Cases/Sites by Element
Contempt to Evidence
Haringey Police - H/B Fraud
V. B. Fodden - Mortgage
V. B. Fodden - Divorce
V. B. Fodden-Solicitor Case
Contempt to Law
Enfield Council - C.Court
Hackney Council - C.Court
Haringey Council - C.Court
Haringey Police - H/B Fraud
Len Miskulin - Divorce
V. B. Fodden - Mortgage
False Instruments
Len Miskulin - Divorce
P. Constantinou - Divorce
Forgery Used
V. B. Fodden - Financial
Haringey Council-H/B Fraud
PERJURY - Used
V.B. Fodden-Solicitor Case
Obstruct - Examination
P. Constantinou - Divorce
Obstructing Justice
Crown Prosecution Service
Court of Appeal - R.B.Del C
part 3     
Strike Out
Helen Patey - Assertions
Divorce Frauds Challenged
V. B. Fodden - Plymouth
part 4

VISITORS ARE URGED to access and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. We had no choice but to REPORT THE CRIMES WE IDENTIFIED TO THE TREASURY [*] . Our observations and knowledge of the constructive frauds made us accessories if we kept quiet, like the alleged victims who work towards the implementation of the schemes by the abductors and rapists of Justice, the Goddess. You will find the addenda statement at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that you will share with us our concerns and most profound disappointment at and with persons who adopt and promote activities which they know are nothing but downright crimes. We refer to our exclusive page where we expose (as conscientious law abiding citizens) the Confidentiality Between Fraudsters that exists care of the BEST OPEN SECRET. 

Guidelines on Navigating through the extensive material: access instructions.  The first step for visitors to acquaint  themselves with the extensive material should be to use the SEARCH FOR facility. Just type in any word or combination of words / issues that are of concern / interest - need information and our views about. Remember that our views rest on factual experiences and research with evidence in support. We urge visitors and in particular victims of the legal circles and the Law Enforcement Agencies to access the introduction page to the Community on Line [*Link].

As part of the reconstruction process our new pages and pages where changes and additions have been implemented, the improved / amended pages are endorsed with the link 'Page Changes and the date of the last changes. The link takes visitors to a List of the changes implemented in the page. These include new material and links from relevant paragraphs to other or new relevant material in other pages. For further clarification email: webmaster@

In a letter to the Daily Mail of 18th December 1997, Erin Pizzey, Twickenham, Middlesex, wrote:

• "As an ardent Antifeminist, unlike Fay Weldon (Mail), I feel sorry for women of my generation who were tricked into believing the so-called women's movement had anything to offer women except tears.
• Harvard Professor Ruth Wisse has this to say about the feminist movement:

• 'By defining relationships between men and women in  terms of power and competition instead of reciprocity and co-operation, the movement tore apart the most basic and fragile contract in human society, the unit from which all other social institutions draw their strength'. (*F2)
• I believe the women's movement internationally has been the most influential cause in the destruction of family this century. Men have been cast out of their role as fathers but women have been disenfranchised from their most potent role in society.
• Millions of women world-wide now face the fact that, because of the vicious, spiteful war waged against men by a handful of middle-class women, they will never be married nor have the choice to have children.
• The injustice to men deserves our concern, but save your tears for the victims of the feminist movement - other women. Erin Pizzey.

On the same day, same issue, E. Diggins of Andover, Hants, wrote:

• "Fay Weldon says women are better able to live without men than men are to live without women.
• Yet on the same day we read that the Government is desperate to reduce the number of women dependants  (Mail).
• It seems women can live without men provided the men keep paying them extraordinary amounts in taxes or through the CSA. Let's hope the feminist fantasy bubble is burst soon before more damage is done. E. Diggins.

We won the battle of the sexes.
So why are women unhappier than ever?

