LATEST SITUATION. Updated June 26 1999

1. On Saturday Afternoon of March 27 1999, I sent via fax mail several documents addressed to The Prime Minister Tony Blair at 10 Downing Street. Included in my correspondence to him was the statement that  the current bankruptcy proceeding against me has involved the use of  fraud, and deception by my opponent Miss Shirley Carr and her friend and "assistant" solicitor Alison Stott. I have again made it known to the Prime Minister that the former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding lied, concocted false stories, and allowed my opponent Miss Shirley Carr the liberal use of perjury which has also been instrumental in the perversion of the course of justice clearly  assisted by the Masonic Mafia who infest the British Judiciary, Legal system , and Police. As the bankruptcy situation has been brought about by the use of fraud, then I have informed the Prime Minister in my fax letters of March 27 that I shall resist by all and  any means, including physical, any moves made upon me in respect of the alleged bankruptcy. This situation has not been brought about by me, but by a Judicial System which it is shown can be used to assist corruption when it is considered that it is required to ruin those who raise questions concerning the infestation of Freemasonry within it. I am aware that as a result of my decision to stand firm against the Tyranny and Oppression that has been used against me by corrupt members of the Judiciary,  some of whom I have named along with their corrupt acts, and by others who have assisted the situation, it may now mean placing my own life in considerable danger. I should hope that if it comes to the worst that others will benefit from my own experience and by the information that I have found it necessary to publish. I have seen and have been touched by Hell on this earth and those who assist it. My conscience will not allow me to run from it. EVIL rules where EVIL is allowed to rule. If I am wrong about this then I shall answer for it only to our creator, Almighty God.

2. In my fax letters to the Prime Minister on Saturday 27 March 1999 I also supplied him with the details of my unlawful arrest and detention by police on Tuesday March 9 1999. 10 Downing Street has been kept fully informed about what is taking place in the matters of my allegations of being subject of injustice at the hands of the Masonic Mafia who rule our judicial, Police, and legal profession.

3. I have also again made the Prime Minister aware of the late Lord Denning's 1956 ruling (Reg-v-Dytham) which is that no Order of a Court can stand if it has been obtained by fraud.

4. A letter received from the Official Receivers Office at Stockton-on-Tees, County Cleveland, U.K. says that unless I cooperate with them then an application for my arrest may be made. I have faxed them brief details of the fraud that has been used against me, which have also been sent to the Prime Minister. I have made them aware that I do not accept fraud any more than I accept the bankrupty which has been derived by use of it.

5. Mr Brian Wake of the North Yorkshire and Durham U.K. Law Society has replied to my very recent  letter to him. I will publish, as it might be necessary, any further matters regarding my correspondence with him. Letters to Mr Wake and his reply are now published on page 51. The Law Society are again shown to be what they really are. An organisation also infested with Freemasonry and maintained to try to cover up misconduct by members of the legal profession when their misconduct becomes subject of complaint.

6. At the present time there has been no further correspondence received to my latest letter to The Office for The Supervision  of Solicitors. I still firmly believe that they should be renamed to something more appropriate to what would really seem to be their purpose. Reply now received from the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors dated 22 April 1999 at page 25. The Office for the Supervision of Solicitors have now written to me to say that they there is nothing further that they can act upon and have referred me to the Legal Services Ombudsman. The Office for the Supervision of Solicitors have not investigated my complaints about corrupt solicitors. They alleged last year that they could not locate my files regarding my complaints which date back to 1994. I still do not know whether or not they have been able to locate the files. The matter is now under referral to the Legal Services Ombudsman. I have little faith that my approach to the Legal Services Ombudsman will assist. It is however a route I must first take before condemning it.

7.  No reply has been received in relation to my Bill of Costs very recently supplied to Miss Shirley Carr and her " McKenzie" friend and "assistant" partner in fraud, solicitor Allison Stott.

8. Following publication on the front page of  Sunderland Echo Newspaper on April 3 1999 of my alleged bankruptcy and disqualification from being a Town Councillor, my father telephoned me and was extremely upset by what he had read in the newspaper about me. On April 5 he collapsed and died shortly afterwards. The Sunderland Echo reporters, which included its senior reporter Mr Paul Taylor, who attended my home on two occasions for a number of hours had indicated to me that they were intending to publish other facts that I had given to them. I do not doubt that their prior intention was  to publish these other facts. It would seem that others including the deputy editor at the Sunderland Echo newspaper had different ideas on what was to be published. I have to wonder now whether the Editor of the Sunderland Echo is also mason or if he had been swayed by the power of Freemasonry? It has now been confirmed on 20 April 1999 that it was the Deputy Editor of the Sunderland Echo newspaper, was the one who "spiked" the original story that was to have been published regarding my expose of corruption linked with Freemasonry. It is now believed that the Deputy Editor of the Sunderland Echo newspaper is a mason. This matter is not concluded. The matter of the publication is now subject of complaint to The Press Complaints Commission.

