TUESDAY 19/08/14 next hearing in the Inner London Crown Court – with or without legal representation?

swearing in cartoon Suomi: Kiroileva sarjakuva...

swearing in cartoon (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I have now tightened the detailed chronology of events in Brian’s life since November 2006 and noticed how he was denied legal representation on a number of occasions. Being forced to become a Litigant in Person is maybe a good thing. But victims are likely to be too emotional and end up using strong language which results in ‘contempt of court’.

In our experience as McKenzie Friends (lay legal advisors), it is NOT worth having legal representation, as they don’t operate in the interests of their clients.

When I saw Brian in the cell below the court on 29 July, he said clearly though, also to the judge, that he does want to be legally represented: Bill Bache of Imran Khan Solicitors.

Hence I contacted Mr Bache, but in Cambridge Court, Brian was on his own again. Bill Bache claimed not to have been aware of the current trials despite my 4 emails.

Catch 22: as a Litigant in Person in prison you can’t win because you can’t communicate with the outside world and don’t have access to the facilities needed to prepare a defence. Experienced very painfully by starfighters such as Maurice J Kirk BVSc, Norman Scarth and Patrick Cullinane.

With legal representation you can’t win, for lawyers are happy to commit white collar crimes, as long as they benefit from funding through the public gravy train…

In support of Brian’s defence, I’m now submitting a witness statement even though I can’t get hold of the number of his case…

Will I see you in the Inner London Crown Court next Tuesday 19 August maybe to help expose this amazing collusion between prisons, police, courts and lawyers after Brian dismissed a teacher who groomed girls in Lambeth Council?


About Sabine Kurjo McNeill

I'm a mathematician and system analyst formerly at CERN in Geneva and became an event organiser, software designer, independent web publisher and online promoter of Open Justice. My most significant scientific contribution is www.smartknowledge.space
This entry was posted in Court Hearing and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to TUESDAY 19/08/14 next hearing in the Inner London Crown Court – with or without legal representation?

  1. Anonymous says:

    Going through an argument with Rochdale/wales over there failure I tried through correct ways and come up against doors but there is ways to embarress them which I intend on doing I am working with exaro on exposing there organised organisation sacked my brief the other day cause she did,not want to fight my fight don’t need them I am clever enough to deal with. this I hope this gets the exposure police and legal and government for there involvement in this evil twisted cover up


  2. Pingback: THEY WANT ME TO DIE before my court case in November: ‘diagnosed’ with paranoid personality disorder | Flying Vet challenges South Wales Police

  3. Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee says:

    RE:- http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2014/C1623.html
    4th September 2014
    Paragraph 60:

    Article 3 (1) of the Council Directive 72/166/EC of 24th April 1972 on the approximation of the Laws of Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of Motor Vehicles, and to the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of “use of vehicles” in that Article covers any use of a vehicle that is consistent with the normal function of that Vehicle. That Concept may therefore cover the manoeuvre of a tractor in the court yard of a farm in order to bring the trailer attached to that tractor into a barn, as in the case in the main proceedings, which is a matter for the referring court to determine.

    There is another EU Directions as EUR-Lex 32009L0103-EN-EUR-Lex
    Dated the 16th September 2009
    and under Article 29 Repeal-
    Directives 72/166/EEC, 84/5/EEC, 90/232/EEC, 2000/26/EC and 2005/14/EC, as amended by the directives listed in Annex 1, Part A, are hereby repealed, without prejudice to the obligations of the member States relating to the time limits for transportation into national law and application of the directives set out in Annex 1, Part B.

    There are many Motor Vehicles Owners in the United Kingdom-
    They should take the above into consideration, whilst Section 55 (2) of the Data Protection Act 1998 does also apply

    Yours Faithfully

    Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s