Sent via fax dated 17 April 1999.
TO: Mr Brian Wake, Secretary of the North Yorkshire and Durham Law Society.
Dear Mr Wake,
Up until this present time I have not received a reply to my letter to you of 30 March 1999 which is copied below. I would appreciate your early response to the points I raise in it as a matter of great urgency.
Mr M. Kellett.
Via Fax dated 30 March 1999
Mr Brian Wake, 16A The Lyons,
President of the Durham & Hetton-le-Hole,
North Yorkshire Law Society, Tyne-Wear DH5 OHT
10 Dunottar Ave.,
March 30 1999 My reference LIP/MK/011
Dear Mr Wake
I am in receipt of your letter of 29th March 1999.
From what you write it would seem that The Law Society cannot take action when a member of the legal profession, namely Solicitor Alison Stott, is shown to have been party to fraud and deception which has caused very serious harm to a third party.
From my understanding it is the duty of all solicitors to report any misconduct that they come across in relation to acts of other solicitors. Perhaps you can confirm my understanding of this? Whilst having this understanding, I have also further understood that such "reporting of misconduct" would normally be made to The Law Society. Is this not also true? What is the relationship between The Law Society and the general public?
I am ware that unless a complaint to The Office for The Supervision for Solicitors relates to a solicitor who has acted for the complainant then they will not act in the matter. Indeed after four and a half years of pursuing my complaint against the former solicitor Nancy Bone I have some grave doubts as to whom that organisation is really trying to assist? It has been alleged that documentation and files supplied to them in my various complaints can no longer be found.
It would seem from your correspondence to me that there is no action that can be taken against a corrupt solicitor unless such corruption is exposed by a client of that solicitor? Surely Mr. Wake this must of necessity raise very serious questions as to the protection of the public by solicitors who exercise corrupt practices, be it against either their own client, or someone they are dealing with in regard to their client? Fraud and deception are just as likely to be used against someone else as much as against their own client?
With regard to your mention that if I feel a crime might have been committed I should make a formal complaint to the police so that they can carry out an investigation. I have made an approach to police on the matter of former Recorder John H. Fryer-Spedding with regard to the use of his lies, concoctions of false stories, judgement made by use of statements he made that are shown to be contrary to know law, and the allowance of liberal amounts of perjury by my civil opponent Miss Shirley Carr.
Before last Christmas I went to a pre-arranged interview with Inspector Atkinson at Washington Area Command Police Headquarters. When I arrived there, the Inspector told me that he had just been in telephone contact with the Home Office and said that they had advised him not to act on the allegations that I was making as it concerned the civil courts. I think this aptly demonstrates the logic that I am up against in trying to obtain justice. By any mans reasoning, fraud whether it be used in civil proceedings or criminal proceedings still remains fraud and it is a criminal offence where police must act upon it once they are made aware of its use. Certainly Mr Wake, as you may recall from an earlier conversation that I had with you, that the infestation of Freemasonry within the Judiciary, legal profession, and police, are involved in the business of trying to pervert the course of justice here. The situation which they invite by doing so is a very dangerous one for those responsible to follow. Those who act outside of law invite similar treatment as they themselves use.
To finalise, are you really saying that there is no action whatsoever that The Law Society can take against the use of fraud and deception by a solicitor unless the complainant has been a client of such solicitor?
I would also advise you that current ongoing matters concerning the fraud and deception that has been used against me by Alison Stott, of which I have detailed to you, does involve a matter of a possible life or death situation.
I also have to advise you that all correspondence relating to the subject of my attempts to obtain justice either have been published or will be published in the Public Interest.
I would be grateful if you could make a very early reply to the further questions that I raise herein.
Mr. M. Kellett
Contents of reply received from Brian Wake dated 19 April 1999.
Dear Mr Kellett,
I have your fax of yesterday.
I did not feel a reply to your fax of 30th March was necessary for three reasons:
1. It seemed to me that the questions you were asking were essentially rhetorical in nature.
2. The letter was in essence seeking to initiate a discussion or argument which I felt would serve no useful purpose.
3. I have said all I could usefully say in my letter of 29th March.
I have nothing further to add either generally or specifically.
Return to opening page
Return to page index
Any E-mail please to: Justice@jiwalu.demon.co.uk