9. A letter dated 22 April 1999 has been sent to the Chief Constable J.C. Strachan of Northumbria  Police regarding corruption. The reply which I received to this letter came from an Inspector Gilberg at Washington Police Headquarters. It simply said, "I note what you say". It is again shown that allegations of action having being taken to pervert the course of justice and of fraud will not be acted upon by police when the matter of Masonic involvement is alleged. A further letter dated May 5 1999 was sent to the Chief Constable of Northumbria stating my requirement that he now press charges against the former Recorder John H Fryer Spedding for his having taken action to pervert the course of justice and Misconduct in Public Office. I also stated in my letter to Chief Constable J.C. Strachan my requirement that Northumbria Police now also press charges against Miss Shirley Carr and her partner in fraud, solicitor Alison Stott. A reply is awaited from him.

10. Up until this present time of May 9 1999, all of the following persons have failed, as per my demand made of them, to declare any membership of Freemasonry. Lord Bingham, Lord Woolf, Lord Irvine, Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Auld, Former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding. District judges (North East Circuit) Cuthbertson, Scott-Phillips, and Jones. as the subject of Freemasonry did enter into the civil court proceedings before the former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding who by means of considerable available evidence, did take action during those proceedings to pervert the course of justice. Lord Justice Auld took an appreciable amount of time in summing up following refusal of my request for leave to appeal the corrupt Recorders judgement, in trying to allay my concerns of Masonic involvement in the injustice of which I am subject. He failed to do that. The other named persons carried out acts which are considered to be contrary to accepted principles of justice. Some of their acts are detailed in the pages on Web Site It is considered that these named people appear to be disregarding the requirement that a court or tribunal must be impartial to the proceedings under consideration. When I approached Lords Bingham and Woolf in 1997 they ruled that it should be left to the individual judge whether or not to declare membership of Freemasonry. I do not accept their ruling unless they themselves are prepared to make such required declaration that they are not members of the Freemasons.These people too are subject of the rules and laws which apply to all other United Kingdom citizens.

11. The Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf has admitted that for the past two years, litigants in person appearing at the London Court of Appeal have been subject of " secret briefings" prior to their appearance before the court. These secret briefings have been carried out by junior solicitors or barristers and then a bench memoranda prepared by them has then been passed to the Lords Justices who have heard the applications. The litigants have never cought sight of the bench memoranda that has been used taken into consideration when giving judgement. This has to be a serious breach of the administration of justice. Though Lord Woolf has said that such procedure has only ben taking place for two years, I understand that there is evidence available that it has taken place from as far back as 1992 and evidence of this has been forwared to the European Court of Human Rights.

12. The British Judiciary are alleged to be impartial of government. The Head of the judiciary, Lord Chancellor Irvine, is in fact a Cabinet Minister. How can the judiciary be said to be impartial, when its head is a member of the government?

13. On Friday May 10 I received a summons of which the informant is Chief Constable J.C. Strachan, to attend the Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court on June 3. It seems that Miss Carr is now alleging that I had harassed and assaulted her "sometime" between November 28 1998 and January 5 1999. It would seem that she has only just remembered the false allegations which she has just now made to police. The allegations are rigged, totally untrue and have again been fabricated. I believe that the Chief Constable J.C.Strachan has had a hand in it. Maybe he is trying to show that he can also follow in the corrupt footsteps of his predecessor Mason Chief Constable Stevens who is now Deputy Police Commissioner of the London Metropolitan Police under Sir Paul Condon. I understand that Chief Constable Strachan is also a mason. Another mason has told me that regardless of what evidence I can show that the allegations have been fabricated, once masons decide you will be subject of their corruption, then I will be found guilty. I am not deterred. They are providing considerable means to show that the Masonic infestation of the British judiciary, police, and legal profession is very active against those who raise questions regarding its infestation of these public bodies.

I wonder, is the above the response to my two letters of  April 22 and May 5 to Chief Constable Strachan? I am aware that police are monitoring  Web site site so perhaps they could answer this question.

More detailed information regarding these matters and pages referenced are published on Internet Web Site

June 19 1999

14. Superintendent N.R. Gilberg of Washington Area Police Command has now replied to a second letter that I sent to him on 5th May 1999 requiring police to take action against those I have named in connection with fraud and having taken additional action to pervert the course of justice. His reply reads:

"Dear Mr Kellett,

I refer to your letter dated 5th May 1999.

Detective Inspector Atkinson is considering the issues which you have raised and will arrange for an officer to examine the issues in more detail."

15. It is now certain that former Recorder John H.Fryer-Spedding required a specific order to allow him to try the four civil actions before him as a consolidated action. It had been believed that as Carr had deliberately excluded her application and subsequent order of the court refusing consolidation from the judges bundle, that may have been the reason Mr Fryer-Spedding had tried the cases as a consolidated action. The County Court Rules Order 13, 9. (1) confirm that the former Recorder was not allowed to try the cases as a consolidated action without such order of consolidation having been made. His false claim that the cases had been subject of consolidation would have required him to see proof that the cases had been subject of consolidation. There was in fact an order in force at the time, made on 1st June 1994. refusing consolidation of the cases.