• Access *from here the article* in HTML text in another page.
• Many the promotions as with the article* about boys not doing as well at school *linked to from here & the promoters, a reporter and his editor  failed to take up our challenge to a dialogue on the subject and the background to the promotion of states created.
• The maligned promoters of the created states wilfully failing to consider the background to it all just as they fail to address what elements and which powers behind the states they are all too happy to promote.
• Any articles in any newspaper about Mrs Hudson and how happy she was after she was used by the legal circles in order to create & impose on her family the making of the societies arranged by the legal circles and other services to 'the serfs', by persons who share common values & teachings?
• Any material, anywhere in the public domain by Mr or Mrs Hudson, Mr Johan M. R. Foenander, Mr Geoffrey Harold Scriven, Ms Marisa Sarda, Mrs Veronica Beryl Foden, Mrs Helen Patey, - and others we name in our pages - through which material they are seen to be exposing the abusers of public office and trust, thereby noted to be informing the taxpayers of the criminal activities including THE TYPE OF FALSE INSTRUMENTS they were all pointed to, as defined by Law under the provisions of the Theft Acts? [*Link from here to legal foundation]

Some awakening

*Link from here to the page where we publish challenges to abusers of the facilities at a County Court AND consider the case we point to in the page footnote. Access from here and read also directions by the Court of Appeal to a couple who were locked in the grip of their respective legal teams.

We point below to elements the Prime Minister, Tony Blair spoke of when he addressed the House of Commons, in June 2005 on his return to the UK at the conclusion of the E.U Summit. We request visitors to access our submissions to government after we caught Mrs. Veronica Beryl Foden party to the blunt constructive frauds she was complaining of & about, while engaging in plenty of theatrical productions in the courts, dancing cheek to cheek with the abusers of the courts facilities. [*Link from here to the page where we publish our submissions to Ministers & the PM]

The Prime Minister  He carried on: "This rebate must be examined. This crisis is not about the failure of Europe's leaders to reach agreement, with each other. The crisis is about that of Europe's Leaders to reach agreement with the people of Europe on issues that concern them; economically and socially; and they want answers to the challenges they face. They worry about globalisation and organised crime, and they do not, at present, see Europe giving a credible response. If we answer these concerns Europe will strengthen and we need a strong Europe to bolster the strength of individual nations. It is those who believe in Europe most who should be 'the most ardent advocates at changing it'. The European budget shouldn't be separate from that debate but part of it, and it is that debate which we will look forward to, in our presidency".

When answering a question on the issue of the Constitution, he said that: "It could not proceed after the recent rejections in the French and Dutch referendums". The UK taking over the Presidency of the European Union on 1st July 2005.

The right to reply and to justify behaviour and activities we cover in our pages, is assured to any one named. We will publish excuses & whatever is submitted to us. Legal argument that shall arise out of their submissions will be used as we apply ourselves to relevant issues in the cases they referred to us & we will cover their acts and all their defaults.

This page is dedicated to all abusers of our time and in particular to Mr. Norman Scarth. His parts in all manner of theatrical productions were nothing but organised scenarios created around his persona as a convert-to and lover of the arrangements in place for recruiting conditioned victims of the legal circles to the fraudsters club, as covered in the exclusive not one of Mr Scarth's affiliates and associates ever bother with as alleged legal gurus. Needless to say Mr. Scarth himself, who allegedly was concerned with the abused court facilities, himself never bothered to address the issue of CONSTRUCTIVE CONSEQUENTIAL FRAUDS covered in the exclusive page. It goes without saying that Mr. Scarth himself and any one of his affiliates and associates IF THEY CONSIDERED THE REALITIES WE POINT TO IN THE EXCLUSIVE PAGE, could and should have simply responded to our countless invitations to each and every one of his circle and assert that the material facts and realities we have been pointing for years constitute non-events and thereby put an end to the invitations. ONLY MORONS & ILLITERATES IN LAW could possibly come forward with such promotions and propositions. Mr Scarth, along with every other fraudsters-club-recruit he was and has been rubbing shoulders with failed to attend to the challenges all were bombarded with at regular intervals simply because he and every one of his chums were and are fully aware that there exists no avenue to either justify their adoption of the blunt & arrogant constructive fraud the legal circles benefit from through contempt of the law.

