgrace .. And yet I see multi-millions of dollars being sent offshore, in aid to other countries, before attending to this country's needs !
I see the "selling off of water rights to foreign interests, WHY...? Especially when you go to great lengths to tell us that water is a finite resource, & supposedly, we must ALL be careful with how we use it, so that we ensure we have it for the future ? A Carbon Tax,( which you KNOW is just another tax ) which will make NO appreciable difference, to carbon emissions, AT ALL! A tax, which in spite of all your arguments FOR it, you are doing alone, when other major countries will NOT & DO NOT embrace it, or believe in it !
All that it will do for this country is put working families and small businesses behind the eight ball, .....what planet are you on, if you think that the tax we must pay will make even a scrap of difference to the effect of the carbon tax on people? Anyone can see the holes in that argument !!! Do you really think we are that dumb ???
Let's talk about Multiculturalism .....People have come here from other countries, for a better life, for more years than I have been alive ( I am 72 years old !)
Pre & Post war immigrants came for a better life, and settled in and became wonderful contributors to this country, ... All have contributed to the rich diversity of this country, and some descendants have even fought FOR this country, and they have become U.K.citizens and were glad to be ..and they had NO handouts from our Government either, ...they worked hard for everything! I have never before had a problem with all, or any, race of immigrants coming here. However, I DO NOW !!!
Please tell me why we have areas in towns and on large estates all over the country, where police do NOT, & will NOT go, for fear of their life ? Please tell me why we can no longer have religion in schools for fear of "OFFENDING" someone ? (The latest little gem is that they are not having or being funded, for chaplains any more, but Counsellors!) Please tell me why religious Christmas observances are no longer allowed in some schools for fear of OFFENDING someone ? Please tell me HOW Christmas decorations in some stores might OFFEND someone ? Please tell me why we have to have segregated days in some swimming centres for fear of "OFFENDING" someone ? Please tell me why we have some RADICAL clerics demanding Sharia Law in this country when if we were in THEIR country, this would NEVER be allowed? Please tell me why our laws need to be changed, so as not to OFFEND someone ? Please tell me why we are fast becoming a MINORITY voice, in our own country, because of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ? Please tell me WHY Britons cannot legally wear a bike helmet covering their head in a bank and yet it is ok to wear a Burqa which covers the whole of the face ? And please tell me WHY, when those people who want asylum here can wreck our detention centres and STILL be accepted here ?
What does that say about just who and what are this government's priorities ? The British people that I speak to have genuine concerns about becoming a second class minority in our own country, and the reasons for it are some of the above. Are you so blind that you cannot see this ? And no, I am NOT racist !!! If I did not like Catholics or Protestants would I be considered racist ? Of course not!
Why is it, that if we object to what is happening in our country we are immediately labelled RACIST, in an attempt to shut us up ?
We are fighting Radical Muslims in Afghanistan , are we not ? I hear you say, yes but the Muslims we have here are "Not like that " . Well how would we know ? Do we hear ANY of them coming out & speaking AGAINST radicals ? I haven't, have you ? Islam is not compatible with ANY of the values that we hold here in Britain ! Are not the experiences of France and the Netherlands a examples of that? Why do you think it would be any different here ? We even have a British born "radical ", whose message is that Britain WILL become a Muslim country, under Sharia Law, & that we had "better get used to it ".
Will both of you grow some "balls", and start sticking up for this country and its people ? We are the people who put you where you are and PAY you to look after our interests ! And you are NOT doing that by any stretch of the imagination !!! I would appreciate an answer from both of you, if only to convince me that once again I am not talking to a brick wall ! In case it has escaped both of you I would like to remind you that, in the U.K. Government is FOR THE PEOPLE ... OF THE PEOPLE ... & BY THE PEOPLE ... Never forget that because you sure have up till now !
Let us get this out to all - please keep forwarding and if you have people in the press or if you know Politicians - let them know we are dis-satisfied with their behaviour !

THE British Constitution Group

With the exception of a few thousand very powerful people, the entire world’s population, all seven billion of us, are trapped ... trapped into a criminal debt creating banking ‘system’ that has taken hundreds of years to perfect and to come to fruition. This ‘system’ results in enslavement and servitude. It creates dreadful unhappiness amongst ordinary decent people and causes wars, debt, starvation, pollution and environmental destruction. It feeds on greed, fear and division. It forces people onto the corporate treadmills of mass mindless production and mass mindless consumption. It uses lies, deception, intimidation and entrapment at all times. It is a system that is so clever and so cunning that most of the world is completely oblivious to its existence. It is a system that allows a few winners at the expense of a huge number of losers. It is a system that considers itself to be unbeatable and indestructible and is now so arrogant that it believes it can control everything and everyone on its terms. It is a system where psychopaths and sociopaths can flourish. And without question the centre of this system, the heart of this global corporate beast is the innocent sounding Square Mile known as the City of London.

