philip jones 01454614420 at philip.jones88@btinternet.com

1. IN DOCUMENT BELOW IN MY WEBSITE WE HAVE HAD A REPLY FROM NEW PCC SHELFORD CONFIRMING POLICE STANCE. I WILL NOT BE MAKING ANY REFERAL TO THE IOPC
   

2. I
   

Can i refer him to IOPC statute,,,,

Most complaints about the police are dealt with by the relevant police force. Each force has a separate department that oversees complaints. These are called ‘professional standards departments’ (PSDs).

By law, forces must refer certain matters to us. These include:

• 
  certain complaints made to their force – such as those that include an allegation of serious corruption or serious assault
  

indications that police officers or staff have committed misconduct – for example, any suggestion that a criminal offence have been commited UNQUOTE,,,,,where this corrupt PCC has as statute,,,, suggestions [numerous] of corruption and criminal offences have taken place. You want Shelford to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process so be it, have instucted lawyers to resolve with you,,,,via statute you must refer. We know from third party evidence that computer records removed, from ref 8 enclosed scan 35from police records what was taken,,,,,computer parts and software,,,,where call from police did you know your toolbox gone, will never see again as your computer parts and software,,,,stealing my property is this not as statute,,,,,a criminal offence ect ect ect

Lets put on record as you frustrate and corrupt the judicial process,,,[your not corrupt sue me for libel from my website ] as you state complain to PSD but they are utterlycorrupt,,,,can i refer nothing to do with me a third party article on the internet,given to me by a barrister.

from COPWATCH

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……

Consider scan 10475 10494 letter from corrupt Angus Krouwel......[not corrupt told corrupt in my website,long time ago,,why not sue for libel told again today in my website] ,,,police stated you have no evidence malfeasance in public office the civil courts ignoring applications and correspondence for many years,,,,,they have letter from the court ,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,,they have letter from a lawyer ,,,,,our application also ignored,,,,they have numerous documents date/stamped by the court ignored. Not withstanding this ask police 11 questions, 22.7.2017,,,eg have you talked to person at court who admits offence in letter, have you talked to lawyer,,,,ect,,,saying 22.7.2017 with no reply would do appeal anyway on the 28.7.2017,,,, WHERE THIS CORRUPT AND BENT KROUWEL SENDS LETTER 24.7.2017 SAYING REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL AS THIS CORRUPT PERSON ADMITS IN HIS LETTER.READ HIS LETTER

Instructions to lawyers over several aspects, one is ensure as statute you refer to IOPC ,if you confirm to lawyers you refuse to do this, i can inform IOPC as statute you refuse to refer to them. You have email address trying to make easy for lawyer,,lrowley@allenhoole.co.uk ,,,,and to save your time, could you please inform her you refuse to refer to IOPC which will stop her raising issue with you.

1. LETS TRY TO MAKE THINGS EASY FOR YOU ENOUGH PUBLIC MONEY HAS BEEN WASTED OVER THIS PIG CIRCUS. LET ME PRODUCE DOCUMENT WHICH YOU CAN USE VIA REFERENCE WHEN TALKING TO POLICE ,,,AND I CAN USE IN APPLICATION TO IOPC‘LET ME COPY PCC AND PSD INTO TODAYS EMAIL WHERE ASK PCC TO FORWARD TO CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH. THIS IS HISTORIC PATHWAY eg MURDER THREATS IN 2020 ,,,WHERE PSD AWARE.. CAN REFER TO JUDGES JUDGEMENT THAT CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH TOO HIGH UP, SHOULD HAVE CONVEYED CONCERNS OVER MURDER THREATS TO PSD AND LOCAL POLICE STATION WHICH I DID ,,,,,ISSUE FOR IOPC. . FROM MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE CASE LAW,,,,,,
   

2. Did the defendant [Marsh/Price/PSD] have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission? [aware i was in protest going to offend over murder threats, eg could have been arrested over threats]
   

3. Did the officer [Marsh/PSD .Price ,,,as judge said local police station ] realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur? [Price aware before oil in HER police station doorway, surely must be aware a possibility of oil in MP doorway ,in email told PCC also not to call my bluff],,,,,,as i said PSD also aware email Jan 2021 and 11.2.2021 they were PRIMARY people in email, cc then to PCC and MP my final begging email for help over murder threats. So MP aware oil in his doorway if he did nothing over murder threats, issue never presented by lawyers to the court .SEEK YOUR REPLY GROUNDS FOR APPEAL ?????IF NOT WHY NOT ,,,,HAVE POLICE COMMITED AN OFFENCE,,,,ASK LAWYERS FURTHER TO CONSIDER HAVE POLICE COMMITED AN OFFENCE,,,ISSUE ASKED AGAIN LATER TO IOPC,,,,
   

Were those consequences ‘likely’ as viewed subjectively by the defendant?

Did the officer realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk?

Suggest was likely was aware protest over non action in murder threats, oil in police doorway, why would they not expect oil in MP doorway.

Recklessness: Price/Marsh/PSD foresees that particular consequences may occur and proceeds with the given conduct, not caring whether those consequences actually occur or not.

• 
  Criminal negligence: Marsh.Price/PSD did not actually foresee that the particular consequences would flow from actions, but a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen those consequences.
  

• From inchoate case law
  

Mens Rea is the mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime; or knowledge that one's action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committe[MARSH PRICE PSD AWARE CRIME WOULD BE COMMITED BUT DID NOTHING]

4. 
   

5. THIS IS JUST SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS EMAIL NOW IN TABULATED FORM SERVED ON ALL PARTIES WITH NOW ADDED COMMENT AS REQUIRED EVIDENCE REQUIRED FOR IOPC ,,,,DOES RELATE TO TODAYS CASE ALL QUESTIONS. TRYING TO HELP AND SAVE YOUR TIME ,,,WOULD IT HELP IN YOUR LETTER ENCLOSING MY DOCUMENT TODAY. REFERENCES RELATE TO LETTER TO PROBATION ALL PARTIES ARE AWARE OF.CAN I DEFINE FRONT DESK STAFF JONES [TJ] HAD PROBLEMS WITH HER YEARS AGO RECORDED ON VOICECAM ALTHOUGH BEING DEALT WITH BY ANOTHER MEMBER OF STAFF GETS INVOLVED. FROM RECORDING NOT AT PATCHWAY STATION BUT ON WAY HOME CAN HEAR TRAFFIC ON THE A38 AS PLAYING BACK HER RECORDING I SAY ON TAPE SHE NEEDS A DOGCOLLAR eg A BITCH. FROM HER OWN OMISSION DOES AGAIN 11.2.2021 AND AGAIN WHAT IS WRONG WITH HER DID AGAIN 19.2.2021.BEING DEALT WITH BY A THIRD PARTY. THEN STATES DID NOT KNOW WHAT HE WAS SAYING,,,,A LADY 60 PLUS,,,AS A MEDIC NEVER EXAMINED HER WE MAY ASK HOWEVER ,,,,,,SENILE DEMENTIA,,,,,STATES DID NOT INFORM ME WHY WANTED TO ARRESTED YES YOU WERE ,,,TOLD ME NOT ON SYSTEM GO AWAY WAIT FOR REPLY FROM SGT PRICE OVER MURDER THREATS WHERE WITHIN THE HOUR AS TOLD BY TJ NOT REPORTED TAUNTED MP AS NOT REPORTED CONFIRMED BY HER AND ALSO COPIED POLICE INTO EMAIL,,,,,SENILE DEMENTIA ??????SHE STATES DID NOT KNOW WHAT HE WAS SAYING,,,,CAN SEE WHY POLICE DROP CASE OVER THREATS TO CAUSE ARSON. WE HAVE BARRISTER WHO DEALT WITH CASE AND WILL CITE BARRISTER AM A BARRISTER WHO SAW MY WEBSITE.
   

QUESTION 1 FOR LAWYERS Can i please have name of barrister and her chambers and person of your firm that came to trial 11.6.2021 required in document to IOPC history,further can i please have name of judge.

QUESTION 2 FOR LAWYERS..As your instructions installed to view arrest, informs me installed correctly appears to back up however police stance non disclosure of documents as it now gives error code 4,,,,,this document not avaliable to this email address,,,NON DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS Can you resolve please and obtain bodycam of arrest, and bodycam seizure of property ,,,and CCTV of alleged offence, as my instructions in April 2021,,,and email 21.6.2021.Can i please quote your reply today ,,,

The information which you require BWV and CCTV should all be on the egress link provided.

The information was released to ourselves which is why the document maybe blocked to be downloaded to another email. I believe that you will need to register in order to see this.

Trying to make it easier for you could you ask police to release to my email address, in disclosure of documents issue for IOPC will complain as my request ignored before. I have registered informs me installed correctly however informs me blocked by police to this email address. .Trying to do as one off ,stopping coming back to you, can you check on arrest you have recording ,,,,when police first stepped onto my property, not inside house and we have audio. For example can i refer to next question police must report to IOPC corruption and criminal behaviour and assault Retired police officer one example has reason to believe criminal damage to front door, caused by police baton, . This delay asked months ago to ALL parties causing great problems for example for years shopping for reductions at Asda, womans husband retired where she moved to Torquay. Have large number of her property given to me which she did not want to take to Torquay, where i can not move as need for reference for seizure that police did .Need to sale, for example in previous sales was able to purchase new tv

QUESTION 3 FOR LAWYERS. Can you ask please that police refer to IOPC, and confirmation from police sent to IOPC.Via statute police must refer to IOPC if allegations of corruption and criminal behaviour, and assault. PSD state ,,,,do not understand issue,,,,if still stance can you ask them to contact me. Barrister AM defined as intellectual insolence saying do not understand,,threatened,,,,do again if still we do not understand will bin, future documents we will bin,,,,WHERE ARE WE I SAY TO MEDIA/IOPC CHINA RUSSIA,,,,,we have call did you know your toolbox gone, will never see again and we have binned computer parts and your software ,,,please see ref 8 ,,,,they steal my property then say we do not understand ect ...ect

QUESTION 4 TO LAWYERS Can you please ask if Sgt Price at work between 11.2.2021 and 18.2.2021,if not when was first day at work, reference judges judgement threats of murder should have been reported to local station, not to Marsh as too high up, and people dealing with complaints, PSD which i did, ALL emails copied to them

QUESTION 5 FOR LAWYERS Can you ask police to confirm there stance in 2017 there was no correspondence from me to Sgt Price, if now change story so can we have it, can i refer to receipt ref 5 number 259327 scan 26 also another number 260861 can they confirm these are forgies as police alledge before, further to confirm why i went to Sgt Price day 1. [can i refer to todays bundle believe ref exhib 7908 as police pervert course of justice, have miscarriage of justice where officer said 20.2.2021,,,,,you know police will never answer question,,,i will just put document in file]

QUESTION 6 TO LAWYERS Can you please ask for return of software and computer parts., please see ref 8 scan 035,,,from correspondence above asked before,,,, Police from call you will never see again, as toolbox we took. Further for return of new bottle of chainsaw oil ect. Further can i refer to person representing the Crown, at court...can you please let me know name and position. Can i refer to hearing 11.6.2021 where he cites police report on seizure,,,,are you aware of report, and could you please obtain for me a copy, all new evidence to me. Is this police tactics in complaints 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 say to third party mentally ill, as theme from start in court he tried to raise in todays proceedings.,mentally ill. This mentally ill theme for IOPC as excuse not to answer above complaints ,note now over a year, where police believe if we ignore complaints i will go away.

QUESTION 7 TO LAWYERS Could you please ask for reply to complaints made 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 over murder threats. Police sent letters over murder threats…..told in future we will just bin.

QUESTION 8 TO LAWYERS. Could you please inform police these murder threats still going on, need to put on record for IOPC.,lawyer /police informed,,,,identical to Ebrahimi case.Can you discuss with police best if Patchway police station not involved, anyway from Met police force who have been excellent that this station not involved, however there is correspodence wiith Bridewell Bristol,,,,,,however NOTHING over murder threats.????????????????????

QUESTION 9 TO LAWYERS. Could you confirm threats to cause arson dropped by police from file. Do not say you were charged only on damage,,,,,, Could you write to police to confirm as arrested,,,,,poured oil through front door letterbox [PS Parhbga ] that this did not take place, no oil through letterbox. Can you write to police to confirm as their allegations, ref 1 today was not sent to Marsh on the 19.2.2021 but was sent in 2019. Can we obtain receipt for clean up please, to correlate with oil through letterbox.

QUESTION 10 FOR LAWYERS. We have another issue over cost payment. For about 15 years go to Asda for reductions. In Dec 2020 therefore go to Asda for reductions at night. Some people i know very well,,,,had relationship with some ,,,others do not even know name. Heard someones mother terminally ill, the woman herself had fractured patella [kneecap] was looking for transport to see her mother. Friends at Asda working however i said have MOT next day if pass could take her to see her mother. Went through redlight next day, going for MOT, at 1.2 secs, police charge , passed MOT. Due to Covid put plastic barrier between front and back seats ,sealed as stuck down with tape. Police in correspondence state no criminal record, clean driving license, as statute no fine, no points on license, just attend a afternoon police session to close case. Of course best way, however as explained to them can not do, as it gives me now chance to go to court to expose murder threats where police will take no action,hope something will be done over murder threats and being set on fire.as in Ebrahimi case . Police make as difficult as possible, put down hearing in Bath, asked to be transfered to Brisol court, request ignored. Then told Covid restrictions should not be taking people in your car,we may ask for 200.00 fine,as pleading not guilty over 1.2 secs. . Great if police want to bring up already quoted code, will show how far they will go in vexatious chronic attacks on me. BRING IT UP WITH CODE YOU WILL NOT GET ANOTHER 200.00. Can not ask todays lawyers for advice assume will be found guilty ,did go through red light at 1.2 secs..where come to

QUESTION In terms of cost say magistrate state fine 100.00 cost 150.00 ,reasonable to pay 10.00 a week, do i go back to Crown Court judge asking to reconsider his order eg say pay each 5.00 a week, or will magistrate do everything on day

QUESTION 11 FOR LAWYERS ….Again as question 10 need background before question asked. We have issue of complaint 1.6.2020 [SAY TO IOPC YES 1.6.2020 NOT 1.6.2021 waiting over a year for reply] which police refuse to answer. Arose from police letter defined ,,,,police june,,,,in my website. Police have removed from computer [again reason as statute for them to refer to IOPC,,criminal behaviour ] however in my website, actual letter they also removed, no problem its in my website, as was court order from Court of Appeal,[also removed by police] ,,,,in case against police, however as barrister AM stated for 10.00 can get replacement from the court. From police june scan in my website,,,,,retired District Judge who saw my website states ,,,,appaling as does not define what your accused of. In complaint 1.6.2020 asked police to confirm what allegations they were making. ASSUMED as at same time had call, from police, allegations you had stolen new Council pass, and damaged mail. Had letter from neighbour that i had stolen pass, complained to Council,,,,why have you contacted police with complaint, ,,,,THE DAY i obtained ,emailed you, you told me to send pass back to you, and recorded delivery confirms returned nearly 2 WEEKS AGO. Council were excellent in letter,,,,,we made no contact with police ,[issue for IOPC] we told you to return and in a few days obtained ,thank you. How did neighbour Bird know was delivered to me, if not planted on me. [many years ago Bird took caution ].So in complaint asked who complained., IF THIS IS ISSUE Asked further question ,now to IOPC , in miscarriage of justice issue, Sgt Price gave for investigation to PCBird,,,,,where asked if officer related to neighbour.Bird. Police in call also alledge as you can see will be arrested over damage to mail. In complaint and other documents state,,,,,,[did Bird plant] the letters came in Royal Mail bags ,titled MAIL found open and damaged, IF THEY WANT BAGS TO ORGANISE A TIME TO COLLECT,,EMAIL IGNORED.AGAIN ISSUE IOPC. Police are arresting from own documents,,,as poured oil through Letterbox , threats to cause arson, utterlywith no merit where for example forced to drop threats of arson. My problem today getting again string of correspondence for Bird, due to threats to arrest over damaged mail asked PSD to call Royal Mail at Derwert Close to collect to confirm not damaged. PSD ignored email, as will point out to IOPC ,the letters still here, would normally put back in post, however with threats of arrest over damaged mail can not take that chance, they will arrest inmaterial of facts, take corrupt Parhbga ,,,arrested as through oil through MP doorway,,,sorry did not occur,,,,read Jenkins statement.QUESTION CAN YOU ASK POLICE TO CONTACT ROYAL MAIL TO COLLECT MAIL

QUESTION 12 FOR LAWYERS. Reoffended 18.2.2021 over murder threats. Told by police we thought last time 4.1.2021 we had frightened you in custody,did not expect you back, we did not charge as did not want before an open court why you offended, the murder threats which were ignored, Therefore all fingerprints ect removed as statute, we will need to take again fingerprints ect...19.2.2021Can you ask police what action was taken,,,,as barrister AM stated at present the legal position you are on bail under investigation, need facts for IOPC.

QUESTION 13 TO LAWYERS. Could you ask police if MP ever contacted over todays issue.

THE MP LOPRESTI ELEMENT JUST FOR REFERENCE NOT ISSUE FOR IOPC

Lopresti continue stance you never contacted me over miscarriage of justice issue,,,,at random take email 26.9.2016, where police removed from computer,,,forgot to steal paperwork,,, have just hard copy in papers made at earlier date for some reason.. Police seizure computer remove evidence, of emails to/from Loprest but forget that also dealt with by his case worker Michael Cobb where emails clearly show dealing with the court,,,,,court were ignoring eg one example MP correspondence,,,,Cobb ,,,,Jack will write again,,,,CORRUPT not ivolved ,yes you were???????

Need to appeal, much later have permission from the court, todays issue, could not get legal aid anywhere, NEVER rejected on facts , eg too busy ect,,,tried to get refund of court fee ,,,,,court states we did not send application.to HHJCotter So email to my MP Lopresti. Contacted Justice department of government told Rt Hon Buckland not your MP, get your MP to make application to Buckland. So email to MP to do this ignored, as request application to ombudsman for refund of court fee as application 6.12.2017 not read,,,,,,via statute i can not do,,,,,statute,,,complain to court,,,,complain then to Resolver,,,,[still before it after many years,,,last week can we close case as other party not responding ] ,,,,still not resolved ask your MP to refer to ombudsman ,refund of fee,,,,general public can not do only MP can refer,,,,MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE,,,,HE IS UTTERLY CORRUPT IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL,,,,from human rights case law,,,,, Legal aid

1. Granting,,, of legal aid

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). YOU HAVE POLICE ADMITTING MY CLAIM

WHERE MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE. CAN I REFER TO POLICE BUNDLE CPS EVIDENCE IN INTERVIEW WITH MP,,,,,,,I IGNORE IF I HAD ALREADY DEALT WITH ISSUE,,,,THIS IS UTTERLY NEW CASE JUST HAD JUDGEMENT PERMISSION TO APPEAL THIS CORRUPT MP HAS NO EXCUSE TO IGNORE MY EMAILS [LOPREST IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL] MADE AWARE OF MURDER THREATS WHICH HE IGNORED. MY LAWYERS RELUCTANT TO PLACE THIS HISTORY BEFORE THE COURT WHY OFFENDED. LOST A LOT OF MONEY AS WOULD NOT SEND TO OMBUDSMAN WHERE COURT ADMITTED THEY HAD NOT SENT APPLICATION TO HHJCOTTER

Well lets do website just 99p www.jacklopresticorrupt.com again if facts not correct sue me for libel. Ican not inform him of website, due to court order, sure someone will let him know from my website

ASKED FOR HELP OVER THREATS TO MURDER ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED,

QUESTION 6 TO MARSH DID MP EVER CONTACT YOU OVER MURDER THREAT

1. NOTE UPDATE FOR WEBSITES,,,,,APPENDIX TO EMAIL OF 18.6.2021 TIMED 9.08 AM ,,,ISSUE TODAY NOW IOPC
   

Need to put on record, we must not ignore the ,,,,,,elephant in the room,,,,,for nearly 8 months threat to murder.,,,,,threatning letters forwarded 2020/2021 to police,,,,where told if you get anymore bin ?????? Police told Dec 2020 TWICE if nothing done then oil in their doorway in protest, goaded into offending, then police inform me will not take to court as we do not want why you offended ,[THREATS OF MURDER] before general public via a trial, we removed fingerprints ect will need to do again as reoffended 18.2.2021again over threats to murder. Told TWICE [Jan 2021 11.2.2021 ]as escalate oil in MP doorway.,,,,he also ignored cry for help, issue lawyers afraid to present in mitagation, now water under bridge,,,POLICE IGNORED EBRAHIMI CASE AGAIN OFFENDED 18.2.2021 MP TOLD IT WOULD OCCUR HOPED HE WOULD HAVE COMPLAINED TO POLICE BEFORE OFFENDING SO ARRESTED OVER THREATS ONLY ?????? Arrested as oil through MP letter box UTTER POLICE CORRUPTION NOT TRUE [see police own statement ,,,oil only on bottom left hand side bottom of door on seal,,,,,in own bundle showing utter police corruption,NOT TRUE,,,and threats of arson UTTER POLICE CORRUPTION Then drop threats of arson as would not stand up in court,,,,,police now say,,,we did not know what he was saying,,,,false arrest and imprisonment ????? would not want why offended before general public via a trial reason dropped case. POLICE UTTER COWARDS

Need to inform, as offers to pay court fine, please readers of my websites please do not make offers. Further will have my day in court over side issue going through red light at 1.2 secs in 2020 .Again are police afraid to take to trial. As i said as offered by police clean license, no police convictions, case will be dropped if you attend half day police course. Can not do this as need before general public via a trial to bring out threats of murder, AS TOLD THEM DAY 1, something has to be done over threats to murder,,,, hoping something done.over murder threats. Making as difficult as possible, put hearing down at Bath, ask for transfer to Bristol court ,email 12.5.2021 ,,,,court email a reply in 10 days, month later plus still no reply.Police then state may also charge over Covid breach, bring it on before the court….please see details below,,,,are police afraid what will come out at trial,.over alleged Covid breach.

Issues utterly unknown , we do not know if lawyers as promised will get evidence,for IOPC or just ignore me,,,,then will be a new issue for Law Society ,,, PCSnell saying after assaulting me ,,,,coming back to ransack house, which police did, and PC Collect,saying on arrest ,,,,found electrical, which was a computer to pervert course of justice ,,,,by removing evidence , this was arrest TO CAUSE ARSON. Going out of house through garage window is 5l can of petrol, you know no threats to cause arson, but want computer to remove evidence to pervert course of justice, and steal my property, and just leave petrol. . Further as explained to lawyers ,suggested by barrister AM did police come back again, official receipt of seizure incompatible for later document of what was seized, further not only my medical books thrown all over the floor, CCTV turned off, confirmed by their records, my stephoscope on floor, and opthalmascope box broken and on floor. The computer router wires ripped out, wanted to see from day 1 if on bobycam, if not then it proves police came back again to ransack or words to this effect,,,and take things as Snell said he would do.Lawyers stated had asked for this bobycam,of seizure ,,,,me saying knowing police we will never see ...not interested if police say ,,,,your lawyers never asked,,,,,clear instructions again to them, further refer IOPC to my request to police ignored, and reporting of such to lawyers, ,,,,,however we do not know if they will ask questions as promised in list given to them ,relating to various issues for the IOPC

1. BELOW IN WEBSITES WWW.CORRUPTIONAVONSOMERSETPOLICE.COM WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM
   

IS LETTER TO COURT PROBATION .THERE WAS A FURTHER LETTER SERVED ON MY LAWYERS PLANNED TO GIVE TO JUDGE BEFORE HEARING OF THE 11.6.2021 HOWEVER BARRISTTER SAID DO NOT SERVE ON JUDGE WE VIA Ms ROWLEY [ALLENHOOLE] WILL HELP YOU IN NEXT STAGE .TO THEIR CREDIT IN LATEST EMAIL Ms ROWLANDS ASKS WHAT HELP I NEED. WE NEED ANSWERS TO SERIES OF QUESTIONS ALSO COVERED TODAY NEW PCC AND PRO STANDARDS DEPT OF POLICE [PSD] IN THIS EMAIL. WHERE ASK AS BEFORE PCC FORWARDS A COPY TO CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH FOR FUTURE COURT USE.DIRECT RELEVANCE IN JUDGEMENT AS JUDGE SAID MARSH WAS TOO HIGH UP ,,,,,YOUR THREATS AS PROTEST TO OFFEND ,,,,DEPOSIT OF OIL IN EXTERNAL DOORWAY DUE TO MURDER THREATS ,,,,,SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE DIRECTED AT PEOPLE WHO DEAL WITH COMPLAINTS AND LOCAL LEGAL PEOPLE LIKE LOCAL POLICE STATION. BUT THEY WERE PSD AND CORRUPT SGT PRICE AT PATCHWAY POLICE STATION,,,,,GROUNDS FOR APPEAL ???????FROM MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE CASE LAW,,,,,,

1. 
   Did the defendant [Marsh/Price/PSD] have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission? [aware i was in protest going to offend over murder threats, eg could have been arrested over threats]
   

2. Did the officer [Marsh/Price ,,,as judge said local police station ] realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur? [Price aware before oil in HER police station doorway, surely must be aware a possibility of oil in MP doorway ,in email told PCC also not to call my bluff],,,,,,as i said PSD also aware email Jan 2021 and 11.2.2021 they were PRIMARY people in email, cc then to PCC and MP my final begging email for help over murder threats. So MP aware oil in his doorway if he did nothing over murder threats, issue never presented by lawyers to the court .
   

QUESTION 1 FOR LAWYERS Can i please have name of barrister and her chambers and person of your firm that came to trial 11.6.2021

1/ In April 2021 asked police under diclosure of documents for evidence eg bodycam of arrest,and seizure of property and CCTV of actual alleged offence ,which was ignored ,,where lawyers in email inform me they had asked. NOT INTERESTED if police state lawyers never asked,,,,the bottom line for example IOPC my request of disclosure of documents ignored. Can i refer to email in March 2021 where i stated would never see seizure of property CCTV. Lawyers have sent me only this week CCTV of arrest.