Solicitor challenged by way of Defence & Counterclaim when the olicitor's audacity and nerve extended to instigating and serving a Summons returnable on a client, claiming non-payment for alleged 'professional' services. Read of the 'typical services' the solicitor provided the client and consider the challenges lodged at court and served in response.

BOW COUNTY COURT

Case Number...........................

**********************************************

DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM

**********************************************

1.

The Defendant denies the liability stated to be founded and resting on alleged professional services. The Plaintiff is called to strict proof of the "professional" services he is alleging to have provided the Defendant, the operative word being "PROFESSIONAL" in this instance.

2.

The Defendant admits to contacting and meeting Nigel Smith hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff to whom he gave full particulars pertaining to an action issued out of the High Court that had been generally adjourned and gave no details of the action apart from a number of questionable acts and failures that were reported to the appropriate Department at the Lord Chancellors Department.

3.

The defendant having given full particulars of the causes and reasons upon which the High Court action rested, benefited from no "legal advise" upon which the Plaintiff can claim and or assert "professional" service. The Plaintiff listened, made some notes but professed and offered no legal opinions and or advised upon the events related to the Plaintiff and in particular to the matters relative to the causes of and the state of mind of a distressed and the mentally confused younger brother of the Defendant even though the Defendant had raised issues such as the Mary Winch Affair, the complicity of the Medical Profession in that instance, as in the Defendant's younger brother, and the questionable activities by members of the legal profession in connection with a constructive dispossession of and the eviction of the younger brother from his residence without due process of law, and an alleged peaceable repossession of that residence by the building society and or its agents, without disclosure as to what constituted "peaceable" repossession.

4.

Furthermore the Plaintiff failed to consider the facts leading to the institution and the purposes of the High Court action and in particular the need for the Defendant to secure an Order from the Court in respect of funds raised through a "sale" of the repossessed property. In particular the Plaintiff failed to profess any means and or action (even a letter to the parties alleged to have and or had control of the funds) through which to ensure a long outstanding loan facility that existed between the Defendant and the joint owners of the sold property.

5.

Subsequently when the Defendant contacted the Plaintiff in respect of an Application supported by an Affidavit from the estranged wife (one of the joint debtors) of the younger brother of the Defendant, the Plaintiff defaulted to consider the context of the unsupported Affidavit from that person and the previous attempts and reliance on unfounded in law assertions from the solicitors acting for the estranged wife, the only persons to enter an appearance in the High Court Action. Failing in the process to suggest and or to take issue with the youngest brother who, the Defendant had stated to the Plaintiff, had acted deceitfully and was instrumental in the developments that led to the institution of the High Court proceedings; failure to consider the grounds and or reasons as to why the other debtor and party to the proceedings was not represented amounting to either negligence and or collusion with the other party's solicitors as events subsequently established.

6.

The Defendant, as an unemployed person was issued with the appropriate Legal Aid Forms to complete. That done the Defendant photocopied the form and handed it to the Plaintiff's secretary. The Plaintiff did not submit the completed form to the Legal Aid Board without specifying the grounds for that failure safe to state that it was not completed properly and the Defendant duly signed a second form, copy of which, after completion by the Plaintiff and or his staff was never handed to the Defendant.

7.

The Plaintiff had been instructed to request for an adjournment of the Application due within two days; and because of the obvious and deliberate late delivery and service of the Summons the Defendant instructed the Plaintiff to ensure the other side were put on notice and be given the appropriate warning, as to practice and costs, should they fail to consent to the requested adjournment.

8.