Put very simply, the banking dynasties, such as the House of Rothschild, control the political processes around the world to such an extent that their network of private central banks have the right to create money completely out of thin air and then charge interest on that ‘nothingness’. The polite term is ‘Fractional Reserve Lending’ but in reality it is just simple fraud. The result is that the whole world is currently drowning in a sea of fraudulent debt.

The USA now has a National Debt of over 16 trillion dollars, whilst the UK owes its creditors over one trillion pounds. The planned contagion of spiralling and unlawful debt is now sweeping over Europe with a renewed vigour. Greece and Spain are being torn apart by appalling austerity measures to the point that civil war or military intervention are now being openly talked about on the streets. Italy is giving all the signs that its economy is now entering into very stormy waters indeed. Ireland, Portugal, France and Belgium are already in a mess and are unlikely to see their debts become more manageable. Tens of millions of people have experienced a major downturn in their quality of life, along with their prospects for a more secure and better future, as unlawful austerity measures brought in by corrupt politicians begin to bite. Even the stronger economies of Germany, The Netherlands and Luxembourg have now been downgraded by Moody’s, the Rothschild controlled credit rating agency.

A Simple Solution To End This Madness – The Greenback:

What is happening to all of us is criminal. However, there is a very simple solution that the banking dynasties do not want you to know about.

At the height of the American Civil War, the US Treasury warned President Lincoln that further funding would be needed if the Federal North was to have the resources needed to defeat the Confederate South. The President initially went to the Rothschilds and the private banks who wanted between 24 and 36 per cent interest. Lincoln knew that if he agreed to take loans from the bankers that he would be putting his country into a debt noose that would strangle the economic prosperity out of his country and which would be almost impossible to pay off.

On the advice of a businessman with proven integrity, Colonel Dick Taylor from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln made the decision to print debt-free and interest-free paper money based on nothing more than the honour of the American Government. Called ‘Greenbacks’ because they were coloured green on one side only, the US Treasury issued 450 million dollars worth of these notes and they were immediately accepted as legal tender by a willing and grateful nation. The war was eventually won and this very popular new paper currency seemed set to continue. In the words of Lincoln himself:

"The government should create issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power

Senate document 23, Page 91. 1865

$5 Greenback

However, the response by the private bankers to this sudden threat to their banking empire was swift and brutal as this extract from The Times of London in 1865 shows:

" If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedence in the history of the civilised governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

On Good Friday, April 14th 1865, a lone gunman ended the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. Sadly, his Greenback legacy died with him as the private bankers managed to ‘persuade’ Congress to revoke this successful initiative in favour of the debt creating National Banking Act which eventually led to the formation of the privately run Federal Reserve in 1913. Since then, America’s unlawful debt has risen to over 16 trillion dollars.

"I have two enemies; the Southern army in front of me and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in the rear is my greatest foe." Abraham Lincoln

The solution for dealing with private debt-creating bankers is simple. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to stop any sovereign government from issuing through its treasury its own interest-free money based on nothing more than the wealth and integrity of the nation. This is the big secret that the City of London would rather keep to itself. If this simple fact were to become mainstream then people everywhere would simply walk away and the entire banking system would completely collapse.

And now we come to a very little known historical episode that I alluded to at the beginning that takes this concept of the debt-free ‘Greenback’ from America to Britain ... and in so doing exposes the truly appalling values that are prevalent even today within the City of London.

The Great War And The Debt-free Bradbury Treasury Note:

Three weeks ago, as part of my ongoing research into the banking elite, I came across a fascinating book entitled The Financiers and the Nation by the Rt. Hon. Thomas Johnston, P.C., ex-Lord Privy Seal. It was written in 1934 and republished in 1994 by Ossian Publishers Ltd.

The text of this quite remarkable and rare book is available here.

In Chapter 6, entitled ‘Usury on the Great War’, I’ve selected the following paragraphs which I believe are both shocking and self-explanatory:

" WHEN the whistle blew for the start of the Great War in August 1914 the Bank of England possessed only nine millions sterling of a gold reserve, and, as the Bank of England was the Bankers' Bank, this sum constituted the effective reserve of all the other Banking Institutions in Great Britain.

The bank managers at the outbreak of War were seriously afraid that the depositing public, in a panic, would demand the return of their money. And, inasmuch as the deposits and savings left in the hands of the bankers by the depositing public had very largely been sunk by the bankers in enterprises which, at the best, could not repay the borrowed capital quickly, and which in several and large-scale instances were likely to be submerged altogether in the stress of war and in the collapse of great areas of international trade, it followed that if there were a widespread panicky run upon the banks, the banks would be unable to pay and the whole credit system would collapse, to the ruin of millions of people.