Carr had deliberately excluded the June 1st 1994 order from the judge's bundle when, without the knowledge or authority of the Court she prepared the bundle. That work had been given to solicitor Alison Stott, who had appeared at Court with Carr on a number of occasions before January 17 1996. On this date she declared to the Newcastle County Court that she had up until that time not been acting for Carr but had only been assisting her. In Court when Stott made that declaration were, Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding, Counsel representing me Michelle Temple, my wife, and Carr. Stott's declaration has been subject of affidavits confirming the declaration that she made. Up until January 17 1996 Stott had therefore agreed that she had no legal standing other than as an assistant to Carr and would have been aware that in those circumstances she was breaching court rules by accepting work from the court. In addition, the court breached Supreme Court Rules by not having Stott make the declaration which she made on January 17 1996 earlier. The courts should not have given any work whatsoever to Stott before January 17 of 1996.

I went into court with the understanding that the cases were to be tried one after another. I had prepared my cases and defence on the basis of the 1st June 1994 order made by District Judge Scott-Phillips refusing consolidation of the cases. In the light that the cases were falsely alleged by former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding to have been subject of a consolidation order, I was therefore at a distinct disadvantage. The false allegation that the cases were subject of consolidation amounts to fraud. Under the ruling of the late former Master of the Rolls, the Rt. Hon. Lord Denning, made in case Regina -v- Dytham in 1956, because fraud has been used, the judgement of former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding does not stand. It is also of possible interest to say that Counsel, Mr Merritt, who represented Carr was also aware that the cases were not subject of consolidation. Documentary evidence is available to show this.

Lord Justices Auld and Pill were made aware that there was an order in force refusing consolidation of the cases. They also had access to the approved transcript of judgement of the former Recorder where he falsely alleged in the opening paragraph that the cases were subject of consolidation. Why then did their Lords Justices refuse me leave to appeal the judgement of the former Recorder? This fact alone, without the others, was sufficient to allow my appeal against the Recorders judgement. I cannot think that they would not have been aware of Supreme Court Rules 1981 Order 13, 9.? Combining the latter, with the evidence to show that the former Recorder had failed to tell the truth, made statements contrary to law, of which are contained in his approved transcript of judgement, and had allowed Carr the liberal use of perjury, and other things which are a contradiction of the natural principles of justice, I cannot accept that this was all one long error or mistake, but had been a deliberate act on the part of former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding and others I have named in the use of fraud, acts to pervert the course of justice, and of others in attempting to hide these facts. Misconduct in Public Office is applicable to all regardless of position or title.

Lord Justice Auld went to some lengths while I appeared before him and L.J. Pill on June 6 1997 to try to allay my concerns that Freemasonry had played a part in the injustice that I have suffered. At times I did detect a note of sarcasm in his tone of voice. He was aware that the Rt. Hon Lord Nolan as Chairman of the Committee of Standards in Public Life, had thanked me for a dossier that I sent to him. It was used in the Committee's Enquiry into Freemasonry within the police and judiciary.

The accepted principles of justice require that a court will be impartial to the proceedings before it. The subject of Freemasonry and my "arguments" with it had been raised in the proceedings before the courts. Though I have required that the following declare any membership of Freemasonry, because all have had some involvement in the decision making process, none of these people will confirm or deny that they are Freemasons. I can only presume that this amounts to a denial that a litigant has the right to information to be so satisfied that the court and decision making processes have been impartial to the proceedings. Those I have required to make the necessary declaration, or none declaration of membership of Freemasonry are: The Lord Chief Justice Lord Bingham, The Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf, The Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine, Lord Justices Auld and Pill, Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding, District Judges Cuthbertson and Scott-Phillips (North East Circuit). This is I think evidence to show the sorry state of the Justice System in the United Kingdom.

15. June 26 1999. A meeting has now been arranged between myself, my solicitor and Detective Inspector Coxon of Northumbria Police for this coming week  in regard to the various issues that most certainly require police action.

16. The Chief Registrar at the Durham District Land Registry, Mr Patrick Timothy, still refuses to co-operate in providing information about what Statutory Declarations were used in registering cautions on the land subject of the litigation. Solicitor Mr Paul Graney, of Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne-Wear, has already agreed that a Statutory Declaration which he swore for use in lodging a caution in regard to the land, contained untrue information. He agreed that when he was confronted with evidence to show it. This matter is to be pursued. I regard Mr Timothy's none co-operation as a serious matter.

17. A letter of request to the Newcastle County Court, for the judges name and reasons for his refusal to allow me to take copies of the audio tapes made during proceedings before the former Recorder John H, Fryer-Spedding, still remains without reply. The request was made several weeks ago. The contents of the tapes will provide further evidence of the judge's vile acts.

18. I  took part in a Radio Broadcast by BBC Radio Newcastle concerning Freemasonry on June 20th. Details of my web site and its address were broadcast during the program. Following it, I have been contacted by a number of people. I must apologise for not having been able to reply to all of those people up to the present time. I will reply at the earliest opportunity. I wish to thank BBC Radio Newcastle for allowing a full and fair airing of the issues concerning Freemasonry and the recent decision made in relation to it, by the Ministry of Defence. 

Go to latest news edition

Go to opening page.

Go to page index listing.

Any E.mail please to: