Citizens come forward with evidence that FORGERIES were/are used and
introduced in court proceedings. Our Law Enforcement Agencies ignore and or endorse such
activities for and in the interest of criminals who are seen to benefit. Solicitors
and barristers always promoters and accessories during and or after the introduction of
the FORGERIES, and or as aidors and abettors thereafter. All are JUST AS GUILTY of the
offence as the instigators. The judges, in each and every instance (we
report and publish) simply rewarding the legal circles for and because of
their joint intended purposes that any diligent citizen can adduce from:
1. The facts attached to the use of forgeries for the transfer,
misappropriation and distribution/dissemination of Housing Benefit funds as clear as can
be. A typical example of the practices as instigated and promoted by public servants, for
the INSTITUTIONALISED FRAUDULENT CONVERSION of the funds as organised by the staff and
officers at Haringey Council, in North London. FORGERIES introduced, used, relied upon and
promoted. And the police defaulting with intent to prosecute the criminals as in other
Housing Benefit, fraud, deception, dishonest handling and fraudulent misappropriation that
we cover in our pages. In short, the CIUKU Enterprises, at their very best performance.
2. The
depositions and statements of Mr Geoffrey Harold Scriven, cover issues of FORGERIES to
which he refers as MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
3. False instruments - COURT ORDERS
issued and introduced without hearings, without reference to the evidence in court files
and IN CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT'S LAWS simply intended to lead to the need for Appeals.
Blunt abuse of the court' facilities by public servants. Reference to such instruments in
the APPEAL we publish as called for and warranted in the National Scandal - pages.
Fraudulent conversion of Housing Benefit funds as Haringey Council staff and officers
engaged in through reliance on 'the relevant county court' stated and pleaded on the
succinct appeal.
The Legal and Judicial circles
indulging in the creation and use of false instruments, FORGERIES. They indulge
unchallenged through abuse of the much revered independence of the judiciary. Through such
activities the conversion of assets industry controlled by absolute Lords and Masters in
charge of our legal system. The judges acting injudiciously in
their judicial chairs, while the investigative branch of the law* does
nothing for years, as can be noted in the Haringey & Other Councils Housing Benefits
Fraud - The National Scandal.
FORGERIES* as blatant as the forgeries our founder was the victim of over a quarter of a
century ago, ignored by the police and the Courts. Such instruments
never referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions by any party from within the Law
Enforcement Agencies. All the while solicitors and
barristers silver lining their pockets through alleged civil proceedings proper and as the
offenders in charge of CIUKU determine. At least one
solicitor, on OATH declared the SPECIFIC (document) INSTRUMENT precisely what it was (link next line). Simply, A
BLATANT FORGERY. By definition in law it was nothing else*; it did not exist at the time of the events that gave rise to the High Court
action. THREE years later it was 'procured' but the criminals made a mistake, and 'their
instrument' was endorsed with a date as of the year of the High Court writ and not as of
the year of the events that lead to the issue of the Writ. The date on THE INSTRUMENT,
thereafter was AMENDED to the previous year, the year of the events. That amendment and
the simple fact as to WHY it was 'procured', USED and
relied upon by the legal experts established INTENT TO DEFRAUD, and or to prejudice the
proceedings through deception and use of the instrument. The Metropolitan Police
in that instance were handed also court documents seen to be blatant FORGERIES intended to
defraud the targeted victim, but in typical 'operations tactics' the police simply shoved
the instruments in their 'collection box'.
Thereafter, the police themselves, accessories
and abettors after the fact; just as the 'judicial persons' sitting in their chairs
turning a blind eye to the obvious, the amendment on the document before them; an instrument, which in any event the fraudsters had
admitted in letters AT THE TIME OF THE EVENTS (that lead to the institution of
proceedings) DID NOT EXIST, created over two and half years later and when the error of
In the above stated case, as in many others and the Haringey
Council Conversion of Housing Benefit funds case, THE METROPOLITAN POLICE defaulting to
act as the law provides. The victims of the practices at Haringey fully aware of the fact
that the police receive their salaries from the offenders who are in charge of the
creative accountancy practices within Haringey Council.
British Justice, BLIND DEAF AND DUMB*
declared the Daily Mirror on 12 May 1992. Deaf to the statements of at least
one of the solicitors who declared on affidavit the fact that the INSTRUMENT born years
later, indeed WAS a forgery (a false instrument made falser after changing the date also).