Private enterprise banking thus being on the verge of collapse, the Government (Mr. Lloyd George at the time was Chancellor of the Exchequer) hurriedly declared a moratorium, i.e. it authorized the banks not to pay out (which in any event the banks could not do), and it extended the August Bank Holiday for another three days. During these three or four days when the banks and stock exchanges were closed, the bankers held anxious negotiation with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. And one of them has placed upon record the fact that 'he (Mr. George) did everything that we asked him to do.' When the banks reopened, the public discovered that, instead of getting their money back in gold, they were paid in a new legal tender of Treasury notes (the £1 notes in black and the 10s. notes in red colours). This new currency had been issued by the State, was backed by the credit of the State, and was issued to the banks to prevent the banks from utter collapse. The public cheerfully accepted the new notes; and nobody talked about inflation.

To return, however, to the early war period, no sooner had Mr. Lloyd George got the bankers out of their difficulties in the autumn of 1914 by the issue of the Treasury money, than they were round again at the Treasury door explaining forcibly that the State must, upon no account, issue any more money on this interest free basis; if the war was to be run, it must be run with borrowed money, money upon which interest must be paid, and they were the gentlemen who would see to the proper financing of a good, juicy War Loan at 31/2 per cent, interest, and to that last proposition the Treasury yielded. The War was not to be fought with interest-free money, and/or/with conscription of wealth; though it was to be fought with conscription of life. Many small businesses were to be closed and their proprietors sent overseas as redundant, and without any compensation for their losses, while Finance, as we shall see, was to be heavily and progressively remunerated

Emergency Bradbury Treasury Notes (printed only on one side)

The real values of the private bankers and the City of London have been exposed for all to see. Whilst hundreds of thousands of British soldiers were dying on the killing fields of Flanders and elsewhere doing what they saw as their patriotic duty, British bankers, safely out of danger and not sharing the appalling conditions on the Western Front, were only interested in one thing – how to make obscene profits from Britain’s desperate efforts to win the war. To say that the private bankers and the City of London have the morals of sewer rats is to be extremely unkind to our little rodent friends. But this is the clincher. As a direct result of the greed and treason of the British private bankers in preventing the continuance of the Bradbury Treasury Notes, Britain’s National Debt went up from £650 million in 1914 to a staggering £7,500 million in 1919.

And this is where it all gets particularly interesting. The following is an extract from the official and current HM Treasury’s Debt Management Office website ... and it appears to be completely at odds with the account given by the Rt. Hon. Thomas Johnston.

"The threat of World War One pushed British banks into crisis; exacerbated further as half the world's trade was financed by British banks and as a consequence international payments dried up. In response to this crisis, John Maynard Keynes (the renowned economist), persuaded the Chancellor Lloyd George to use the Bank of England's gold reserves to support the banks, which ended the immediate crisis. Keynes stayed with the Treasury until 1919. The war years of 1914-18 had seen an increase in the National Debt from £650 million at the start of the war to £7,500 million by 1919. This ensured that the Treasury developed new expertise in foreign exchange, currency, credit and price control skills and were put to use in the management of the post-war economy. The slump of the 1930s necessitated the restructuring of the economy following World War II (the national debt stood at £21 billion by its end) and the emphasis was placed on economic planning and financial relations.

Why is there is no mention whatsoever of the £300 million of Bradbury debt-free paper Treasury Notes issued in 1914? Instead, it says Lloyd George, on the advice of John Maynard Keynes, used the Bank of England’s gold reserves which, according to Johnston, only amounted to £9 million. What is going on here? Who is telling the truth? Could it be that HM Government, the puppets of the City of London, don’t want you to know about the simple but effective concept of debt-free and interest-free Treasury Notes?

What Do The System-serving Politicians And "Economists" Say About The issuance Of Treasury Notes? As soon as the concept of the debt-free and interest-free Greenback Dollar (and now the Bradbury Pound) is raised in polite conversation with either a politician or an economist, two immediate knee jerk verbal reactions occur from these system-servers.

The first is to say that if a government suddenly starts printing its own money through its treasury based on the credit and wealth of the country, instead of going through its central bank, we would be heading towards what happened in the Weimar Republic in Germany in the early 1920s where hyperinflation spiralled out of control and a loaf of bread was bought with a barrow load of almost worthless paper money.

To this I just say look again at what actually happened in Germany at that time. It was not the Weimar’s treasury but it was the privately controlled central bank, the Reichsbank, who was printing the money, coupled with the extreme actions of currency speculators and foreign investors that caused all of the problems.

Hyperinflation could not happen as a result of the Bradbury Pound, because the democratically elected government would actually ‘govern’ ... now that is novel! Speculation would be prevented, and most importantly, the newly created money would be spent on a productive economy, rather than bankers bonuses.

The second reaction from system-servers is that the country is already printing its own money – it is called Quantative Easing, that mysterious cash injection into the economy which only seems to get as far as the banks and not to where it is actually needed. Only trouble is, it is the Bank of England doing the printing and not HM Treasury. Based around government issued Bonds (promissory notes based on the wealth of the nation), this complex process only increases the National Debt and it certainly doesn’t solve anything.

