22nd September 2001

I continue to receive information about the destruction of the World Trade Centre buildings. Some American Groups are not happy the situation as being put out by US Authorities. I publish below a link to a source of some information which will allow the reader to make up his or her own mind as to what might be behind the current world situation following on from 11th September. Islamic leaders in Afghanistan have called on the US to provide evidence of Osama Bin Laden's involvement in the World Trade Centre destruction. Surely, before any military action is carried out against anyone, evidence of the allegations made against them should be made public? Any true democracy would require that.

Several weeks ago the Jewish Defence League replied to my correspondence and made an admission which is of relevance to the present day situation. My subsequent letter to them did not receive a reply. They had of course agreed that Jews are not Christians. It is I think also of significance that in just over fifty years since its establishment, Israel now has a substantial well equipped army, airforce and navy. They have also developed nuclear weapons. Where in such a short space of time have they been able to obtain the resources both financial and technical to be able to achieve these things? Allegations from reliable sources claim that the resources have been provided by both the USA and the UK. Strange indeed is it not that these two powers are now forefront in sabre rattling and threatening revenge attacks on any country they decide might have harboured terrorists? Terrorists are those who use or favour violent or intimidating methods of coercing a government or community. On this web site I have published evidence of such actions which have and continue to be carried out against me in an apparent attempt to silence me in publishing the truth of judicial and police crime in the UK. Those who are carrying this out are by reason of the terrorist interpretation, also terrorists. Indeed they are State Terrorists.

Visit http://www.islamzine.com/ideologies/zionism and read what is published there. Click the following links (2) (3) and (4). Then decide whether its the truth and worthy of consideration and has any relationship to current events.

It was only very recently that the US walked out of a Human Rights Conference in South Africa when the assembly was about to declare Israel as being racist. For those who may be interested, I suggest that they look for information on the Jewish Talmud which I understand is some twenty five volumes in size. The Jewish Defence League accept the teachings in the Talmud. Those teaching should alarm every none Jew world wide. In the Talmud none Jews, (Gentiles) are referred to as the Goyim. It is the Talmud's reference to the Goyim and what they can be used for, which should concern all none Jews. The nearest any none Jew can come to being a Jew is to become a Freemason. Many of the Masonic rituals are based on Jewish rituals. It was Britain who created the present problem in the middle east. We gave away land to the Jews in 1947 which was not ours to give. We have since nourished and sustained Israel to the point of turning a blind eye to Jewish atrocities against the Palestinians and others in the middle east. Lately we have all seen the Israeli army shoot children dead and fire into people whose only means of protest was to throw stones. What have we done about that? I am aware that the Jewish influence is worldwide and that there are claims that it presently has control of the World Bank. Certainly the Jewish influence is a reality in both the USA and the UK. I am not anti-semitic. I was due to attend a Jewish function quite recently but other engagements prevented it.

It was also Britain who helped create the present situation in Shri-Lanka (formerly Ceylon). The Tamil population there came about as a result of immigration to satisfy labour demands during the time the British were using that country as a tea producing base. When we left that country we left the Tamil problem with it. I recently spent a number of weeks in Shri Lanka and saw for myself the true situation existing there. I met and spoke with member of all communities including the Tamils. None of them were entirely right or entirely wrong in my view. I also had lunch with two of Shri Lanka's government ministers but we did not discuss the war situation there. Often I had sub machine guns poked at me while I was being searched when I tried to make my way to the war area in the north of the island and was not allowed to go as far as I wanted to. I did however get much of the information I was seeking at the risk of being shot. Jack Straw banned the Tamil Tigers (TTLF) but as in the present situation, simply ignored the facts of why the Tamil Tigers were formed. They did not come about without cause and a solution to that problem, as in the present problem of terrorism, is to address the reasons people have taken such drastic action in what they consider as being their cause. That should be a priority before the probable massive loss of life now in the planning stage takes place. Enough innocent lives have been lost already and no amount of revenge attacks will bring them back.

It is also of interest that while the US government say that they are our friends, they were allowing the collection of funds for use by the IRA terrorists in former years. I have been allowed to see the other side of the coin in regard to the IRA and see why it too was formed. It is alleged that the Ulster Constabulary were involved in the murder of around some one hundred and seventy Catholics. A book publishing facts about those allegations was banned by the UK government. If what is published in that book was lies, why did the government here ban it? The IRA also came about for a reason and addressing that reason is essential if there is to be any lasting peace in Ireland.

We are living in very dangerous times. For those interested in other matters regarding the New World Order and who heads it, look for information on the Bilderberg Council and what its aims are. One of them is for a massive reduction in the worlds human population. How will that be done and which people will be excluded from the Bilderberg Council aims? Could some sort of virus attack blamed on Islamic Terrorists be the means to bring about the Bilderberg aims.

Wednesday 15th August 2001.

It has come a s a great surprise to learn recently that my ancestors, which included Robert the Bruce, King of Scotland, were allied and protectors of the Knights Templars. Robert the Bruce gave safe haven to the Templars at a time they were being executed throughout Europe on the orders of the Pope. The very roots of Freemasonry stems from the Templars. The Templars fought alongside Robert the Bruce's brave army at the battle of Bannockburn in Scotland when the English were well defeated by them. It was the Templars who held the secrets of King Solomon's Treasure. The same secrets which Freemasonry claims to hold today. I am satisfied from recent research which took me to Scotland that the rank and file of Freemasonry today do not have knowledge of any of the secrets held by the Knights Templars. My recent contact with someone in the USA has opened up for me a wealth of information of which I was never previously aware. I am indebted to him for pointing me in what I think will be a very fruitful direction. For reasons of security I cannot name him but we are to continue our links. He has written that what he has imparted to me in a matter of only weeks, took him twenty years to learn.

I am sure that if Robert the Bruce knew what has been carried out against me by Freemasonry he would rise from his grave in vengeance. I am persuaded that the early roots of Freemasonry had all good intentions. Now I know from personal experience and that of others, that it has degraded into little more than a band of men who use its secrecy for all the wrong reasons. Freemasonry has created it own path of self destruction. Again I say that they do not have the secrets imparted by King Solomon's Treasure excavated and transported by the Knights Templars. They may however have what amounts to some fragmented form of them. Masonic equations do not add up in the same way as those of King Solomon.