QUESTION 2 FOR LAWYERS..As your instructions installed to view arrest, informs me installed correctly appears to back up however non disclosure of documents as it now gives error code 4,,,,,this document not avaliable to this email address. Can you resolve please and obtain CCTV of arrest, and seizure of property CCTV please as my instructions in April 2021.

2/ Via statute police must refer to IOPC allegations of assault, corruption and criminal activity, where my application to PSD to refer to them. Petra King at PSD perverting course of justice, last thing she would want is for complaint to go to them,,,,,,get email do again, maximum 2 pages, [IOPC inform no limit ]told i do not understand issue, told if i do not understand next time it will be binned and future correspondence relating to it will be ignored, issue for IOPC. As i said to King your corrupt and bent perverting the course of justice .SAY TO PCC THIS IS TYPE OF PEOPLE YOUR EMPLOYING. Asked King to inform me when sent to IOPC assume not done as she perverts course of justice, as she is utterly corrupt.

QUESTION 3 FOR LAWYERS. Can you ask please that police refer to IOPC, and confirmation from police sent to IOPC.

QUESTION 1 TO MARSH,,,,[asking please PCC refer this document to Marsh]Can you instruct King to refer to IOPC. Can i please seperate barrister acting in this case ,cited above asked lawyers before for name, and barrister who saw my website defined barrister AM. Barrister AM suggested if any aspect not clear that King calls me. Further she could refer stating issues not clear. If not corrupt and bent eg she has refered to IOPC i will issue an apology in my website, if she supplies evidence she has refered to IOPC. SAY TO KING IF FACTS UNTRUE SUE ME FOR LIBEL

3/ Can i please refer to judges judgement, that Marsh too high up your concerns over threats of murder and being set on fire, IDENTICAL TO EBRAHIMI CASE and your protest of this,,,deposit of oil, should have been made to people dealing with complaints and local police station BUT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I DID. In Dec 2020 police told twice of oil in their external doorway if threats to murder me not dealt with, so oil in doorway 4.1.2021. Told end of Jan 2021 would escalate ,,,,oil in MP office doorway, followed up with letter as above of the 11.2.2021. Will help IOPC have historic recording with front office staff Ms Jones [TJ] where problems over just giving receipt for a letter i wished to leave at Patchway police station,,,,,not in front of her ,we can hear on Voicecam recording on way home, traffic on the A38 with my comment after making sure recorded ,me saying she needs a dogcollar,,,,eg she is a bitch. From her statement from this historic event again although being dealt with by another member of staff, AGAIN can not help herself she admits she was involved as i left letter on the 11.2.2021., although other staff dealing with matter. So oil in MP doorway 18.2.2021. On the 19.2.2021 went to be arrested to stop being murdered, again being dealt with by a member of staff, however TJ can not help herself as wants to deal with issue. She is told this can not go on any more ,threats to murder, had taken up issue with police and specific Sgt Price in letter. Asked why wanted to be arrested, told her , where TJ states not on system ,not reported, go away wait for reply from Sgt Price. Said to her would not occur however if i had said thrown petrol in MP doorway would you say go away wait for reply from Sgt Price. Worried over murder threats asked TJ when we will get reply to murder threats, told you will not dictate to police when we deal with issue, asked if in today ,,,told no, asked if in in last week told YES. CAN I REFER TO JUDGES JUDGEMENT,,,,,REPORT TO LOCAL STATION SO SHE WAS AWARE OVER THREATS TO MURDER ASKED POLICE IN DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS IF PRICE IN WORK IN PERIOD 11 TO 19.2.2021 WHERE REQUEST IGNORED. AS THEY IGNORED CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS.

QUESTION 2 TO MARSH. Was Sgt Price in work in this time span. 11 to 19.2.2021

QUESTION 4 TO LAWYERS Can you please ask same question to police.

TJ as corrupt [if not corrupt sue me for libel this document in my websites]states never told me why he wanted to be arrested, yes you were as soon as went home emailed MP copy to police ,tauted MP as she informed me not reported ,alleged offence not on system, go away await reply from Price. Why would i not say why wanted to be arrested ,as wanted to stop murder threats, HOW DID I KNOW MP HAD NOT REPORTED IF NOT TOLD BY HER ,,,NOT ON SYSTEM. Why would i say throw oil in MP doorway ,,,,had done this to stop threats of murder, you informing me not reported,,,,,why do again if MP will not report. We know Price had letter , as judges judgement , should have been reported to local police station ,,,as TJ confirms letter was left 11.2.2021

4/ Price can not pervert course of justice this time saying never obtained letter,,,,TJ confirms letter was left. Can i please refer to document sent to probation ref 5 scan picture 26 .This relates to miscarriage of justice, please see also ref 1 in that document to probation, scan picture 29. Price states ,issue today for IOPC ,over miscarriage of justice, that i never wrote to her, and police make allegations that receipts ref 5 have been forged. Price your corrupt over allegations, if not corrupt sue me for libel. This is issue for IOPC not lawyers today, however need to ask question.

QUESTION 3 FOR MARSH. The receipt ref 5 number 259327 [letter to probation] also another number 260861 can you confirm these are forgies. Talked to medical department at the court, young lady said next time at Patchway station would try to look at ,,,,property receipt form ...to see in system if they give you master receipt which i now have ,,,however underneath we had identical copy what was given to you. We have in another form 2 receipts to corrupt Price confirming letters to her.

QUESTION 5 TO LAWYERS,,,Could you please ask police same question.

IOPC issue now can i please refer to ref 3 and 4 in probation letter scan 10475 10494 over miscarriage of justice, where corrupt Knowle makes statement, IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL the allegation for years in my website. YOUR CORRUPT MAKING MARSH AWARE. Picket at court ,barrister who i gave leaflet to told me to report to the police malfeasance [misconduct] in public office to the police, court ignoring applications and correspondence for years, where PSD state you have no evidence. We have letters from the court ,[for IOPC],,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,,they have letter from lawyer,,,,,our correspondence ignored. So wish to appeal,,,,asked police 22.7.2017 11 questions eg have you asked lawyer for confirmation that THEIR application also ignored, have you talked to person at court who admits allegation,,,,we ignored your applications and correspondence come and talk to us,,,you have numerous documents date/stamped by the court as taken by hand ,,where i state to polie unless i hear from you by the 28.7.2017 will assume you refuse to answer questions and WOULD DO APPEAL ON AFTER THE 28.7.2017.Where corrupt Knowsel perverting course of justice sends letter 24.7.2017 rejecting appeal, i have made no appeal, waiting for reply to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017. No dispute here for IOPC please see probation document ref 3 and 4,,,eg scans 10475 10494 where he admits facts. YOUR CORRUPT

5/ Can i again go back to letter to probation . In reference scan picture 6 and 7 is official police receipt of what was seized, can i please refer to scan picture 8 where other items seized eg software and computer parts.

QUESTION 4 TO MARSH Is scan picture 8 your document.

Computer parts were a TV monitor, while doing research at university ,supervisors consultant surgeon and consultant radiologist ,,,tv monitor in skip, where obtained permission to take, marked university property assumed taken as believed stolen property by police,,,,,however as statute seizure only on relation to crime charged with, arrested over arson.????? The software were 7 USB backup sticks , assumed police wanted to returned after removal of data. Remember arrested over threat to cause arson, where police aware false arrest false imprisonment where had to drop case. We have the utter shambles of TJ saying did not understand what he was saying,,,,,,,an elderly lady in her 60s ,as a medic of course never being able to examine, however is there a case of onset of senile dementia, she can remember,,,,,something has to be done,,,,[over murder threats] but not remember what issue was,,,,,however inform me offence not on system where i confirmed conversation to MP and police,,,taunted MP as not reported, as TJ had confirmed this alleged offence not on system,after informing her why offended... Again why was computer removed as arrested over threats to cause arson. Can be explained from arrest, in first second as PCCollett states,,,,,,found electrical,,,,,waiting for recording, done to remove data from my computer to pervert course of justice. Why take a brand new bottle of chainsaw oil ?????and leave behind as assume dirty other oil. Charged at 2.00 pm 20.2.2021 ,asked 5.00 pm if wanted food told no as told going home now. At about 8.00 asked for food told should have taken food at 6.00pm. Not released although knowing severe claustophobic until about 10.00pm. Barrister AM suggested could be back at house ,waiting for darkness, my medical books all over floor, stephoscope on floor , my opthalmascope on floor where lid of box ripped off after throwing on floor. Had call your toolbox you will never see again,,,,,had padlock why not break padlock lie through teeth say was broken when we came rather than steal my property. Lawyers had stated we have asked for return of computer parts and software which included installation disc ,again not interested if police state your lawyers never asked.

QUESTION 6 TO LAWYERS Can you please ask for return of software and computer parts., from correspondence inform asked before,,,, Further for return of chainsaw oil ect. Further can i refer to person representing the Crown, at court...can you please let me know name and position. Can i refer to hearing 11.6.2021 where he cites police report on seizure,,,,are you aware of report, and could you please obtain me a copy, all new evidence to me. Is this police tactics in complaints 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 say to third party mentally ill, as theme from start in court he tried to raise in proceedings.,mentally ill. This mentally ill theme for IOPC as excuse not to answer above complaints ,note now one over a year, where police believe if we ignore complaints i will go away. Issue for IOPC.

6/ Can i refer to judges judgement again, that I should inform police of murder threats however not Marsh to seek responce.. Well covered PSD from above ,,,,today as judges judgement will do again.. As i said to judge these threats to murder , being stalted will go on no longer. Police stole my VoiceCam,,,will buy another, a few weeks ago again followed by same woman,still going on ,,,,where would now after purchase of Voicecam have recording ,,,she will be told last time, next time i will put her in hospital.Unless lawyers believe a better way, do not think Patchway police station should be involved , further not attack on police, Met police have been excellent ,understand anyway no correspondence between this woman and Patchway, but correspondence with Bridewell. THE DISTURBING EVIDENCE HOWEVER FROM MET ,,,,IS THAT AVON AND SOMERSET HAVE NEVER CONTACTED US OVER MURDER THREATS. I HAVE TOLD YOU TODAY AS JUDGES JUDGEMENT INFORMED OF MURDER THREATS WAITING FOR POLICE ACTION.

QUESTION 7 TO LAWYERS. Could you please inform police these threats still going on, Can use in evidence to IOPC.

7/Barrister AM suggested before it goes to IOPC should clarify facts, so no misunderstanding .Take for example alleged damage, concerns as i said to barrister [not AM todays barrister] it shows damage down left and right side of door. Barrister stated sun reflection, as Jenkins statement,,,,,,although bottles on floor ,key on right hand side of door ,noticed no damage, then told of alleged offence and notice damage to just bottom seal of door onthe left hand side. As barrister stated they are only claiming for damage to bottom left hand corner of door, which you admit you caused so told by barrister to plead guilty.

QUESTION 8 TO LAWYERS. Could you confirm threats to cause arson removed by police. Could you write to police to confirm as arrested,,,,,poured oil through front door [PS Parhbga ] that this did not take place, no oil through letterbox. Can you write to police to confirm as their allegations, ref 1 today was not sent to Marsh on the 19.2.2021 as police alledge., admit they have dropped case however required for IOPC.

QUESTION 5 TO MARSH. Can you confirm no correspondence to you dated 19.2.2021 if you alledge you did can i please have copy. Further as arrested from above, can you confirm no oil was ever poured through letterbox,

8/ We have another issue over cost payment. In Dec 2020 go to Asda for reductions at night. Some people i know very well,,,,had relationship with some ,,,others do not even know name. Heard someones mother terminally ill, the woman herself had fractured patella [kneecap] was looking for transport to see her mother. Friends at Asda working however i said have MOT next day if pass could take her to see her mother. Went through redlight next day, going for MOT, at 1.2 secs, passed MOT. Due to Covid put plastic barrier between front and back seats ,sealed as stuck down with tape. Police in correspondence state no criminal record, clean driving license, as statute no fine, no points on license, just attend a afternoon police session to close case. Of course best way, however as explained to them can not do, as it gives me chance to go to court to expose murder threats where police will take no action,hope something will be done over murder threats and being set on fire. . Police make as difficult as possible, put down hearing in Bath, asked to be transfered to Brisol court, request ignored. Then told Covid restrictions should not be taking people in your car,we may ask for 200.00 fine,as pleading not guilty. . Great if police want to bring up already quoted code, will show how far they will go in vexatious chronic attacks on me. BRING IT UP WITH CODE YOU WILL NOT GET ANOTHER 200.00. Can not ask todays lawyers for advice assume will be found guilty ,did go through red light at 1.2 secs..

QUESTION 9 TO LAWYER In terms of cost say magistrate state fine 100.00 cost 150.00 ,reasonable to pay 10.00 a week, do i go back to Crown Court judge asking to reconsider his order eg say pay each 5.00 a week.

9/ We have issue of complaint 1.6.2020 [SAY TO IOPC YES 1.6.2020 NOT 1.6.2021 ] which police refuse to answer. Arose from police letter defined ,,,,police june,,,,in my website. Police have removed from computer however in my website, actual letter they also removed, no problem its in my website, as court order from Court of Appeal,[also removed by police] ,,,,in case against police, however as barrister AM stated for 10.00 can get replacement from the court. From police june scan in my website,,,,,retired District Judge who saw my website states ,,,,appaling as does not define what your accused of. In complaint 1.6.2020 asked police to confirm what allegations they were making. ASSUMED as at same time had call, from police, allegations you had stolen new Council pass, and damaged mail. Had letter from neighbour that i had stolen pass, complained to Council,,,,why have you contacted police with complaint, the DAY i obtained ,emailed you, you told me to send pass back to you, and recorded delivery confirms returned nearly 2 WEEKS AGO. Council were excellent in letter,,,,,we made no contact with police ,[issue for IOPC] we told you to return and in a few days you did ,thank you. How did neighbour Bird know was delivered to me, if not planted on me. [many years ago Bird took caution over threats of violence].So in complaint asked who complained. Asked further question ,now to IOPC , in miscarriage of justice issue, Sgt Price gave for investigation to PCBird,,,,,where asked if officer related to neighbour.Bird. Police in call also alledge as you can see will be arrested over damage to mail. In complaint and other documents state,,,,,,[did Bird plant] the letters came in Royal Mail bags ,titled found open and damaged, IF THEY WANT BAGS TO ORGANISE A TIME TO COLLECT,,EMAIL IGNORED.AGAIN ISSUE IOPC. Police are arresting from own documents,,,as poured oil through Letterbox , threats to cause arson, utterlywith no merit where for example forced to drop threats of arson. My problem today getting again string of correspondence for Bird, due to threats to arrest over damaged mail asked PSD to call Royal Mail at Derwert Close to collect to confirm not damaged. PSD ignored email, as will point out to IOPC ,the letters still here, would normally put back in post, however with threats of arrest over damaged mail can not take that chance, they will arrest inmaterial of facts, take corrupt Parhbga ,,,arrested as through oil through MP doorway,,,sorry did not occur,,,,read Jenkins statement.

10/ THE MP LOPRESTI ELEMENT JUST FOR REFERENCE NOT ISSUE FOR IOPC

Lopresti continue stance you never contacted me over miscarriage of justice issue,,,,at random email 26.9.2016, where police removed from computer,,,forgot to steal paperwork,,, have just hard copy in papers made at earlier date for some reason.. Police seizure computer remove evidence, of emails to/from Loprest but forget that also dealt with by his case worker Michael Cobb where emails clearly show dealing with the court,,,,,court were ignoring eg one example MP correspondence,,,,Cobb ,,,,Jack will write again,,,,CORRUPT ???????

Need to appeal, have permission from the court, todays issue, could not get legal aid anywhere, NEVER rejected on facts , eg too busy ect,,,tried to get refund of court fee ,,,,,court states we did not send application.to HHJCotter So email to my MP Lopresti. Contacted Justice department of government told Rt Hon Buckland not your MP, get your MP to make application to Buckland. So email to MP to do this ignored, as request application to ombudsman for refund of court fee as application 6.12.2017 not read,,,,,,via statute i can not do,,,,,statute,,,complain to court,,,,complain then to Resolver,,,,[still before it after many years,,,last week can we close case as other party not responding ] ,,,,still not resolved ask your MP to refer to ombudsman ,refund of fee,,,,general public can not do only MP can refer,,,,MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE,,,,HE IS UTTERLY CORRUPT IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL,,,,from human rights case law,,,,, Legal aid

1. Granting,,, of legal aid

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). YOU HAVE POLICE ADMITTING MY CLAIM

WHERE MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE. CAN I REFER TO POLICE BUNDLE CPS EVIDENCE IN INTERVIEW WITH MP,,,,,,,I IGNORE IF I HAD ALREADY DEALT WITH ISSUE,,,,THIS IS UTTERLY NEW CASE JUST HAD JUDGEMENT PERMISSION TO APPEAL THIS CORRUPT MP HAS NO EXCUSE TO IGNORE MY EMAILS [LOPREST IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME FOR LIBEL] MADE AWARE OF MURDER THREATS WHICH HE IGNORED. MY LAWYERS RELUCTANT TO PLACE THIS HISTORY BEFORE THE COURT WHY OFFENDED. LOST A LOT OF MONEY AS WOULD NOT SEND TO OMBUDSMAN WHERE COURT ADMITTED THEY HAD NOT SENT APPLICATION TO HHJCOTTER

Well lets do website just 99p www.jacklopresticorrupt.com again if facts not correct sue me for libel. Ican not inform him of website, due to court order, sure someone will let him know from my website

ASKED FOR HELP OVER THREATS TO MURDER ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED,

QUESTION 6 TO MARSH DID MP EVER CONTACT YOU OVER MURDER THREATS

1. EMAIL TO Ms ROWLEY LAWYERS ALLENHOOLE ASKING HER TO CONTACT CPS TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE FOR Ms SLOCOMBE ………..PROBATION COURT INTERVIEW 27.5.2021 9.00 AM BY PHONE WITH Ms SLOCOMBE COURT MORE THAN HELPFUL TOLD ALL WE NEED TO SAY WHY OFFENDED EASY HAVE THREATS OF MURDER IN OCT 2020 COMPLAINT TO POLICE FOLLOW UP COMPLAINT 17.10.2020 TO POLICE IGNORED. BEGINNING AND END OF DEC 2020 INFORM CHIEF CONSTABLE MARSH WOULD TAKE MATTER IN MY OWN HANDS BY PLACING OIL IN POLICE STATION DOORWAY AS WAY OF PROTEST. ALTHOUGH AWARE OF THREAT MARSH TOOK NO ACTION OVER THREAT. SO GOADED INTO OFFENDING ON THE 4.1.2021 HOWEVER MARSH REFUSES TO PROSECUTE DO NOT WANT AT A HEARING IDENTICAL TO EBRAHIMI CASE WHERE HE WAS MURDERED. SO STILL GETTING MURDER THREATS SO MARSH TOLD IN JAN 2021 AND 11.2.2021 WOULD LEAVE OIL IN MP DOORWAY,,,,AS PROTEST DID NOT WANT TO BE MURDERED WHERE MARSH AWARE OF THREAT HOWEVER GOADED ME INTO OFFENDING WHICH OCCURED 19.2.2021.MP WAS ASKED FOR HELP. POLICE ALLEDGE 19.2.2021 THAT FURTHER THREATS WERE MADE Ms ROWLANDS INFORM ME THIS CHARGE DROPPED HOWEVER COULD NOT UNDERSTAND AS COURT DOCUMENT STATES THAT Ms SLOCOMBE WILL CONSIDER THIS ELEMENT. Ms SLOCOMBE WOULD ALSO CONSIDER WILL IT OCCUR AGAIN, NO TODAY HAVE MY DAY IN COURT TO GET SOMETHING DONE OVER THREATS TO MURDER,,,,MARSH AFRAID OF EVIDENCE WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO A COURT AFTER 4.1.2021 OFFENCE AND EVEN BEFORE IN 2020,Ms SLOCOMBE WILL PRESENT EVIDENCE TO THE JUDGE. WILL TAKE BY HAND COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT EVIDENCE FOR Ms SLOCOMBE WHERE ASK PLEASE FOR RECEIPT. ,,,,,,SO GIVING HER NOTES BEFORE INTERVIEW...,RETURN TO COURT MIDDAY 11.6.2021 THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM THREAT TO MURDER.THE JUDGE STATES YOU MUST GIVE Ms SLOCOMBE 100 % COOPERATION WHICH I WILL DO TRUST I WILL GET CREDIT FOR THIS HOWEVER I TRUST Ms SLOCOMBE IN HER REPORT IF EVEN HANDED WILL EXPRESS HER VIEWS CONCERNING POLICE AND CIVIL COURTS IN THEIR COPERATION IN HER INVESTIGATION.eg THE HUMAN RIGHTS LEGAL CONTEXT OF EQUALITY OF ARMS WHICH INCLUDES ALSO,,,.ECHR CASE LAW ,,,,,,,REQUEST CPS REPLY BEFORE 25.5.2021.THIS IS IDENTICAL TO PROFUMA AFFAIR CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS WITH TORY MP INVOLVED. IN 1960s MY LETTERS TO CHRISTINE KEELER AND MEDIA,,,,FOR EXAMPLE NEWSPAPER REPLY SHE WAS NOT INNOCENT PARTY IN THIS SEE ADVERT OF DANISH MAGAZINE CONCERNING 8 MM FILM. ,,,HUMAN RIGHTS QUOTE LAW,,,
   

Witnesses for the prosecution and the defence must be treated equally; The Court has found that unrestricted access to the case file and unrestricted use of any notes, including, if necessary, the possibility of obtaining copies of relevant documents, are important guarantees of a fair trial. The failure to afford such access has weighed in favour of finding that the principle of equality of arms had been breached (Beraru v. Romania, § 70). In this context, importance is attached to appearances as well as to the increased sensitivity to the fair administration of justice. Respect for the rights of the defence requires that limitations on access by an accused or his lawyer to the court file must not prevent the evidence from being made available to the accused before the trial and the accused from being given an opportunity to comment on it through his lawyer in oral submissions (Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], § 140). Non-disclosure of evidence to the defence may breach equality of arms as well as the right to an adversarial hearing (Kuopila v. Finland, § 38, where the defence was not given an opportunity to comment on a supplementary police report). As a rule, Article 6 § 1 requires that the prosecution authorities disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 60). In this context, the relevant considerations can also be drawn from Article 6 § 3 (b), which guarantees to the applicant “adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence” (Leas v. Estonia, § 80).4 173. An issue with regard to access to evidence may arise under Article 6 insofar as the evidence at issue is relevant for the applicant’s case, specifically if it had an important bearing on the charges held against the applicant. This is the case if the evidence was used and relied upon for the determination of the applicant’s guilt or it contained such particulars which could have enabled the applicant to exonerate oneself or have the sentence reduced. The relevant evidence in this context is not only evidence directly relevant to the facts of the case, but also other evidence that might relate to the admissibility, reliability and completeness of the former (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 66; Mirilashvili v. Russia, § 200; b. Adversarial hearing As a rule, Article 6 § 1 requires that the prosecution authorities disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 60). In this context, the relevant considerations can also be drawn from Article 6 § 3 (b), which guarantees to the applicant “adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence” (Leas v. Estonia, § 80).4 173. An issue with regard to access to evidence may arise under Article 6 insofar as the evidence at issue is relevant for the applicant’s case, specifically if it had an important bearing on the charges held against the applicant. This is the case if the evidence was used and relied upon for the determination of the applicant’s guilt or it contained such particulars which could have enabled the applicant to exonerate oneself or have the sentence reduced. The relevant evidence in this context is not only evidence directly relevant to the facts of the case, but also other evidence that might relate to the admissibility, reliability and completeness of the former (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 66; Mirilashvili v. Russia, § 200; Leas v. Estonia, § 81; Matanović v. Croatia, § 161). 174. prosecuting authorities are obliged by law to take into consideration both the facts for and against the suspect, a procedure whereby the prosecuting authorities themselves attempt to assess what may or may not be relevant to the case, without any further procedural safeguards for the rights of the defence, cannot comply with the requirements of Article 6 § 1 (Natunen v. Finland, §§ 47-49; Matanović v. Croatia, §§ 158, 181- 182). 175. Belgium, § 85).

UNQUOTE FROM CRIMINAL LIMB ECHR CASE LAW

So ask Ms Rowland to ask questions please to police/court with reply by the 25.5.2021 with no reply to inform Ms Slocombe so she have evidence before interview of the 27.5.2021 and can make her views clear to the court. .Accept Ms Rowland will formulate questions as she feels fit ,under no circumstances will convey my format shown below at end. THE FORMAT HOWEVER FOR EVIDENCE REQUIRED IN MY QUESTIONS I WANT ANSWER TO QUESTIONS IN LIST BELOW AT END Further this document delivered to Ms Slocombe so she can advise before interview any further evidence she requires to do her report. Ms Slocombe looking why offended can i cite,,,

,Can i change CASE LAW text reference below to read,,,,defendant to Chief Constable Marsh as ask questions,today,,,,lawyer today said court would ask why offended ,,,,the offence misconduct in public life,,,,,QUOTE

In considering whether the neglect or misconduct was wilful, the following issues should be addressed:

• 
  Did the defendant have a subjective awareness of a duty to act or subjective recklessness as to the existence
  

• 
  

• of a duty?
  

• Did the defendant have a subjective awareness that the action or omission might be unlawful?
  

• Did the defendant have a subjective awareness of the likely consequences of the action or omission?
  

• Did the officer realise (subjective test) that there was a risk not only that his or her conduct was unlawful but also a risk that the consequences of that behaviour would occur?
  

• Were those consequences ‘likely’ as viewed subjectively by the defendant?
  

• Did the officer realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk?
  

Recklessness: the defendant foresees that particular consequences may occur and proceeds with the given conduct, not caring whether those consequences actually occur or not.

• 
  Criminal negligence: the defendant did not actually foresee that the particular consequences would flow from his actions, but a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen those consequences.
  

• From inchoate case law
  

• • 
    Mens Rea is the mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime; or knowledge that one's action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committed.
    

Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,[,i am afraid the reader will need to consider issues as a whole if going to understand why offended,,,,eg why went to my MP in 2018 via statute why i had to go to him]

THE FACTS [chronological order court cases are all civil]

1/ Please see appendix final where party admits in letter perjury ,however now party states to police in defence ,,,,we will not take court award, eg will not take cost money awarded , so police say you have lost nothing [untrue lost case no free central heating]so will do nothing, complain to PCC,,,,,in reply will not get involved ,any future correspondence police will ignore. As i said to PCC so i can rob a bank, payback money, and you will take no action,,,,POLICE STANCE. Case HISTORIC NOT ISSUE TODAY terminated at earlier date at court of appeal, where Lord Golding was excellent, tried to help me get judgement, said can we show corruption, via statute very limited ways to grant an appeal, in judgement stated the county court got verdict very badly wrong, however could not appeal due to statute,,,,only special items,,,,,Strickson v Preston county court EWCA 1132 [2007] cost award however to court he could quash however could not quash award to the party in litagation. Although party admitting perjury police state anyway you have no evidence of perjuryplease see scan appendix final, ….repeated again ,,,no evidence in different case below in 2/,?????????????????????????

2/ Never forgiven by the courts over above judgement. We have court ignoring my applications and correspondence, where issue cited in my website, HHJDenyer then states remove website or consequences.,will not be BLACKMAILED. Relevant today, police removing evidence ,must have copy, as i have today, shows police criminal behaviour, today asking for referal to the IOPC ,,,,so asked Compuwave to find way to back up, emails, program given would not work, told was working when you left shop, so litagation started, the program given on invoice, where they now admit typing error in program given , case then settled, where ask court via email to remove from hearing list .eg email

CLAIM NUMBER B26YM042 HEARING 5.1.2016

Could you please put before a judge as soon as possible, to vacate hearing 5.1.2016. I accept as in AOIBS346 Jones v N Bristol NHS Trust , for medical records, DJBrittan would not accept settlement and told both parties to attend court. This again was a settlement request from defendants a few days before second hearing, and i informed hospital lawyer, that settlement was nonsense, however they now give me everything requested from day 1. [identical today]

In todays issue, from tab 4 these instructions to read emails are utterly different from instructions given 21.12.2015, from tab 6 my email to defendants, where asked if tab 4 correct, which obtained no reply, as defendants ignored email, proceedings issued. Again a few days before hearing defendants ask to settle, as court aware no papers 14 days before hearing by defendants. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UNQUOTE

Record call later to court told HHJDenyer removed from hearing list no need to attend court ,,,,matter settled, then get judgement ,,, hearing took place ,no parties turned up, case struck out where appeal, send copy of recording not to attend, where see what CONSEQUENCES MEAN AS RESTRAINING ORDER BECAUSE I APPEALED. Applications to remove order ignored, by court.....

3/ So as restraining order in place need to ask HHJCotter to issue any further proceedings., eg malfeasance in public office court ignoring applications and correspondence for years, take complaint to police ,becomes IPCC investigation where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations, in our investigation, and sent reply to your appeal where no appeal had been made. BACKGROUND,,,.As court ignoring applications and correspondence picket at the court, TWICE not as CPS state today on regular basis, barrister who i gave leaflet to on leaving court told to report malfeasance [misconduct] in public office to the police as court ignoring applications and correspondence for years, warned about police may try to brush off, please see cited document in appendix final from internet Copwatch. Seen by Sgt Price Patchway police station, told to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office ,and within it make my complaint, the barrister was correct, was being brushed off Price stated make claim to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] ,police too busy to deal with this, please look at Copwatch appendix final where Homeoffice state,,,,all crimes should be investigated. SHE STATED DID NOT KNOW WHAT MALFEASANCE STOOD FOR IF NOT CRIMINAL OFFENCE WOULD NOT GIVE TO OFFICER TO LOOK AT. SO PRICE AWARE LATER A CRIMINAL OFFENCE VIA STATUTE JCIO COULD NOT INVESTIGATE AS THEY CAN NOT LOOK AT CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS,,,,AS THEIR WEBSITE STATES,,,IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES YOU NEED TO COMPLAIN TO POLICE THATS WHAT I DID. PRICE GAVE TO PCBIRD TO INVESTIGATE.Correspondence with JCIO told via STATUTE from our website we can not investigate as criminal allegations we are not allowed to investigate, as our website states,VIA STATUTE ,,,,,,,,,,,,criminal allegations complaints should be made to the POLICE. SO PRICE AWARE ACCEPTS CRIMINAL SO GIVES TO PCBIRD AWARE COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO. SHE HAS LETTER FROM THEM There were 4 correspondence with Price , for example please see ref 5 scan picture 26 you can see police number 259327 [red ink on printer exhaused number however put in by hand] another 260861 .At this stage much later Price makes allegations of a criminal offence by me,eg ,,, forgery by me over these receipts ,saying ,,,,,,you never wrote to me., receipts forged. In CPS paper on malfeasance in public office is table of people who had been convicted , included are civil and criminal judges. We have letter from the court,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,,we have letter from lawyer,,,,,our correspondence also ignored, lawyer,,,,we have chased them via phone, can not get a reply .....numerous documents date/stamped by court, however PCBird states you have no evidence , as in perjury issue,above ?????,,,states now you should complain to JCIO and judges immune from prosecution. ???????Becomes IPCC investigation please see appendix final where police ADMIT we did not follow IPCC regu;ations ,please see ref 2 TODAY ,scan 10594 ,,,we never talked to you, and ref 3 scan 10475 10494 we sent reply to your appeal where no appeal had been made. ,,,,POLICE letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal I have made no appeal, waiting for reply to questions, the above history not in dispute can I refer to police letter scan 10475/10494,,,police admit,,,ref 3 and 4 today,,,

eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply to questions by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.

SO SAYING POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE I HAVE NOT LODGED ONE ,,,

November 2017 application to Cotter to issue proceedings malfeasance in public as for years the court ignoring applications and correspondence where now litagation in judicial review against police,,,,eg police did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to an appeal where one not made,,,,,,send court N244 form [please see ref 9 today for format] plus note to HHJCotter where he asks me to make official application and to pay fee, Visit court 5.12.2017 to obtain evidence to do application to the court, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,eg where lady was more than helpful went to get files, then Mr Blair comes running out saying, your not looking at files, we refuse WHO IS WE ,,HHJCOTTER ?????told ,,make application to Cotter who will also ignore , utter breach of Article 6.which Cotter did,,Blair making clear court will not allow

Demand old N244 form from file, deface ,,,,line through it,,,write on it not to be sent to Cotter until new N244 send with application next day, 6.12.207,,,made under ,,,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessarytime to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,PAID FEE ON THESE CONDITIONS ,,,,, application sent next day via email.,6.12.2017 the court has no N244 form what i am asking court to do, as defaced it. Now 6.12.2017 sent

Series of emails confirming agreement,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS for example email 7.12.2017

In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. ,,,,,IGNORED

Cotter in judgement states as he continues denying evidence in front of him ,,,,,police were correct should have complained to JCIO where he has letter from JCIO IN BUNDLE WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE. FURTHER STATE VEXATIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT AGAINST POLICE WHERE IN APPENDIX FINAL POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION. Eg we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your appeal where one not made. Retired District judge who saw my website suggested Cotter never looked at application made under Adorison,,, again in it on N244 form was application to remove restraining order,,,,in judgement ,never mentioned. Court state we did not send as court required another fee,,,,,untrue from Adorisio,,,allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,Again as several lawyers/barristers have stated,,,,if court believed in goodwill a fee was required, and consider… Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

WHY DID COURT NOT ASK FOR A FEE. Or were they perverting course of justice not sending to Cotter,,so ,he read wrong papers.

4/ Need to appeal, could not get legal aid anywhere, NEVER rejected on facts , eg too busy ect,,,tried to get refund of court fee ,,,,,court states we did not send application.to Cotter So email to my MP Lopresti. Contacted Justice department of government told Rt Hon Buckland not your MP, get your MP to make application to Buckland. So email to MP to do this ignored, as request application to ombudsman for refund of court fee as application 6.12.2017 not read,,,,,,via statute i can not do,,,,,statute,,,complain tocourt,,,,complain then to Resolver,,,,[still before it after many years] ,,,,still not resolved ask your MP to refer to ombudsman ,refund of fee,,,,general public can not do only MP can refer,,,,MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE,,,,from human rights case law,,,,,C. Legal aid

1. Granting of legal aid

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). YOU HAVE POLICE ADMITTING MY CLAIM

WHERE MP IGNORES ALL CORRESPONDENCE. CAN I REFER TO POLICE BUNDLE CPS EVIDENCE IN INTERVIEW WITH MP,,,,,,,I IGNORE IF I HAD ALREADY DEALT WITH ISSUE,,,,THIS IS UTTERLY NEW CASE JUST HAD JUDGEMENT THIS CORRUPT MP HAS NO EXCUSE TO IGNORE MY EMAILS

Restaining order ended anyway Feb 2018 so no need to ask permission, however required evidence to do application,,,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,All correspondence ignored ,visit MP office told to contact Avon Law,,,,told too busy,,,,,contacted MP saying emailed court to look at file, to obtain evidence to do application, just ignored, copied Cotter into email, MP IGNORES AGAIN EMAIL HOWEVER AFTER 2 MONTHS COTTER REPLIES SAYING ASK BLAIR,,,,,KNOWING FROM ABOVE SAID NO,,,,,ASKED BLAIR SAID NO UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],

NEED CONFIRMATION OF EMAILS TO THE COURT WOULD PROVE MY CASE WOULD SHOW WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 WHEN SEEN BY SGT PRICE.

5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17

6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time

7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59

21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00.

29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,.

Visit court again asking same questions, talk to manager of PSU [known now support through court] who talks to courts Mr Hunt, where Hunt lies to PSU manager states will confirm in 10days if above LISTED EMAILS/ TIME in file, for example application of 6.12.2017 under ,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS IS IT IN FILE.

AGAIN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 MS PAWSLEY COURT MANAGER REFUSES EVEN TODAY TO ANSWER QUESTION HUNT STATED TO PSU HE WOULD ANSWER AS HUNT CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. JUST LIED TO PSU.TOOK WITNESS WITH ME TO CONFIRM AGREEMENT AT THE COURT. Court of appeal gives permission to appeal, however police/MP ignore all correspondence.

5/ In Feb 2018 restraining order ended so no need to ask permission, so ask court to look at file to obtain evidence, ignored, where matter comes before court of appeal. Police corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, ignore all correspondence,,,,CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE EMAILS IGNORED by police,,,

,LETS TRY TODAY,,,At court of appeal in live case try to issue unrelated proceedings in county court,,,,,all money claims must go through Salford county court, where refused as ANOTHER restraining order in place, contact Salford where told judiciary at Administration court Cardiff instructed if i made any applications not to issue, There was never any order , this judge acting utterly corrupt,,,,where Justice department pays 150.00 compensation, case settled then by other party, no court hearing. In website cite corruption at Administration court, no restraining order ever made, print government list of people on restraining order list, in my website, of course my name not on it. Then get emails from someone on list, know nothing about her, know nothing about case , then emails of threating nature , not really worried until letters to murder. Complaint made to police where told to block her,emails and bin any further murder letters. It appears nothing to do with me Google do website on this woman, and cite my website,,,,,this site nothing to do with me.

6/ Get call from police as never home when police call, can we interview as alledge i had stolen council parking pass sent in post and damaged other mail. Told untrue the council pass did not recognise name on letter,had sent back to council weeks ago, which S Glos council later confirmed, and other mail was delivered in Royal Mail bag, bag titled found open and damaged where from email told if police wanted evidence as obtained as damaged,,,to organise a time to collect Royal Mail bag. Then get letter scan police june,,,,,[can not show police removed from my computer to pervert course of justice however they made mistake as it was in my website if required today]which retired District Judge called appaling ,,,,undated,,,,what are allegations ?????????????So complaint to police 1.6.2020 WHAT ARE ALLEGATIONS,,,. Asked police who complained to them, enquired to Council why did you contact police where told we never contacted police we did NOTHING,,,can i quote responce,,,you emailed, we told you to post back to us, and we obtained from you, can i again thank you. What are allegations anyway not defined COULD BE NOTHING TO DO WITH MAIL. POLICE WILL NOT INFORM ME PERHAPS IOPC CAN FIND OUT.WHAT ARE ALLEGATIONS OR MY LAWYER TODAYCAN ASK POLICE. Asked police did neighbour plant on me, years ago he took caution and then today complain to police, did he place letters in my letterbox ,then saying stolen,,,did he alledge to police i had stolen,,,,,how did he know i had pass ????COMPLAINT IGNORED,,,,OVER A YEAR NOW STILL SEEKING A REPLY TO COMPLAINT OF THE 1.6.2020

7/ Threats continue via post to murder, with email comment that she had contacted police and was told,,,,,i am delusionary mentally ill in allegations against police in judicial review, [not today paragraph to show evidence however put in appendix FINAL you have judicial revew application and police admitting application],,,,,mentally ill ?????? by definition police comments are libel or slander, further refer to recent court examination not mentally ill. Complaint made on the 17.10.2020 where police refuse to answer complaints, further letters sent threat to murder,,,, police where again told to bin,evidence sent to them over murder threat.

8/ From scan picture 29 REF 1 23.11.2019 througout 2020 the issue of perverting course of justice, a miscarriage of justice not urgent, now my life at risk, eg no reply to complaint 17.10.2020 ,,,,IPCC informed of problem 20.11.2020 aware of issue,,,,Marsh told 2.12. 2020 of oil in police doorway to get something done, ,,eg From a garage have obtained 5L cans of old oil to throw in police/court doorways,,,,will have my day in court before the end. …..he is aware of threat to cause criminal damage ,,,,no need to repeat here see start of document numerous quotes,,,knew threat took no action, goaded into offending. So oil in police doorway 4.1.2021 , request for lawyer refused while in custody, kept in police custody over 10 hours,,,no lawyer. Told later to staff severe claustophobic , seen by police nurse, where placed in exercise yard. We have group who shop for reductions at night at Asda, knew what Ms X did ,however only when talked about arrest was aware as part of her work visit Patchway station on regularly basis and special cells for claustophobics, complaint to police told duty sergeant was unaware but STAFF were as put in exercise yard, so issue appeal to police complaint ,,,, you can quess appeaIGNORED STILL TODAY WAITING FOR REPLY. Correspondence 19.12.2020 more letters sent to police, threats of murder, told to just bin, told police oil in their doorway if nothing done over threat to murder.Further asked would they talk to this woman was willing to put her comments in my website, underneath restraining order to show her point of view,,,,asked police again in 2021 do not know if ever contacted.

9/ Still getting letters to murder, so Marsh aware of threat,told in email 27.1.2021,,,oil in MP doorway,QUOTE ,,, Caused criminal damage at Patchway police station,[poured 5l can of oil in doorway] bet they have not informed media of offence, would not want why action taken, only way to get story out, [a court hearing] Tory MP Lopresti and police and local police PCC Mountstevens aware i would do this ,if correspondence ignored, they called my bluff knowing criminal series of offences will be made..... they will not want before a court, they will try to issue a caution, [will be refused] or as barrister stated,,,,will release without charge no public interest ,,,,will need to offend at another police station, or MP office [5L again of old oil] until sent to prison to die. Have one opening, at moment ,vindictive police have issued court summons as went through red light 1.2 seconds ,,,,yes 1.2 secs ,,,,max speed ,,,,wet road dangerous to brake ,,,,action taken due to complaints historic to police, given option no action if attend a day course,,,,easy way to conclude,,,,,however can defend via trial to bring out issues,not only above defence however just vindictive prosecution,,,police will take me to court over this,,,,,1.2 seconds,,,however historic evidence ,,,,,have lawyer in letter stating we commited perjury,,,,too late for you to do anything about it now, please see below.....we have court saying we commited offence malfeasance in public office however police refuse to deal with ADMITTED criminal offence. ,,,,,,,,,however take me to court over 1.2 seconds,,,,,WE HAVE AS IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES IGNORED,,,ask MP for help, however as corrupt and bent as he has done for years ignore correspondence in pocket of police and the courts, this document in my website ,will follow up with new website www.jackloprestimpcorrupt.com say if facts untrue sue me ....MP Jack Lopresti,for example in last 18 months 32 emails all ignored, recently confirmed he would ignore all correspondence any subject ….UNQUOTE .So Marsh aware of murder threats where quoted Erahimi case. Did not want to offend further email 11.2.2021 to Marsh ,in detail explaining murder threats.Took copy to Sgt Price to make sure as scan picture 29 did not want to offend, just wanted to be arrested over threats to stop being murdered, in document 11.2.2021 outlined being followed ect worried about murder.. Have historic recording with Ms Jones TJ front staff Patchway police station, where gets involved although nothing to do with her,, beng dealt with by another member of staff, from police papers today, when leaving letter 11.2.2021 being dealt with by another member of staff, TJ can not help herself ,,, gets involved,,,,police refuse to give receipt for letter. Told police/PCC not to call my bluff ,, pouring of oil,,,told would offend,,where concerned for my life poured oil in MP doorway, 18.2.2021. Presented at police station 19.2.2021 to be arrested, being dealt with by another member of staff where TJ gets involved again.,,,,can not help herself. Ask why i want to arrested, told threat to murder this can not go on no longer, where Marsh /PCC/Price involved ,,,asked where i had offended and what i had done,GIVEN she checks states not on system no record of any offence wait for reply from Sgt Price. She did not know initally where offence took place where person sat next toTJ both of us pointing along A38 to show her where Woodlands was situated. Lawyers Reeds state your entry, and leaving 19.2.2021 from recording and CCTV they have record of movements and what was said. Recording would show what was said, would show movements, told speaking too quite move closer as also with mask on can not hear you, and what your saying,was not ranting and raving,,,. Present barrister state police have destoyed evidence. Gave examples, TJ will get away with this, police have destroyed evidence, however she states,,,,,did not understand what he was saying,,,,she keeps saying not on system, wait for reply from Price ,,,,,where i state it would not happen, would you say not on system go away if i said i had thrown petrol in MP doorway,,, TJ does not want to admit theoretical issue,,,,told it would not occur so states ,,,,,he would not inform me why he wanted to be arrested,,,,,she was told of offence where she stated not on system,,,,reason for my reply,,,,would not occur would you say go away,if i said thrown petrol,,,,,,,,after all threats to murder would any jury believe i would not say why wanted to be arrested,,,,, further if not told not on system , not reported, why do i taunt MP in less than a hour as he had not reported as confirmed by TJ ,,,,,,,,in MP statement in todays papers, there was NEVER threats to us. In respect to letter to Marsh PCC Price 11.2.2021,,,to make sure gives detail of murder threats, further aware of offending 18.2.2021 to get something done,,,,,POLICE WOULD NOT DEAL WITH ISSUE OR MP [ALSO SENT 11.2.2021 LETTER VIA EMAIL] OR IPCC. So offended fear for my life as email 27.1.2021 police aware oil in MP doorway. So in desperation do you get criminal record,,,,end of your medical career or do you get murdered.

10/ Arrested at 11.45 pm threat to cause arson. Front door damaged, retired police officer suggested caused by police baton, Told on your arrest throwing oil in police doorway, 4.1.2021 we did not want background before the court,[murder threat] so dropped case, WE NEED THEREFORE TO TAKE FINGERPRINTS ECT AGAIN AS WE REMOVED AS NOT CHARGING. BUT THIS IS FORCE AWARE OFFENCE WOULD OCCUR TOOK NO ACTION,,,,GOADED ME INTO OFFENDING THEN DO NOT WANT TO PUT EVIDENCE TO A COURT AS THEY WOULD BE EXPOSED.Assaulted by PC Snell ripping handcuffs up and down, me screaming in pain, request for boby cam ignored, understand lawyer making new application. Lawyers Reeds state police have evidence which would prove my case what was said, my barrister informs me police have removed,,,,comes before interview no threat was made,,,,to prove my case did never want to be arrested, would always give police written notice so could be arrested over threat, please see scan picture 29.Asked when document sent to Marsh ,,,,,top of page in scan picture 029 ref 1 today was in bundle i bought with me yesterday , police statement nonsense suggest correspondence sent on the 19.2.2021 this was just misunderstanding. Further evidence as police asked for copy on the 20.2.2021 , first time presented to police was at interview. Interview at 2.00 pm charged, can i refer as above to facts where police admit to facts raised, eg murder issue complaint 17.10.2020 [error in todays police papers complaint 27.10.2020 no ,,,,,complaint 17.10.2020 which was ignored no complaint 27.10.2020]. Did not help as explaining facts where lawyers Reeds state,,,,,,heard enough have to go, in papers under exhibite7808 today while in cell produce above document where it states,,,,,INTERVIEW TERMINATED EARLY. Was told about 4.00 pm just about to be released, asked if wanted food told no as just about to go home. About 8.00 pm complain as not released ,hungary, where told should have eaten at 6.00pm. Not released for about another 4 hours.

11/ Coming home my medical books all over floor, my stethoscope on floor. , the wires ripped out of computer router, and FIRST thing i did was look in filing cabinett X where my late parents wedding rings were, also related items, eg my late mothers purse, no issue with police, no allegations nothing missing , however filing cabinett unlocked. Can i explain as one of my last epidemiologist projects , for NHS , was looking at all people in Bristol who had died before their time eg under 65, as having medical records in house must be secure. Was supplied with 12 filing 4 draw cabinets . Had made mistake before where locked with key inside, went to call out locksmith, where told code on plunger and could supply a key, told to go through routine,in future your not first one to do this, ,,,,talk to yourself, if openedl ,,,leaving filing cabinets,,,,,,,have you key left hand,,,yes,,,then can lock,,,do this every time would never leave unlocked,,,why have police gone into cabinets. Remember arrested over threat to cause arson,,,,,why have they taken card from camera of photographs taken,,,,,as barrister who saw my website,,,,fishing ,utterly illegal,,,,anything to convict,,,,child pornagrahic images ???????,,,,remember from statute can only take if relevant to ,,, why charged, As barrister said who saw my website,,,you were arrested over a threat to cause arson at MP office, if threat made to MP he would have email to show to police, what extra would be on your computer, .OR WAS THIS TAKEN TO PERVERT COURSE OF JUSTICE. Remember arrested as threat to cause arson, recently car repair at home ,trademan also will state from front door right in front of you are 2 windows into garage, where there is a 5L can of petrol, can be seen through window ,[please see scans 19 20 and 21 ] why was petrol not taken.. Then get letter scan picture 35 not compatible with scan picture 32 and 33. Police have taken scan 35 ,,,also computer parts and software not declared in scan 32 and 33. Police state further we had taken computer parts, can i help doing research at university on lung carcinoma [cancer] supervisors a consult surgeon, and consultant radiologist. In skip were 2 matching tv monitors , where given permission to take, marked university property,,,,can i suggest assumed stolen, taken, now know not stolen so scan picture 35 to return. Have numerous back up USB sticks where 7 missing and paperwork what was on each removed. Also other software taken if police want to remove virus on computer.Barrister who saw my website suggested where police back for second time , CCTV turned off, Asked police what computer parts and software were taken, where they ignore email, took third party to confirm not returned on collection. Talking to my lawyer where she is asking for return. Had call do you know your toolbox gone, will never see again,,,,was locked can not understand why not break lock lie through teeth say was broken when we entered house than steal my property.

12/ Can i define computers.

a/Old Tower computer,,,20 years old

b/ When Tower was purchased there was i in 30 chance of obtaining 300.00 off another computer so used to buy laptop,,,,,was the 1 in 30 lucky one

c/ From old age pensioner computer club was given laptop ,,,,,where organiser backed up b/ and put data on this computer…..now not working ,,,done as only 10 years old b/ much older...

d/ Computer shop late 2020 backed up data on c/ and put onto new lap top. To save carrying around this laptop also purchased a harddrive where data recovered from c/ copied on to it, size 4 x2.5 x 0.3 inch. Eg identical copy of what was put on d/computer. CAN WE DEFINE AS FATAL EVIDENCE HARDDRIVE [FEH]

Police were not interested in arson threat , TJ was told it would not occur, however from front door you can look into garage through window and see 5l can of petrol which was not taken.?????? Arrested assaulted by Snell, waiting for bobycam where within 20 secs PCCollett [came with Snell] reporting back to assume station states,,,,found electrical,,,,.thats what they came for to pervert course of justice to remove evidence from computer.Where computer from above a/ seized thats what they came for. Coming home 20.2.2021 computer a/ missing ,wires ripped out of computer router. Also lawyer asked for search video cam does it show wires being ripped out , if not as barrister who saw my website suggested did police come back again. MP utterly corrupt and dishonest in earlier emails state,,,,,,our office was never involved in your historic problems with the court ,so made note of emails as evidence, when following day went to print, they had gone, all emails with MP from mid 2014 and earlier removed, from FEH we have missing evidence with MP back to 2011 all of this removed, as far as MP is concerned and police are concerned alright remove evidence, however you forgot Michael Cobbs emails [MP SECRETARY] where we have his emails over historic legal case.,,,,say to MP your utterly dishonest YOU WERE INVOLVED.As barrister stated who saw my website police aware only very old documents on Tower, used mainley as other computers would not accept scanner, eg required if i need to scan. As he said looking for anything to convict ,,,fishing,,,need to go back to other computers, So c/ not working will not produce a picture,,,,while computer b/ due to virus when you switch on just get error message. New computer uses Windows 10, problems using computer shop will confirm asked them a few days before arrest to remove virus so i could use as problems with new laptop, told no charge will give tutorial on new system., no need to spend money on removal. Computers b/ and c/ on bed after arrest, computer b/ lid open, need to confirm with police videocam of first search, understand lawyer already requested evidence….THEY HAVE REMOVED VIRUS from computer. b/ Can i refer to above scan police june,,,this removed , All computers at home how can data be altered, this is IOPC expertise, i know i talked to a company, where told as hacked in could control computer,,,,gave example say i go to library,,,,,all you need is log in details, do not need actual computer.,,,,what else have they altered.Again lucky for evidence the old age pensioners computer club , expert, when putting data on computer 2 to computer 3 was asked to please keep record on hard drive for me, shows all documents,,,,[go to documents type in search police,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,all documents now gone,,,,,,however have record on backed up harddrive of computer club.