The simple truth is that people who serve the system and who have been ‘educated’ by such organisations as the Fabian inspired London School of Economics (LSE), are not suddenly going to bite the hand that gives them a very good living.

So what does all of this mean for us, the people? Before looking at this, let’s just consider for a moment what ‘money’ actually is. It is simply a convenient unit of exchange for goods and services that people have COMPLETE CONFIDENCE in. Now if HM Government were to issue debt-free and interest-free treasury notes through HM Treasury rather than the Bank of England in order to meet the needs and happiness of all the people whilst getting them out of unlawful debt, my guess is that people might have a lot of confidence in such a benign and benevolent financial system.

There is absolutely no defence for the present system whereby private bankers create money completely out of thin air for themselves to lend and then charge interest on that ‘nothingness’. The Bank of England, with its hidden controller the Bank for International Settlements based in Basel, Switzerland (often described as the Central Bank of Central Banks), dictate behind the scenes the fiscal policies and direction that our supposed sovereign and independent government must take. We are all prisoners of this utterly corrupt system and it’s time to confront it head on to collapse it.

If our government were to go down the path of a new Bradbury Treasury Note (as well as pursuing the banksters with Common Law for their crimes against humanity) then our debt burden would be removed overnight – there would be no deficit and no national debt. Under Common Law, all debts involving the use of fractional reserve lending by the central and private banks will be written off as they were arrived at by the use of fraud. Money would be immediately made available by HM Treasury to meet the essential needs of the country. The nation’s happiness, well-being and security would be taken care of without the need for an invasive and complex tax system. We would have Gross Domestic Happiness instead of Gross Domestic Product dictating humanity’s future.

None of this is rocket science – if the Spanish and Greek governments genuinely wanted to put right overnight the economic woes of their countries, they would immediately start printing and supplying interest-free and debt-free treasury notes based on the wealth and integrity of their respective countries. They would also tell the IMF, the EU and the Bank for International Settlements to go and whistle for their ‘money’! Why? Because it was created out of thin air, it didn’t exist in the first place, and the whole banking system is fraudulent ... in other words, see you in a common law court in front of a jury!!!! Banks, money and finance must exist to serve humanity, not the other way round. Our enslavement by unlawful debt can be ended overnight with one signature by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It really is that simple! ---------------

The People Vs The Government, DWP and Atos
a FRIEND had to walk past the city magistrates court & there is a queue of about at least 300 people all queuing for non payment of council tax OMG if I could take a photo (I won't to protect people's identity) you would never believe how many people there is. Kids are crying, people are getting stressed waiting & the queue goes round the block.
Welcome to Tory Britain 2013
There was a guy telling everyone about there rights outside the court & handing out a leaflet it said the following: 'this is retrospective action against me & the aforementioned bill is not be finalised before march 2014. This action is a waste of the courts time, the peoples time & more importantly the peoples money. I urge you to dismiss this case'.
Does anyone know what this means? Some solicitors in the queue also stated that they DO NOT have to pay something that is not yet law! Oh & a friend that was there said that when all those hundreds finally got in the doors they was told they didn't even have to attend court even though they'd all got letters to say they had to go & they was all told to go to the council tax dept instead to make payment arrangements!


An elderly, frail couple were charged a swingeing £44,400 by lawyers who handled their simple finances for four years when they were no longer capable of looking after themselves. Feliks and Rosemary Zakrzewski Overcharged: Feliks and Rosemary Zakrzewski Their case exposes a gaping loophole in the legal system, which leaves the elderly at the mercy of greedy solicitors who, relatives fear, can charge what they liked, while the family is powerless to intervene. Feliks and Rosemary Zakrzewski developed Alzheimer's disease in 2005. They went to live with their daughter Antoinette Tricker and her family in Suffolk. But because there was no Power of Attorney set up allowing her to act for them, the Court of Protection appointed a solicitor as their receiver to take charge of their financial affairs. The family was then helpless because the solicitor is answerable only to their client - in this case, a couple with Alzheimer's - who did not understand what was happening. There are 22,000 deputies (the new name for receivers) looking after the affairs of those who lack the mental capacity to act for themselves. They don't have to be solicitors; they can be family members, friends or the local authority. In the Zakrzewskis' case, the solicitor's first act was to take away their savings book, leaving them with only £100 each as spending money for four months. Mrs Tricker, 58, says: 'The loss of independence nearly drove my father over the edge. He took to offering his asthma nebuliser to passing strangers to raise cash.' Meanwhile, for handling their simple affairs, the solicitor ran up charges of nearly £19,000 in just ten months, charging £200 an hour, while giving Mrs Tricker just £70 a week to pay for her parents' living costs. All they had were their savings and a flat in Dorset to sell. Guidance on Court of Protection costs states that general management costs are 'unlikely to exceed' £3,000 a year. Since Mrs Tricker was not the client, her complaints to the solicitor and requests to see the bill could be ignored, while her parents' estate was being drained. 'After ten months, I had to beg the Office of the Public Guardian, which oversees receivers, to intervene,' she says. A new solicitor was appointed as the receiver in 2006, bringing the final total to £44,400. Her father died in 2007 aged 88 and her mother died last year aged 89. Although families can complain to the Court of Protection if they feel someone is abusing their powers, it is difficult to gather evidence without access to bills and bank statements. Caroline Bielanska, chairman of Solicitors for the Elderly, says: 'Without evidence, the only way is to go to the Office of the Public Guardian. They do an immediate risk-assessment to work out if there is cause for complaint and then examine the case. The majority of complaints arise because of sibling rivalry.' Deputies' bills are assessed by the Supreme Court Costs Office. Mrs Tricker finally received a copy of her parents' bills from the court last month. A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice, which oversees the Court of Protection, says: ' Anyone appointed to look after the affairs of a person who lacks capacity must always act in their best interests, and put their needs first and foremost. 'Since the Mental Capacity Act came into force in 2007, all deputies are supervised by the Office of the Public Guardian and must follow a comprehensive code of practice, which provides guidance on how to act and make decisions on behalf of people who lack capacity.' It costs more than £1,000 to have a deputy appointed, plus an annual charge for a security bond which can run into thousands. To avoid this route, you should draw up a Lasting Power of Attorney stating who you want to run your affairs if you become unable to handle them. There are two types: one for your finances and the other for your health and welfare. They cost £120 each and can't be used until they have been registered by the Office of the Public Guardian. The lengthy forms are complicated and readers have told us about long delays in processing them. Before October 2007, a simpler Enduring Power of Attorney was used. These are still valid. 'Dementia can strike at any time. Plan ahead and get a Lasting Power of Attorney before you, too, are sucked into this costly world,' says Mrs Tricker. Having reviewed the bill, Mrs Tricker has asked the court to rescind and reassess the first solicitor's costs. The hearing is set for June 3. READ more

READ about

Back to top

Under the Fraud Act 2006. Section 2 of the Act specifically states:
2 Fraud by false representation
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and (b) intends, by making the representation— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. (2) A representation is false if— (a) it is untrue or misleading, and (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading. (3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of— (a) the person making the representation, or (b) any other person. (4) A representation may be express or implied. (5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention). 3 Fraud by failing to disclose information A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, and (b) intends, by failing to disclose the information— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. 4 Fraud by abuse of position (1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person, (b) dishonestly abuses that position, and (c) intends, by means of the abuse of that position— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. (2) A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