Sunday 25th March 2001.

This week I have published more evidence of just how far corruption extends within authorities who are in place to protect the public. I suspect by mistake, I have came into possession of a document which shows that very material evidence that I had not approached National Insurance Inspector Shirley Carr at the Sunderland County Court and threatened her as she had falsely alleged (click here to view evidence) had been suppressed. To suppress material evidence in a criminal case is a crime. The statement of a court security officer was in the hands of solicitor A.N. Jackson of A.N. Jackson & Co. Hartlepool, solicitor C. D. Hughes of Harding Swinburne Jackson & Co , 58 Frederick St. Sunderland , Northumbria Police, and the Crown Prosecution Service at Washington. Part of my prosecution for alleged harassment of Carr concerned her allegation of my approach to her at the Sunderland County Court. My conviction took place in November of 1998. It was only a little over two weeks ago that I came into receipt of the letter dated 14th May 1998 sent to A N Jackson by the Crown Prosecution Service. Within recent months, the Crown Prosecution Service situated at Washington, Tyne-Wear, had also attempted to blackmail me in an attempt to have me remove material from this website. Carr had made further false allegations against me which were instantly acted upon by Northumbria Police. There was no evidence of her allegation, there could not have been any because her allegation was untrue, but as is the practice of Mason led police forces, they will always seize upon any opportunity to cause harm to an anti-mason such as myself. Masons are sworn to uphold the Brotherhood of Freemasonry and Northumbria Police Chief Constable, as a mason is subject of that. Solicitor A. N. Jackson of Hartlepool who was supposed to be acting for me is also a mason and says he belongs to what he calls a Judicial Lodge. By suppressing very material evidence for use in my defence against Carr's false allegation, he has proved that in fact he was working for me but working for his brothers the masons. Why did solicitor Hughes also conceal that evidence? That will eventually be shown of this I am sure.

When both Northumbria Police and the Crown Prosecution Service at Washington knew that a member of the Sunderland County Court Staff, a security officer, who had been asked to be in the courtroom as a precaution, and I was more likely to be at risk of threat from her than I her, had said that nothing of note occurred in that court on the day Carr falsely alleged I had approached and threatened her, why did they prosecute me on that allegation? Why was no statement taken from either the security officer or the court clerk? Why were neither of these persons called to give evidence in my defence? I have the answers to some of these questions which I will publish later. I have made allegations that the UK justice system is out of control and evidence on this website shows that to be true. There is a vast amount of other evidence to show that. Head of the Judiciary Mr Irvine has been made very aware of what is taking place but simply watches it happen. He uses his Court Service Department to frustrate and block attempts to rectify the situation. In my view, he is unfit to hold public office.

My case of alleged harassment of Carr is presently subject of application for leave to appeal the House of Lords. Preparation is also in progress for an application to the European Court of Human Rights because the appeal court bench at Newcastle, headed by a judge Moir, refused to admit or deny any membership of Freemasonry. They had been informed several days before my appeal that I had taken part in the Nolan Enquiry into Freemasonry within the Police and Judiciary and was actively involved in voicing concerns about Freemasonry. This is only part of the substantial evidence to back up the fact that Freemasonry is being excluded from the normal requirement that a court must be impartial to the proceedings before it. By not being impartial and by refusing to give information which would show that, the court is guilty of breaching Article 6.(1) of the European Human Rights Convention. Common sense alone dictates this fact. UK courts breach this Article on a very regular basis. It will be stopped. I promise all judges and magistrates active in breaching Article 6.(1) that what went before 2nd October 2000 will not under any circumstances be allowed now. I think soon all those employed in public office will be required to declare any membership of Freemasonry. Parliament, with its many masons, may have to be dragged screaming to enact law to bring about that situation. Nonetheless, circumstances will bring it about. Freemasonry is like a creeping virus.and those of us who are subject of it are only too well aware of this fact. This website is only publishing a small part of the overall picture showing that Freemasonry and its members employment in the public service are not compatible. Indeed, Freemasonry involved in the public service is in fact very harmful to the general public.

Sunday 11th March 2001

The saga continues. The longer it does, the more I learn about just how corrupt some authorities are within the Tyne-Wear area. These include Northumbria Police,  Northumbria Police Authority, the Crown Prosecution Service  and the North East County Court Circuit. I can state this fact as there is indisputable evidence to back it up.  I do not allege that everyone within these authorities is corrupt. But when the boss is corrupt surely those under his control will ultimately become corrupt as well? If you mix white and coloured washing  the white changes colour. This is also the situation existing within authority. When corrupt authority protects corrupt authority, which is the  current situation in Britain, then we all have something very serious to worry about. 

Britain has become a State within a State trying in every way possible to avoid rights  and laws of which we are now subject under European Human Rights justice. The men heading our justice system show time and time again that they are unfit to hold public office. Those who are responsible for these men being employed in those positions are even less fit to hold public office. Yes, Mr Blair's promise of a fairer Britain, like many of his pre-election promises has fallen by the wayside. We are again in the silly season. Vote for us the pretenders say and we will give you the Earth. Strange is it not, that breach of promise never arises when it comes to politicians? A promise is surely a contract? Contracts politicians make to gain positions of power are broken time and time again. Only we the electorate can remedy this situation. Think very carefully before you cast your vote. Please don't let that nice smile and apparent nice personality fool you. The real person often hides behind them.

