Groovy Gang and Supreme Court.

Very disappointed to hear that Kaim Todner have been stymied from obtaining justice in appealing the case of R v Kingston, Reynolds and O’Connell. Last August Rafferty LJ ignored damaging evidence of abuse of process and paid perjury by ex D.C Derek G Haslam now living in Norfolk and desperate to leave the UK (why is that?)

Strong rumour are emerging that a major newspaper will shortly present significant new facts of Haslam’s numerous illegal activities which will force “The Met” to end their inaction concerning a notoriously corrupt ex cop – quite an achievement when dealing with the British police.


About Ciaran Goggins

Defeated UK at ECHR over innocent folks DNA sample retention, spokesman in Justice for Ched Evans campaign, now researching largest case of police perjury in UK legal history.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Groovy Gang and Supreme Court.

  1. thorella says:

    Sadly when the UK Establishment want to hide their involvement in organised crime one of their strategies in court is the judge omitting key grounds or evidence.

  2. thorella says:

    ‘The legal mechanism and Judges and the court system need to be beyond reproach. Sadly they are not and the chronicle of abuse and manipulation of cases is appalling. Judges are not independent in most government related cases and are no different to salaried and pensioned civil servants. The independence of the Judiciary is an allusion fostered by the Judiciary. Too often a Judicial Inquiry is a system for cover up and concealment. Too often the courts are influenced by political considerations as in the Scott Inquiry and the recent Lloyds of London case.’.My experiences, the Scott Inquiry, the British Legal System By Gerald Reaveley James

  3. thorella says:

    Read this article by Martin Bentham of the Evening Standard in which he describes how one of the leading judges, Mr Justice Calvert Smith, ruled that a hearing in the Adminstrative Court would be held in secret because of the claimant objecting to the media’s presence.

    ‘This was not a matter of national security, nor one requiring the disclosure of some sensitive intelligence-gathering methods. Yet even before it began, the way the case was listed on court documents — which described the hearing as involving “S”, rather than giving Stapleton’s name — seemed designed to shelter him from public scrutiny.

    There’s more to it.

  4. thorella says:

    Collusion between judge and HMCE to hide certain matters (not directly related to Stapleton)??? This VAT fraud and all that flowed from it was highly, highly sensitive to the Establishment. I’ll come back.

Comments are closed.