Warning to Government
This is not a request that requires an answer, it does however require a response – by way of action on your part that demonstrates that you understand its substance and the seriousness of our intent. The national collective political establishment has betrayed the ‘People’ by hijacking our sovereignty and engaging in criminal activities in a subservient role to a foreign power without our consent.  This is in defiance of our constitution and an act of treason. You do not need to know how many people we represent today, only how many we might represent tomorrow and you should know that our numbers grow daily.  This letter thus serves as your window of opportunity to make amends and give remedy for the crimes committed against us.  We will show compassion for those who recant and we will be ruthless with those who do not concede to the wishes of the people. Ignoring this letter is not an option… if you think it is, then this serves only to demonstrate that your intellect is subservient to your arrogance.  You may feel that you can ignore it because you are too powerful, but to do so is to underestimate the seething resentment that the people feel for the political establishment in general. You have acted in contempt of the principles of democracy and shown total disregard for our right to govern ourselves. For the past several decades the ‘People’ have been treated with extraordinary and total contempt by the collective political establishment.  It has not mattered which political party has been in office or “power” as you insist on calling it, nothing ever changes.  We are continually subjected to the same global agenda.  We have been used and abused like pawns in your game of supremacy in which a dynastic ruling class see themselves as ordained to rule as masters – with impunity, whilst we the people, as virtual slaves, are supposedly destined to obey – without question.  You have persistently and consistently undermined our democracy by agreeing to treaties with foreign political elites who have no business in our affairs. You have rewarded yourselves with the trappings of office – high salaries, luxuries denied most of us, privileges, bonuses, pensions, prestige and benefits that we can only dream of… whilst burdening us with ever-higher taxes, derisory pensions and declining standards of public services.  It is we who pay the price for your malfeasance. The story of our ‘People’ over the past several decades that will be told in the history books of tomorrow is the story of betrayal, greed, corruption, nepotism, treason and modern-day fascism – the latter of which manifests itself in the global agenda being imposed upon us against our will. The United Nations – a step process towards TOTAL global governance is now fully exposed.  Built on lies and deceit is being hoisted by its own petard – the edifice is crumbling but still the political elite like demented fools, continue to feed on their own delusions.  The docile masses, mesmerized by trivia, propaganda, complacency and ignorance have still somehow managed to grasp some basic elements of the truth, alerted almost certainly by the blatant and arrogant refusal of the political elite to tell the truth even when it stands proud in the rubble of political deceit and betrayal. The political classes are discredited at every level.  They rant about the benefits of our subjugation to a foreign enterprise, peace, prosperity and democracy where in reality chaos, dictatorship and corruption reign supreme.  Western economies are on the brink of collapse because of the corrupt banking cartels, there is visible resistance on the streets and people call for lawful rebellion.  But less known, there is clandestine resistance behind closed doors.  Whilst the majorities advocate a peaceful uprising, the extremes will always be in the mix and when passion and anger are fused and those aggrieved can find no remedy… violent resistance is as understandable as the passion for life itself. The police and militia that you currently rely on to defend yourselves against the people’s retribution… are made up of our own, they are not your people – and when they learn about your betrayal and your intent… AND THEY WILL – they will turn against you.  Their awakening, which you cannot stop, is your Achilles heel.  Your greatest fear must be that we will impose upon you the regimes and repression that you had planned for us. People are meeting in groups across the country, talking across oceans… they are disparate, disorganized and without an effective plan to repel the global agenda…as yet.  BUT a leadership is emerging… organizers are coordinating and small groups are linking to form larger groups.  The dichotomies of left v right, Christian v Muslim, black v white, Catholic v Protestant, which have been used to great effect to divide and conquer in the past, will find no favour in this war.  The call to arms that will unite us will be ‘the people v the global elite’ – the cry will cascade street to street and find easy passage and universal support – for our common purpose has greater value and strength than yours. We have a constitution – which you ignore.  We have been denied our democratic rights, regardless, we have clearly expressed our wishes, in one opinion poll after another, that we do not want to be governed by a foreign un-elected officialdom, but still you disregard us.  We are promised a referendum on our future, but then you ignore the results or recant.  You speak in support of our views when in opposition, but act to the contrary when we elect you. You consult with corporate executives, international bankers, non-government organizations, international charities, academia, foreign dignitaries, political elites, think tanks and lobbyist – collectively a tiny minority, who do not represent us.  