13/ So comes before court, probation issue today,,,,threat of arson,,,,where recorded evidence destroyed by police TJ shown as witness utterly dishonest,,,,,did not know why he offended at MP office ,,,yes you were you said after asking person sat next to you, where Woodlands was situated,,,,told thrown oil,,,,told not on system, offence not reported wait for reply over threats to murder from Sgt Price,,where i said to her would not occur however if i said i had thrown petrol in MP office ,would you say not on system go away,,,,,where i taunt MP within the hour as not reported,,,,,HOW DID I KNOW IF NOT TOLD BY THIS CORRUPT PERSON, CAN SEE WHY POLICE HAVE DROPPED CASE Police will not want her in the dock, crossexamined where they drop case, on record today is just criminal damage, where March aware would occur, took no action, can i refer to start of this document, offended due to threats to be murdered…...MARSH TOLD THESE OFFENCES WOULD OCCUR GOADED INTO OFFENDING DID NOTHING AWARE OFFENCE WOULD OCCUR

• 
  Did the officer realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk?
  

Recklessness: the defendant foresees that particular consequences may occur and proceeds with the given conduct, not caring whether those consequences actually occur or not.

• 
  Criminal negligence: the defendant did not actually foresee that the particular consequences would flow from his actions, but a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen those consequences.
  

• 
  

14/ Due to statute police must report allegations of criminal activity, corruption, assault to the IOPC [independant office of police conduct] ,,,,,stealing my property compare scan picture 32 /33 and 35,,,,where my computer parts and software stolen,,,,look at computer evidence where from THIRD PARTY evidence can prove corruption, POLICE perverting course of justice removing computer records,,,,where police state ,,,,,do not understand with threat,,,,,do in 2 pages maximum if we do not unserstand ,will bin and as usual will ignore any future correspondence, in respect to statute referral to the IOPC.

15/ Not looking for any favours , knew before leaving oil in doorway would get criminal record, however more important was to stop being murdered. Hoped something would be done over threat, even in 2019 scan picture 29 to pour oil ,,,arrested,,,then murder issue arises from above Marsh aware oil in police doorway,,,,did not get result eg arrested, so Marsh aware oil in MP office,,,,Mountstevens PCC like Marsh told in email,,,,,not to call my bluff,,,,hoped threat to murder addresed ,,,, put before court say after threat to pour oil in MP office, [no actual pouring of oil] ,,,,discharged say good behaviour over 12 months, so could get on with my life, now for example in respect to Covid and as medic told as criminal record can not accept your offer to vacinate free of charge for us.

16 This vindicitive force now taking me to court as going through red light at 1.2 seconds. Making things as difficult as possible instead of hearing in Bristol wants it heard in Bath. Thought end of it in 2020, where had option to go to afternoon police workshop ,where case would then be dropped, however as i stated to them in normal situation correct way, however put forward anyway defence, as below, however had to go for hearing to bring out threats to murder, where police will do nothing about it. Will use this document at hearing. From above group of people going to Asda for reductions, did not know woman well, however told knee problem, difficult walking, wanted to go to hospital to see mother who was terminally ill. Said i woud do, however next day was MOT if failed could not do. Had to be on time for MOT ,,,late, where from records went through red light at 1.2 seconds,,,,,eg equal to one car in front of me, anyway surface wet would be dangerous heavy breaking . As retired epidemiologist was aware of Covid, had organised, told police plastic sheet between front and back seats taped in place for her to sit in back. As barrister said who saw my wesite police can amend charge, could include breach of Covid orders, with extra fine of 200.00 due to Covid breach when go for hearing.

This was issue unchanged from above, see prosecution made by Marsh ,yes Marsh aware of murder threats to me ,who does nothing. Police warn over breach of Covid regulations, after defence filed. Accept as barrister said charge can be amended,,,,,say to police ask for 200.00 EXTRA at hearing,in Bath will show what a pathetic vindictive people you are, can i quote,,,,,DNOWDNT would explain at hearing, with email to myself today what DNOWDNT stands for.

17/ Reference murder threat this woman still following me, Starts also again in last few weeks ,please see par 6 above,,,,STRANGE numerous letters in last few weeks for neighbour,,,,has he complained to police planting on me. Before allegations to damage of mail, contacted police sometime ago to contact Patchway sorting office to collect , these letters waiting to be collected do not want allegations mail damaged.

PROPOSED LETTER FROM MS ROWLAND TO CPS ACCEPT SHE WILL WRITE AS SHE FEELS FIT HOWEVER PLEASE ASK SHE ADDRESS THESE ISSUES.CAN I PLEASE HAVE COPY OF LETTER SENT ,,,,can we ask for reply by the 25.5.2021 as required for interview 27.5.2021,,,,

My client due to talk to Ms Slocombe on the 27.5.2021 at probation service , over why commited damage, eg threats to him of murder, which police ignored. My client warned to cooperate with probation, and ask you also as even handed to do the same, producing evidence for probation,Can i cite Human Rights case law,,,,

An issue with regard to access to evidence may arise under Article 6 insofar as the evidence at issue is relevant for the applicant’s case, specifically if it had an important bearing on the charges held against the applicant. This is the case if the evidence was used and relied upon for the determination of the applicant’s guilt or it contained such particulars which could have enabled the applicant to exonerate oneself or have the sentence reduced. The relevant evidence in this context is not only evidence directly relevant to the facts of the case, but also other evidence that might relate to the admissibility, reliability and completeness of the former (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 66; Mirilashvili v. Russia, § 200; b. Adversarial hearing As a rule, Article 6 § 1 requires that the prosecution authorities disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused (Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 60).

1/ Can i refer to my client picketing at the court in 2017 , DIRECTLY RELATED TO ISSUE WITH MP ,,,where barrister he gave leaflet to told him to report to police malfeasance in public office, confirmed in letter from Insp O Mahony ref 2 today.,,,scan 10594 So abundantly clear to Ms Slocombe in ref 2 it states,,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office ,,,,,,,,,,,,,judges and court officers,,,,,however does not state what judges and staff court accused of, can you please confirm, for Ms Slocombe. Need in own words accept in preaction protocol for judicial review, and actual judicial review application, its stated, however you may has statute disputed allegation,,,,as court advised you should if dispute facts. In your judgement stated report to JCIO , and judges immune from prosecution .Sgt Price asked my client to send evidence can i refer to police property receipts number 259327 ref 5 today and 260861 , we have others. Sgt Price stance she never obtained letters and allegations of forgery of receipts. Can you confirm stance that these receipts forged, if you did have correspondence could you please send me a copy.

2/ On the 1.6.2020 over a year now complaint made MACVFQVM to you, can i please have reply for Ms Slocombe. Again complaint related to murder threat made 17.10.2020 ref MAC-VZJDG again can we have a reply please to complaint for Ms Slocombe, still waiting for reply over 7 months.

3/ We have murder threats complaint 24.9.2020, where sent her letters to you , told to bin letters in future and block her from emailing, further evidence 19.12.2020 sent and in email to Marsh PCC Sgt Price 11.2.2021 gave you details. Confusing limited evidence, my client in discussion with Met police told she contacted US never issue to contact her, see correspondence with Bridewell station Bristol. Your aware of threat to murder, in TJ statement states my client told her this can not go on any longer these threats to murder, where told to await reply from Sgt Price of his letter 11.2.2021 as issue of murder in his document of the 11.2.2021. Could you please outline what action you took over threats to murder, for example over 3 months since his letter to Marsh/PCC /Sgt Price or is this a case of ,,,Did the officer Marsh realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk? We ask for reply to complaint of 17.10.2020 asdirecly related, this woman told by you, my client is delusionary .mentally ill in making judicial review application against us, could you please outline history of threat to murder,,,,for example was this woman ever questioned,,,,,or was this a case as in Ereahimi case ,where aware of threat to murder,in 2020,,,,,,eg email 11.2.2021 however police ignored.

4/ On the 2.12.2020 you were aware for example asking reply to complaint 17.10.2020 concerning murder threats, that if nothing done my client would pour oil in police doorway so he could be arrested to bring to a court to stop murder threats. You were aware of threat however ,,Did the officer Marsh realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk? Where my client goaded into offending. On the 19.12.2020 was Marsh aware if murder threats not dealt with, oil in police door way, offended 4.1.2021did not work out to get arrested,,,so email 17.1.2021 told oil in MP doorway, in letter 11.2.2021 desperate not to offend, police given second chance to act to arrest over oil in MP office,,,Did the officer Marsh realise that those consequences were ‘likely’ and yet went on to take the risk? ,,,,,eg no arrest over threats

5/ My client produced compelling evidence concerning police corruption and criminal activity, where as statute police must refer to the IOPC, in his rejected correspondence was threatened ,,,,,must be in 2 pages, untrue, if you did not make clear we will bin and ignore future correspondence . A new request to you to refer to IOPC , can you confirm so Ms Slocombe can report, that application has been sent to the IOPC , if refuse to refer can you please inform Ms Slocombe why you refuse to refer.

6/ In respect to murder threats, my client suggested to resolve, you ask her to conclude if she wished to put statement in my clients website under restraining order list,in my clients website ,,,[2020 and 2021] did you ever talk to her, or was my client emails ignored.

7/ Previosly i have requested [Ms Rowlands told me had requested ]on the ,,,,,,,,,,,for boby cam of arrest and seizure of property, can you please ensure i have 48 hours before my clients interview with probation.

8/ On arrest 19.2.2021 my client told did not expect you back, thought we had frightened you, 4.1.2021 while in custody, We did not want evidence before open court, [can do today] so dropped case , so need to do fingerprints ect again as statute we have removed as taking no action. My client never informed case was dropped, could you please supply paperwork that case was closed by you. So you were aware offence would occur,,2020 ,oil in policestation doorway took no action over threat,,,,goaded my client into offending over non action over murder issue,,,,my client offended,,,then you refuse to prosecute ?????????????????????

9/We have issue in CPS bundle, alledge correspondence sent to Marsh on the 19.2.2021 can you confirm not sent

10/ Lawyers Reeds state that you have evidence on recording CCTV of my clients entry and leaving station on the 19.2.2021, which would prove his case, as he maintained from day 1 , can you confirm evidence has been destroyed. To

11/ Can i refer to scan picture 32 33 and 35, Ms Slocombes reference 6 7 and 8. Can you confirm scan picture 35 is your document, further it states besides official seizure picture 32 33 you took computer parts and software. My client asked for details of these, knowing taken, before collection of his property however his email ignored, so took witness to station. We asked for return on the [lawyer informed me she had asked] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,however obtained no reply, can you please explain why. Further as picture 32 33 was other items,,,,,eg new bottle of chainsaw oil can we please ask for return.

12/ In later discussion with barrister my client stated did not cause this damage, reason he pleaded not guilty .It then arose confusion, my client saying did not cause this,,,,,and barrister saying,,,,not sure they are saying this,,,,think this was just reflection from sun. With reference to each of CPS evidence photographs could you preciosly state whar area you alleged my client damaged. From expert witness my client contacted,,,,the WORSE thing, utter incompetance was pour boiling water over it, and cites not only his view, but from internet,,,,to remove stain in wood use strong detergent.

NEWS STORY FOR MEDIA….This is repeat of Profuma sex affair case Have been forced into obtaining a criminal record to get this story out,end of therefore of my medical career,,,offered free of charge to vacinate Covid 19 6 days /week however informed via vetting now would not be accepted,,,Police and courts [civil not criminal] believe if we ignore correspondence we can get away with a miscarriage of justice, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,Todays issue over restraining order due to complaint against police, as vexatious ,you have below the actual allegations in judicial review pasted, and in police own words admitting allegations, is this first time this has occured,,,,NO,,,court as you will see already in another vexatious restraining order paid compensation to me. Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider above not first time,,,,Asked Tory MP Lopresti for help eg Legal Aid /ombudsman all correspondence as he confirms he will ignore,,,,knowing miscarriage of justice. Caused criminal damage at Patchway police station,[poured 5l can of oil in doorway] bet they have not informed media of offence, would not want why action taken, only way to get story out, [a court hearing] Tory MP Lopresti and police and local police PCC Mountstevens aware i would do this ,if correspondence ignored, they called my bluff knowing criminal series of offences will be made..... they will not want before a court, they will try to issue a caution, [will be refused] or as barrister stated,,,,will release without charge no public interest ,,,,will need to offend at another police station, or MP office [5L again of old oil] until sent to prison to die. Have one opening, at moment ,vindictive police have issued court summons as went through red light 1.2 seconds ,,,,yes 1.2 secs ,,,,max speed ,,,,wet road dangerous to brake ,,,,action taken due to complaints historic to police, given option no action if attend a day course,,,,easy way to conclude,,,,,however can defend via trial to bring out issues,not only above defence however just vindictive prosecution,,,police will take me to court over this,,,,,1.2 seconds,,,however historic evidence ,,,,,have lawyer in letter stating we commited perjury,,,,too late for you to do anything about it now, please see below.....we have court saying we commited offence malfeasance in public office however police refuse to deal with ADMITTED criminal offence. ,,,,,,,,,however take me to court over 1.2 seconds,,,,,WE HAVE AS IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES IGNORED,,,ask MP for help, however as corrupt and bent as he has done for years ignore correspondence in pocket of police and the courts, this document in my website ,will follow up with new website www.jackloprestimpcorrupt.com say if facts untrue sue me ....MP Jack Lopresti,for example in last 18 months 32 emails all ignored, recently confirmed he would ignore all correspondence any subject …...my email……………...[part quote]

1. My MP s office states you should have responce in 3 days to emails to us,,,,,after 2 weeks still no responce to emails. States woman dealing with this in Friday, will assume with no email on t,,he 18.12.2020 there will be no reply. State we do not know how to deal with matter. WE MAY ASK SIMPLE QUESTIONS IS THIS NOT CASE OF ....WE DO NOT KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH MATTER ,,,,,OR WE WILL NOT DEAL WITH MATTER.....SIMPLE QUESTION.

2. Well issue is

3. a/ Ask my MP to put papers to Hon Buckland as ask state to provide Legal Aid. The statute via Human Right Act in scan evidence 2. [in my website]

4. b/ In scan evidence one my MP can see in own words the police admit my claim to the court, eg this was a IPCC investigation and we did not follow IPCC regulations. Further admit by police we sent reply to your appeal,where one not lodged. Have one outstanding item ,,,,as Buckland would require merits of case, before State giving legal aid, ,,,,,why did i come to police day 1.

5. c/ We have further issue complaints 1.6.2020 17.10.2020 that police ignored, where asked MP to obtain replies .

6. d/ We ask MP to present related issue to ombudsman, where we do not know court stance, where ask him to ask court, as he would require merits to refer to ombudsman. ,details in scan evidence 4./6

7. P JONES

8. Lopresti,,,, knowing miscarriage of justice, as asked State for take one example ,,,to provide Legal Aid, ,,,,,,,,via statute i can not refer to ombudsman ONLY LOPRESTI can do this,refuses ,,,,GIVES NO REASON WHY REFUSED JUST IGNORES EMAILS

9. C. Legal aid

10. 1. Granting of legal aid

11. However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26). civil courts, police involved , where tortued in police custody these trying to sweep matter under the carpet. Police aware i suffer from clauustraphobia, for example after cholecystectomy operation many years ago tearful as wanted to go home next day to recover, however 4.1.2021 held in cells for 10 hours no referal to lawyer, for records at end put in exercise yard, as clautraphobic, however only given 5 mins. Tuesday shopping day, specific day due to Covid 19,,,group of friends go for reductions done between 6.00 and 7,00 pm at supermarket,now group go different days. Others in group go other nights due to social distancing,to shop reductions as govenment instructions,,,, inform Ms X [in bubble] about arrest day before, knew what she did, however unaware until told due to her job visit Patchway police station on regular basis, where told special cells with windows, for people suffering from claustaphobia….however police felt fit to tortuer me. For years ,,courts /police ignore correspondence , Lopresti ignores as he has done for years, only option offending to bring matter out at court hearing. From proceddings [please see relevance later an issue relevant even today] had cited court restraining order list[i am not on list] list where woman on list sends violent threating emails...do not know woman. She contacts police where told i should have not cited her in list,police continue,,,my allegations against police are delusionary ,he is mentally ill, please see below ….will paste actual application [the allegations] in judicial review and you will see there are 2 elements, where POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT APPLICATION. SO APPLICATION AGAINST US DELUSIONARY HE IS MENTALLY ILL AS MADE ?????? YOU ADMIT IN OWN WORDS THIS WAS A IPCC [independent police complaint commision] INVESTIGATION AND WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE NO APPEAL MADE. SO THIS APPLICATION DELUSINARY MENTALLY ILL. ????????????Make official complaint about libel comments,female barrister and judge who saw my website stated ‚police no time limit to reply to complaint, however via statute should be done ….in reasonable time, made 17.10.2020,,,,[over 2 months ago] also other complaint 1.6.2020 which police believe if we ignore it will also go away, police they ignore complaints, South Glos Council confirm these libel comments now made to them,,, Corruption between above parties which is repeat of parties in Profuma affair. The Profuma affair a long time interest of mine at time for example my letters to Christine Keeler, and media, one reply from national newspaper Keeler was not innocent party in this see enclosed advert from magazine,,,,,see Christine Keeler take penis in rectum only homosexuals do this 18 dollars see 8mm film.

12. CORRUPTION PROFUMA,,,BETWEEN COURTS AND POLICE WITH TORY MP INVOLVED AS WE HAVE TODAY...ALL PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE KNOWING MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. ALREADY CRIMINAL DAMAGE AT POLICE STATIONS STARTED 4.1.2021 WILL CONTINUE EVERY WEEK in FEB AS ONLY WAY TO SHOW CORRUPTION MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE ALSO DAMAGE AT COURT AND OTHER PLACES [LOPRESTIS OFFICE ] LATER WHERE MP JACK LOPRESTI/ POLICE ,,COURTS,,, PCC OF POLICE MS MOUNTSTEVENS AWARE IN 2020 I WOULD TAKE MATTER INTO MY OWN HANDS IF CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED, WHERE ABOVE HAPPY FOR ME TO OBTAIN A CRIMINAL RECORD.. REPEAT OF HISTORIC CASE OF CHRISTINE KELLER WHERE HAD CONTACT WITH HER AND INVOLVED ANOTHER TORY MP JOHN PROFUMA WHICH BOUGHT DOWN GOVERNMENT AT TIME , BARRISTER DID WARN ME AT TIME

IN OWN WORDS POLICE ...WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION AND WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL,,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS ,,[,CORRUPT POLICE HAD LETTER FROM COURT,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,]WHERE NO APPEAL LODGED. IS THIS NOT AS WHEN STEVEN WARD PROSECUTED IN PROFUMA CASE ,,,AS CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS. WE HAVE TODAY JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] IN 2017,,,SAYING POLICE AND COURT WRONG, VIA STATUTE WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS IF INITIAL CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS,,,,JCIO,,,PASTE FROM THEIR WEBSITE,,,ALSO SENT TO ME

We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ),,,THE EAGA CASE IS THE PERJURY CASE SGT PRICE ON RECORDING STATES SHE WOULD NOT GIVE TO OFFICER TO INVESTIGATE IF NOT A CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,WHERE BRUSHED OFF BY POLICE,,AS WARNED BY BARRISTER WHO SAW ME PICKETING AT THE COURT from COPWATCH

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.” [TODAY ADMITTED PERJURY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE]

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……

I try to be independant, due to claustophobia could never live in a care home,for example from GP records stated would die on tennis court not in a home,,, from any exercise have become a drug addict, as exercise releases neurotransmitters the endorphines which i need,,,,,ALL i need short input eack week,,,accept would be arrested, claustraphobic would have to get out of cell,,forced to take actions by police/courts/Lopresti. Assumed seen by lawyer in a few hours, did not sleep night before,,,could sleep in cell for a few hours,,to pass time before seen by lawyer,however now 10 hours can not sleep,,, no access to a lawyer,,,,,Accept by running into cell wall until unconscious however may get brain damage, may be then not independant,,,,where hope therefore to die in police custody. ,,,,,,,WE HAVE POLICE IN JUDGEMENT SAYING REASON WE DID NOT INVESTIGATE YOUR COMPLAINT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO HOWEVER UTTERLY AWARE FROM ABOVE JCIO COULD NOT INVESTIGATE,,,THE JCIO DOCUMENT SENT TO THEM ;;;WHERE JUDICIARY WRONGLY CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURT STATING SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO,,,,,THEY HAVE LETTER FROM JCIO STATING WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE,,,AS IN PROFUMA CASE CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS.ARE THE JUDICIARY /POLICE ,,,,,,DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE IT ??????

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ..…

ASKED POLICE IN 2017 SAME QUESTION TODAY WHY DID I COME TO SGT PRICE

WE ASK POLICE TODAY FOR ,,,RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ASKING FOR YEARS AGO ..Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Media will need to see issue ,,,details in my website.,synopsis below. Female QC barrister and judge who saw my website stated in cases there is cornerstone issue,,,,take theoretical case i am sitting as a judge man accused as robbing a bank, however case fails,,,,,,,,,,,,,on day in closed prison, your issue why you went to police day 1. There is no dispute here as from recording with Sgt Price told to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office and within submit my complaint, called FEDJCAB document, [title describes issue,,fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent ]this document in statute document pre action protocol document for judicial review , further document had to be produced via statute Annex A paragraphs scan annex a in my website eg,,

paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS]

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

The police have courts admitting facts,,,,,,,,,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,they have numerous applications [taken by hand to the court ]date/stamped by court ignored, even lawyer saying his application ignored. In my website you have scan 10594 from Insp O Mahony confirming went over criminal offence malfeasance in public office, from statute of JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office ]they confirm via statute as criminal offence can not investigate any complaints, as criminal allegations as JCIO state should be investigated by the police, which they refuse to do. So becomes a IPCC [independant police commision complaint] .Where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations in your IPCC case and sent reply to your appeal,WHERE ONE NOT MADE,,,police,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,,,. HOWEVER JUDICIARY STATE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO AND VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE,,,,,,THEY ADMIT ALLEGATIONS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW. We have further the initial judgement of HHJCotter, where HHJBigger at Admin court Cardiff states the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement, later at court of appeal Legatt LJ states facts of case in HHJCotters judgement. However from several lawyers and barristers who saw my website,,,,cited the fairtale,,,Hans Christane Andersan THE KINGS NEW CLOTHES to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants,day 1 as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

WE HAVE FURTHER COURT STATING HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,,as female judge stated serious legal issue now,,,,read wrong papers,,,so ask for refund of fee. Legatt judgement in tatters,,,,facts of case in Cotters judgement,,,but Cotter did not read application,,,statute,,,complain to court,,,,take to Resolver,,,then refer to Lopresti,,,,,who will collate evidence to refer to ombudsman,,,where LOPRESTI CONFIRMS HE WILL IGNORE MY CORRESPONDENCE,,LOPRESTI YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT IN POCKET OF POLICE AND COURTS YOU KNOW MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.WILL NOT COLLATE EVIDENCE FOR OMBUDSMAN,,,, ASK LOPRESTI FOR STATE TO PROVIDE LEGAL AID HOWEVER 32 EMAILS IN LAST 2 YEARS ALL IGNORED

SYNOPSIS FOR MEDIA TO SEE WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON

SYNOPSIS,,,CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS AND TORY MP REPEAT OF PROFUMA CASE IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER ,,note court is civil court not criminal

PLEASE SEE MY WEBSITE WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM WHERE YOU HAVE AT START RECENT LATEST IGNORED EMAIL TO LOPRESTI IN LETTER YOU HAVE SCAN EVIDENCE 1 THE POLICE ISSUE AND SCAN EVIDENCE 4 AND 6 THE COURT ISSUE BOTH IGNORED REQUEST FOR DATA REASON FOR CRIMINAL ACTIONS FORCED INTO,,,,COURT ISSUES OVER 20YEARS

Court case at Bristol county court, comes before Administration court Cardiff in judicial review where Bristol court awarded 500.00 costs. Take to court of appeal where comes before Lord Goldring, where asks if i can argue corruption at the court, TRYING TO HELP,,where he states via Strickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132 although as today ,,,,,the court getting judgement very badly wrong ...its not a reason to appeal a High court judgement in judicial review, will return to later asked for return of file, if i paid postal cost,,,inside WHEN papers returned was Lord Goldrings note,,,,,,,,,,,circumstances when a High Court judge can judicially review a County Court judge's decision were exceptional and limited to instances where the judicial process itself had been frustrated or corrupted…..can see why asked if i could argue corruption.

Lord Goldring said he was sorry although the courts getting judgements very badly wrong he could do nothing, however he could look at cost awarded against you, and this 500.00 would be quashed

NEVER FORGIVEN BY BRISTOL COUNTY COURT AND ADMIN COURT CARDIFF FOR JUDGEMENT REASON TODAY ISSUES

Court case ,,,,contract with government contractor reason Lopresti does not want to get involved,,,between Ms Suggett and myself,,,have the court transcript of hearing…LAWYER,,.transcript..my client does not know Ms Suggett or where these emails [the contract ]come from….as judge who saw my website stated,,,did judge believe you forged evidence,,,judge who heard case in note stated later,,,on reflection something very odd with this case,,as asked for his notes,,,,[from barrister told heard by DDJGisby told has a law firm in Bristol hoping to become a full time judge] accuse LATER defence lawyer of perjury with letter reply….Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application too late for you to do anything about it now,,,report perjury to police told by Sgt Bell as corruption between police and the courts,,,as in Profuma affair ,,,,we will not take on the courts ,anyway they have informed MP they will not take cost awarded to them, no need for us to act,,,so i can rob a bank repay money and therefore police will take no action,,,even many years later money taken every month and then repaid SAME DAY from my bank account,,,,still done 2021.