Thereafter the Plaintiff was unavailable and or away from the office; eventually in the afternoon of the day before the hearing, and after numerous attempts to speak and or meet with the Plaintiff, the Defendant was told by the secretary of the Plaintiff that it would be best if the Defendant went to the High Court in person in the morning because the Legal Aid Application had not been processed; and in the circumstances the Plaintiff was not in a position to represent the Defendant.

9.

The Defendant proceeded to the Plaintiff's offices, demanded to see the Plaintiff and or his secretary and when she attended to the Defendant, the Defendant produced a cheque book enquired of the likely cost, issued and handed a cheque to the secretary and pointed out that he was recording the meeting on his memo recorder. She was told to inform the Plaintiff that everything had been noted, inclusive of the failure to submit to the legal Aid Board the initial application form which had been endorsed in specific terms as to the cause of action at the High Court; the wording and the specific term used was "constructive fraud" by the debtors. The secretary was told that in the event further inexcusable and unjustified failures to act honourably and with the client's full interests in mind would be dealt with appropriately in due course and that the Defendant was relying on the Plaintiff to act as expected of him in the client's interests AND NONE OTHER.

10.

From the High Court the following morning the Defendant had to telephone the Plaintiff's offices because no one had turned up as the time for the hearing was approaching. The Defendant was told that the papers, inclusive of the copy of the Affidavit and the exhibits attached thereto (drafted and used by the Defendant earlier at the High Court) had been despatched to Barrister's chamber and that someone was definitely to attend the hearing in time.

11.

The barrister arrived a few minutes before the hearing and, after meeting with the Defendant, had the usual chat, in private, with the other party's barrister. The hearing was in chambers before Master Turner; and the Defendant was informed earlier, by another barrister waiting outside, that Master Turner was a no nonsense Master and strict to the rules. Sure enough Master Turner was in full command and made adequate and sufficient observations as to the fact the Summons had been issued weeks prior to being served and he referred to the white book on procedures and practice matters. Barristers and the Master concurred that there was a case to be answered, which matter rendered the application before the court as nothing else but the usual income generating practices from within the legal circles. The Application was dismissed with costs to be borne by the other side.

12.

Thereafter the Defendant requested and demanded that the Plaintiff secures and forwards to the Defendant a copy of the Master's Order. The Plaintiff failed and defaulted to comply with that simple act and persistently sought to take other steps than to ensure first there were to be funds at the end of the day. The Plaintiff carried on being evasive and it was not until the Defendant wrote to a senior partner at the firm where the Plaintiff practices, that the Plaintiff took any notice of the Defendant, the client, but nevertheless the Plaintiff persisted in his failures to secure and forward a copy of the Master's Order and this after the Plaintiff had raised issues of alleged uncertainties which caused the Defendant to forward and fax copies of: -

AND the aforementioned documents were faxed and sent as a warning shot NOT to indulge and or permit others to do so let alone act in collusion with them as the Plaintiff had already done previously.

13.

NOTWITHSTANDING the fact that the Plaintiff had defaulted to secure and forward a copy of the Master's Order (need to comply without Service?) and because the Defendant had consented (as indeed he had indicated and stated earlier) he proceeded to draft and serve on the other party's solicitors an Amended Statement of Claim, copy of which was also served and faxed to the Lord Chancellor's Department. The Plaintiff was made aware, but evidently failed to take any notice, of other issues and matters that were reported to there in respect of a County Court action over which the Department eventually acted, as reported in the press months later, while the Defendant was in hospital.

14.

The Defendant had requested a meeting with the only Defendant in the High Court action who was present at the hearing before Master Turner. That Defendant was aware of, and a witness to, the statements and the consensus of opinions as to "a case to be answered". In a letter the solicitors for that Defendant wrote to state that their client did not wish for a meeting to materialise.

15.

The Defendant in this action duly noted the Open Legal Aid Certificate (no limits for a small claim?). Setting aside the implications on society as to how another person was being treated like Mary Winch (the other Defendant in the High Court action who was not represented and or had failed to enter an appearance either on purpose and or under questionable circumstances) the solicitors were simply seeking the usual field days in court. These tow factors, and statements from other parties, inclusive of the failures and acts of collusion between the solicitors caused the Defendant to write an explicit letter to the Plaintiff and at the same time to proceed in other avenues (instigated and acted upon earlier) such as blatant attempts to abuse the Legal Aid Funds facilities; the Defendant took the view that: -

FURTHER AND OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE the Defendant claims that the Plaintiff after deliberately misleading the Defendant into believing the Plaintiff's prime concern was to be the interests IN LAW (no fraudulent intentions implied in the statement) of the Defendant (as his client) that the Plaintiff accepted a remittance in lieu of work that the Plaintiff was meant to but defaulted to do himself thereby acting in breach of trust and securing funds from the Defendant under false pretences and with further intent to mislead and misconduct the case related to him by failing in the first instance to consider the consequences arising out of a possible next of keen medical certificate for a mentally certified person, the possible frauds on the Plaintiff (besides the elderly and ailing mother) and the negligent and gross indifference to suffering of others by the Doctors and or others who were conscious and or aware of any medical certificates and or next of keen certificates in force; matters of utmost importance in the case at hand conveniently ignored and or suppressed by one and all INCLUSIVE OF THE FAILURES BY THE PLAINTIFF TO ADVISE AND OR ACT in the interests of his client, the Defendant.

AND THE DEFENDANT WILL SEEK AN ORDER FROM THE COURT, should the Plaintiff fail to undertake and or comply with the need to secure by himself the following:

(a)    Confirmation from the Medical Authorities in charge of the younger brother of the Defendant in this action as to whether the younger brother had been Certified and or Sectioned and when.

(b)    Seek and secure information in writing as to whether or not the estranged wife of the younger brother of the Defendant in this action was in possession of a Next of kin certificate and or other statutory instrument.

(c)    Seek and secure information in writing from the Building society and their solicitors as to how and who granted and or allowed peaceable repossession of the property. Also who, when and how funds held in a joint account were withdrawn and or transferred from the account, held in the joint names of the previously registered owners of the property.

THE DEFENDANT IN PERSON

FOOTNOTES:
    1.     *Link from here to the page where we publish an extract from a letter a solicitor wrote to a client in March 2003, and the solicitor wrote of judges indulging as they do with a tongue in cheek mentality, thus confirming Andrew's conclusions in 1972-75, *linked-to from here, over three decades earlier; when considering the freedom afforded to the judiciary or bestowed upon them by successive governments / representatives of the citizens in our alleged democracy. The solicitor also confirmed what Andrew set out to research and investigate after the managers / organisers of the LIPS crowd/mob contacted him within days of the lodging of the explicit appeal visitors can access from here. *Link from here also to challenges, released in this page, relative to a solicitor's indulged in the usual manner when 'serfs are targeted by the legal circles in the manner that Jesus Christ spoke of when He addressed the lawyers of His days; *access from here the words attributed to Jesus Christ by the editors of the New Testament and consider the fact that they knew of the very elements St. Luke included in his Gospel, hence they included such matters in the New Testament compilation 1700 years ago. The very elements and issues were covered and pointed to in 1902 when Sergei Nilus published, in Russia; *access from here an explicit part of the document which Sergei Nilus attributed to followers of the most misrepresented work ever to have been presented to the sons of  men, 2300 years ago; *access also from here an extract from the Old Testament and consider the obvious implications when one reads the two lesson -in the page- by examples stated in works which Andrew read & studied over and over from his pre-teen years.  
    2.    *Link from here to the long existing plans qualifying and clarifying the fact that the assault on the family and use of alleged Social Services to 'the targeted and ill-informed (by design sons of men' - humans on planet earth) were and remain part of the plans of the organisers of it all. No visitor could possibly overlook, let alone ignore the elements covered under paragraph 7 and in particular subparagraph 7.3; yet we have had victims of the divorce industry as created by the criminals who ORGANISE & CONTROL pseudo-democratic states simply busying themselves in blunt misrepresentations and engaging in the alternative NEW AREAS of activities that simply amount to expansion of the plans of the criminals who have been in control for far too long. All visitors, victims, readers and researchers should *access from here and read the extracts from the work of Frank Schaeffer (USA) we copied in the quotes page as of the creation of the original / first web-pages which Andrew first published at www.human-rights.demon.co.uk in 1997 & closed it in March 2006 for a number of reasons. Many the victim-challengers who contacted Andrew over the years and were pointed to the REALITIES OF LIFE IN ALL PSEUDODEMOCRACIES (as we refer to the states created by the criminals in control). In our experience not one of the allegedly concerned challengers ever co-operated in the areas we have been suggesting and even made provisions for such avenues such as TAP*, (*The Alternative Press linked to from here). One and all were noted to have converted to love of and *promoter-users of the avenues created by the master-minds who have been arranging and organising everything for far too long. Each and every one simply adopted the ways of Mammon as all fell in love with the arrangements in place and the rewards on tap for persons who adopt the ways of the organisers of the lives of 'the serfs', whom, the converts themselves accost and entice / coerce into the ways of the master-planners.   
    3.    *Link from here to an extract from the Old Testament we have been pointing to for over a decade on the Internet, and in these pages after we had collated more than enough evidence about one of the many stooges and fraudsters who were sent along / introduced to us from known quarters of promoters of the element covered in the extract from the Old Testament linked-to from here. It befalls upon every thinker -human-, user of grey matter to consider the element we point to and recognise that what mankind received 23 centuries ago, from the creators of it, besides introducing the creators of it and their alleged creator of all and everything they also laced it with hints about their plans for the sons of men on planet earth, as the extract we point qualifies. 
    4.    *Link from here to the page where we publish material facts and realities consequential to the experiences of a typical victim of a number of solicitors, That victim was sent along by the managers and organisers of the Litigants In Person Society (the LIPS crowd/mob) after the con of a victim had converted to lover and promoter of the arrangements in place for rewarding conditioned victims of the legal circles to front line soldiers of the subliminal indoctrination tactical assaults on 'the serfs' and maintenance engineer of the facility for enticing and converting conditioned victims of the legal circles to the ranks of recruits to the fraudsters club. The scenarios related to Andrew by Mr. Johan Michael Richard Foenander and especially how he was approached by a person who introduced himself as an alleged barrister who was operating out of solicitors offices in the victim's area and WHAT the alleged barrister instigated and organised for the said victim was typical of the modus operandi Andrew was very familiar with. *Link from here to the evidence in the form of a letter which a solicitor (who was acting for the victim-convert to the system of operations at the time) wrote to one of the solicitors who engaged with other solicitors in the usual constructive frauds through abuse of the need for legal services, as ORGANISED BY JUDICIAL CHAIR OCCUPANTS that we are very familiar with, care of the experiences Mr Andrew Yiannides, the creator of these pages and website, benefited from in the early 1970s. *Link from here to the left margin pane of another page where we relate to the parts