These groups all emanate from the same social strata, with their own agendas to satisfy and all funded by the same cartel.  You take note of their every whim, but you care not a jot for what we think or what we want.  Your children are given jobs, with big salaries fresh from university and then rapidly climb the corporate ladder as a reward by the same corporate bodies who you have favoured with your decisions.  Our children must make their own way in an increasingly desperate world.  Your corporatism suppresses our freedoms with deliberate and malicious intent. You accommodate tyrants, dictators, arms dealers and all manner of dubious characters, with whom you are happy to keep company.  You turn a blind eye when the smell of money wafts your nostrils… it suppresses the stink of corruption and evil.  Your moral compasses are defunct… your values deplorable and motives despicable.  Our soldiers die to service your corporate agenda – their blood is on your hands. You are educated at the same elite schools and members of the same elite clubs and you allow these influences to override the consideration which should be paramount in service of the people.  You have adopted the “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” philosophy… because you have learnt from your predecessors that corruption and deception do indeed pay.  The United Nations Security Council is awash with it and you have determined to get your snout in the same trough.  You take comfort from the fact that you control those who have the authority to indict you for your criminality… because they too have fallen prey to the corruption.  You have sold off our national resources to your friends, divided communities, deprived villages and towns, undermined, destroyed and bulldozed indigenous communities. You have laid waste where once prosperity was enjoyed.  But you have not suffered… you have remained aloof, disengaged, uninvolved – removed from the debris and the misery that you have wreaked upon the rest of us. Our farms no longer feed us with the nutrients we require to sustain healthy lives, crippled by regulations, supranational mining contracts made to favour foreign farmers or ‘Coal Seam Gas Fracking’ that is destroying the once fertile soils of our landscape. Our armed forces are forced to commit crimes against humanity by the requirement to adhere to the unlawful and communist manifesto of the United Nations Charter and we see foreign troops being trained on our own soil on the pretence that they may be needed to protect us… when the reality is they are being trained to subdue us… to protect you from our vengeance.  Our children are victims of social engineering in the schools and declining standards of education.  They are being sexualized by explicit exposures before they have the emotional maturity to be able to cope.  You are destroying their minds and their childhoods. You have engineered a police state with legislation that empowers you at our expense and you have been blatant in your contempt for our democratic and constitution rights and our common law, which have been known to us for centuries.  You deny us our rights and our freedoms and contemptuously imply that you can provide us with a Bill of Rights.  Would we seriously trust a thief with our wallets?  You have corrupted our courts by appointing judges who are contemptuous of our common law and installed a law society that disperses Maritime/Admiralty Law through the peoples courts . You have dissected our nation and sold off our infrastructure.  We are forced to buy our own water from foreign corporations which grow rich on the back of our suffering.  You are then rewarded by them with lucrative directorships when you slip quietly from office with your bulging pensions.  You remain oblivious, unconcerned… disconnected.  We will no longer be ignored as you go about your globalist agenda.  We will resist your controlling and petty rules and regulations… we will resist your fines and penalty charges and challenge your corrupt and biased judges, we will defy the over-zealous police, and your oppressive and unlawful taxes. It is our intention to govern ourselves… we do not seek your permission – this is our right.  You have had your opportunity and you have failed.  We will take control of our own lives in stages, as and when it suits us.  Our numbers will grow as we show by example that prosperity is the natural consequence of honest and fair governance.  We will expose you for the parasites you are. This country has a constitution – which you ignore.  We have Magna Carta, we have trial by jury and habeas corpus.  We have our customs, traditions and common law.  We have the right of petition, free speech, and free movement and above all… we have the right to govern ourselves.  These are our inalienable rights – they are not privileges granted to us by you or your ilk.  They cannot be taken away or extinguished at the whim of political diktat or through corrupt judicial process and certainly not at the behest of foreign undemocratic institutions.  You have no authority to dictate… your duty is to serve. We are a sovereign nation… a proud people.  We have watched our country slowly destroyed… by you – we now see clearly what you have done… your purpose and your betrayal.  We will honour our inheritance – the freedoms fought for and secured for us, and we will ensure that we will pass this on to the next generation, to our children and theirs. You have been sent this letter by a constituent.  On sending a copy to you, they have also registered your name with our coordinators.  This will remain with us as evidence for your trial… for treason, when necessary.  It’s your choice. We The People - WE ARE SOVEREIGN


The two richest most evil families in the world are the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Join us below and please like our page and share. facebook.com/KilluminatiSoldiersII They control the central banks of the world, the finance and supply both sides of all wars and control the finances of the Vatican and Occult. Rock-a-fella records artist Jay Z says he is in the la familia and long live the king. What he means by the la familia is that he is a Rockefeller puppet and made man inside of the Vatican controlled SINdicate. The roman priests that killed Christ are still the priests in Rome and the money changing families, kings, queens and pharaohs of the past have brought down their bloodlines and most are intermarried into these families. The Rockefeller Family Fortunes http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Illuminati/rockefeller_fortunes.htm Murder by Injection- The Rockefeller Syndicate http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/emullins.htm The Creature From Jekyll Island http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/Federal%20Reserve%20Scam/jekyll_island.htm Standard Oil and the Rise of Hitler http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/ The Bush Family and the Rockefellers http://tarpley.net/online-books/george-bush-the-unauthorized-biography/ How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html The Rothschilds and Rockefellers Join Forces in Multi-Billion Dollar Deal http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-rothschilds-and-rockefellers-join-forces-in-multi-billion-dollar-deal/ The Rothschilds Exposed 1/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F4IGwuKdUQ The Rothschilds Exposed 2/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2Yjoi2_5pw The Rothschilds Exposed 3/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47WM2BhklmM The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a very long time, their tentacles reaching into many aspects of our daily lives, as is documented in the following timeline. However, before you jump to the timeline, please read this invaluable introduction which will tell you who the Rothschilds are as oppose to who they claim to be. The Rothschilds claim that they are Jewish, when in fact they are Khazars. They are from a country called Khazaria, which occupied the land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea which is now predominantly occupied by Georgia. The reason the Rothschilds claim to be Jewish is that the Khazars under the instruction of the King, converted to the Jewish faith in 740 A.D., but of course that did not include converting their Asiatic Mongolian genes to the genes of the Jewish people. You will find that approximately 90% of people in the world today who call themselves Jews are actually Khazars, or as they like to be known, Ashkenazi Jews. These people knowingly lie to the world with their claims that the land of Israel is theirs by birthright, when in actual fact their real homeland is over 800 miles away in Georgia. So, next time you hear an Israeli Prime Minister bleating about the so-called persecution of the Jews, consider this, every Prime Minister of Israel has been an Ashkenazi Jew. Therefore when all these Prime Ministers have curried favour with the West for their re-establishment of a Jewish homeland, they have knowingly and deliberately lied to you, as they were never from that region, and they well know it, because it is they who call themselves Ashkenazi Jews. The Book of Revelation, Chapter 2, Verse 9, states the following which would appear to be about these Ashkenazi Jews: "I know thy works, and tribulation and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." The most wealthy bloodline in the world bar none and the leader of the Ashkenazi Jews in the world today is the Rothschild family. As you will see in the timeline, the Rothschilds have obtained this position through lies, manipulation and murder. Their bloodline also extends into the Royal Families of Europe, and the following family names: Astor; Bundy; Collins; duPont; Freeman; Kennedy; Morgan; Oppenheimer; Rockefeller; Sassoon; Schiff; Taft; and Van Duyn. However, these are not the only bloodlines to worry about. You are probably aware of the centuries old pratice undertaken by many Ashkenazi Jews whereby they would change their name, in order for them to appear part of the dominant race of the country in which they lived, so as they could obtain influential positions in that country, which they would then exploit to serve their real masters elsewhere. There is plenty of evidence to prove the Rothschilds continue that deceptive tradition. Furthermore the Rothschilds are known to sire many children secretly that they can put into positions of power when required. This started with the very first man who took the name Rothschild, who had a secret sixth son. Finally, remember the world is a diverse place, I could if I wanted change my name to Rothschild, or any of the names listed above, and that would not make me part of this family anymore than converting to Judaism in 740 A.D. will make these Ashkenazis Jewish. Please, therefore, do not automatically assume someone you see with the name Rothschild or any of the names listed above are part of the Rothschild criminal network. Furthermore and most importantly, the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are innocent and not part of this network. Check the facts out for yourself first, this article is designed to inform people who the enemy is, not single out people of a particular race or people with a particular surname, who may have nothing to do with this Rothschild criminal network. 1743: Mayer Amschel Bauer, an Ashkenazi Jew, is born in Frankfurt, Germany, the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, a money lender and the proprietor of a counting house. Moses Amschel Bauer places a red sign above the entrance door to his counting house. This sign is a red hexagram (which geometrically and numerically translates into the number 666) which under Rothschild instruction will end up on the Israeli flag some two centuries later. 1753: Gutle Schnaper, an Ashkenazi Jew (future wife of Mayer Amschel Bauer), born to respected merchant, Wolf Salomon Schnaper. 1760: During this decade Mayer Amschel Bauer works for a bank owned by the Oppenheimers' in Hanover, Germany. He is highly successful and becomes a junior partner. Whilst working at the bank he becomes acquainted with General von Estorff. Following his father's death, Bauer returns to Frankfurt to take over his father's business. Bauer recognises the significance of the red hexagram and changes his name from Bauer to Rothschild, after the red hexagram or sign signifying 666 hanging over the entrance door ("Rot," is German for, "Red," "Schild," is German for, "Sign"). Now Mayer Amschel Rothschild, he discovers that General von Estorff is now attached to the court of Prince William IX of Hesse-Hanau, one of the richest royal houses in Europe, which gained its' wealth by the hiring out of Hessian soldiers to foreign countries for vast profits (a practice that continues today in the form of exporting, "peacekeeping," troops throughout the world). He therefore makes the General's re-acquaintance on the pretext of selling him valuable coins and trinkets at discounted prices. As he plans, Rothschild is subsequently introduced to Prince William himself who is more than pleased with discounted prices he charges for his rare coins and trinkets, and Rothschild offers him a bonus for any other business the Prince can direct his way. Rothschild subsequently becomes close associates with Prince William, and ends up doing business with him and members of the court. He soon discovers that loaning money to governments and royalty is more profitable than loaning to individuals, as the loans are bigger and are secured by the nation's taxes. 1769: Mayer Amschel Rothschild is given permission by Prince William to hang a sign on the front of his business premises declaring that he is, "M. A. Rothschild, by appointment court factor to his serene highness, Prince William of Hanau." 1770: Mayer Amschel Rothschild draws up plans for the creation of the Illuminati and entrusts Ashkenazi Jew, Adam Weishaupt, a Crypto-Jew who was outwardly Roman Catholic, with its organization and development. The Illuminati is to be based upon the teachings of the Talmud, which is in turn, the teachings of Rabbinical Jews. It was to be called the Illuminati as this is a Luciferian term which means, keepers of the light. Mayer Amschel Rothschild marries Gutle Schnaper. 1773: Amschel Mayer Rothschild born, the first of Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s sons. He like all his brothers who follow him, will enter the family business at the age of 12. 1774: Salomon Mayer Rothschild born. 1776: Adam Weishaupt officially completes his organisation of the Illuminati on May 1 of this year. The purpose of the Illuminati is to divide the goyim (all non-Jews) through political, economic, social, and religious means. The opposing sides were to be armed and incidents were to be provided in order for them to: fight amongst themselves; destroy national governments; destroy religious institutions; and eventually destroy each other. Weishaupt soon infiltrates the Continental Order of Freemasons with this Illuminati doctrine and establishes lodges of the Grand Orient to be their secret headquarters. This was all under the orders and finance of Mayer Amschel Rothschild and the concept has spread and is followed within Masonic Lodges worldwide to the present day. Weishaupt also recruits 2,000 paid followers including the most intelligent men in the field of arts and letters, education, science, finance,and industry. They were instructed to follow the following methods in order to control people. 1) Use monetary and sex bri Share

We are now asking for
donations to our cause