Try to obtain evidence from the court,to do appeal applications ,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,where court Mr Fowler states however your correspondence will not be read not answered just filed utter breach of Article 6 as Fowler corrupts and frustrates judicial process...utter breach of Article 6

Courts ignoring correspondence contact Lopresti MP he ignores correspondence ,then obtain letter will write again to the court never obtained reply from Lopresti

Courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence ,issue website... www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com Have my website NOW where blackmailed ,,,,told by HHJDenyer ...remove website or consequences. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED Have claim v Compuwave where they asked to settle ,settlement sent to the court, ask for removal from court hearing list...[please see my website at start recent email to Lopresti under scan evidence 4 where you have email to the court plus court receipt] record conversation with court, no need to attend hearing as case settled ,told on recording HHJDenyer had removed from hearing list, matter settled,no need to attend. Then see what CONSEQUENCES means as this corrupt and bent judge Denyer issues restraining, order ,,,,collusion with judge who now hears case, order as i now appealed., of course no party turned up for hearing.,appealed as case dismissed,we had settled matter.,sent court copy of tape ,,recorded delivery told not to turn up for hearing. [sole issue over computer program defendants admit error they had now supplied revised computer program

case settled] Quotes in restaining order, further case NBT [North Bristol NHS Trust] as i again appealed,,,]CAN SEE WHAT CONSEQUENCES MEAN] initial case for medical records/put statement in medical records/travel expenses. Case struck out in papers, no hearing ,,where i appealed,,,,NBT THEN ASKED TO SETTLE JUST BEFORE HEARING DATE SUPPLIED MEDICAL RECORDS PAID TRAVEL EXPENSES AND PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL.MONTHS BEFORE WOULD NEVER HAVE OBTAINED IF NOT MADE APPEAL.AS STRUCK OUT . IN RECENT EMAIL TO LOPRESTI HE IS AWARE THAT ABOVE PARTIES COVERED IN EMAIL IF FACTS NOT CORRECT ABOVE TO CONTACT HIM ,,,COPY TO ME. PERHAPS CORRUPT LOPRESTI CAN INFORM ME AND MEDIA IF HE HAD ANY REPLIES HE REFUSES TO ANSWER MY CORRESPONDENCE AS BENT COLLUSION BETWEEN LOPRESTI COURT POLICE. MEDIA CAN ASK ABOVE IF FACTS CORRECT at hearing with NBT their lawyer asks that judgement reads i acted unreasonably,,,,rejected by DJWatson, applications by myself and lawyer for transcript of hearing ignored by corrupt court,,,DJWatson however stated i had not acted unreasonably ,,,,,therefore ,Denyer never any reason to issue restaining order, i would never of obtained medical records, put statement in medical records, get travel expences if i did not appeal,,,,again bent and corrupt HHJDenyer utter breach of Article 6 [see later NBT again drag me through court REFUSE to release further medical records years later]

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective NBT asked that judgement reads i acted unreasonably ,,,rejected by DJWatson stated i had not acted unreasonably ,,,,Denyer now saying DJWatson wrong,,,media ask NBT just before hearing did you ask to settle ????? supply outstanding medical records and put statement in medical records,,,did you ask judgement states i acted unreasonably rejected by judge.Did you then ask Denyer to make order, ....ask court to look at files rejected utter breach of Article 6…..Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,

DID NBT ASK DENYER TO MAKE ORDER

Another case comes before the courts, applications date/stamped by the courts, however missing at hearing, it appears someone at court or judges removing papers, as DJWatson stated,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,,,a case i won not issue today,,,earlier further documents date/stamped by the court missing from another case file

Picket at court as applications to them and correspondence as above ignored,OVER MANY YEARS. [20 years ] Barrister who i gave scan picket to, please see my website for document, told me to report malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years to police, seen by Sgt Price where she asks for CPS document on malfeasance in public office and insert my complaint,

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red this is direct paste to Sgt Price ,eg why I went to police,,, this is subsection of FEDJCAB complete, court document defined just FEDJCAB as subsection of full document,,,,eg,,,,, why I went to police

SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appication are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.[CAN I ADD SEE APPENDIX 2,,,,,used today same document title Appendix 2 for reference] DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,,,

Please see Copwatch above was brushed off by Sgt Price,,,,told to complain to JCIO, where told of statute malfeasance in public office a criminal offence,,,,SHE KNOWS THIS HER OWN OFFICERS CONVICTED AND JAILED IN IBTAHIMI CASE via statute JCIO could not investigate ,,,,,,PCBird states i talked to court was told we could not investigate.. judges immune [in CPS document have long list of people convicted ,,,includes judges,,,]and to complain to JCIO. The police as in Sgt Bell case try to call black is white,,,,,again court say,have letter from the court,,,,,,,,,,,,,we ignored your applications malfeasance in public office,,,come and talk to us,,,however police state you have no evidence,,,,PCBird asked third party who confirmed, asked for years who was this person. Becomes IPCC investigation please see below where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your later appeal when no appeal lodged.IPCC advise a judicial review.

THE FEDJCAB IN PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW SERVED ON COURT AND POLICE.

FROM MY WEBSITE THE PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT VIA STATUTE HAVE TO BE SERVED VIA FURTHER ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS PLEASE SEE SCAN ANNEX A IN MY WEBSITE,,,,,,,,,,,

paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS]

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

8/ THE DETAILS OF ACTION THAT DEFENDANTS ARE EXPECTED TO TAKE

We expect criminal offence to be investigated, the Home Office state all crimes should be investigated

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

ASKED POLICE WAS THIS AS STATED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT WHERE DEFENDANTS IGNORE ,,,,,,,IN 2018 POLICE DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION. THE QUESTION ASKED UNDER ,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

Can i please refer to my website scan 10594 letter from Insp O Mahoney,,,,malfeasance in public office ignoring applications and correspondence for years,,,however from my letter,,,,did not know if Denyer doing criminal act or court staff not sending documents to him.As blackmail restraining order in place have to ask HHJCotter to issue the judicial review.

HHJCotter asks for fee to hear this case, visit court 5.12.2017 ,told by Mr Blair ,,your not looking at files of us ignoring your applications ,make application to HHJCotter told who will also ignore,clear tactics between them to pervert the course of justice, breach of Article 6 The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,

THE PRESENT COURT ISSUE

SGT PRICE ALSO SENT THE LETTER SCAN 13.4.2017 DOCUMENT PLEASE SEE MY WEBSITE FOR DOCUMENT ,,THESE PLUS FEDJCAB IN LATER STATUTE DOCUMENT PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW HOWEVER SGT PRICE STATES ,,,DO NOT REMEMBER SEEING THEM. IS THIS NOT IDENTICAL IN CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND JUDICIARY IN PROFUMA CASE WHERE MANDY RICE DAVIES STATED IN COURT ,,,,HE WOULD SAY THAT WOUL*D HE [TODAY SHE PRICE WOULD SAY THAT] WE HAVE STATUTE CAN NOT MAKE APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW UNLESS FIRST TRIED TO SETTLE, VIA PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT ,,,ASK POLICE FOR YEARS WAS FEDJCAB IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW SERVED ON POLICE AND COURTS VIA EMAIL 17.10.2017,,,,SGT PRICE STATES UNAWARE OF EVIDENCE ???????PERHAPS POLICE CAN SUPPLY EVIDENCE SUPPLIED TAKE ONE EXAMPLE SEE PROPERTY RECEIPT 259327 ,,,,RECEIPT STATES LETTER FOR PS SUE PRICE TEAM 3 ,,,THIS DOCUMENT TODAY SERVED ON POLICE WHERE ASK CAN I PLEASE HAVE ALL DOCUMENTS SERVED ON SGT PRICE HOWEVER POLICE CONFIRM THEY WILL IGNORE ALL CORRESPONDENCE THIS DOCUMENT SENT TO POLICE MS JENNISON WHERE ASK FOR COPIES OF ALL DOCUMENTS SERVED ON SGT PRICE IN 7 DAYS,,,FURTHER THIS DOCUMENT SENT TO PCC MOUNTSTEVENS,,,CAN SHE ENSURE IN 7 DAYS ALL CORRESPONDENCE SERVED ON PRICE IS SUPPLIED TO ME ,,,WE KNOW SHE WILL IGNORE FURTHER ASK MOUNTSTEVENS TO FORWARD THIS DOCUMENT TO CHIEF CONSTABLE LATER WHEN IN magistrates COURT CAN REFER TO POLICE IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE WHY NOW IN COURT BEFORE MAGISTRATE BEFORE SENT TO PRISON

Accuse initally court of malfeasance in public office where in court reply admit ,,,,,we ignored appliations and correspondence,,,,,,come and talk to us. Is this not as with Sgt Bell police corruption with judiciary as in Profuma case ,their reply you have no evidence of offence where court admit we ignored. Police judgement comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. Eg you have no evidence,,,consider earlier Sgt Bell stance you have no evidence of perjury,,,he has transcript what was said in court and lawyer admitting offence. We have issues with the police Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety so that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider these 2 cases no isolated incident. On the 22.7.2017 ask police 11 questions to do appeal ,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE,,, application,,,under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,to be able to make appeal, saying with no reply would do appeal on the 28.7.2017, where police send letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal, i have made no appeal waiting for reply to 22.7.2017 email. No dispute of facts please see from my website scan 10475 scan 10494 where police state ,,,,, eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you. +

Can i address IPCC investigation and regulations Regulations IPCC [independent police complaint commission] in a police investigation.,,,,sent to me ALSO ON INTERNET....[in present 2021 NEW issue have email from police,,,CI Debarah Palmer-Lawrence will contact to discuss your complaint ,,,,never any contact in historic complaints breach of IPCC regulations]

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

PLEASE SEE SCAN 10594 IN MY WEBSITE WHERE INSP O MAHONY ADMIT WE NEVER TALKED TO YOU ,,,SO IS IT NOT TRUE WE IGNORED IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT MADE,,SO I AM DELUSINARY MENTALLY ILL ???????YOU HAD NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE FOR YEARS COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE WHERE HAVE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,SENT REPLY TO THIS PROPOSED APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT MADE,,LODGED,,,JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION ,,,DIRECT PASTE

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial review]

THE DETAIL IN MY WEBSITE AT START EG EMAIL TO LOPRESTI ,,,FOR POLICE ISSUE SCAN EVIDENCE 1 AND COURT SCAN EVIDENCE 4.AND 6

Police have letter from court ADMITTING OFFENCE ,,,,[AS SGT BELL HAD ,,,]we ignored your applications come and talk to us..please see below also aware again please see above that via statute JCIO [JUDICIAL CONDUCT INVESTIGATION OFFICE] could not investigate AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE …..ONLY SHORT TIME BEFORE IN EBRAHIMI CASE IN BRISTOL THEIR OFFICERS JAILED UNDER IDENTICAL OFFENCE EG IGNORING CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS . HOWEVER POLICE JUDGEMENT YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS,,,IS THIS NOT SAME CORRUPTION AS WITH SGT BELL ABOVE ,,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE BOTH PARTIES ADMIT OFFENCE POLICE STATE FURTHER JUDGES IMMUNE HOWEVER IN CPS DOCUMENT AWARE JUDGES CONVICTED

Becomes IPCC investigation, where police admit we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit we sent reply to your appeal,,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ,,,,,where you had made no appeal, PLEASE SEE MY WEBSITE

You have evidence why restraining order made, by bent HHJDenyer i can not get replies from bent court/police/MP can i please ask media to ask Compuwave /NBT if facts correct. As restraining order in place have to ask court permission to issue the judicial review. Ask police and court for evidence,,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,, In litagation eg again later at Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

ASKED POLICE WAS THIS AS STATED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT WHERE DEFENDANTS IGNORE ,,,,,,,IN 2018 POLICE DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION. THE QUESTION ASKED UNDER ,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

HHJCotter asks for fee to hear this case, visit court 5.12.2017 ,told by Mr Blair ,,your not looking at files of us ignoring your applications ,make application to HHJCotter told who will also ignore,clear tactics between them to pervert the course of justice, breach of Article 6 The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,????????????????????

As evidence withheld ask 5.12.2017 for court N244 form please see my website for example of form,,,write on it application not to be sent to HHJCotter until new N244 plus application sent next day, pay court fee on this understanding, made under

Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,

No need to repeat here, can i refer to detail evidence in letter to Lopresti,,,in start of my website ,,scan evidence 1,4 and 6,,,HHJCotter aware there is new N244 form,,what i want court to do, aware application against police malfeasance in public office, aware also application to remove blackmail of restraining order, aware of application made 6.12.2017 ,aware why i went to police day 1. Already 2 applications to remove restraining blackmail order ignored. Can i digress start of 2019 use library computers to do work, young woman crying working on computer, where as medic try to help, SHE,,,,severe depression . She has bus pass much later suggested going to court to obtain evidence , as third party ,would buy her a coffee afterwards. Not required her evidence at court have PSU unit [now known support through court] where manager said he would help.Discuss with court Mr Hunt where court inform PSU manager he would reply to question in 10 days, lied to manager, as court frustrate the judicial process ,where today court manager Ms Pawsey knowing miscarriage of justice now confirms courts refuses to answer questions,Hunt told PSU he would answer,,,asked Lopresti to ask for reply,,,he knows miscarriage of justice, however ignores correspondence collusion between Tory MP/police /courts. What was question...

Series of emails confirming agreement,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS for example 7.12.2017 email stated

In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. COURT IGNORED emails,,

ASKED HUNT AND PAWSEY ARE THESE EMAILS IN FILE MADE UNDER ADORISIO

5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17

6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time THE APPLICATION UNDER ADORISIO

7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59 PLEASE SEE ABOVE

21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00. AWARE APPLICATION TO ALSO REMOVE BLACKMAIL RESTRAINING ORDER ALSO IN SKELETAL ARGUMENT AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE AS BARRISTERS ADVICE DAY 1 Nn.You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this was in email of the 21.12.2017 so Cotter aware of application under ADORISIO 6.12.2017

i29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,,quote from email aware also of 6.12.2017 application as asked if obtainednawwaseem,aeFor example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, -UNQUOTEa,,,

,,,,,itCs a criminal offence THIS B

,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example police Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application ,,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staffWe then get HHJCotter judgement with retired District judge stating not judicial language however they are utter bastards,,,saying vexatious to make allegations against police, and should have made complaint to JCIO, [is this not as Profuma case collusion between police and court with Tory MP involved] however he states in judgement i went to police malfeasance in public office, its a criminal offence THIS BENT JUDGE AWARE VIA STATUTE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE CAN NOT REFER TO JCIO ,POLICE ALSO AWARE FROM DAY 1 COULD NOT REFER TO JCIO. ,,COTTER HAS JCIO SAYING THEY CAN NOT INVESTIGATE. COTTER HAS PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT,,,MADE UNDER STATUTE ANNEX A PARAGRAPHS HOWEVER STATE ISSUE AS I WAS SOLELY UNHAPPY WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ????

paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS]

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

HE HAS THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IN PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT,,,

SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/application are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.,,,,nothing to do with judgements...

W here get contradictory evidence in visit to the court,,,,we did not get email application of 6.12.2012 ,,THEN ,we had it under Adorision,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS told not sent to Cotter where ask for refund of court fee, where told later please see scanredgrave ,,,,only looked in fee section no record of EXTRA fee, no fee extra required under statute Adorisio ,,,,Again as several lawyers/barristers have stated,,,,if court believed in goodwill a fee was required, and consider… Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

WHY DID COURT NOT ASK FOR A FEE. Statute make complaint to court [for refund of court fee ],,,next step take to Resolver,,,,still not resolved ,via statute general public can not refer to ombudsman ,only MP can refer to ombudsman ,he/she would have to collate evidence to see if MP will refer to ombudsman so asked corrupt MP to write to court, he would need facts before referring case to ombudsman,,,,THIS CORRUPT AND BENT MP AWARE VIA STATUTE ONLY HE CAN REFER TO OMDUDSMAN IN POCKET OF POLICE,/COURTS IGNORES MY CORRESPONDENCE AS HE CONFIRMS ,,, THEREFORE CAN NOT REFER TO OMBUDMAN ,,,did you get application 6.12.2017,,,was it sent to Cotter ...did Cotter read application,,,ect ect...how can he refer HE does not know facts,,,,,and refuses to obtain ….important document asked Lopresti to ask for defaced N244 form,,,,and N244 form sent to Lopresti,,,,was it one made 6.12.2017 or ONE COTTER MADE AND FORGED MY SIGNATURE,,,,IN MY N244 IS AGAIN APPLICATION TO REMOVE BLACKMAIL RESTRAINING ORDER,,,,,ISSUE NOT RAISED IN JUDGEMENT,,,,.collusion of corrupt and bent Lopresti with court and police.

1/ Restaining order ended.2018 Need further medical records at LATER date when previous summons issued. Again NBT refuse to supply where summons issued, struck out in papers where again appeal, given court hearing date. Then have correspondence not from Cotter but his CLERK ,,,told we had discussion with NBT where agreed case removed from hearing date you will be given new date for hearing later. Remember struck out in papers never served on NBT ,no defence therefore what did Cotter via his clerk organise with NBT. So application under

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,

on the 22.2.2018 where Cotter ignores application to look at files WHAT WAS AGREED WITH NBT,,,,,APPLICATION IGNORED AS THIS COURT HAS DONE FOR YEARS. Comes before HHJRalton, who states ….reason struck out as application utterly incomprehensible,,,, in my website ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, QUOTE FROM POC ,,,,,APPLICATION FOR MEDICAL RECORDS OF [DATE] AND TO PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS,,, INCOMPREHENSIBLE ??????????????????..Agreed at hearing NBT would supply medical records and put statement in medical records as the POC [particular of claim].Never obtained medical records taken on day, only their understanding summmary of facts. Ask as NHS statute to look at files, recorded, where from recording NBT admit in visit my statement not in file, further the actual records as the POC removed from file. Contact court where talk to PSU ,,,they talk to court must admit court helpful,,,suggested letter appliation to HHJRalton saying his order ignored, where Ralton stated to court,,,i have no comment to make, knowing order ignored.

2/ Then get medical records of third party not mine, NBT utter shambles, ask for sae to return ignored,,,,,inform Lopresti i have third party medical records, ask for help, where corrspondence ignored. NBT/LOPRESTI UTTER BREACH OF DATA PROTECTION STATUTE.STILL HAVE HIS PERSONAL MEDICAL RECORDS WHAT DO I DO

3/ Blackmail restraining order out of time so could make application for judicial review,NO NEED TO ASK PERMISSION. . Need evidence so application to HHJCotter to look at files, made under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,???????????????????? ignored. Make complain to Lopresti ,for help, covered Cotter in email, where Cotter aware of above replies 2 months later please see scan Cotterlate in my website. Cotter as you can see corrupts and frustrates the judicial process asks me to ask court staff,,,knowing said no,,,they confirm again no,,,,,clearly court is ,,,DENYING ,,, ,,,,opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,????????????????????.In proceedings asked Admin court to make order,,,,to obtain evidence, the court and police in proceedings asked questions to admit facts under ,

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

As previous problems with also Admin court Cardiff ask for judicial review to be heard in Birmingham, under APPLICATION PRACTICE DIRECTIVES 54D 5.2

Pro Bono Unit let me down as had to do application on my own, therefore later evidence under ,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS

For example Birmingham Admin court SENT recording with Sgt Price, has the FEDJCAB document, has scan 14.4.2017, has pre action protocol for judicial review document, has correspondence from JCIO ect,,,,,have asked Birmingham court did you get correspondence, have Royal Mail proof of posting slip.asked Cardiff court did Birmingham send to you, where in utter breach of Article 6 both courts ignore my emails.

The initial application in judicial review,,,,QUOTE

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. UNQUOTE

Very clear what issue is ,,,,malfeasance in public office, ,,,,,even today applications ignored,,,

GET JUDGEMENT FROM HHJBIGGER IDENTICAL AS COTTER WENT SOLELY AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,,,,BIGGER AWARE FROM ABOVE ..The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, DID HE READ APPLICATION. FROM APPLICATION STATE STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,,,,AS FEMALE JUDGE STATED COTTER/BIGGER NEVER GOING TO GRANT THIS APPLICATION ,,,TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS,,,,INVITING POLICE INTO THE COURT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS. SENIOR BARRISTER ANDREW MARSDEN STATED DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 REASON COTTER HEARD APPLICATION 6.12.2017 SO ISSUE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW CAN NOT BE ,ISSUE WITH DENYER,,,RETIRED IN 2017 ,,,Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

Something odd here Denyer in same chambers as Andrew Marsden,,,,,one week after seeing me observed Andrew moved to another chambers.

4/ So Bigger confirms vexatious to make allegations against police ,and i should have complained to JCIO , from above you have allegations in judicial review where in own words police admit allegations , further did not go to police as unhappy over many years with judgements of Denyer,,,,malfeasance in public office criminal offence from JCIO statute could not make claim to JCIO.

5/For media need to explain all money claims must go through Salford county court. New defendants ,new case,where Salford court refuse to issue proceedings as phantom restraining order in force. At time no order in place ,where told judiciary HHJ Bigger ????at Ad ministration court told court not to issue ANY more proceedings, by me , told to get letter from judiciary fromAdmin court Cardiff if facts not correct, where they ignore all emails, take up issue with PSU Bristol court,,,,they talk to court staff,,,no OFFICIAL LEGAL ORDER EVER MADE where court NOW pays compensation.Further state today we will issue your claim,,,informed defendants claim on way, apology for delay,,,they then pay claim, inform court settled to remove from file. Consider the blackmail restraining order it appears the judiciary determined to keep me out of the courts. Offered 50.00 compensation, where inform court money not issue, how did court get this, looks like corruption at the judiciary. Where told by manager my staff offering 50.00 utterly unacceptable,,,i have paid 150.00 compensation to you.

Goodafternoon REF BELOW

Barclays

P D JONES

30884960 O2

20 1334

P JONES

Thank you for your email of 3 March accepting our offer of £150.

In order for us to make the payment of £150 by bank transfer, please email me at customerinvestigations@justice.gov.uk including your:

• bank name

• account name

• account number

• sort code.

We will then arrange payment for you. It can take up to 20 working days for the money to reach you from the date we hear from you.

You can also write if you prefer at: HM Courts & Tribunals Service Customer Investigations Team Post Point 5.13 5th Floor 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ

If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

LAST CONTACT 16.12.2020 YES A FEW WEEKS AGO THEY HAVE NO RECORD WHY PAID DO ADMIT CHEQUE ISSUED AND PAID ASKING ONE QUESTION WHAT WAS ON FILE THAT THE COURT WOULD NOT ISSUE MY PROCEEDINGS FROM ADMIN COURT CARDIFF. STILL WAITING FOR REPLY ,THIS DOCUMENT SENT TO THEM TODAY CAN WE HAVE RECORDS WHY COURT COULD NOT ISSUE MY CLAIM

6/ Now comes before court of appeal, restraining order,as i solely appealed HHJBiggers wrong judgement. So we have restraining blackmail order history,,,,made over a settled case ,please see in my website the settlement Compuwave wanted scan 10246 and in my website emails sent to court, and court receipt received,,,,where from recording told not to turn up for hearing as removed from hearing list ,,,settled case blackmailed by HHJDenyer,,,now phantom order the courts admit never made,,,now this one. HHJBiggers corruption failed ,,ordering Salford court to not issue my claims, courts already paid compensation for his corruption. Did he now ask court of appeal to issue a restraining order,,,,remember collusion between police and courts in Profuma affair. no one would take on my new case under legal aid NO ONE WOULD LOOK AT FACTS OF CASE new restaining order as i appealed HHJBiggers judgement.IN OWN WORDS POLICE ADMIT MY APPLICATION.No one would consider facts of case, over new restraining order. Police /courts had to be informed by court order if they object to removal of this restraining order ,they had no objection to removal of order. Court said issue with you and police we do not want to be involved.

C. Legal aid

1. Granting of legal aid

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

ASK LOPRESTI WHERE THIS CORRUPT AND BENT MP REFUSES TO PASS PAPERS TO RT HON BUCKLAND,,,,IN POCKET OF POLICE AND COURTS

IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE APPLICATIONS AGAINST POLICE PLEASE SEE ABOVE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT ALLEGATIONS CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial review]

From my website you can see application to obtain data, scan 10547 on court form, ignored by corrupt Legatt LJ as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process.

WE GET SAME STANCE WITH COURT AND POLICE SEEN IN LITAGATION BEFORE COTTER AND BIGGER NOW LEGATT WITH AGAIN APPLICATIONS UNDER The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO COURT OF APPEAL IGNORED AS COURT AND POLICE FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.•

For example asking police question why did i come to you day 1, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications and correspondence over many years ,,,malfeasance in public office you are utterly aware of your officers a short time before jailed over same offence ignoring criminal allegations, via statute of JCIO can not investigate complaints if criminal offence allegations. SO YOU WERE WRONG ,,,,ISSUE NOW BEFORE THE COURT I SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JCIO,,,Asked under

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS COURT AND POLICE FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.•

To courts HHJCotter did not read application of 6.12.2017. eg in application back to court,,,,,read wrong papers.

Application to court of appeal had to do myself at end, Pro Bono Unit taken on case, they asked for numerous extensions of time, at end court of appeal stated final extension,,,heard nothing last day had to do on my own,,,,Via (Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,via emails Legatt has the FEDJCAB knows why i went to police, has letter of JCIO knows i could not complain to them, has letters from police admitting my application eg in the IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your appeal,,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications correspondence for years where police /Legatt have court letter we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,they have email from Fowler,,,,,,your correspondence under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,will not be read not answered just filed. Legatt has correspondence from LAWYER application ignored made by them

Application to court of appeal, ,,,,Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.

Eg to vary, amend order to remove restaining order where Master [level of judge ] demands 528.00 to remove. Where ask corrupt and bent Lopresti to send papers to Rt Hon Buckland for State to provide Legal aid He has all evidence that claim must be succesful,,,police in own words admit we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to your appeal, where no appeal made, need one more bit of information why did i come to police day 1,,,and court therefore wrong could not refer to JCIO. For court to confirm that application 6.12.2017 was not read by Cotter. Lopresti has evidence of miscarriage of justice however however refuses to refer to Justice minister. From above historic application to court of appeal to return application,,,,before done after paying postage/packing charges, now computer crash ,,,part of application missing email court for return of application after hearing,,,,however court bins application

7/ So police over many years know miscarriage of justice,,,,chief constable,,,PCC Mountstevens know this however ignore my correspondence,,,eg from above application to admit facts and under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,

8/ From my website get police letter scan police june which retired district judge stated was appaling, undated ,what are allegations ???