of two Lord Justices who engaged in perversion and corruption of Justice; we add that the court had been invited, in an affidavit endorsed and submitted to court by solicitors and barristers to act so. We stress the fact that the submitted affidavit with such invitations was lodged at court by the legal team representing fraudsters, who indulged also in the creation and promotion of a blunt FORGERY as part of their tactics intended to defraud the targeted victim in a typical manner when the legal circles serve other interests and agendas and not the Law or Justice itself. The sad reality happens to be that the ill-educated and ill-informed serfs (as arranged by the media and persons who are in command of the state) are also victims of the front-line soldiers, the converts-to and lovers of the system of operations AS ORGANISED BY THE CRIMINALS IN CONTROL, THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES. 
    5.    *Link from here to the page where we relate the realities of life from within allegedly civilised Democratic states and consider the role of the media as planned and organised by the criminals who have been in control for far too long. 
    6.    *Link from here to the submitted challenges as pleaded in the Defence and Counterclaim above; it was lodged at Court and served on the offending solicitor. Consider the realities covered and if beneficiaries (visitors / readers) from such 'professional services' contact us by using the webmaster email connection / contact facility. We request of visitors to let us know if they are stating such matters in personal web-pages and if they are in a position to furnish information and evidence, we also urge them to access the website http://www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk and to report / record such matters at the said website. We will gladly exchange links with any other who is publishing in the public domain, material that relates to the events covered in the pleadings lodged at court through the DEFENCE & COUNTERCLAIM as was called for in the instance attached to the events leading to the case stated through the pleadings.
    7.    *Link from here to the page where we publish a letter, the content of which hints and points to much, care of organised scenarios for all of which the core element simply rests on organised criminal (in intent) activities; no one could ever promote the events and activities as anything else but ORGANISED CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY due to the regularity of such arrangements. Full particulars will be released and pointed to from the content of the letter. It should suffice, by way of an introduction, to bear in mind that as in the 1970's Islington scenarios so it was in the case to be related through the hints included in the letter. Indeed so it was, also,  with the scenarios related to the solicitor in the case that gave rise to the Defence & Counterclaim Pleadings*, above, *linked to from here, 
    8.    It goes without saying that we do not expect of the persons we name and expose, in our pages, to consider our invitations and point victims they target to this or any other page at this website. Nor do we anticipate any of them to point any 'serfs' or taxpayers they come into contact with to the explicit page where we cover the theft and plundering of the taxpayers' contributions to the national budget through arrogant fraud and the abused court facilities. As maintenance engineers of the system of operations and as ardent partaking promoter-users of the organised constructive frauds instigated and executed through the abuse of the courts' facilities, 'protecting their interests happens to be their main concern. One has to consider the simple fact that not one of them ever addressed the issues we point to, through the material in the exclusive page*, *linked to from here, We are not that naive to expect of persons who adopted the system as is and made it their way of life, to aim for any changes, for to do so would amount to aiming for or seeking to cut off the hands and feet of their dancing partners. Readers & researchers who have not accessed the House of Lords Precedent case, dating back to 1939-40 should do so; one has to look at both sides of a coin in order to find out if the coin is not a counterfeit and its value. Familiarising one's self with law applicable to activities, such as their Lordships clarified in 1940* - *precedent case linked to from here should be uppermost in their mind. Their Lordships INCLUDED INTENTIONAL DEFAULTS and we point all visitors to the element of 'confidential agreements to keep the targeted victims of crime - the taxpayers - in the dark AS EVERYONE WE NAME and EXPOSE ENGAGED & ENGAGE IN. Electing to ignore the element of ORGANISED CRIME, the constructive  fraud imposed on the taxpayers while fully aware of the fact that by keeping it all from the taxpayers, like the media Barons and the Intellectual Prostitutes retained and maintained by the media Barons simply serves the undisclosed plans of the evil who set out to take control of all and everything on planet earth. The truth of the matter is that Andrew had the very precedent case up his sleeves since 1975, while researching the reasons and the elements that sustain the rampant fraud organised and executed through abuse of the legal system and the courts' facilities. The images of documented evidence we released in our pages establishes the practice and what elements, persons have been sustaining it all for centuries / millennia. We expect of victims of the practices and the activities covered in this page to consider their rights and above all their duties to society at large. The CHALLENGES WARRANTED - as covered through the Defence & Counterclaim Pleadings we released in this page on 30 June 2008 - should be considered alongside the words of ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair to the House when he returned to the UK.and spoke of ORGANISED CRIME* [*Link to the Prime Minister's other considerations from here]. 
    9.    xxx
   10.   xxx 
   11.    xxx 
   12.    xxx 
   13.    xxx 
   14.    xxx 
   15.    xxx