Miss Shirley Carr, the woman named in other pages on my site along with evidence of her past use of perjury, has been made the instrument of  corrupt elements operating within Northumbria Police. These corrupt elements are without doubt masons. Around two years or so ago I was told that it was customary to have a mason as Chief Constable of Northumbria. Who has allowed this custom? They could not have been none masons. The oaths made upon becoming a mason is in direct conflict with the public interest in relation to those holding public office. It cannot be argued otherwise. Miss Shirley Carr falsely alleged that I had approached her in the Sunderland County Court in 1997 and had threatened her amounting to harassment. I had also informed Miss Carr's employer about my concern at her spending so much time at home and carrying out other activities at times it was reasonable to think she should have been involved in what she called her full time employment as a National Insurance Inspector. What I had reported to the National Contributions Agency was proved true and the prosecution agreed that. I still have considerable concerns regarding this, but maybe she now only works part time as a National Insurance Inspector? On these two matters I was convicted of harassment, fined a total of eight hundred pounds with two hundred and fifty pounds in costs. My trial was at Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court. Illegal proceedings at that same court in 1986 was the instrument in the start of my investigations into masons who had a hand in it. I had been battered and then struck by a car that was deliberately driven at me. The man who carried out that attack on me was a Robert Willis Gardner Pringle. He supplied fruit and vegetables to Hetton-le-Hole Masonic Hall  where many of the local mob hang out. When the matter came to trial, a close acquaintance of Pringle, a mason named William Moseley, sat on the bench along with another magistrate. When I went to see Moseley at his home later that same day he told me that although he had remained seated at the bench, he had stood down. I was also acquainted with Moseley. I had got him work for his garage. Pringle walked free from that court. What he carried out against me had amounted to no less than attempted murder. I learned later that the other magistrate who sat next to Moseley did not have the necessary qualifications to act alone. A fact backed up even quite recently following my interview with a long serving policeman.

The Clerk to the Justices, Mr Bavidge, was party to the cover up of those illegal court proceedings in 1986. He was also assisted by a Mr J.J. Death of the Lord Chancellors Department. Bavidge was still the Clerk to Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court at the time of my trial in November of 1998. Could he have influenced the outcome of the case. I think he most certainly could have. By covering up illegal proceedings at that court in 1986 he had carried out what amounted to nothing short of a criminal act. He would have been well aware of the allegations I had made about him long after 1986. At my trial in 1998 I was represented by a barrister named Harle. My wife agreed that the questions he put to her while she was in the witness box had no relevance. I too agreed that. Harle wanted video equipment removed from the court after the first day of the proceedings. He claimed it would save money. I would not agree to that. Evidence now in my hands shows that it would not have saved any money. What was Harle up to? Who was he really working for? Video film which I insisted should be shown to the court was never shown. That film showed further evidence of Carr's use of perjury. It also showed that former Recorder John Fryer-Spedding had not only assisted that perjury but had added to it himself. Spedding fled the scene of his crimes when I reported him to former Lord Chancellor Mackay. Mackay failed to act upon what I reported to him. Northumbria Police have been in receipt of indisputable evidence of the fact that Spedding  had  carried out acts to pervert the course of justice for some considerable time. They have failed to carry out the duty required of them. Mason controlled authorities make a habit of doing things like this.

Last Thursday  I received part of some files which have been held by solicitor C.D. Hughes who owns the firm of solicitors Harding Swinburne Jackson & Co. 58 Frederick Street, City of Sunderland. In those files I found a letter dated May 14, 1998. The letter was sent to my former solicitor and mason,  Mr A.N. Jackson of Malcolm Smith & Co, of Hartlepool. from Senior Crown Prosecutor at Washington Mr P.M. Heads. Part of my prosecution for alleged harassment of Carr was that I had approached her at Sunderland County Court and had threatened her. The letter from Senior Crown Prosecutor Heads contained the following, " My understanding is that the security officers name is ******* ******. He has been spoken to by police but my understanding is that no witness statement has been taken from him as apparently his only recollection is that he was asked by the court clerk to enter the court as a precaution but to his knowledge nothing of note occurred. I am unaware of the identity of the court clerk concerned. I know that she was spoken to by the police but she was reluctant to become involved and certainly has not made a statement......"

Here we have a security officer of the court, a man I asked to be called as a witness, who was asked to remain in the courtroom as a "precaution" who had said that "nothing of note occurred"  and these very material facts were obviously deliberately suppressed at my trial. The letter, nor the facts contained within it, was never produced as evidence in my defence. The security officer was never called upon to give evidence. He could of course have verified that Carr's allegation of what took place in that courtroom was only an extension of  the lies she has used against me and a further extension to the liberal use of perjury she had already used against me. The other fact is that Northumbria Police were also aware that in the Sunderland County Court, " nothing of note occurred". Despite this, part of  my prosecution of my alleged harassment of Carr included her allegation relative to the Sunderland County Court. Yes, Mr mason Chief Constable Strachan, you have a lot to answer for and this forms only part of it. Also worthy of note, the Crown Prosecution Service at Washington, Tyne-Wear recently attempted blackmail to have me remove material from my web site. These are only some of the depths the British Justice System has  now shrunk to in their efforts to protect selected criminals.

Why did mason solicitor A.N. Jackson who agrees he belongs to what he calls a judicial lodge, suppress the facts contained in that letter of May 14, 1998? Why did solicitor C.D. Hughes also remain silent about the contents of that letter? He was supposed to be acting for me in the subsequent appeal at the London High Court. I only became aware of the contents of that letter following my receipt of my files last Thursday. I have informed Mr C.D. Hughes that there is material missing documents from those files. I have also asked for an explanation from him as to why the contents of that letter of May 14, 1998 was never given the attention of which justice required.  I await his reply.

My barrister Mr N. Addison has been sent a copy of the letter of May 14, 1998 for his observation of its contents. Following the refusal of my appeal in the High Court appeal on February 12, against the alleged harassment conviction, an application for leave to appeal my case to the House of Lords has been submitted. Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Penrey Davey were the judges in my High Court appeal. They were made aware that at my appeal against alleged harassment of Carr at Newcastle in December of 2000, prior to that appeal  judge Moir and two magistrates who sat on the bench were told that I had taken part in the Lord Nolan Enquiry into Freemasonry within the Police and Judiciary. They were also informed that I had a web site detailing concerns about Freemasonry. They retired for around a half an hour. On their return they said they would not declare any interest in Freemasonry. They refused my appeal. Now we have the two judges sitting in the London High Court who were made aware of these facts, but  ruled that Freemasonry had no significance. Our courts are required to be impartial to the proceedings before them.  How on earth can a court be considered as impartial if in cases such as mine, with my long history of publicly raising justified concerns about Freemasonry, go before a court if any mason sits in judgement in it? Where is your logic Mr Rose and Davey? Where is your sense of justice? What about the Lord Hoffman/General Pinochet affair? I am too long acquainted with judicial double standards and indeed corruption. Freemasonry is not the sole basis for my application for leave to appeal my case to the House of Lords. Another point of law has been called into question.

Editorial Thursday 15th February 2001.

