Stott agreed to criminal former recorder John Fryer-Spedding in January of 1996 that she had not up until that time been acting for Carr. She had attended the Durham County Court with Carr for nearly one and a half years before that time. She had accepted work from the court which she then secretly passed on for carr to carry out. Part of that work had included the preparation of the judge's budle for use in the trials. Carr then excluded documents from it. Part of that documentation had included her application and subsequent refusal by the Durham County Court to allow consolidation of the three actions. Carr and Stodd had thus confirmed their part in fraud, and conspiracy to defraud. They are being protected by Northumbria Police, and our Masonic Mafia controlled Courts.
Alison Stott, 16A The Lyons,
Aykley Vale Chambers, Hetton-le-Hole,
Durham Road, Tyne-Wear,
Aykley Heads, DH5 OHT.
Your Ref: AMS/JF/C123.21
Our Ref: MK/AS/15
June 11 1997.
Dear Ms. Stott,
My application for leave to appeal against the order made by Mr Fryer-Spedding on October 24th 1996 has been refused. I have informed Lord Woolf MR, and the Lord Chief Justice that I will shortly forward them documentation to support my allegation that significant parts of Mr Fryer-Spedding's judgement contained things which were not fact, and were shown not to be fact during those proceedings. Certainly there is no doubt whatsoever that Mr Fryer-Spedding would seem to have ignored those things which I submitted before him in evidence. I will not go into those facts as I am very sure that Miss Carr, and indeed Mr Merritt will be aware of the facts of which I reference. In these circumstances I invite your client the opportunity to comment whether she is aware of any mistakes or errors contained in Mr Fryer-Speddings judgement. I have no intention whatsoever in conceding the cases when judgement would seem to have considered only those things which were of help to Miss Carr.
Lord Woolf MR and The Lord Chief Justice were of the opinion that it should be left to Mr Fryer-Spedding whether or not he declare any possible membership of Freemasonry. I supplied them with my own reasons why I believe that the former Recorder, Mr Fryer-Spedding should have declared any membership of such Secret Society. They declined to reply to what I submitted to them. I have already supplied Lord Mackay with documentary evidence to support my allegation of possible conspiracy against since the outset of the litigation. His office advised I place the evidence before the Parliamentary Commissioner, who has agreed to receive it.
I would advise you that although the four cases at Newcastle were tried as consolidated, as you are aware there was no consolidation order allowing it.
The time that I was allowed to present my appeal before their Lords Justices, was that which is allowed for only one case, so obviously that too is questionable and I have made Lord Woolf MR and the Lord Chief Justice aware of this. Failing due consideration being attached to what I have reported to their Lords, I have stated in my letter to them, that I am to pursue the matter before The House of Lords. I therefore advise you, that failing due consideration to what I have written to Lord Woolf MR, and The Lord Chief Justice, I will now be placing the matters before The House of Lords.
Mr. M. Kellett
In reply to several letters that I addressed to Lord Chief Justice Bingham and Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf I received a reply that I could petition the House of Lords on the matter of former Recorder John Fryer-Speddings vile corrupt acts. I was told by a senior member of staff at the London Court of Appeal to write to Lord Justice Auld to inform him of my wish to lodge the petition before the House of Lords. The reply that I received from Lord Justice Auld refused me leave to lodge the petition. I understand that he may be a member of the Freemasons from Masonic lists held by a man in southern England. If this is true then again the matter of declaration of interests of members of the judiciary has been ingnored. In these circumstances, should LJ. Auld be a mason then his ruling refusing me leave to appeal is null and void.
The cases were tried as a consolidated action. My opponent S. Carr had withheld the fact that on June 1st 1994 her application to the Durham County Court for consolidation of the cases was refdused by District Judge Scott-Phillips. He ordered that the cases could not be tried as a consolidated action. That order still stood at the time of the trial before the corrupt John Fryer-Spedding.
Solicitor Alison Stott wrongly led the court to believe she was acting as Carr's advocate. She was then delegated the work of preparing the judge's bundles of documents ready for trial. Without authority, knowledge, or consent of the court or myself she then passed on that work for Carr to carry out. Carr then left out substantial documention from the bundles which included the order refusing consolidation of the cases. She has agreed that she deliberately did that in a tape recorded discussion that I had with her in July of 1997. That tape recording was sent to Lord Chancellor Irvine who it would seem also wishes to ignore its contents. Stott carried out other improper acts which I shall include in future issues of information. In January of 1996 she agreed to the Court that up until that time she had not been acting for Carr but had only been assisting her as she seemed to have a good grasp of the situation.
Return to opening page.
Return to page index listing.
Any E-mail please to: Justice@jiwalu.demon.co.uk