All legal 'experts' were incapable of referring A BLATANT CRIMINAL activity (intended to
mislead and to defraud) to the Director of Public Prosecutions. It was only natural, of
course, because THEY WERE ALL UP TO THEIR NECKS IN FRAUDULENT COURT PROCEEDINGS. And those
who rose to public office, sitting in 'judicial chairs', KNEW IT. As promoters of
'strokes of genius' in legal practice they ignored 'The LAW' and or treated it as
non-existent for the purposes of those who were in charge of and 'controlling the
proceedings'. Reference to the National Scandal practices qualifies, clarifies and
quantifies who the controllers always are, and who the beneficiaries; the serfs always the
victims.
Why should ANYONE from
within the legal circles refer THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES of their colleagues in
arms to the authoroties? The legal professions! The relevant Public servants who
should AND MUST PROSECUTE them, even now, because CRIME is not statute barred, acting as
blind, as deaf and as dumb asw ever. All busy milking the cow; their intended
victims; the litigants; at least one of them because the beneficiary of the FRAUD in the
course of alleged legitimate legal proceedings could OUTLAST FINANCIALLY the intended
victim of all. Simply put, constructive frauds THROUGH FRAUDULENT COURT PROCEEDINGS.
Criminals seen to be BUYING CORRUPTED JUSTICE through the corrupt and the corrupted, CARE
OF THE CORRUPTERS.
And the solicitors who actually procured and PROMOTED THE FORGERY dared declare
their intentions on affidavit through 'a blatant invitation to a judge'. Thus
confirming the adage "... the law grinds the poor(er) to a halt ...." and we add "....or to an early grave, as many
victims of the violations of sections 134, 135, 136 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988,
inevitably do". The Law
Enforcement Agencies indulge in crime, as protected species. Those who rose to judicial
office care not about Parliament's Laws! When a solicitor admits and pleads on affidavit A
CRIMINAL OFFENCE and neither he, nor the judicial chair occupants, as directors of and
promoters engaging in constructive frauds through abuse of public office IGNORE THE LAW
what you have is Crimes Incorporated UK Unlimited in the making; that much our founder
recognised in 1972 when he was handed a blatant forgery by his 'school friend' and at the
time 'trusted solicitor'. Constructive frauds through the "Need to revert to court on
these issues" as the criminals in charge of the legal system intent, for thus they
benefit from the extended facilities and the 'invisible services' they offer to and
provide for one another. The very criminal activities, albeit documented, ignored by the
police. Thus one recognises the principles upon which our blind, deaf and dumb directors
and actors found their services and operations. CRIME, unashamed, blunt!
Our courts are simply there to create
conditions through which to generate income for the circles* from within which our
judges rise to become 'judicial chair occupants'. Most certainly very few can be seen to
be judicious and or respectful of 'The LAW'. The C.o.A
ruling and the 'directions on the occasion of the injunction application in "The
Downing Street Years"* case established that issue in the most profound manner. We repeat our observation and FAIR comments below; we are entitled to
such under International Law; never mind the authority of the 'demigods' sitting in their
justice halls and theatres the cost of which is met by the revenue providers along with
their fat salaries.
A classic and typical example
of abuse of and misconduct in public office. An application by "The Sunday
Times" for an injunction because of the threatened copyright infringements in respect
of "The Downing Street Years" book. On dismissing the application the C.o.A ruled: "We could not grant to you what we would not to the needy and
the poor.....This is the wrong application .... Let them (the Mirror
newspaper) publish (copy from the book) AND THEN institute proceedings for damages..."
Pure, unadulterated constructive frauds on the persons seeking a
simple court order in order to block COPYRIGHT infringement. A 'serf' copies
a video film and his equipment gets confiscated, is ordered to pay damages and even goes
to prison BUT when a conglomerate business the same Law does not exist! Want to know
why? No, the serfs need no help; the answer IS simple; there is PLENTY THERE for
conversion to legal costs for
theatrical productions through scripts galore.
WE all know how the CoA
proposed scenario and cases are conducted and how
long they take! HOW DOES ONE ESTIMATE OR QUANTIFY DAMAGES IN SUCH AN INSTANCE? Better
still HOW MUCH DO LEGAL BOFFINS MAKE OUT OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS? ("Best theatre I have been
to..." (court) Richard
Branson after the Camelot, libel/slander action). |