The requirements related to the burden of proof from the perspective of the principle of the presumption of innocence provide inter alia, that it is for the prosecution to inform the accused of the case that will be made against him or her, so that he or she may prepare and present his or her defence accordingly, and to adduce evidence sufficient to convict him or her (Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, § 77; Janosevic v. Sweden, § 97).

Article 6 § 3 of the Convention “3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: (a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him; (b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence; (c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; (d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;

Complaint 1.6.2020 to police what are allegations ,please see in my website scanevidence 6 for details in email to Lopresti ,where complaint ignored by police as with over the years ,,,,,why did i come to you day 1.

9/ In application to court of appeal, cite history of restraining orders, the blackmail one, and the phantom one where judiciary at Admin court Carfiff inform Salford county court never to issue my proceedings, supply evidence of restraining order list at time, of course not on list. On list is unknown woman. It appears Google MAKES WEBSITE cites this woman and cites confirmed in my website, do not know woman, know nothing about her case. Then get series of violent threating emails, from her, contact police you know answer will take no action, then get correspondence from her, she has contacted police, told i am delusionary in allegations against police, and mentally ill, so complaint to police 17.10.2020 over these libel comments. The female QC barrister and judge asked for reply from police to be sent to her for consideration over libel allegations. You know next bit application complaint ignored ,contact Lopresti as complaints police ignoring where he is happy police can ignore complaints. WE STATE TO MEDIA POLICE CAN MAKE ALLEGATIONS UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT MAKE COMPLAINT WHERE MP HAPPY POLICE CAN IGNORE COMPLAINT.Ask police for replies ,cover bent PCC Mountstevens into email, can we have reply to complaints 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 which police ignore. Chance to obtain evidence,so i am delusionary ,mentally ill,,,,in allegations against police, where what were allegations, which from above you admit,,,,in IPCC investigation, we did not follow IPCC regulations, and we sent reply to your appeal where we admit no appeal made, ,,,,had just one outstanding issue.....DELUSIONARY....why did i come to you day,1,,was it malfeasance in public office ignoring applications /correspondence for years,,now is it a criminal offence, and therefore you and court wrong to state should have taken to JCIO ,via statute as they told you they could not investigate complaint,,,email again to Ms Jennison LAST ONE 7.1.2021 asking for replies to complaints of the 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 and why did i come to you day 1.

10/ After Lopresti confirming refusal to help, no where else to go, only option media, offending every week ,,,,court hearing,,,until sent to prison. Already released under investigation,,,,need court case,,,now or reoffending until sent to prison. My websites speak for themselves if facts wrong why have police not sued for libel.Galloway your bent your utterly aware could not refer to JCIO,,,,YOU STATE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS THEY TOLD YOU COULD NOT REFER TO THEM AND YOU SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED,,,YOU SAID IF DOING APPEAL,,,NEED TO ENCLOSE OUR APPEAL FORM ,,,,NEVER SERVED.YOU THEN CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS KNOWING MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE REFUSE TO CONFIRM EVIDENCE UNDER ,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,, In litagation eg again later at Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,ALL CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

P JONES

STATEMENT PUBLISHED IN WEBSITE MONDAY 21.12.2020 ,,,,WAS TODAY GOING TO EXPAND COMPLETE ,,,,,,,,,,,AS TAKING MATTER IN MY OWN HANDS

NOT HINDSIGHT THE STATEMENT CAN NOT BE GIVEN NOW MEDIA WILL UNDERSTAND WHY ON THE 4.1.2021,,,,, HOWEVER WILL BE ISSUED ON THE 4.1.2021 AS I SAY NOT HINDSIGHT MEDIA WILL SEE THIS WEEK IN MY DOCUMENTS,,,FURTHER THIS WEEK WILL ADD TIME FILED IN MY DOCUMENTS.

THE LETTER TO MP JACK LOPRESTI WILL BE POSTED ASAP APOLOGY FOR DELAY

EMAIL TO JACK LOPRESTI MP BRINGING ALL LOOSE ENDS TOGETHER

NOTE THIS DOCUMENT JUST PART OF EMAIL TO JACK .PARTIES SHOULD CONSIDER FULL EMAIL IN MY WEBSITE IN THEIR CONSIDERATION

PHILIP JONES V AVON SOMERSET POLICE INTERESTED PARTY HMCS CO/1731/2018

31 BIBURY AVE BS346DF

1/ Jack issue of corruption between police and courts as in Profuma affair, please see my relationship with Profuma affair /Christine Keeler in skeletal argument., events that bought down your government, parties copied into this document, eg newspapers. Jack seeking evidence ,accept you can not involved in court judgements, not asking you to, however seek evidence . For example historic issues back to 2010 however for example via statute complaints to police x2 in 2020 where they refuse to address complaint,just ignore. . You may ask why bother me just ask parties. Well we have FOR MANY YEARS BEEN ASKING PARTIES WHO BELIEVE THEY CAN IGNORE QUESTIONS IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,, In litagation eg at Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which HMCS [courts] and police ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Accept problem can I refer to your Mr Cobbs letter,many years ago, as i contacted you OVER SAME ISSUE TODAY for years the courts ignoring applications, and correspondence ,,,Bristol court ignored your Mr Cobbs letter with Mr Cobbs reply,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Do not expect many replies, however you will need information as asking you to present to His Hon Buckland as asking for State to provide legal aid, have exhausted all routes to them,,,,NO FIRM CONSIDERED MERITS, OR OTHER AGENCY eg also applications to Pro Bono Unit and Avon Bristol Law Centre a friend of yours Dr Gupta legal representive asking for legal help ect,,,if they wish in 7 days copy to me can inform you of their position,,,,,you will need to see merits of case before presentation. In scan evidence 2 you have the human rights act citings in respect to State providing legal aid. Further in respect to ombudsman separate issue you will need to see merits before you present case to ombudsman. AS NO REPLIES IN OBUDSMAN ISSUE YOU AND ME DO NOT KNOW COURT DEFENCE You may say,,,,I will not write to court/police no problems ,asked them to reply to you, with no replies in 7 days, ,,,,,you will not help will take matters into my own hands .Collected 5L of old oil from garage to throw everyweek into police/court doorways before sent to prison to die,due to heart condition. ;rejected simple cardiac surgery at present as this is my sole issue in life today.Best outcome for publicity to die in police custody to expose what has been going on for years. Lets list parties where ask for reply in 7 days, to you Jack, with no reply in 7 days ask you to ask questions. Tactics , after talking to retired district judge, only selected documents sent to parties, however parties must accept and consider the full email to you today can be found in www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com For example court only needs ,,,,scan evidence 4 and told to look in website to see rest of email sent to you Jack.

1/ POLICE ,,

We have restraining order as you appealed HHJBiggers judgement a copy of HHJCotters judgement.

In scan evidence 1 you have the actual judicial review application ,,,the skeletal argument also from application as you can see is just TWO ELEMENTS pasted. Further in scan evidence 1, you have police in own words ADMIITTING APPLICATION THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION AND WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS,,,,FURTHER ,,,IN POLICE JUDGEMENT YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS WHERE YOU HAVE LETTER FROM COURT ,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,HAVE NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS DATE/STAMPED BY THE COURT WHICH WERE IGNORED...ectPOLICE JUDGEMENT COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS,,, ALLOWED AN APPEAL TO UTTER NONSENCE POLICE JUDGEMENT,, WHERE POLICE THE SECOND ELEMENT ADMIT IN OWN WORDS WE SENT REPLY TO AN ALLEGED APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT FILED BY YOU.CAN I CITE LOCAL QC BARRISTER AND JUDGE AGAIN CITED FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in scan evidence 1 in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, admitted in scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions,,,,,to obtain evidence to do THE appeal you would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN THEIR REPLY OF 24.7.2017 PLEASE SEE DETAILS SCAN EVIDENCE 1

Have just one outstanding issue ASKING FROM ABOVE FOR NEARLY 3 YEARS,,FROM ABOVE The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,,

Notice to admit facts

32.188(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,, In litagation eg at Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE

WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1. FROM RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE DAY 1 TOLD TO PASTE CPS DOCUMENT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AND INSERT IN IT WHY I CAME TO YOU DAY 1. Eg MY COMPLAINT. DEFINED THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT. Asking nearly 3 years ,,,under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,, In also litagation eg Admin court /court of appeal in live proceedings asked under,,,PART 32 EVIDENCE [CPR]

Notice to admit facts

Was this FEDJCAB document sent, which was also pasted in statute document ,,,,pre action protocol document for judicial review served on you 16.9.2017.

From above all correspondence ignored, lets just ask police the following questions,,,if they want can comment on above,also so be it police may say Jack ,,,eg FEDJCAB this was not CPS document we asked for and he sent,,,was not in pre action protocol for judicial review document ect,,,,,,Lets simplify this for them .THE CPS DOCUMENT AND CONTENTS FEDJCAB WAS,,THIS ,,,,,,,,,,SEND TO YOU ….JACK ASK THEM IN 7 DAYS TO INFORM YOU COPY ME VIA EMAIL IN REPLY

a/ Why did I come to you day 1 ,looking at correspondence even police agree was MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. Was it as courts for years malfeasance in public office , ignoring applications and correspondence. Do you maintain it was as judiciary state,,,,,,,,,,,,malfeasance in public office as I WAS DISSATISFIED OVER THE YEARS SOLELY WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER .CAN WE EXPAND THIS IF POLICE STANCE ,,,,WILL YOU PLEASE SUPPLY ANY EVIDENCE YOU HAVE I CAME DAY 1 AS ,,,,SOLELY DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.OR DO YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE CAN YOU SUPPLY TO JACK IN 7 DAYS EVIDENCE EMAIL COPY TO ME

b/ You state it was malfeasance in public office why I came to you,,,,this agreed,,,,from start,,,PCBirds letter,,,,,,,,,,,,can you confirm malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence, [your utterly aware of this identical situation where you ignored my complaint of criminal behaviour , as you did in Ebrahimi case where your officers convicted of criminal offence malfeasance in public office and jailed] .Further via statute is it correct you were wrong to state ,,,,,refer to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] as they state malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence, and via statute we can not investigate.,,,THATS WHAT JCIO STATE AND YOU DID CORRECT THING ,,, REPORT TO POLICE

c/ From Copwatch warned by barrister who i gave scanpicket to at court,,,,they may try to brush you off,,,sent Copwatch,,

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……UNQUOTE

Police now say,,,,huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you,...,THAT CAN NOT INVESTIGATE AS COURT STAFF/JUDGES IMMUNE. Asking question again did you get CPS document on malfeasance in public office,,,was this in pre action protocol for judicial review in table of people convicted of offence malfeasance in public office,,,in CPS document were judgesconvicted ??????????????????? Being brushed off know not true

d/ From above you ignored my correspondence, can I refer to later unrelated complaints.,,,,,are we seeing as with courts malfeasance in public office,,,,police now ignoring applications for years,,,where you do the same believe if ignore he will go away,,,well soon old oil in your doorway also,,,,lets look at issues..

1.Can I refer to scan police june enclosed. A letter retired District Judge called appaling, ITS ,,undated ,,,,,incomprenensible ,,,,in utter breach of ECHR [criminal limb ] ,case law eg allegations not stated. The detail in scan evidence 6 .This complaint 1,6.2020,ASK AGAIN ,,,,can you please supply evidence of your allegations ,,, unsociable behaviour. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. JUST VEXATIOUS DUE TO ABOVE TODAYS ISSUE .SUPPLY TO JACK IN 7 DAYS YOUR ALLEGATIONS.DETAILS IN SCANEVIDENCE 6,,,,POLICE IGNORECOMPLAINT

2/ The Salford court refused to issue unrelated proceedings as a restraining order in place,from evidence supplied from judiciary at Cardiff Admin court. Clearly discussions between HHJBigger and Legatt LJ, behind my back,as they corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ll no order in place,OR EVER MADE AT THIS TIME,,,,from Salford county court ,,,,we have been informed by judiciary ,,,Admin court Cardiff a restraining order in place, clear what has occurred here,,,,Bigger calls Legatt and asks behind my back for restraining order to be put in place. In my website expand this, as in Profuma affair corruption between police and courts paste people on restraining order government list. I am of course not on it One of people on list sends numerous violent emails, do not know woman, do not know why she is on list. NOT FROM MY WEBSITE,,,,there is a NEW SITE NOTHING TO DO WITH ME that just cite this woman, and reference ALSO ,,my site. Do not know why they did this, if grudge against woman why involve me, I just cite court restraining list.Go to police,over these violent emails, ,,,we will do nothing,,,,is this similar to Ebrahimi case. Then she states abuse continues,,,talked to police your mentally ill, your utterly delusionary. Complaint 17.10.2020 again police ignored,are we seeing pattern here as with courts,,,,,ignoring applications for years,,I ask today why are you making these libel allegations to this woman,,,who made them ????. So www.corruptionavonsomersetpolice.com and www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com made by someone who is mentally ill and delusionary , we ask media if true why officers have not sued for libel ?????????Leads as retired District judge stated we can use into todays issue, so police state facts are delusionary ….,,,SO DELUSIONARY

a/ From scan evidence 1 in judicial review application in IPCC investigation you ADMIT IN OWN WORDS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS .YOU SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ADMIT AN APPEAL NOT LODGED.am I delusinary or are facts correct simple question to police YES/NO CONFIRM WITH JACK

b/ I am mentally ill and DELUSIONARY WHY I CAME TO YOU DAY 1. Supply to Jack in 7 days any evidence you have I came day 1 as solely dissatisfied over the years of judgements of Denyer,,,SIMPLE QUESTION. YES/NO Can not be so as judical review application ..QUOTE ,,,, .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. UNQUOTE

THIS WAS ABOUT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018 ,THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT CAN BE NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER HE RETIRED IN 2017,,,,SEEK REPLIES IN 7 DAYS TO JACK PLEASE

2/ PCC MS MOUNTSTEVENS

In 1/ above you have questions to police, we ask you have been informed of questions ,you know miscarriage of justice ask you please talk to your officers to ensure questions are answered to Jack in 7 days. When in magistrates court can say we asked you to ensure reply, you ignored, as you pervert the course of justice. ,,, oil in police doorways, where in media reporting of magistrates case they can ask questions if you will not answer questions today.MOUNTSTEVENS CALL MY BLUFF OUTSIDE BRIDEWELL AS OIL IN YOUR DOORWAY AS YOUR OFFICERS COME OUT TO ARREST JUST ONE THING TO SAY ONLY WAY TO GET ANSWERS.BEST WAY TO DIE IN POLICE CUSTODY TO GET MAXIMUM PUBLICITY .SIMILAR WITH OIL IN DOORWAY OF COURT. YOU CAN NOT AS MUSLIM PEOPLE WATCH ME 24 HOURS A DAY...FURTHER A FRIEND TERMINALLY ILL STATED,,,YOU HAVE BUS PASS IF FIRST ATTEMPTS STOPPED YOU CAN GO SHOPPING I WILL TAKE OIL IN CAR CAN GIVE YOU OUTSIDE TO THROW. MOUNTSTEVENS YOU AND YOUR CORRUPT OFFICERS HAD YOUR FUN ANSWER QUESTIONS TO JACK IN 7 DAYS INCLUDING 2 COMPLAINTS IN 2020..WHO THE HELL DO YOUR OFFICERS THINK THEY ARE FOR EXAMPLE SAYING I AM MENTALLY ILL,,,DELUSIONARY...WHERE YOU ADMIT FACTS,,,SUPPLY TO JACK EVIDENCE I DID NOT COME TO YOU AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS

3/ COURTS/MR REDGRAVE,,,THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE

Details in scan evidence 4. Skeletal argument ,,,Nov 2017 just a note and court N244 form sent to HHJCotter, where he asks for fee ,Visit court 5.12.2017 to obtain evidence to do application, where courts Mr Blair refused to answer questions or allow me to look at files, told make application to Cotter who will also ignore, which he did utter breach of Article 6. Demand N244 form state not leaving until allowed to add statement on the N244 , where deface stating not to be sent to Cotter until new N244 with application sent next day , and pay fee, made under,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,, application sent next day via email.,6.12.2017

As soon as retired district judge saw judgement stated not judiciary language however they are utter bastards, for example removal of restraining order not addressed. Went to court told we did not send to Cotter ,,,,ombudsman issue seek refund of fee. THE ONLY RESPONCE from court, which female barrister and judge stated who saw my website,,,its intellectual insolence,,,they state we looked in fee section for 6.12.2017 and can see no fee from you,,,,NO FEE REQUIRED,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,

Take up above with courts where all correspondence ignored,,,Jack as i state I do not know,,,,YOU DO NOT KNOW COURT DEFENCE SO TODAY YOU CAN NOT REFER TO OMBUDSMAN

a/ As yet another person who saw my website, a crown court judge stated,,,,i work on facts you have no evidence the court obtained application made under ADORISIO,,on the 6.12.2017,,,so ask today did you get,EMAILS ,,,,if no then Jack can send court receipts, further email of 7.12.2017,,,,

In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done PLEASE SEE BELOW IS THIS CORRUPT COURT SAYING ALSO WE DID NOT GET EMAIL.

b/ Can Jack have copy of defaced removed N244 form. And actual N244 considered by Cotter. Chilling as QC female barrister and judge who saw my website,,,will we get can not find file or N244 missing,,,a document Cotter produced and forged my signature ????

c/ May see today the court stating was read by Cotter, then Jack of course no application to ombudsman,,,you made application was read no refund of fee. Court realise now in a catch 22 situation ,Cotter read so utterly aware why i went to police day 1 and was not as ,,,,dissatisfield with judgements of Denyer,,,he is just denying evidence before him,,further note again the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, ,,,Blair your not looking at file will be confirmed by Cotter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

d/ Leads to another issue in scan evidence 4 for detail, covers for example email 7.12.2017,,,.Visit court talk to PSU Bristol [now known support through court ]manager who talks to court Mr Hunt where agreed to confirm email evidence of documents before the court before judgement made under,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,, Visit recorded as i state after Hunt left,,,,,,TALKING TO PSU MANAGER,,,FROM TAPE HE WILL IGNORE HE IS BENT ,,,,,NOT HINDSIGHT. Take up issue with Hunt and courts Pawsley where request ignored,,,,ask again today,,,,are these in file EMAILS

5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17

6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time

7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59

21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00.

29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,.

e/ Court may say was not read as no fee,,,ombudsman can not interfer with statute no fee required Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,

Reason can not answer if did not read Cotter read wrong papers

Can I refer to ECHR case law,,,, a note from the lower court [Cotter] to the appellate court [court of appeal] aimed at influencing the latter court’s decision, even though the note did not set out any new facts or arguments (ibid., § 41); documents obtained directly by the judges, containing reasoned opinions on the merits of the case (K.S. v. Finland, §§ 23-

Had numerous contacts from my website, concerning Sharing v Preston cc from lawyers, for example female barrister manchester, male barrister Birmingham,,,they can I refer….

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt LJ had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 made under ADORISIO THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER LEGATT LJ HAS EVIDENCE POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION AS HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED IS THIS JUDICIARY PROTECTING THEIR OWN

LEGATT JUST ACCEPTS COTTERS/BIGGERS WRONG JUDGEMENT ,,,,,FROM SHARING ,,,, in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – FROM ABOVE POLICE /MOUNTSTEVENS CAN CONFIRM MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1.

4/ IPCC ,,PRO BONO UNIT,,,NBT [see scan evidence 5] COMPUWAVE ,,,PSU BRISTOL , DR GUPTA COVERED IN EMAIL IF THEY HAVE ANY COMMENT TO MAKE ON DISPUTE OF ARGUMENTS IN SKELETAL ARGUMENT rest of email PRESENTED ASK THEM TO INFORM YOU JACK IN 7 DAYS WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME

5/ ICO [INFORMATION COMMINORES OFFICE] PLEASE SEE SKELETAL ARGUMENT AGAIN IF THEY WISH TO COMMENT TO YOU JACK,,,,AN ISSUE RAISED BEFORE. In scan evidence 5 have NBT not sending medical records, dragging me through the court to obtain. They did send third party medical records where asked for sae to return, so still have third party medical records,,,,,THIS INCOMPETANT TRUST WILL NOT SUPPLY MY MEDICAL RECORDS HOWEVER HAPPY TO SEND THIRD PARTY MEDICAL RECORDS BY MISTAKE. AGAIN SEEK DIRECTIONS FROM ICO AGAIN MAY WISH TO COMMENT TO YOU JACK IN 7 DAYS,,,EMAIL COPY TO ME.

6/ Again reference to skeletal argument plus rest of email ,,,if courts Cardiff/Birmingham/court of appeal wish to comment ask them to contact you Jack in 7 days with copy to me.Application made under

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,,

Implication for example application back to court of appeal to remove order…..where standard stance if we ignore correspondence he will go away

SKELETAL ARGUMENT OF ISSUES-CORUPTION POLICE AND JUDICIARY

1/ Jack you can not get involved in court judgements, CO/1731/2018 , not asking you to. Can I put history to you, you are aware of much of this,wish to show where I seek your help today.This is urgent need resolution in next few weeks, as retired district judge stated perhaps reason not answering questions as soon out of time. Have main issue ignoring applications and correspondence for years utter breach of Article 6,,,,[we have court letter confirming they will commit breach,],The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

Many years ago courts ignoring applications, and correspondence, had call one evening,,,,,well spoken male ,,,I do not approve of a one of your old applications to MY court,,,,[a district judge ?????] however will not stand by where corruption is going on HHJDenyer, and court out to get you, they have made a mistake, they have removed 2 applications,in this case however one in this new case still on system in that PRESENT AT TIME case,,,,,,[8 years ago]. Visit court talk to Mr Blair,,,,recorded,,,all I state just checking to see applications in file,,,,,from recording ask nothing else,,,live case,,,[true now 2 missing] we get reply,Blair ,,,nothing to do with me I check your applications, make sure you have evidence of being fee except,ect, and put in tray behind me,,,,,no one making allegations ,,,,is he responsible for removal of applications???. Is this not identical to Watergate,,,where Woodward/Bernsteine at Washington Post in deductions state we never asked about this, .....did not make any allegations the courts removing applications.However we know even later OBS80441 that applications, date/stamped by the court missing from file,,,,as at hearing a case I won, DJWatson states something very very odd here.