On Monday 12th February 2001 my appeal against conviction for alleged harassment of Miss Shirley Carr was heard before Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Penrey Davey. I was convicted of alleged harassment in November of 1998 by reason that I had contacted Miss Carr's employer, the National Contributions Agency at Longbenton, Newcastle, giving the fact that she was spending a lot of time at home and with other activities. This was happening during times it was reasonable to presume she should have been involved with what she called her full time employment as a National Insurance Inspector. In the civil litigation between us she claimed it was difficult for her to attend court directions hearings because of her employment workload. Judges Davey and Rose refused my appeal.

At my earlier appeal hearing at Newcastle in December of 1999 none of the two lay magistrates and judge Moir would declare any possible interest in Freemasonry despite my requirement that they did that. They were made fully aware by counsel Mr Neil Addison representing me that I had a web site publishing matters of concern about Freemasonry and that I had contributed to the Nolan Enquiry into Freemasonry within the Police and Judiciary. High Court judges Mr Justice Penrey Davey and Lord Justice Rose said that Freemasonry had no relevance. What short memories these men must have? Or could it have been something else?

A high court ruling in the General Pinochet case was overturned because Lord Hoffman, a party to the first ruling in that case, was found to have links with Amnesty International. The British taxpayer had to pay out over six million pounds in legal costs in that matter. Here are the facts of the Pinochet case and then try and argue that these two judges, Davey and Rose, are not practising double standards when it comes to a question of possible conflict of interests in the matter of Freemasonry.

Five Law Lords ruled in the first hearing of the Pinochet case. They included Lord Nichols, Steyn and of course Lord Hoffman. Lord Chief Justice Bingham had earlier ruled that Pinochet was entitled to immunity as a former sovereign from the criminal and civil process of the English Courts. It was Bingham's view and that of another two judges sitting with him in the High Court that "a former head of state is clearly entitled to immunity in relation to criminal acts performed in the course of exercising public functions". Yes you did read it right. According to our Lord Chief Justice crimes are OK if you are head of State. Alun Jones Q.C for the Crown Prosecution Service seeking Pinochet's extradition, said that Pinochet's public functions did not include crimes against humanity or offences such as genocide, torture, hostage taking and others which were deeply repugnant to any notion of morality. Lord Bingham was prepared to agree with this argument but asked, "Where do you draw the line?" Surely any reasonable minded person would draw the line at those criminal acts against humanity? Do we mere mortals live on a different plain to that of Lord Chief Justice Bingham?

In the November 1998 High Court ruling Lord Lloyd said, "In my opinion the State of Chile is entitled to claim immunity on behalf of Senator Pinochet under the terms of the State immunity Act of 1978 and at common law. I would therefore dismiss the appeal." Lord Steyn said, "For the reasons contained in my speech, copies of which are available to the parties, I would allow the appeal. The effect of my speech is that, in a correct interpretation of the law, General Pinochet has no immunity whatsoever." Lord Slynn said, " For the reasons set out in the speech which I prepared and which is available in print, I would hold that the respondent, as a former head of state, is immune from arrest in respect of matters alleged in the warrant of October 22 1998, and I would dismiss the appeal." In his reply, Lord Hoffman said, "I have the advantage of reading in draft the speeches of my noble learned friends, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead and Lord Styn. I agree with them that Senator Pinochet does not have immunity from prosecution and I too therefore would allow the appeal."

The second High Court hearing was to use seven High Court judges following the overturning of the first ruling because of Lord Hoffman's failure to declare his links with Amnesty International. Opinion was that this was designed to restore confidence in Britain's highest court. Five High Court judges heard the original appeal.

Lord Hoffman had agreed with Lord Steyn's argument. Lord Steyn had rightly scorned Lord Bingham's conclusion that there was no line to be drawn. He went on to say that under Lord Bingham's conclusion, torture would have meant Hitler's "final solution", his plan to exterminate European Jews, was perfectly lawful. Clearly, with his way of thinking, Lord Steyn obviously seems to live on the same plain as all reasonable thinking men. There is yet hope for our justice systemů. but I think not with Lord Bingham as the Chief Justice.

Following the ruling that Pinochet could be extradited, his legal team raised the question of whether Lord Hoffman should have ruled in that matter. They agreed that there was no suggestion that Lord Hoffman was actually biased against Pinochet. Lord Goff, for Pinochet, did say that Lord Hoffman had an interest in the outcome of the proceedings because of his links to Amnesty International. Accordingly said Lord Hope, Lord Hoffman was in effect acting as a judge on his own cause.

Following the second High Court hearing it was ruled that Lord Hoffman's role as a director of Amnesty International's charitable arm, "gave rise at the very least to the real danger of bias". Clare Montgomery QC, for Pinochet, told the High Court, " The real danger of this case and the real danger of bias emerging is that this case provokes very strong emotions indeed. We submit and suggest that it is in cases such as this, where emotions may be running high, that it is most difficult to adopt a dispasssionate attitude. Yet it is in cases of this sort that it is most essential that people do not give way to emotion in disregard of right and due process." For the Crown Prosecution Service, Alun Jones QC, said lawyers representing Pinochet knew of Lord Hoffman's links to Amnesty International before Home Secretary Jack Straw's December nine 1998 ruling. The November twenty five ruling by Lord Hoffman and others had paved the way for Jack Straw to rule that Pinochet could be extradited to Spain.

Lord Norman Lamont had written to Lord Chancellor Irvine with the statement, " To be a director of a fund raising arm of Amnesty International is surely a sufficiently close connection for him (Lord Hoffman) to have ruled himself out of this case?" Norman also clearly recognised the fact that no man can rule in his own cause. This is a fact all too commonly ignored by British judges. They have demonstrated this in my case alone. But what is very important is that they are failing to supply information which will assist in finding out if they are ruling in their own cause in matters of Freemasonry.

There had been private government disapproval of the first Pinochet ruling. It was said that a Chilean boycott was costing British companies millions of pounds. Just think what it had cost the victims of Pinochet. That probably did not occur to the many mindless follow the leader zombies, with some exceptions, sitting in the House of Commons. Margaret Thatcher was a close friend of Pinochet and he often visited her as an honoured guest. In October of 1997 Tony Blair's government entertained Pinochet. An attempt is said to have been made to conceal that visit. On a later Pinochet visit to the UK, solicited by British arms manufacturers, Blair's government provided an official hospitality suite. I ask myself, what kind of people is it who would extend this kind of friendship and hospitality to a man like Pinochet? How can people like this be allowed to gain positions of high office?

Recent events in my own case prove beyond all doubt that double standards are being deliberately operated by the judiciary. This, more especially when it comes to matters of Freemasonry. No man can rule in his own cause yet this is happening up and down this country all of the time. The many mason judges are not required to declare membership of Freemasonry even when a clear conflict of interests relative to that occurs. I approached Lord Chief Justice Bingham and Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf in 1997 when judges in civil proceedings would not declare any membership of Freemasonry. My involvement in trying to bring to the public attention the fact that Freemasonry is a blight on society, with the uses its secrecy is put to, is well known among masons. I have taken part in both local and national radio programs highlighting the hidden problems caused by masons. There have also been Press publications detailing my concerns over Freemasonry. When MP Chris Mullin declined to appear on a Radio Newcastle program on the matter of the Ministry of Defence having banned Masonic meetings on their property, I then took part in it. Masons too took part in that program.

I had actively supported Mullin's private members Secret Societies Declaration Bill in Parliament which failed. I supplied him with lots of information relative to my own problems with masons and what I had learned in my own investigations. Around three years ago I noticed a change in Mullin's attitude towards Freemasonry. He had moved office to a building which it is said is owned by the Durham Grand Lodge of Freemasonry. He is also credited with helping in a thirty five thousand pound public grant for the renovation of a City of Sunderland Masonic Hall. Around six years ago Mullin was accused by masons of being paranoid. Mullin was a back bencher. Now he sits on the front benches. Why has there such an apparent change in his attitude to Freemasonry? Problems with masons are at least as bad now, and probably worse, than when Mullin introduced his Bill to Parliament around six years ago.

Monday's High Court ruling by judges Rose and Penrey Davey can never be accepted as a just outcome. Lord Hoffman's links to Amnesty International were sufficient to overturn a High Court ruling in the Pinochet case. My work in bringing to the public attention the fact that masons are involved in just about every authority in the UK. Corruption within these authorities involving masons is rife. My case deserves at least the same consideration as to that given to the Pinochet case. Judges must be shown that they are there to judge in the general public interest. Many it is clear, rule for the benefits of outside interests.

I recently sent a letter to the Durham County Court for the attention of District Judge Scott-Phillips. Amongst other questions I put to him I asked if he would normally grant the work of preparing the judges bundles ready for trial to a litigant when that litigant was allegedly represented by a solicitor? Scott-Phillips has declined to reply to that and other questions I put to him. In fact he had given solicitor Alison Stott of Durham the work of preparing the judges bundles in early 1995. Stott had secretly passed on that work to my civil opponent Miss Shirley Carr. Carr then left out important documentation from those bundles. In January of 1996 Stott declared to the Newcastle County Court that up till that time she had not been acting for Carr but had only been assisting her. In fact she had no lawful right to accept any work from the court as Carr's assistant. It would of course follow that, as Carr's assistant, she would pass on to Carr any work given to her by the court. This is what she did. Why would any solicitor enter into such a deal as that which she clearly did with National Insurance Inspector Carr? Had she met Carr as a result of her work as a National Insurance Inspector? Did Carr visit her offices in connection with her employment? There are still many questions to be answered.. Legal Services Ombudsman Ann Abraham was provided I think with sufficient evidence of Stott's gross misconduct. She failed to give that evidence all due consideration and erred on the side of Stott's misconduct. It is more than clear that she never carried out any proper investigation into what I reported to her. I was warned that Ann Abraham always erred on the side of bent solicitors. I had to find that out for myself.

Stott's January 1996 declaration brought astonishment from counsel Michelle Temple. That hearing was presided over at Newcastle by then Recorder John Fryer-Spedding. He is extensively named on my web site along with evidence of his acts to pervert the course of justice. He fled the scene and went into sudden retirement when I reported some of his vile acts to then Lord Chancellor Mackay. Mackay opted out of his responsibilities by suggesting I place the matter before the Parliamentary Ombudsman. I also reported Spedding's acts to pervert the course of justice to Lord Chancellor Irvine, Lord Chief Justice Bingham and Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf. They sat on their butts and ignored Spedding's criminal acts as a judge. In the circumstances, I hold that they are unfit to hold public office. In the matter of Lord Bingham's opinion in the Pinochet case there must be due cause for concern. So many now involved in "Good Old British Justice" are shown to be unfit to judge.

Scott-Phillips directed the Durham County Court manager Mr K. Hunt to send my letter with my questions to him, to the Court Service at Newcastle. The simple reply they gave was typical of the Court Service. The Court Service are very active in trying to cover up misconduct by judges. They are clearly not in the service of the public. Following my contact, they sent my letter to the Court Service in London. Again the reply I received from them was totally unacceptable. It was however a typical type of reply used I think to frustrate any attempt to right the wrongs done by bent judges who will not admit the truth even when it stares them in the face. I recently examined the Durham County Court files in the matter of the litigation between Carr and I. I am informed by the court that they are the largest files held by them. This matter will be pursued to a just conclusion. It is far from being concluded. North East Circuit Court deputy district judge Baird had unlawfully heard my appeal from a judgement of district judge Scott-Phillips. A pitiful attempt was made to cover that up. A deputy district judge cannot hear an appeal from the ruling made by a district judge. This was just another example of the fact that judges are prepared to break the law when required to do so. Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court acted illegally in 1986 following my having been battered and then struck by a car. The single magistrate who sat was not qualified to act alone. Both the Clerk to the Justices at the court, a Mr Bavidge and a Mr J. J. Death of the Lord Chancellors Department actively attempted to cover that matter up. I was thus deprived of justice. On the evening that I was battered, I had little choice but to crawl for around five miles in torrential rain, in the middle of the night, with blood pouring from my throat and face. The way police treated me that night will live with me till the day I die. The man who carried out that attack supplied the local Masonic Halls with fruit and vegetables for use in their functions. His pal, and mason, magistrate William Moseley also sat on the bench. He later alleged that he had stood down even though he remained on the bench. The remaining magistrate was not qualified to act alone but act he did. These were these reasons that I started to investigate Freemasonry. In my recent examination of the Durham County Court files I found a note written by its former Manager Mr I. Cuthberson. The note, written for the attention of his namesake district judge P. Cuthberson, referred to me as, "The infamous Mr Kellett.". What did that make Mr Cuthberson? The present manager of the Durham County Court, Mr K. Hunt has, I have to say, been very co-operative.

An application for Mondays High Court ruling by judges Rose and Penry Davey to be heard in the House of Lords is underway. The matter will also be subject to an application to the European Court. It is well past the time for judges to declare membership of Freemasonry when possible conflicts of interests regarding such membership is called into question. No man (or woman) may rule in their own cause. When it comes to Mason judges, as I have previously written, they do it all of the time. Just how many masons have walked free from British Courts presided over by mason judges is not fully realised. Many masons have and continue to be protected by mason judges. Its now time to put an end to this.

As a final note. I gain no satisfaction from having to name people and facts on my web site. Unfortunately, since the judiciary are clearly protecting masons, then the underlying reasons for them doing this must come under scrutiny. I have little option in the circumstances but to publish the facts. Deputy District Judge Baird, district judge Scott-Phillips, district judge P. Cuthbertson, district judge Jones, of the North East Court Circuit have all failed to declare any membership of Freemasonry as I had required of them. Lords Woolf and Bingham also adopted this attitude despite being aware that no judge can rule in his own cause. The Hoffman/Pinochet case backed this up. I wonder what the ruling would have been if Freemasonry had been involved in that case? Lords Justices Auld and Pill refused my application for leave to appeal the perverse judgment of former Recorder John Fryer-Spedding. They too, like the other judges, knew that I had contributed to the Nolan Enquiry into Freemasonry within the Police and Judiciary. They also knew I was an active "anti-mason" so I had a right to ask if they were masons. These two also declined to supply that information so that I might have the opportunity to decide whether the appeal court had been impartial to the proceedings before them. Good Old British Justice? Now I really know what it means.

Dr. Harold Shipman.

The latest official report says that Dr Harold Shipman may have murdered up to three hundred of his patients. Just how many Dr Harold Shipman's might there be out there?  Do any of us really know? My own experience has shown to me that self regulating bodies such as those within the medical profession, police and legal profession inevitably leads to a hotbed of corruption or at the very least self protection. When a doctor can murder so many people without detection there has to be something very seriously wrong with the system. I know that there are many good conscientious doctors who can be trusted. There are others, albeit in the minority, who should not be let loose with a stethoscope and a prescription pad. Given the number of people that they can harm, its time that a more competent authority than the British Medical Council should police the medical profession.

Is Shipman a mason? Many doctors are and that's not good for our health. If you can answer this question and can supply some evidence of it, I should be happy to hear from you.

EDITORIAL 11th October 2000.


Throughout the UK many masons presently serve in the public sector as policemen, judges, magistrates and councillors etc. Masons swear an oath to uphold the Brotherhood of Freemasonry. In my recent conversation with a mason, he agreed that regardless of the wrongs committed by his Masonic brothers, he was duty bound by his Masonic oaths to protect them to the exclusion of any other consideration. The UK justice system is a hotbed of Freemasonry. The judicial oath, "I do swear by Almighty God, that I will well and truly serve our sovereign lady Queen Elizabeth the Second, in the office of judge, and I will do right to all manner of people, after the laws and usages of this realm without fear or favour, affection or ill will." thus binds judges. When confronted with mason litigants, or solicitors, a mason judge is bound by his Masonic oath to protect his Masonic Brothers. A conflict of interests then occurs. The same situation is true of the many employed in key public sector positions. Can a mason Chief Constable, again of which there are many, truly be said to be serving the public when he has sworn an oath to uphold his Masonic Brothers at all costs? The answer can only be NO. The same type of situation is occurring in many similar instances in which mason civil servants are involved. I suggest under the new European Human Rights Law where a person has any valid reason to believe that masons are involved in any litigation, be it as litigants, judges, magistrates, solicitors and police officers, then the person expressing such valid concern now has the right to demand that all concerned in any such litigation declare any such membership of Freemasonry. British courts have always been bound by the rules of impartiality, but the policies of Bingham, Woolf, and Irvine defy this very important fact. They have proved this in my own situation alone. Masons serving in the public sector cannot both serve the public and the Brotherhood of Freemasonry at the same time. Under European Human Rights Law we have additional rights. One such right is most certainly to refuse the judgment, by means of the proper channels, of any court where valid concerns about Freemasonry are raised and are ignored by it. What sets Freemasonry above any other possible conflict of interests? The fact is that masons refer to themselves as the BROTHERHOOD of Freemasonry. A mason judge is duty bound to protect his mason brother regardless of the merits or otherwise of the case before him. I add the additional fact that contrary to general belief,  it is now known that there are many female masons.

Below is a list of Dorset mason magistrates as compiled by some of the victims of injustice in that county. Multiply this sort of number nationwide and the problem immediately becomes very apparent. The list, which is by no means complete, includes only one judge. Of course there are many more mason judges and magistrates in Dorset than are named here. Any who are named on the list below who may wish to claim that they are not masons, should make this known to me. Below are the names of some Dorset mason magistrates along with their lodge numbers in brackets.

GILLETT D J, (137, 9508, 3366)  - WHITE G W (707) - WINARD J (137) -  BARNES G M (170) - RUSSELL F (137) -  BARNES K H (1037, 3366, Hon 8099)  - WAY P J (137 , 3366 & RAM 132) -  BEESON A J (8118 , 6445) -  PERRY J A (137 & 8641)   - MILLER T (6525) - HARDING R E (137 & 3366) -  STICKLAND R D (1266, 8099 & RAM 1095) - WELLMAN J F (137) -  SMITH B P (2559 & [re j] 9508) -  HARVEY P E G (137)  - BRETT J M (1168) -  CROSS K V (137, 622 & 3366) -  FRY A N (7873 & 1037)  -  TUCK M R (417) -  DAY D J (622) -  CLARE J S (417 ,3366 , 9163 & 8726)   - LOWE P S (6582) - ANDERSON R (386) - DOWNTON A (8726 & 417) - PARKER D J (622) - PURCHASE A H L (622) -  KITCHING M (1037) -  SAUNDERS L H (1037 & 3366 &91631367) - HUGHES D J (3366 & 2689) -  MARSH P V (8315 & Hon) - STONE R (3473) - STONE T A (3473) - WALLIS R (3473) - CLARKE J A (137 & 3878) - KENNEDY S R (137 & 3878) - LLOYD D J (2689) - WEBSTER J (2689) - SCOTT D E (1266) - MORGAN F S J (386 & 7986) - TWINN P A S (1146)  - WEBB C R (8641) - JUDGE ASKHAM I (7966)


As of 2nd October 2000 Britain became subject of European Human Rights Law. UK subjects can now address their breaches of human rights to British courts. There is however a major flaw. Many approaches to the European Court of Human Rights have came about because of the many corruptive practices being exercised by the British courts. Many of these same courts will now hear cases of breaches of human rights! Of course if justice is not satisfied by British courts, then the European Court of Human Rights are still empowered to receive complaints. The new situation has been described as a charter for lawyers. It can only become this if a tight reign on lawyers is not exercised. The names of bent and corrupt lawyers, of which there are many, have to be published along with supporting evidence against them. I thank God that the Internet is now allowing the huge number of victims of injustice to publish the facts of what has/is being done to them. This is endangering the corrupt system so I am sure that moves to curb the use of the Internet will ultimately follow.


There have been recent nationwide protests where PM Blair is accused of not listening to the public. Immediately the latest Labour Party conference was over, off he goes again globe trotting in his attempts at establishing himself as a world leader. In his visit to Poland he said, "We want you in the EEC."  Who, I wonder is "we"?  Could it be his Bilderberg Council pals? He said he wanted the European Union to be a "new Europe". He described it not as a superpower but not a superstate. Shadow foreign secretary Francis Maude described Blairs speech to the European political leaders in Warsaw, Poland, as " dangerous and grandiose."

If Blair spent more time in trying to solve our own problems instead of meddling in the affairs of other countries, I for one might have more respect for him. He came to power on a bed of lies and deception. I believe that he will leave it on a bed of truth and reality. He is aware of the many current corruptive practices being exercised by the UK justice system. He has turned a blind eye to it. This makes him, and indeed others close to him, unfit for government.


Its now known that some African Countries are paying only thirteen pence per litre of fuel. Where is our national wealth of North Sea oil and gas going?

EDITORIAL 28 September 2000

Another day another week another year. With each comes more evidence of the forces of evil and corruption now so rife in the United Kingdom. Most are unaware of it until they are touched by it. Much of the organised corruption, more especially within the justice system, has its roots in Freemasonry. The oaths sworn by masons are not compatible with the oaths sworn by many of those holding public office. This fact becomes very apparent when we take a close look at the judicial oath sworn by judges:

"I do swear by Almighty God, that I will well and truly serve our sovereign lady Queen Elizabeth the Second, in the office of judge, and I will do right to all manner of people, after the laws and usages of this realm without fear or favour, affection or ill will."

A brief examination of the pages on this site shows not only what corrupt acts judges get up to, but more important, that they are protected by the corrupt establishment. There must be more public accountability in Britain for the justice and policing systems. Both of these public bodies, and many more are riddled with membership of Freemasonry. For those who may not be aware, masons swear an oath to protect their Brotherhood. How on earth can a judge, being a mason swear the above oath that he or she "will do right to all manner of people" when he or she has sworn another oath to uphold the Brotherhood of Freemasonry? If a litigant goes before a court and his or her opponent is a mason, then if the judge is a mason, as most are, then his Masonic oath binds him to find for his Masonic brother regardless of the merits of the case put forward or defended by the none mason litigant. Either one way or another there are obviously many occasions when this scenario happens. None of us should ever be tried before any court presided over by a mason judge. He or she cannot serve two masters. From my contact with many victims of Britain's corrupt justice system it comes across very clear that the Lord Chancellors Department is heavily involved in the attempted cover up of the many corrupt elements active in our justice system. Those who cover up corruption are and have became part of the corruption itself.

What I have published on this site is not for malicious reasons. It has been done solely because the justice system has shown to me that it is at least as corrupt as some of the people who go before it. The more you defy their corruption, the more corrupt they become. When authorities overstep their power, then the word for that is tyranny. Tyranny now rules in Britain. Included in these tyrannical forces are the police and many other public bodies. Possibly the biggest surprise I have experienced lately is the realization that the Crown Prosecution Service can be well and truly corruptly motivated. A case they are pursuing against me for alleged harassment for one and a half years does not mention in any way that which is published on this site. Now they say there is a possible deal on offer. It is that if I remove certain items (probably around eighty per cent of them) from this website they will consider dropping the case against me. I have never given way to attempted blackmail and I have no intention of starting now when the Crown have found it necessary to use it. There will be no deal. When the courts and police do the duty required of them and act on the evidence I have supplied to back up my allegations against Carr, solicitors, judges, and policemen then this site would not be necessary.  There is in fact no harassment case against me. On 5th September 2000 Judge Taylor said that the prosecution case against me was a waste of public money. His latest statements are published on my "latest news page". The hole these authoritarian criminals thought they were digging for me will not be wasted. It may be rather cramped, but I think it might be possible to stuff the whole lot of them into it, in a manner of speaking.

Make no mistake, I am prepared to die rather than give in to the corrupt system. In 1996 I came close to it when I was unlawfully imprisoned at Durham for alleged contempt of court. The injunction which allowed my imprisonment was unlawful. Details of it are printed on this site. These are the sort of commonplace acts the judiciary stoop to in order to protect themselves. Corrupt Masonic controlled police will always do their part where necessary. This is proved by facts. A few years ago I was stopped from leaving Hetton-le-Hole Town Council Chambers. My way to the door was barred by mason Councillor James Blackburn. He, his mother and father, also councillors set about and assaulted me. I would have suffered very serious injury were it not for the intervention of a councillor named G. Wandless who saw what was about to be done to me. The assault on me was witnessed by at least another sixteen councillors. They all kept quiet about it. They still serve on the Hetton-le-Hole Town Council! Police Superintendent Williams, since retired,  telephoned me to say that as he did not think the other councillors would say what they had seen of the assault on me so he was not taking any action. These are now known to be common Masonic Mafia controlled police tactics. What was the reason for the assault on me? I declared interests on behalf of four family members of the council which include two masons who had failed to declare an interest in land owned by mason councillor James Blackburn which came under the City of Sunderland Draft Unitary Development Plan for proposed housing. Two members of that family spoke in favour of the housing proposals. Sunderland Echo newspaper reporter Bob Horn sat in on the meeting where I stood up and expressed disgust that  none of the four had declared the necessary interest. Nothing whatsoever was published in the newspaper about the incident. The newspaper showed me its true colours when instead of publishing my expose of corruption, it published front page my alleged bankruptcy. Two of its reporters, Paul Taylor and John Cornay had spent two days with me. They viewed the evidence I have of the corruption of which I am subject. Paul had even telephoned me in March of 1999 to say they were due to publish my expose within the next few nights. The story was "spiked" by the deputy editor of the paper. No explanation was offered. The substituted story in May of 1999 was said by some to be a contributory factor in the death of my father which suddenly took place two days after the papers publication of my alleged bankruptcy. I accept that reporters Paul Taylor and John Cornay were not responsible in any way for what had happened.


Britain has the highest divorce rate in western europe. Almost one in every two marriages end in divorce. Past experience and those of others show the probable reason for this. Obtaining a divorce in Britain is almost as easy as buying a lottery ticket. It has in fact been made deliberately very easy. The reason? Divorce proceedings allow the conversion of the couples assets into legal costs. County Court judges, coming from the ranks of  solicitors preside over divorce cases. They know what's required of them. In my case Judge Grills sitting at the Harrogate County Court did not even ask me if I wanted to defend the action. The decrees nisi he granted is invalid by reason that he was in breach of his judicial oath printed above. Breaching that oath amounts to High Treason but some people think this is putting their act in the extreme. Nonetheless, breaching the judicial oath is an act of  High Treason. I have made this known to the court who replied that they had placed my letter to them on file. My wife had also been subject to the horror meted out to me by the corrupt people and bodies named on this site. It is known that Masonic Mafia tactics do involve the destruction of the families of their victims. My wife lied in her decrees nisi application. I have proof of some of those lies and what her real motive for divorce was. God forbid that I ever need to make them public. When I raised the question with the West Rainton Surgery, Co. Durham, as to whether my wife would have been told to inform me that she had started with hormone replacement therapy in late 1997, they failed to give a reply to my question. Instead I was confronted with a false allegation made by a Dr. Wylie of that practice which nearly resulted in my death in March of this year. Not only had my medical records excluded a significant medical problem I did not know I had, but also included on my records was false information. It was not until 1999 that I became aware that hormone replacement therapy does cause psychological changes in those who receive it. I should have been made aware of this fact at the time my wife started with the treatment. I did see a change in her after she started with the treatment. Whether what she eventually did to me can be wholly responsible for the hormone replacement therapy I do not know. Almighty God will know the answer to this one. The turn she took was a very wrong one and I do feel sorrow for her. When she did not want me to ask for the hospital chaplain to say some prayers for her dying father in November of 1997 because she said it would upset her, that came with it my realisation that she did not have any christian beliefs. Her subsequent actions proved this beyond all possible doubt. God alone will be her judge. The devils advocates who helped her will also be subject to Gods judgement. She will know who I mean. Parasite solicitor Mellors is not the least of them.

My own Christian beliefs came about after some very unusual occurrences following files I had sent to the London Court of Appeal having gone missing. The story will take too long to publish here, but the person I eventually met at the London Court of Appeal who said that our meeting was not by chance has shown this to be fact. That person, who I will not name here, is my most trusted friend and one whom I had the privilege of hosting at my home in March of this year. This same person was the one who took me to a Christian meeting at the London Arena in October of last year. I was one of less than a dozen white people in a sea of thousands of black people. Something that took place there relative to my daughter Dawn defied a logical explanation. I accept now that attached to that incident was the answer to a question that had troubled me.


The New World Order has commenced and the mark of the beast 666 is beginning to show. The United Nations is the new world power. American troops occupy nearly one hundred countries. PM Tony Blair is said to be a member of the world  elite secret society  the Bilderbergs by those who are investigating  it. What is more, leader of the opposition party William Haig too is said to be a member of it. Some other very prominent members of it are also included in pages on this site. What became of Blairs fairer Britain?  The situation was bad before Blair came to power but Britain is more unfair now than ever in our more recent history. It is common practice now for successive governments to use lies and deception against our people both before and after election. What became of the higher standard of living we were promised when gas and oil were discovered in the North Sea? The recent petrol crisis has raised some very serious questions. Italy, Germany, France, and others don't have North Sea oil or gas but its generally accepted that they have a higher standard of living that we in Britain. We are paying a lot more for our fuel than those in these countries. Its also accepted generally that their hospitals and schools too are of a standard higher or at least as high as ours. Where has the wealth from the North Sea oil and gas reserves gone and is going? Once these resources are exhausted what becomes of Britain?  Under Blairs fairer Britain, we now have more fat cats than ever. A rich man only becomes rich if he makes his fellow man poorer. British Telecom who now make huge profits was given away to the private sector along with other national assets. It may well have been intended that British Telecom was deliberately intended to start making losses before it was privatised ? Just think if its present profits were part of our economy, what a lot better off we all might be. But that would never do would it?


Britains justice system is shown to be out of control. This is what happens when justice is placed beyond public accountability. To undermine justice is to undermine democracy. The same situation is true of our police. Remember the Stephen Lawrence affair? Jack Straw and Tony Blair who are aware of what is taking place sit idly by. Have they masters too? Who is their God? Is it wealth or simply a desire for power? The party system as used here is not a democratic system. It cannot be when policies are almost dictated by its leader. Only when people are elected for their own personal views will democracy become a  reality. Only with the mixing of the ingredients of a few hundred independently thinking  minds working together for a common cause will the nation benefit.

From the Holy Bible, Luke C11.v23-24.

He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. The unclean spirit when he is gone out of man, passeth through waterless places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will turn back unto my house from whence I came.

Published by Maurice Kellett.

I have seen Gods work. In him I now trust. I have also seen lucifers work.  I despise it for what it is.   

Return to front page