|
|
From my letter below to Mr Woolf ( some solicitors say Woolf by name but wolf by nature) and his failure to respond to the evidence of my allegations I sent to him, I have had little left open to me but to accept that this man has nothing whatsoever to do with justice. He has now agreed that all litigants in person (without legal representation) who make any applications to the London High Court, are subject of his "Secret Briefings.". His acts amount to a gross violation of Article 6.1 of the European Court of Human Rights ruling. He says his secret briefings are meant to save money. At the same time he fails to admit that ninety six per cent of all litigants in person are probably losing huge amounts of money by reason of his own breach of International law. The wheel always turns full circle, Woolf should realise this fact.
Rt. Hon. Lord Woolf, 16A The Lyons,
Royal Courts of Justice, Hetton-le-Hole,
Strand, Tyne-Wear,
London, DH5 OHT.
WC2A 2LL
10 October 1997
Dear Sir,
I am in receipt of your letter of 9 October 1997.
I understand from you that you have examined the papers in the matter that includes a transcript of the Lord Justice Pill.
I need to ascertain that you have examined all of the evidence which I have sent for your examination which shows cleary that the former Recorder Mr. Fryer Spedding did not tell the truth when he gave judgement. It is also shown in the evidence that I have supplied for your use that the former Recorder also concocted stories when he delivered judgement. The documentation relatated to items 1 to 56 and those items of evidence relative to these numbers were included. The video film evidence, also included within it an audio recording of a recent conversation between Shirley Carr and I
I enclose copies of the two letters that I have received from Mr M.J.Hill. dated 1 August and 15 September 1997.
In the latter bundle of documents, of which I retain a list, there was also included a video tape recording. Included on that video tape is the video evidence that not only went before the former Recorder, but was supplied for the use of Lord Justice Pill and Auld in respect of my application for leave to appeal the judgement of the former Recorder. Also included on that video tape recording was part of an audio taped conversation between Shirley Carr and I where she has agreed that when she prepared the judge's bundle, she had left out documentation from it. Shirley Carr had no authorisation to prepare that bundle. She also agrees that "they" have proved that there was indeed no consolidation of the cases. A ninety six page affidavit dated 23 September 1996 was also included in the documentation which I supplied for your use. Should there be any doubts, I retain a list of, and copies of all of the evidence which I have supplied for your use.
I do need to be sure that you have examined all of the evidence of which I have supplied for your attention. I also understand by Mr. Hill's letter of of 1 August that the evidence was also to have been examined by The Lord Chief Justice. Has the Lord Chief Justice also examined the evidence?
The evidence to show that the former Recorder had indeed lied is substantial. I have little doubt that my active opposition to Freemasonry could have been the reason for it given the fact that the judicial system has such substantial membership of Freemasonry within it. Certainly there are questions arising now as to how many Freemasons have been active in the decision making processes in this three and a half year litigation. It is my God given right in any event to ignore any decisions made by parties who are members of the Worlds largest Secret Society. We have heard how Thomas Hamilton who murdered the children at Dunblane was a member of the Freemasons. According to Press reports files on Police computers relating to him had been erased. We have seen men imprisoned for years by evidence planted by corrupt policemen yet no action has been taken against them. There is little doubt now that massive numbers of policemen are also Freemasons.
At my appearance before Lord Justice Pill and Auld on 6 June they ruled that the former Recorder had the right to warn me that I would not gain by highlighting that while I was cross examining Shirley Carr, she had commenced to swear contrary statements. I will never under any circumstances agree with that ruling. That too is my right. The purpose of cross examination is to get to the truth. The former Recorders warning that I would not gain by highlighting the fact that Shirley Carr had commenced to swear contrary statements while I cross examined her was nothing short of a gross breach of my rights. He also effectively prevented me from carrying out full and proper cross examination of Shirley Carr and the surveyor employed by her. Of course you will be aware that proceedings were recorded and it should be easy for you to verify this as fact.
To add to the above the former Recorders statements which were again grossly contrary to the evidence shown to him, and that included the video evidence, I have substantial reasons for making these statements.
To add again the lies that were stated by the former Recorder, some of which have been clearly shown in the evidence which I have supplied to you, and the concoction he made alleging that the pre contract enquiries for the property number 16 The Lyons had gone missing and could not be found and he thought they had been destroyed by termites only was a further lie. This clearly shows the extent to which the former Recorder was prepared to go so as to have grounds to rule against me. He did the decent thing by going into what most certainly was sudden retirement. That retirement came around the time that I had reported some of my concerns about those proceedings to the former Lord Chancellor, Lord Mackay.
It is clear in the evidence that I have supplied for your use and it is also clear that the former Recorder allowed that. I believe that the evidence which I have supplied for your use shows this very clearly indeed. It is for this reason and others that I do need to be sure that you have looked at all of the evidence that I sent to Mr. M.J.Hill for your use.
If you have examined the evidence which I have supplied for your use via Mr. M.J. Hill it should also have been clear to you that the statements which I make here are backed up by the very substantial evidence.
I have had eleven years of problems with Freemason's where I can also show other major injustices suffered by me because of them. That included illegal proceedings in Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court. It followed my assault and then having been struck by a vehicle driven at me. That matter was most certainly covered up by the Lord Chancellors Department. It was heard before only one magistrate who was not a Stipendairy Magistrate. The social acquaintance of the man who had carried out that assault upon me remained on the bench that day and later alleged he had stood down. The other magistrate was a frequenter to our local Masonic Hall and the man who assaulted me supplied it with fruit and vegetables for use in its functions. He walked free from the court. That was my reason for commencing to investigate the extent of Freemasonry within my own immediate area.
Medical opinion is that some of my current health problems may have been triggered by that mans assault upon me.
My former MP Roland Boyes warned me around that time, "If you have tangled with Freemasons you have bitten off more than you can chew.". He said that at that time enough questions were already being asked in the House of Commons on that subject and said he would not raise any other qestions about it.
Lord Justice Pill and Auld were of the opinion that for their judgement it was matterless whether I was the Plaintiff or Defendant in the actions.I found myself being referred to as the Defendant in all actions though I was the Plaintiff in two out of the three actions. I do not agree with that decision either. The case for defence and prosecution are entirely different and I presume no other than their Lords Justices are well aware of this.
I was imprisoned last year as a result of further injustice. The injunction that allowed that was improperly granted after proceedings had adjourned and my wife and I had left the court. My appeal against it went before the same judge as had granted that injunction. After I was imprisoned at Durham, in protest at that injustice I refused food, drink, and very essential medication. I then had a stroke and found myself chained to a bed at Dryburn Hospital. That injunction was granted by a District Judge Cuthbertson. His actions this year alone do need some serious examination. That injunction prevented me from taking further evidence for use in those trials. That must have been very apparent to the judge. It is the duty of man to fight against injustice no matter from whence it comes. I will die on those principles. Shirley Carr had sworn that I had received treatment at a Mental Hospital.That was another of her many lies. District Judge Cuthbertson said that I should wait before commencing action on that until these proceedings had been dealt with. He did not of course inform me that there is a three year limitation period in which to commence such proceedings. I have medical evidence to support the fact that I have never been a patient at any mental hospital.
In her attempts to keep me imprisoned, Shirley Carr had her solicitor send a fax message to the Court of appeal saying that I was not of previous good character and had been bound over. That was again another lie by a woman who had based her defence and prosecution upon a bed of clear lies. I have bno criminal record whatsoever as the certificate I have obtained from the Police verifies, I have never been bound over at any time, and those who are acquainted with me consider me to be of very good character. I have not needed to call upon perjury as a means of defence and prosecution.
As a further example of the actions of which I am subject I enclose a letter that i wrote to the DSS with whom Shirley Carr is employed. I made two telephone calls to her employer about these matters. Last week I was arrested on the new laws on harrassment.
I am a Councillor and have been subject of Shirley Carr's actions of complaint to others who include the Environmental Department of Sunderland Civic Centre, and to the Leader of the Sunderland Civic Centre. I am told that as it is in the public interest she is allowed to do that. Shirley Carr is a Civil Servant, paid by the public yet I have been arrested because I have reported to her employer facts that I can back up with evidence. These facts include DSS files being off loaded into her home. The DSS say that as she is sworn to The Official Secrets Act she was allowed to do that. Her resident boyfriend is not so sworn. Though Shirley Carr has alleged that she is a full time employee of the DSS, she has over the years since she has been our neighbour, been spending huge amounts of time at home and on her small holding which she sited next to our property without the benefit of Planning Approval. A few weeks ago when my wife and I were shopping at a local store, Shirley Carr and her boyfriend arrived at the store.That was on a Wednesday afternoon and it was reasonable to presume that as she has alleged in proceedings that she is a full time employee of the DSS, she should therefore have been at her employment at that time.
I reported that to her employer. I have been arrested on an allegation of harassment for doing this. She is a servant of the public and it would seem now that the police have acted upon this under the new harassment law. It is indeed in the public interest that persons who have reasonable belief that a civil servant might be in breach of their employment to report that concern to the employer. If the new Act prevents this, then this has to be made known to the public.
I reported my arrest to a local newspaper, The Evening Chronicle. I had supplied one of their reporters, a Mr. Martin Anderson, with copies of considerable documentation which had included some of the evidence that is available to show that the former Recorder had not told the truth when he gave his judgement in the actions between Shirley Carr and I. Despite having the facts included in that documentation, the story that the newspaper had published was well detached from the truth. Mr.Anderson later told me this his editor had also made an agreement with the DSS Press Officer not to publish Shirley Carr's name. It may well have been considered that the DSS was of more use to the newspaper than I.
The Chief Executive of the City of Sunderland Council has now agreed to have a further enquiry into matters concerning the small holding. It had been alleged by the City's Environmental Department Enforcement Officer that there had been buildings on the site of that smallholding before 1987. I have resided here for fifty years and that was untrue.My wife and I have sworn affidavits to that effect . We have supplied them to the authority. According to an officer of the Environmental Department they have based that assumption only from the information which Shirley Carr supplied to them at that time. Ordnance Survey maps have also confirmed that there were no buildings on the site of that smallholding before 1987. Deception has again been at work in this matter. Of course I was responsible for highlighting to former MP Roland Boyes the substantial membership of Freemasonry within staff of Sunderland Civic Centre around ten or eleven years ago. He did not act on the matter and gave me the warning that I have quoted herein.
It seemed pointless compalining to him when in a nine month period some four years ago we had six cars crash into the frontage of our property in a nine month period. A policeman and the local authority said we had no special problem. It was later alleged by a policeman, Sergeant Yates that the speed equipment they placed near our home had blown up. An Inspector, who I believe is not a Freemason confirmed that equipment had not blown up.
When Mr.C.Mullin MP learned of the substantial membership of Freemasonry with the Sunderland Authority staff it was published on the front page as headlines in a local newspaper. I had no hand in the findings of Mr.Mullin.
These along with many more facts that I briefly detail here have now become a way of life for my wife and I.
Yours sincerely
Mr. M. Kellett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any E-mail please to: Justice@jiwalu.demon.co.uk