We seek reply from police, a MAIN issue, however later unrelated complaint 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020 where told,,via EMAIL,, acknowledgement would be made in 10 days, their tactic like main issue just to ignore correspondence as they corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.. Seek their reply in 7 days to you Jack , with email copy to me. You will need evidence to present to Rt Hon Buckland. There will be no reply, as female QC barrister and judge stated who saw my website,,,,would be turkeys voting for Xmas. We please ask you to ask police for reply., if they ignore this document... If do not get replies will be offending every day, until sent to prison to die, have severe heart condition.simple surgery correction however have had enough. , From a garage have obtained 5L cans of old oil to throw in police/court doorways,,,,will have my day in court before the end. No one now to leave home and property to contacting Bristol Evening Post to make legal contract for them to leave everything to a deserving family,,,,,,Seek you please ask State [Rt Hon Buckland ] via human rights law,,,,please see scan evidence 2 to provide legal aid, HAVE EXHAUSED ALL CONTACTS INCLUDING PRO BONO UNIT and to present issue to ombudsman.MAIN ISSUE

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

This will reduce to police answering one question, MAIN issue,,why did I come to you day1. LITAGATION THERE ARE 2 SIDES OF ARGUMENT IN THIS CASE THERE IS DOCUMENT CONFIRMING WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 FROM RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE DAY 1 SHE ASKED TO PASTE CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AND INSERT MY COMPLAINT INSIDE THE CPS DOCUMENT PLEASE SEE SCAN EVIDENCE 1 DEFINED THE FEDJCAB. DOCUMENT SENT TO SGT PRICE.PLEASE SEE SCAN 10594 WHERE SHE STATES ,,,DO NOT REMEMBER SEEING IT,,,,WILL REFER BELOW TO PROFUMA AFFAIR WHERE IN COURT HEARING MANDY RICE-DAVIES MADE COMMENT WE CAN STATE TO SGT PRICE TODAY AGAIN ,,,,SHE WOULD SAY ,THAT WOULDN*T SHE,,,,,HAVE POLICE RECEIPT,,,HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR OVER 3 YEARS WAS THIS DOCUMENT SENT IF NOT CAN I HAVE CPS DOCUMENT SENT WITH MY COMPLAINT,,,,SIMPLE QUESTION,,,ALSO THIS DOCUMENT IN STATUTE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT eg IN ,,,PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW,,,,SERVED ON PARTIES 16.9.2017 AS STATUTE YES OR NO WAS IT IN APPLICATION SERVED ON YOU.ITS A SIMPLE QUESTION WAS IT IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICAL REVIEW DOCUMENT. YES OR NO

ASKING UNDER FOR 3 YEARS The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,, AND WHILE IN LIVE LATER PROCEEDINGS AT ADMIN COURT AND COURT OF APPEAL UNDER,,,

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts,,,,

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,HOWEVER P0LICE AND COURT JUST IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE ,,,SO AWARE OF DOCUMENT,,DID YOU DISPUTE EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU.. BEFORE THE COURT SIMPLE QUESTION YES OR NO,,,,ARE YOU SAYING RECEIPT IS A FORGERY for document CAN I DEFINE FEDJCAB,,,eg FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT. Not trying to humiliate police just ask please answer question, was it as barrister advice to contact police,,,,malfeasance in public office as courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence. Can I refer to correspondence from police eg from Insp O Mahony scan 10594 where as she explains as my letter to police,,,we do not know if HHJDenyer malfeasance in public office ignoring applications,,,or malfeasance in public office of staff not sending applications/correspondence to him,,,,Blair above ????. As malfeasance in public office a criminal offence via statute could not complain to JCIO [JUDICIAL CONDUCT INVESTIGATION OFFICE] AS THEY CONFIRMED . Have from scan evidence 1,,,,police admit….in the IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations

What did I say , in judicial review, please see pasted copy of application to the court, in scan evidence1. There are 2 issues,I cited in judicial review application, as you can see,,,scanevidence 1,,,one that this was a IPCC investigation, where police did not follow IPCC regulations, ,,,

Regulations IPCC [independent police complaint commission] in a police investigation.,,,,sent to me ALSO COPY IN INTERNET

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you and sent reply to your appeal where one not lodged. We have judicial review where HHJCotter /Bigger states vexatious to make allegations against police,,,where he has police admitting application,,we did not follow IPCC regulations in this IPCC investigation, and sent reply to an appeal where you had not lodged one. Although as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process he has the FEDJCAB ect ect states …you went to police as SOLELY dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer. Appeal to court of appeal, however as appealed restraining order issued. Can I quote female barrister and judge who saw my website,,,Bigger was never going to grant this application turkeys voting for Xmas. ,,a crown court judge,,,i am not making any allegations,,,however media may ask is Legatt LJ protecting their own,,,,To remove restraining order fee 50.00,,,,however after application told …..Master requires 528.00 to consider application. Can not find anyone to represent under legal aid, not on facts, will not consider even merits of case,eg no one to help you at moment, 100 applications,also Pro Bono Unit , Avon legal help, Jack a friend of yours legal representative Dr Gupta,,,ect. Ask TODAY for State to provide legal aid, please see human rights regulations in scan evidence 2. Jack ask you please to present when you have full evidence to Rt Hon Buckland for State to supply legal aid, as my Human Rights. You have evidence so case must be won,,,,over issue in restraining order, POLICE ACCEPT in the IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and sent reply to your appeal where one not lodged. WE HAVE THIS ONE OUTSTANDING ISSUE AGAIN FOR POLICE IN OWN WORDS TO ADMIT MY CLAIM I WENT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THE COURTS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE THIS IS CRIMINAL OFFENCE SO COULD NOT TAKE AS JUDICIARY STATE TO JCIO AS VIA STATUTE AS THEY STATE WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE..POLICE WERE WRONG TO SUGGEST. AS LEGATTS JUDGEMENT Jack ask police to inform you in 7 days why I went to them day 1, with no reply as we expect ask you to contact them, they have demanded money to answer question. With no replies will take matters in my own hands. Stocking up with 5L cans of old oil from garage to throw in police station /court entrances, every week until sent to prison to die, have severe heart condition.,simple surgery to correct rejected,,,this is issue taking over my life,,,need to make point Copied PCC Ms Mountstevens into document, ask she ensures police reply to you Jack, say to her miscarriage of justice .will you withhold evidence that would prove my case., or are you happy, miscarriage of justice. Will have my day in court,these questions will be asked in magistrates court before sent to prison to die. Is this common practice of this force ignoring criminal allegations, where in end have fatality,,,,ask media to look at recent Ebrahimi case, where this forces officers jailed as ignored criminal allegations,as my case today

Court not police further to answer one question the OMBUDSMAN ISSUE ,,,,,was the application of 6,12.2017 read by HHJCotter, made under

Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , [where rest of issues fall into place]

If not read seek refund of fee

2/ As a young man, well over 40 years ago, interested in the Profuma affair, purchased the Denning Report ,the blue colured government publication still have it. Interesting issue today as in letters to national newspapers ,over 40 years ago, talked about CORRUPTION AND COLLUSION BETWEEN POLICE AND JUDICIARY AS WE HAVE TODAY. Can I refer to one reply from paper,,,,,,Christine Keeler was not innocent party in this matter, please see advert from adult Holland magazine,,,,,8mm films,,,,18 dollars ,,,,see Christine Keeler take penis in rectum, only homosexuals do this,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Sent letters to Ms Keeler., although main interest Steven Ward ,corruption of judiciary and police. Further aware from my newspaper cuttings of Tom Mangold, who covered this story, and his thoughts in recent BBC series,,,,,will forward this document to him. CORRUPTION POLICE AND COURTS AS WE HAVE TODAY IN MY CASE

3/ Had issues [all civil matters] with the courts,,,malfeasance in public office ,ignoring applications and correspondence for years , can I refer to same issue correspondence to my MP Jack Lopresti many years ago, with reply from Jacks staff, Mr Cobb,,,,,they [Bristol county court ]ignored my correspondence ,I will write again, Jack can not force them to reply,,,Ironic today ask parties for reply to Jack in 7 days ,copy to me via email, no replies ask Jack to write to court,,,,Jacks letters ignored,,can not force court/police to reply ,,where take matter in my own hands,,,,this document will save in police custody me repeating facts to attending lawyer.

4/ We have incidents please see www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com where have court hearings, with no defence filed,,,,told at hearing do you really want to come back after I make order for a defence to be filed,,,,[a case I won on day] ,,,,we had another case where asked to leave so DJBrittan could talk to defendants, later followed up issue with defendants as they made excuse not to talk,to Brittan ,,,REPLY ,,,,we would not be seen talking about case behind your back, for you to exploit at a later date. Case 2018 comes before HHJRalton, again case I won, where no defence filed.

5/ As ignoring correspondence and applications for years issued website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com . The court then states remove or consequences, I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED,,THEN SEE WHAT CONSEQUENCES MEANT AS RESTRAINING ORDER MADE UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT. WHAT WERE CASES CITED IN ORDER [2016]

a/ Please see scan evidence 4 for details, note defendants were Compuwave, Jack note Compuwave covered in this email if facts not correct ask them to email you Jack in 7 days. Not in cloud [OUTLOOK EXPRESS] wanted to backup emails,fear of libel, for example calling courts Mr Fowler corrupt and bent, many years ago in old judicial review application, asked as today for information to do application under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,where Fowler states in utter breach of Article 6 ,,,,your questions will not be answered, not read, just put in file,,,,today from same Bristol court get IDENTICAL reply from Ms Pawsy. On invoice Compuwave state program to back up, which did not work, call them told was working when you left shop,,,proceedings issued, where defendants admit error in their program on invoice, settlement sent to the court, please see scan evidence 4 for settlement sent and court receipt. Heard nothing in settlement had asked ALSO for removal from hearing list, matter settled, called court recorded told ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HHJDenyer removed from hearing list no need to turn up for hearing your matter settled. FELL INTO A TRAP,,,CONSEQUENCES ,,,NOT REMOVED WHERE CASE STRUCK OUT NO ONE OF COURSE ATTENDED HEARING .Send recording to court not to come to hearing, appeal, corrupt Denyer rejects can see what consequences means, where RESTAINING ORDER MADE AS I APPEALED. DENYER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL ,,,SETTLED CLAIM,,,YOU ORGANISED THIS

b/ Denyer cites further case in restraining order,,,, against NBT [North Bristol NHS Trust] This was for medical records, travel expenses , and to put statement in medical records. Jack again NBT sent this document today , if facts not correct ask them to inform you Jack in 7 days, with copy to me of reply. Initial hearing comes before DJWatson, where asks in 28 days for statement from third party of defendants, where he then strikes out claim, in papers after obtaining statement,,[statement untrue] I appeal. Say to NBT you must supply medical records, put statement in medical records, pay travel expenses, eg MY POC [PARTICULARS OF CLAIM] settle claim now please, NBT SAY NO. Six months later a few days before APPEAL hearing NBT ask to settle , supply medical records , agree to put statement in medical records, and pay travel expenses, they send settlement to court rejected by DJBrittan . At hearing NBT ask DJWatson [second hearing] that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, where he stated ... NO ,,,not saying this, ,,,,AWARE 6 MONTHS BEFORE NBT COULD HAVE SETTLED MATTER ON TERM THEY NOW ASKED TO SETTLE . Can I refer at time clear always audio recording of hearing, asked in email ,,if video made as new court, ,,,CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED,,,could not get into conversation at hearing as defendants keep on asking judgements reads I acted unreasonably… could not get in to conversation, as DJWatsons right hand raised towards me. NO COMPLAINT TODAY OF DJWATSON CLEAR WASTE OF HIS TIME DID NOT WANT TO DISCUSS ISSUE CLEAR I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY Parties were asked to make witness statements, [never one made from NBT] however DJWatson waved my statement to defendants,,AWARE ,I ASKED THEM 6 MONTHS BEFORE TO SETTLE TO SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS PUT STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS AND PAY TRAVEL EXPENSES,,THEN 6 MONTHS LATER ASK TO SETTLE AND SUPPLY EVERYTHING AS THE POC

THIS CORRUPT AND BENT JUDGE DENYER CITES THIS APPEAL,,AGAINST DJWATSONS INITIAL JUDGEMENT ,HIS REASON TO ISSUE RESTRAINING ORDER ,PICKED WRONG HISTORIC CASE CAN I REFER TO

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective

IS DENYER ,,,,,calling into question judgement of DJWatson ??????? NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY ,,YOU WILL SEE 3 APPLICATIONS TO REMOVE THIS RESTRANING ORDER IGNORED BY COURT,,EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL..WOULD NEVER HAVE OBTAINED MEDICAL RECORDS GET STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS GET TRAVEL EXPENSES WITHOUT APPEAL LODGED ,,,,DENYER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED

6/ Still ignoring applications. Had enough start picketing at the court,,,,malfeasance in public office ignoring applications and correspondence for years, please see scan picket, where barrister who I gave scanpicket to, told me to report to police, when he left court.

7/ Please see scan evidence 1, seen by Sgt Price where asks to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office and to insert my police complaint, FEDJCAB document. Police have letter from court,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us,,,ect ect,,,had documents stamped/dated by the court as obtained,,,,,,,ignored . Police reply comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office for years courts ignoring applications, and correspondence. THEY HAVE THE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS

8/ Therefore wish to appeal. Asking police 11 questions in 22.7.2017 email saying with no reply by the 28.7.2017 assume no reply, would then do appeal, , police stated previously if doing an appeal need to enclose our appeal form,,,.GET EMAIL 24.7.2017 REPLY TO EMAIL 22.7.2017 THEY HAVE NO APPEAL FORM THEY ALLEDGE LETTER 24.7.2017 IS REPLY TO MY APPEAL OF 22.7.2017….I HAVE NOT SERVED AN APPEAL

9/ Contact IPCC [again covered them today in this document, if they wish to address you Jack in 7 days]where advised judicial review, what were issues please see scan evidence 1,,you have application issue,,,they did not follow IPCC regulations,in IPCC investigation, in scan evidence 1 admit this, and sent reply to an appeal where one not lodged,,,not in dispute can I refer to scan 10475/94 ,,,,,POLICE STATE

eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.

10/ From above as Denyer issued restraining order,,,as I appealed judgements as ,,,,,a case settled,,,TOLD NOT TO ATTEND HEARING SETTLED CLAIM and ,,,,APPEALED DJWatson, INITIAL JUDGEMENT AS MEDICAL RECORDS TRAVEL EXPENSES AND ISSUE OF PUTTING STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS STILL OUTSTANDNG ,,,,,POC WAS THEREFORE STILL OUTSTANDING ,,, THEY ASKED TO SETTLE A FEW DAYS BEFORE HEARING 6 MONTHS LATER,,,,SUPPLING EVERYTHING AS THE POC .THIS DENYER ORDER JUST VEXATIOUS,,,,COMES UNDER COURT CORRESPONDENCE REMOVE YOUR WEBSITE OR CONSEQUENCES,,,,I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY CORRUPT AND BENT DENYER

11/ As above restrainng order in place, VIA statute have to make first application to court to issue proceedings, send note/court N244 form where HHJCotter asks for fee. Visit court 5,12,2017 to obtain evidence to do application, however utter breach of Article 6

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

Retired District Judge advised need also in application to remove restraining order or judgement could be thrown at you later. For example 5.12.2017 court visit, ask is settlement of B26YM042 in file, every right to appeal as struck out in papers, matter settled, from above, from recording as settled told not to turn up for hearing, trap set by Denyer ,,,defendants asked to settle, case should not have been struck out. Ask Mr Blair is settlement in file, where refuses to answer any questions , issue followed up in email of the 7.12.2017 ignored by the court,eg title of email urgent for Mr Blair ‘’

4/ We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please

Wanted information to follow up application made on the 6.12.2017 under

Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,so could add further evidence under Adorisio,,,,BLAIR IGNORED EMAIL OF 7.12.2017

Mr Blair on the 5.12.2017 refused to disclose evidence or allow me to look at files, details in scan evidence 4, utter breach of Article 6

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

Saying 5.12.2017 [Blair] make application to HHJCotter who will also ignore. Demand N244 court form, see format scan N244, eg what I want court to do, deface it state on it not to be sent to HHJCotter until new N244 court form, and further evidence sent to HHJCotter,,,,made under,

Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,agreed with Mr Blair where now pay court fee,,,,.In scan evidence 4 you have follow up emails in Dec 2017 to the court, read by HHJCotter from judgement. We have judgement which retired District Judge states not judicial language, however they are utter bastards.

a/ Application to remove restraining order just ignored. AGAIN IGNORED AS BENT AND CORRUPT COTTER KNEW ISSUED UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT

b/ States vexious to make allegations against police, the actual allegations in scan evidence 1,paste of judicial review application, where police admit allegations in judicial review application, scans 10594/10475/10494.

c/ In judgement Cotter accepts application as malfeasance in public office ,,,as criminal offence aware via statute could not complain to JCIO,,,,aware why I went to police day 1.

d/ States I went to police as malfeasance in public office as solely dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer. Over the years. Police were correct to state make complaint to JCIO. The bent and corrupt Cotter is denying evidence before him,,,the FEDJCAB document, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WENT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS AND CORRESPONDENCE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE AS JCIO STATE TO HIM COULD NOT REFER TO THEM

12/ Feb 2018 require later medical records [ a later date when first proceedings issued, could not be included in previous litagation] ,,,NBT AGAIN REFUSED TO SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS ,,,STRUCK OUT BY COTTER IN 48 HOURS .in papers. Appeal given hearing date, where then Cotters clerk states in correspondence long talk with NBT on way to settle matter, and considered her evidence on matter, hearing removed from hearing date and .a new hearing date .would be issued,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.MY

EMAIL 25.2.2018,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WITH N244 APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,TO SEE FILE WHAT WAS AGREED WITH COTTERS CLERK AND NBT BEHIND MY BACK NO DEFENCE TO MY CLAIM AGAIN

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,

FROM APPLICATION,,,TO LOOK AT FILE WHAT WAS ,,,APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, submissions to a court without knowledge of the other ,,,,,,FURTHER

I will from start today make a stance, i will not tolerate any fresh nonsense defendants lawyer Ms Smith puts before the court. I REQUEST BY 5.00 PM 26.2.2018 SHE SENDS TO ME VIA EMAIL HER COMMENTS TO THIS ORDER.WITHOUT THIS WILL REQUEST AN ADJOURNMENT SO I CAN AT A LATER DATE PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN TERMS OF ALLEGATIONS FILED AFTER I SEE DEFENCE .

Are we going to have the utter nonsense as in OBS08441 which i won where DJWatson states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do you want to come back after i get you a defence, …..UNQUOTE

APPLICATION IGNORED BY COTTER AS LATER IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION, TO BIGGER I STATE,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,COURT UTTERLY AWARE THIS IS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018

APPEAL ,,,,AT HEARING HHJRALTON STATED,,,,HAD LONG TALK WITH COTTER REASON HE STRUCK OUT AS POC UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE ,,,,[THIS IS STANDARD COURT DEFENCE WHEN PRESENTED WITH OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE] YOU HAVE POC ????????????????? ,,,SUGGEST REASON REMOVE YOUR WEBSITE OR CONSEQUENCES WE WILL STATE ANY NONSENCE ,,,,WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED ALSO BELOW AGAIN,,,,INCOMPREHENSIBLE WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO ????????

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in DEFENDANTS medical records.

LEGAL BASIS ,,,,,1/ ,No evidence required in terms of obtaining medical records, in terms of putting statement in medical records, please see statutory regulations of NHS ,,,,,,the defendants must allow if requested for plaintiff to add statement to his medical records UNQUOTE

ASK MEDIA WAS IT UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO ????? OR IS COTTER UTTERLY BENT OR IS HE FIT TO BE A JUDGE,,,,INCOMPREHENSIBLE ???????

At hearing defendants agree AGAIN to supply medical records, dragging me again through the courts again and put statement in medical records.

NBT refuse to supply, ask to look at my medical notes where my statement not in file...ask lady of NBT supervising to show me statement [visit recorded] where she could not find. Get then third party comments of medical records required, where NBT refuse to supply copy ,,,notes taken on day. Talk at court to PSU , [NOW KNOWN SUPPORT THROUGH COURT] where must admit court more than helpful, where between court and PSU suggested at this stage no N244 form for a court order, but send letter to HHJRalton saying his order ignored. Follow up visits to the court,,,,although Ralton aware his order ignored, told on recorded visit,,,,,RALTON HAS NO COMMENT TO MAKE ALTHOUGH AWARE FROM ORDER COULD MAKE FRESH APPLICATION TO THE COURT TO HIM

13/ The old restraining order had expired, retired District Judge wanted it removed however the court 3 times ignored applications, LAST ONE 6.12.2017 has they have done for years. So could do anyway application in judicial review. So application to Cotter to look at files,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,, eg is settlement of B26YM042 in file ect COTTER IGNORES APPLICATION,,,

APPLICATION IGNORED BY COTTER AS LATER IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION, TO BIGGER ,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018 SO BIGGER UTTERLY AWARE THIS IS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS AND STILL GOING ON IN 2018. CITE THIS ISSUE IN DETAIL IN APPLICATION ,,NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENT OF DENYER

JACK I CONTACT YOU COPY COURT INTO EMAIL WHERE NOW HE ANSWERS APPLICATION,,,,,SCAN COTTERLATE UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 STATES ASK MR BLAIR KNOWING BLAIR SAID NO,,,ARE THEY IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 AS BLAIR SAID HE WOULD ON THE 5.12.2017 COLLUSION BETWEEN THEM

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,

THIS REPLY WAS 2 MONTHS LATER HAD TO DO JUDICIAL REVIEW OR WOULD BE OUT OF TIME WAS THIS WHAT COTTER WAS AFTER TO STOP JUDICIAL REVIEWHAD TO DO WHERE EVIDENCE WITHHELD

14/ Need to issue judicial review application, make application late March 2018 as in 2017 to obtain evidence to do judicial review application 12.3.2017 application to obtain evidence ignored by Cotter,,,utter breach of Article 6.

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

Admin court Cardiff also previosly ignoring applications, so as retired district judge advice under Practice Directives 54D 5.2 application to Birmingham Admin ,court to hear the judicial review. From Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , sent recording with Sgt Price, sent the FEDJCAB document ,[knows why i went to police day 1 ] ect,,,,Birmingham reject application stating all papers sent to Cardiff ,case will be heard in Cardiff. [Could ask corruption of judiciary Practice Directives 54D 5.2 where case could be heard elsewhere ,where parties as regulations had no objection case heard at Birmingham] HHJBigger in judgement identical to HHJCotter. Again as female barrister and judge stated was never going to grant application, turkeys voting for Xmas as inviting police in to investigate malfeasance in public office this court ignoring applications for years also. Ask Birmingham to confirm documents sent to them under ADORISIO ,and Cardiff court to confirm documents sent to them under ADORISIO from Birmingham, where both corrupt and frustrate the judicial system where refuse to answer question .ASK AGAIN TODAY REPLY TO YOU JACK COPY TO ME Further in judicial review application, request for order to obtain evidence, for example to look at files to do application, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,WHERE IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 BIGGER IGNORES APPLICATION. BIGGER AS ADVISED WAS NEVER GOING TO GRANT APPLICATION TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS. NOTE JUDGEMENT IDENTICAL TO COTTERS,,,WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OVER THE YEARS OF DENYER ,,,NO,,,FROM APPLICATION AS EXPLAINED CAN NOT BE TRUE AS APPLICATION FROM ABOVE STATES,,,,,,PRACTICE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE APPLICATIONS AND CORESPONDENCE IGNORED,,,DENYER RETIRED IN 2017,,,QUESTION TODAY TO POLICE IN OWN WORDS WHY DID ICOME TO YOU DAY 1 ????????’PLEASE ANSWER QUESTION FOR JACK. STATES VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE,,,WHERE AWARE POLICE ADMIT ALLEGATIONS IN THEIR OWN WORDS ,,,AS RETIRED JUDGE SAID WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA

15/ Application to court of appeal, please see scan 10547, again seeking court order to obtain evidence to complete application, ignored by Legatt LJ, utter breach of Article 6,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,While before the court of appeal wish to issue proceedings over a utter unrelated event. All money claims must go through Salford county court. Application rejected by Salford as restraining order in place. All calls in and out recorded where from Salford it appears Admin court Cardiff judiciary had instructed Salford court not to issue my proceedings. Email Cardiff court no order in place, CONFIRM ,PLEASE ,,emails ignored. Take up issue with PSU [now known as support through court] Bristol where they contact the Bristol court where inform PSU we can see no order in place. Go back to Salford where claim NOW issued, paided by defendants return of post and Salford offer 50.00 compensation. Money not issue ask who in judiciary at ADMIN COURT CARDIFF INFORMED THEM THAT RESTAINING ORDER IN PLACE AND NOT TO ISSUE ANY OF MY PROCEEDINGS. GET REPLY FROM MANAGER QUESTION NOT ANSWERED AT SALFORD COURT HOWEVER STATE,,,50.00 COMPENSATION UTTER TOO LITTLE AND 150.00 PAID, ASKED QUESTION AGAIN EMAIL IGNORED. ASK TODAY TO SALFORD COURT CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF DOCUMENT WHERE YOU WERE UNABLE TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS DUE TO JUDICIARY IN CARDIFF

We may ask ,,,,judiciary ,,,Cardiff Admin court was this HHJBigger,,,now saying to Legatt LJ,,,,COULD YOU ISSUE RESTRAINING ORDER FOR ME. Send to Legatt FEDJCAB,,,knows i went to police as malfeasance in public office ignoring applications and correspondence for years, as criminal offence could not complain to JCIO , Cotter/Bigger wrong, sent POLICE documents where Legatt LJ aware as judicial review application, in this IPCC investigation, police ignored IPCC regulations and sent reply to an appeal where one not lodged. Can i refer to Crown court judge who saw my website,,,,,,not making any allegations, however media may ask is Legatt LJ protecting their own, as he issues restraining order as i appealed.WAS THIS FROM REQUEST FROM BIGGER

16/ From Legatts order have to ask parties if they object to removal of restraining order, no objection filed,,,,court states,,,,,we do not wish to be involved an issue between you and police, we were just a interested party., POLICE ignore my email,,,no objection ,ASK AGAIN TODAY TO INFORM YOU JACK IF THEY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS JACK YOU CAN SAY TO BUCKLAND THE POLICE HAVE NO OBJECTION THAT ORDER IS REMOVED. Legatt states facts of case in Biggers judgement, a identical copy of Cotters judgement,,,,however it was not vexious to make claim against police, LEGATT AWARE FROM EMAILS Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , in own words admit application, and from FEDJCAB did not go to police as solely ,,,dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer,,,,,,WE SAY TO POLICE TODAY IF YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE IN 7 DAYS YOU SUPPLY TO JACK EVIDENCE DAY 1 I CAME TO POLICE AS SOLELY DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER, FROM FEDJCAB LEGATT DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM,,LEGATT BEFORE STOPPED ,,,access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, IGNORED MY APPLICATION ,,

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

IN PROFUMA CASE HAD CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS HAVE SAME ISSUE TODAY. COURT PROTECTING POLICE

17/ Application to remove order.

From internet 2 entries one in lower case, one in upper case type ,,,,,,,,,,,fee to change/amend order…..50.00 was sent with application . eg from official HMCS site actual document

•Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.

Eg to vary, amend order

Via (Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,further evidence therefore sent with application where HMCS return application, demands 528.00 to remove restraining order. In Legatts LJ order states he would hear any application, where issue challenged Application made for Legatt LJ not to hear appeal, where Master [judge] states would be heard by Legatt OR another judge, partial victory, application however need 528.00 application was under,,,

,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of Legatt from judgement,,,,,vexatious to make claim against police,,HE have police in OWN WORDS ADMITTING CLAIM DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,copied by HHJBigger, ,but I did not go to defendants [police] over judgements of HHJDenyer, LEGATT KNOWS THIS SENT FEDJCAB IS THIS AS PROFUMA CASE COURTS PROTECTING POLICE POLICE KNOW THIS KNOW MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE AND CAN NOT ANSWER QUESTION TODAY ,,,WHY I WENT DAY 1 defendants police asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAP complete document , plus scan 13.4.2017 letter,in scanevidence 1, went over malfeasance in public office courts ignoring applications for years,back to 2010,,,and FEDJCAP also later in pre action protocol document for judicial review HHJCotters /Biggers judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, why I went day 1,,CLAIM NOT VEXATIOUS POLICE ADMIT FACTS

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt was either protecting the police as in Profuma case, OR had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,copied by HHJBigger,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,, From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER As judge stated who saw my website,,,,making no allegations, however people may ask is Legatt protecting their own,,,human rights issue,,,

Legatt LJ from evidence before him know Cotter/Bigger wrong is he protecting his own, as in Profuma case where courts protect police.

Had numerous contacts from my website, concerning Sharing v Preston cc from lawyers, for example female barrister manchester, male barrister Birmingham,,,

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt LJ had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,

LEGATT JUST ACCEPTS COTTERS/BIGGERS WRONG JUDGEMENT ,,,,,FROM SHARING ,,,, in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal

Contact the court under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,is 528.00 correct are the emails,,,,in file made under , , Goc vTurkey,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,, where Legatt LJ has FEDJCAB,,,knows did not go to police as ,,,,dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, aware not vexatious to make claims against police HAVE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMITTING ALLEGATIONS. Court of appeal corrupts and frustrates the judicial proceess ignore correspondence and follow up emails

Ask appeal court today in 7 days to reply to you Jack with email copy to me. Were the application made under Adorisio,,,,,before Legatt LJ or were they removed by the the court to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process .(Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ... Seek state to provide legal aid, please see main text.

18/ OMBUDSMAN ISSUE PLEASE SEE SCAN EVIDENCE 4 FOR DETAILS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Visit court5.12.2017 to obtain evidence to make application to Cotter , The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,where Mr Blair in utter breach of Article 6, refuses to answer any questions, refuses me to look at files to obtain evidence, restates make application to Cotter who will ignore your request , clearly tactics agreed before, utter breach of Article 6 please see above, Deface court N244 form state on it not to be sent to Cotter, until new N244 and application next day ,sent via email 6.12.2017, made under (Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , On this agreement with Blair pay court fee.

From judgement retired district judge stated not judicial language however they are utter bastards, application not read, go to court where told we did not send, where ask for refund of fee, now today in complaint process before Resolver. You have in scan redgrave ,,,we looked in court fee register no fee paid 6.12.2017,,,THAT IS ALL WE HAVE,,,however from Adorisin no fee required. Jack you can not send case to ombudsman as do not know facts asked under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,COURTS IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE

Jack at present you can not send to ombudsman, do not know court stance. Asked under Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France these questions, asked in live proceedings at judicial review and court of appeal stage, under

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts,,,,

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,HOWEVER P0LICE AND COURT JUST IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE ,,,

Why is this important, this is application to remove restraining order, what are issues, we have judiciary stating it was vexatious to make allegations against police, from above police in own words admit claim, we did not follow IPCC regulations and sent reply to appeal where one not lodged,,,not vexatious TRUE. . We have just one outstanding issue with police why did I come to you day1.ISSUE TODAY AS WE ASK POLICE TO CONFIRM WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1. Legaatt LJ states facts of case in Biggers judgement, copy of Cotters judgement. Further evidence back to court of appeal, judiciary state facts of case in Cotters/Biggers judgement, HOWEVER DID COTTER READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017. THESE ARE NOT FACTS OF CASE AND COTTER READ WRONG PAPERS.COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION

Jack basic questions to court.see also evidence in scan evidence 4

a/ Can we please have copy of defaced N244 form, can we please have copy also of N244 form considered by HHJCotter,,,,,chilling remark of female QC barrister and judge who stated will we get can not find file,,,,,,or the N244 missing from file……..Cotter utterly aware of new N244 , email 7.12.2017 ,,,,In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. Made via Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , When state Cotter aware can I qualify. Went to court where talk to manager of PSU [know NOW called support through court] where we talk to courts Mr Hunt. Agreed Hunt would reply in 10days ,,,,,ASK TODAY is this common events ,,,,todays application ,,,court for years ignoring applications and correspondence where Hunt no intention giving reply to questions, as he lied to manager of PSU. Follow up emails ignored, Jack lets ask again. ARE THESE EMAILS IN FILE OR ARE MY RECEIPTS FORGED ????

5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17

6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time

7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59

21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00.

29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,

b/ Simple logic as ask court for nearly 3years ,,,did Cotter read application 6.12.2017 ,,,Cotter did not read application of 6.12.2017 so Legatts judgement in tatters,,eg ,,facts of case in Cotters judgement,??????? HE did not read application,,,. Or did read then utterly aware why i went to police day 1 as you corrupt and frustate the judicial process. Or is defence,,,,we admit we obtained, not read as no fee paid, no fee required ,,Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,

c/ This reduces to simple logic. Have basic question did you obtain application of the 6.12.2017 made under ... Göç v. Turkey / Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,

Why do we ask question if answer no can send to you Jack court receipts .Further ask was application read by Cotter. If was not read seek refund of court fee. If was read then of course no application to ombudsman ,however if today confirm was read,,,,then Cotter utterly aware did not go to police day 1 as he states in judgement,,,,,,as solely dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer,, refer to ECHR case law,,,,Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

FURTHER WILL REFER TO ANSWERS ABOVE ARE THESE IN FILE

19/ Today simple question to police why did i come to you day 1, where for 3 years knowing miscarriage of justice refuse to answer question, WE ASK FINAL CHANCE TODAY,,,NO REPLY ASK JACK FOR YOU TO ASK,,,STILL NO REPLY WILL ASK QUESTION INMAGISTRATES COURT AS BEFORE IT THROWING OIL IN POLICE STATION. BEFORE SENT TO PRISON TO DIE Is this a common event of police ignoring complaints can i please refer to scan evidence 6 where seeking replies to complaints of the 1.6.2020 and the 17.10.2020 again ask for reply in 7 days, with no reply ask you Jack to obtain reply.

20/ Have final issue, from above you can see seeking from NBT medical records, please see details in scan appendix 5 where sent medical records of a third party. Asked NBT for sae to return , correspondence ignored. Took up issue with ICO, covered them today again, so informing them and media have third party medical records, where seek instructions

q S

SCAN EVIDENCE 1

SCAN EVIDENCE 4 THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE REFUND OF COURT FTHIS IS PART EMAIL TO JACK LOPRESTI MP ,,,SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH FULL EMAIL THE REST OF EMAIL CAN BE FOUND IN WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM. SPECIFIC ELEMENT SCAN EVIDENCE 1 ONLY SENT TO THE P0LICE TODAY ……THEIR SOLE ISSUE

THE WHOLE ISSUE AT END OF DOCUMENT UNDER CONCLUSION

ENCLOSED ALSO TO POLICE SCAN EVIDENCE 6 TO LOOK AT THEIR BEHAVIOIR ,,,,MADE UNDER ,,,..Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,isolated incident,,????consider complaint 1.6.2020 ,17.10.2020 please see details in scan evidence 6 ,,, where after 6 months police ignore complaint ,,,,ECT IGNORE AS TODAYS ISSUE

COPY ALSO SENT TO PCC Ms MOUNTSTEVENS AS PUT ON NOTICE REQUEST TO HER TO ENSURE JACK [LOPRESTI MP] HAVE REPLY IN 7 DAYS COPY TO ME VIA EMAIL .WITH NO REPLY AS WE EXPECT ASK JACK TO CONTACT TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE AS YOU CONTINUE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS WITH MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.

THE ISSUES TO POLICE

a/ Why did i come to you day 1 when barrister told me to make complaint when seen by Sgt Price

b/ Can we please have replies to complaints, where as in a/ the police attitude,,,,if we ignore correspondence he will go away, as of 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020

c/ Can they confirm for media as in Ebrahimi case that in criminal /antisocial behaviour if you make complaint we will ignore.

ISSUE MAIN,,,,ARISES FROM CO/1731/2018 WHERE MASTER [level of judge] GIVES PERMISSION TO MAKE APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT. NEED TO EXPLAIN TO MEDIA POLICE ARE DEFENDANTS AND COURTS [HMCS ] JUST A INTERESTED PARTY. THE COURTS AS SUCH LIKE RATS IN A SEWER SOMETIME AGO,SAY ,,,DO NOT REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS ,,,,, COURT ASKED US IF WE WANT TO COMMENT ON EVIDENCE ,,,NO THIS IS ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE….DO NOT AGREE ,,,,,,,,THE POLICE ALSO AT ALL STAGES MADE NO COMMENT TO THE COURT,,,,WHAT ARE ISSUES

POLICE [judiciary state A/ B/ vexatious however police in own words admit allegations, their correspondence before judiciary, this is identical as in Profuma affair, great interest of mine,,,,COLLUSION BETWEEN POLICE AND JUDICIARY]],

A/ THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS SCAN EVIDENCE 1 INSP O MAHONY ADMITS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

B/ IN EVIDENCE ,,,SCAN EVIDENCE 1 POLICE FURTHER ADMIT WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHEN NO APPEAL LODGED. POLICE CORRESPONDENCE BEFORE 22.7.2017 STATES IF DOING AN APPEAL WE REQUIRE OUR OFFICIAL APPEAL FORM NO APPEAL FORM SENT TO 7.8.2017 WHERE POLICE/PCC MOUNTSTEVENS STATE WE WILL IGNORE APPEAL,,,,eg YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE FOR YEARS BACK TO 2010 MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE WHERE POLICE AND JUDICIARY HAVE COURT LETTER,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,

C/ THE ONLY OUTSTANDING ISSUE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 ..[THEY ARE UTTERLY AWARE A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE SO IGNORE REQUEST,,,,THIS REQUEST WAS MADE IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE Admin court and court of appeal, under,, CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts,,,,,why I came to you day 1

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which POLICE in questions ignored… ,IS THIS COMMON EVENT.....Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,isolated incident,,????consider complaint 1.6.2020 , 17.10.2020 please see details scan evidence 6 where after 6 months police ignore complaint

COURT [THE OMBUDSMAN SOLE ISSUE PLEASE SEE SCAN EVIDENCE 4]

A/ HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2917 ADMITTED BY JUDICIARY SEEK REFUND OF FEE

Jack sole issue that you have been involved with for years, NOW before ombudsman, refund of court fee as application of 6.12.2017 not read by HHJCotter.Simple question they refuse to answer in papers WAS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 READ BY HHJCOTTER I ASKED COURT ???????????

Jack must be first time do not know HMCS defense to ombudsman issue YOU DO NOT KNOW SO CAN NOT REFER UNTIL YOU KNOW COURTS STANCE. HAVE ASKED SAME QUESTIONS IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS AT JUDICIAL REVIEW AND COURT OF APPEAL STAGE TO COURTS ,,,UNDER

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which COURT in their questions ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Coming to end of my life, these questions if need be answered in magistrates court, collecting 5L cans of old oil to throw in police station doorway before sent to prison to die,,,,severe heart condtion., simple surgery rejected Stress of arrest best result to expose corruption if die in police custody. Accept problem can I refer to your HISTORIC Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Further when ISSUE was in proceedings,POLICE in ,utter breach of Article 6 ignore correspondence

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

QUESTIONS

1/ WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE I CAME AS SOLELY DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER IFYOU HAVE CAN YOU DISCLOSE TO JACK

SYNOPSIS

Have permission from Master [level of judge at court of appeal ] to make an application back to the court.

TODAY UNDER ECHR CASE LAW SEEK REPLY IN 7 DAYS FROM POLICE TO MY MP JACK LOPRESTI WITH COPY TO ME.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, FROM ECHR,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,]VERY SIMPLE QUESTION THE POLICE ELEMENT WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 SIMPLE QUESTION WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS BACK TO 2010 ,AS JCIO STATE VIA STATUTE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE WE COULD NEVER INVESTIGATE. OR WAS IT MALFREASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS SOLELY OVER THE YEARS I WAS ,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE IT WAS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER OVER YEARS COULD YOU PLEASE SUPPLY EVIDENCE TO MY MP JACK LOPRESTI ,IN 7 DAYS WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME,,,HAVE ASKED POLICE BEFORE WHILE IN PROCEEDINGS under

CPR 32 Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

WHERE THEY IGNORED CORRESPONDENCE WHILE IN PROCEEDINGS ASK RECENTLY WHERE DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION, FINAL ELEMENT OF CASE REQUIRED THEN BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL. HAVE REMAINDING EVIDENCE IN POLICE OWN WORDS

FACTS

JUDICIARY ALLEDGE IT WAS VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE, HOWEVER BECAUSE MADE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED, WHAT WERE ALLEGATIONS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION eg LETS QUOTE ACTUAL APLICATION

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial reriew]

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed,

Can I refer as cited this further also was in judicial review application /pre action protocol document for judicial review [2017] ,,,, from local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office],

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, admitted in scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions,to obtain evidence to do THE appeal you would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017

EVIDENCE BELOW WHERE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT APPLICATION THEY ADMIT WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT MADE

This evidence below before judiciary, denying evidence before it, utter breach of Article 6 denying evidence before it,,,,,eg

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

WHAT ARE REGUATIONS OF IPCC IN THEIR INVESTIGATION

Regulations IPCC [independent police complaint commission] in a police investigation.,,,,sent to me ALSO CITED ON INTERNET

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

PLEASE SEE INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 WHERE ADMIT POLICE NEVER TALKED TO ME eg DID NOT FOLLOW 1PCC REGULATIONS

LETS LOOK AT OTHER ALLEGATION IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,

Many years ago courts ignoring applications, and correspondence, had call one evening,,,,,well spoken male ,,,I do not approve of a one of your old applications to MY court,,,,[a district judge ?????] however will not stand by where corruption is going on HHJDenyer, and court out to get you, they have made a mistake, they have removed applications, however one in new case still on system in PRESENT case,,,,,,[8 years ago]. Visit court talk to Mr Blair,,,,recorded,,,all I state just checking to see applications in file,,,,,from recording ask nothing else,,,live case,,,we get reply,,,,nothing to do with me I check your applications, make sure you have evidence of being fee except,ect, and put in tray behind me,,,,,no one making allegations ,,,,is he responsible for removal of applications???. Is this not identical to Watergate,,,where Woodward/Bernsteine at Washington Post in deductions state we never asked about this, .....did not make any allegations the courts removing applications.However we know even later OBS80441 that applications, date/stamped by the court missing from file,,,,as at hearing a case I won, DJWatson states something very very odd here.

Courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence, pickit at court ,please see scan picket, barrister advised contacting police malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for many years, . WE HAVE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE COURT WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US AND CITED LAWYER CORRESPONDENCE WHOSE ALSO CORRESPONDENCE WAS IGNORED , had document applications date/stamped by court ignored ect ect . Police state you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office,courts ignoring applications/correspondence,for years, from above evidence comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,THEY HAVE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS. We have email from Mr Fowler [Bristol county court] in respect to statute CPR Part 32 Notice to Admit Facts ,,,,where he states your correspondence will not be read, not answered just filed, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,also

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,]

From above nonsense stated to police in email 22.7.2017 you have come to judgement in IPCC investigation, , and have not followed IPCC regulations, when do you alledge you talked to me, asked further 11 questions eg ,,,have you talked to lawyer from above,,,,stating with no reply by the 28.7.2017 would assume there would be no reply and would then do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017. We then get police letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal I have made no appeal, waiting for reply to questions, the above history not in dispute can I refer to police letter scan 10475/10494,,,police admit,,,

eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.

SO SAYING POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE I HAVE NOT LODGED ONE ,,,,THE JUDICIARY STATE MY CLAIM VEXATIOUS,,,,THEREFORE ISSUE RESTRAINING ORDER WHERE BEFORE IT HAS ABOVE EVIDENCE WHERE POLICE ADMIT ALLEGATIONS WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA,,,or is this like Profuma case collusion between police and judiciary.MY STATEMENTS TRUE ADMITTED BY POLICE,,lets consider a Crown court judge who saw my website,,,,stated not making any allegations however people in media may ask is this judiciary protecting their own

LETS CONSIDER WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1

THE EVIDENCE

Can i refer to another female judge and barrister who saw my website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com who stated in general there is cornerstone issue in case. Stated take theoretical example i sit as judge, defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, however case fails as defendant in closed prison on this date, your case why you went to police day 1. May seem strange however have sympathy with police, courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence, picket at court ,where barrister advises who i gave leaflet to, scanpicket to report to police malfeasance in public office courts ignoring applications for years and correspondence. Seen by Sgt Price where asked to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office, and insert in it my complaint, the FEDJCAB complete document. Given by her then to PCBird, who contacts Bristol county court, where told not issue for police, only route a complaint to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office]

This is where we have problem, under

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,]

And in proceedings at all stages, eg HHJCotter/Admin court Cardiff/Court of appeal while in live proceedings parties as they frustrate and corrupt the judicial process just ignore all correspondence [police and HMCS]

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

What did I ask, who at Bristol county court told PCBird to complain to JCIO. Playing Devils Advocate will we get it was HHJDenyers clerk,,,,where he will state,,,,remember getting call,,,,PCBird stated did not give me full allegations, only said Mr Jones was unhappy with conduct of Denyer,,,,I therefore informed PCBird therefore to complain to JCIO. WHAT DID PCBIRD INFORM THE COURT,,,,,WHO DID HE TALK TO. POLICE IGNORE UNDER CPR 32,,,,,WE DO NOT KNOW ANSWERS IS PCBIRD GOING TO SAY,,,,I TALKED TO X AT THE COURT EXPLAINED I HAD A COMPLAINT OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE YOU IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,, WHERE TOLD NOTHING TO DO WITH COURT,,,,COMPLAIN TO JCIO. HOWEVER IF X AT COURT AWARE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AWARE CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,THEN AWARE VIA STATUTE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE COULD NOT COMPLAIN TO JCIO. LETS TAKE JUDICIARY STANCE FURTHER YOU WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH SOLELY OVER JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER. AS FEMALE JUDGE AND BARRISTER STATED IN JUDGEMENT HHJCOTTER STATES,,,,,CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,AND JUDICIARY STANCE,,, POLICE CORRECT TO ADVISE TO CONTACT JCIO. HOWEVER COTTER AWARE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE COULD NOT REFER TO JCIO STATING YOU WENT AS ,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER. IF THIS IS CASE POLICE WERE WRONG,,,AS FEMALE BARRISTER STATED,,,,IF YOU WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OVER THE YEARS OF DENYER,,,,JCIO CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT THIS,,,AS STATUTE ONLY ROUTE TO APPEAL THESE JUDGEMENTS. FURTHER IF TRUE,,,AS FEMALE BARRISTER STATED,,,,YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOWN DOOR,,,,THIS WAS NOT EVEN CRIMINAL JUDGEMENTS THEY WERE CIVIL CASES,,,,POLICE CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT COURT JUDGEMENTS. FURTHER AS BARRISTER STATED WHY IS SGT PRICE WASTING POLICE TIME ASKING PCBIRD TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS ,,,,,,,I WAS UNHAPPY WITH VARIOUS CIVIL COURT JUDGEMENTS,,,AS SHE SAID SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD WE CAN DO NOTHING,,,,YOU NEED TO APPEAL BACK TO THE CIVIL COURT.

Was it malfeasance in public office as courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence ,a criminal offence, and via statute as they confirm JCIO we could never investigate complaint, as criminal offence, ,,,,judiciary state should have complained to JCIO. ?????? OR WENT TO POLICE AS SOLELY ......DISSATISFIED WITH PREVIOUS NUMEROUS JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,nonsence ????????????????

A STORY MADE UP BY HHJCOTTER TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ???????????? ask police today who did PCBird talk to ??

a/ Court for years ignoring applications and correspondence , picket at court SCAN picket, where barrister advised contacting defendants, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, record conversation with Sgt Price where agreed to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and insert my complaint in terms of this CPS document. Defined the FEDJCAB complete document,[ Fatal Evidence Document Judiciary Corrupt And Bent.] eg

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red to Sgt Price ,eg why I went to police,,, this is subsection of FEDJCAB complete, defined just FEDJCAB eg,,,,, why I went to police

SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appication are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.[CAN I ADD SEE APPENDIX 2,,,,,used today same document title Appendix 2 for reference] DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,

ASKED DEFENDANTS WHILE IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS , TO CONFIRM ABOVE DOCUMENT WAS ONE SENT TO THEM eg WHY I WENT TO THEM,,,,UNDER,,

CPR 32 Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED ,,,

RECENTLY ASK AGAIN ,WAS THIS THE DOCUMENT SENT AS REQUESTED BY SGT PRICE WHERE DEFENDANTS DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION.

b/ Letter delivered by hand, Patchway police station,,,, receipt, please see scan 13.4.2017 eg what did i say,,,

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

You have been supplied with CPS document on malfeasance in public office , where you asked to explain how it relates to my complaint. If you need more information please contact me, When picketing at court, as you know barrister told me to report to you malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications over many YEARS , as you stated would not be given to anyone to investigate if not a criminal offence, lawyer informs me a legal name its ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,misconduct in public office , where he informs me your officers jailed recently over this criminal offence , ,plus above perjury issue.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

ASKED DEFENDANTS AGAIN IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS PLUS RECENTLY AS ABOVE WAS THIS THE DOCUMENT LETTER SENT AS REQUESTED BY SGT PRICE WHERE AS ABOVE DEFENDANTS DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION.

c/ The FEDJCAB in pre action protocol document for judicial review, served on parties on the 16.9.2017 . Further the pre action protocol document had to be produced via statute set paragraphs please see scan annexA for regulations eg paragraph 7 defined in Annex A scan the issue,,, NEED TO INFORM COURT OF ISSUE,,,what did I state…

paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [from preaction protocol document]

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

d/,,,,From pre action protocol statute document, give warning to HHJCotter,,,,,….eg

If practice of ignoring applications continues then next step, European court ECHR

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS] UNQUOTE

Above in email cited in MY note to Cotter 17.11.2017 via email, there were no emails to court, 14.11.2017 .In Cotters judgement states email 14.11.2017 where asking for nearly 3 years ,,,,is this cited email of 17.11.2017 ……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS],WHY I WENT TO POLICE,,,,where HMCS just ignore correspondence utter breach of Article 6. ....

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,] and CPR 32,,,

They ignore as clear to Cotter why i went to police, day 1, and know Cotter read as quoted in his judgement. How does this bent judge go from,,,,[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]........to DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ???????????????????

e/ From ,,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,my court email of 21.12.2017

APPEAL AGAINST MR KROUWEL LETTER OF 5.12.2017

SKELETAL ARGUMENT

1/ Picketing at Bristol county court barrister told me to make complaint to police, malfeasance in public office, plus AGAIN perjury issue, warned police may try to brush you off.

2/ Clearly being brushed off by Sgt Price,, visit recorded,,,,,,,,,,,,,civil issues, make complaint to court, where I inform her I could not make a complaint.;;;;;;[CRIMINAL OFFENCE JCIO CAN NOT INVESTIGATE] tpld malfeasance not a criminal offence.stated on tape ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where I state are you saying you refuse to investigate, where Sgt Price backs down, requests documents sent to her, eg CPS document, ,,,,,,,criminal offence, judges/police/courts convicted. [recently own police convicted Ibramahimi case]

3/Get reply from PCBird, ,,,,,I am investigating your allegations of malfeasance in public office, make complaint to HMCS, from 2/ aware I could not make a complaint. Accept i have been betrayed by Sgt Price, as wished to sweep under carpet as warned by barrister. .

4/ So complain to police, get reply from Mr Galloway,,,,,,advice was correct to complain to HMCS. Further states no evidence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed also by our third party.

5/ Statutory route to appeal. Asking police questions for appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application ,,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staff, admit applications made, which were ignored by the court. Have email from police saying if doing appeal need to enclose also our appeal claim form. Further asking police why statutory regulations of IPCC not followed in investigations, reference leaflet sent to me.

6/ On the 22.7.2017 send email as police ignoring request for data, can I quote end of that email,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume with no email reply [to questions] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there will be no reply and can do appeal to you.h,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

....

7/

77

Can I refer to female judge and barrister STATES ,,,,,HHJCotter was never going to grant your aplication,,,,turkeys voting for Xmas, inviting police in to investigate criminal behaviour,,,,,Cotter states you went to police as dissatisfied WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER, FROM ABOVE HOW DOES HE COME TO THIS JUDGEMENT,,,CORRUPT AND BENT MAKES UP STORY. AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER CALLING THEM BASTARDS

There is at Bristol county court a [PSU] unit now know as Support Through Court ,[STC] visit with Ms Sell where manager at STC takes up issues with courts Mr Hunt. Agreed that Hunt he would confirm ,documents lodged with court, and therefore read by Cotter.[have copied STC into todays email if they want to comment to you Jack] ,so would know read by Cotter and considered,,, ,,,,,from Case Law ,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,,Hunt although promised to STC manager he would confirm, request ignored, take up issue with court manager Ms Pawsey,,,where we get IDENTICAL REPLY as one made by Fowler years ago,,,,your correspondence will not be read, not answered just filed,,,,utter breach as before of Article 6,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],

f/ CAN I PLEASE CITE JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION MARCH 2018

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored……UNQUOTE

WE HAVE BENT AND CORRUPT HHJBIGGER COMING TO IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT as COTTERS.

Again as judge stated ,,,Bigger was never going to grant application turkeys voting for Xmas, inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour.

The application in judicial review was made to Admin court Birmingham , as for years Cardiff ignoring applications/correspondence also, made under Application Practice Directives 54d.5.2 ,. From Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,the FEDJCAB complete document , the recording with Sgt Price , the pre action protocol for judicial review document sent to Birmingham court, no doubt why I went day 1 to police. I have asked under CPR directive 32.18 Notice to Admit Facts, NOW LIVE THEN IN ADMIN COURT ,,,Birmingham court , we have proof of posting sent, did you get,,,did you forward to Cardiff,,,,asked Cardiff court what documents were forwarded to your court from Birmingham, where both courts ignore correspondence, again utter breach of Article 6,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,

A barrister who saw my website cited application in judicial review,,,,,,from above

Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

VERY CLEAR WHAT ISSUE IS WHAT DID I SAY IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.,,,,,CONSIDER COTTERS JUDGEMENT ,,,,YOU WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,,,,HOWEVER AS BARRISTER SAID DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 SO ISSUE CAN NOT BE ,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER IN 2018 AS ISSUE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 CAN BE NOTHING TO DO WITH DENYERS JUDGEMENT HE WAS NOT AT COURT IN 2018. RETIRED

g/ Considers Biggers judgement , copy of Cotters judgement.

We already have police from above in own words admitting in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and sent reply to an appeal,,,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office the courts for years ignoring applications/correspondence ,,,where we have court stating,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us. . We have one outstanding issue,,,,,why I went to police day 1,,,,

WILL USE SEVERAL TIMES CAN WE DEFINE TERM OETICARF ,,Overwhelming Evidence Tactically Ignore Correspondence As Reply Fatal

We have case where police are defendants and civil courts are interested party, police can not answer question,,,,,why did I come to you on day 1 , and court can not answer question ,,,,did HHJCotter read revised application of 6.12.2017 , made under Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,

As I state police can not reply , look at judgement of Bigger, IDENTICAL copy of Cotters judgement went to police malfeasance in public office as courts for many years ignoring applications and correspondence.FROM ABOVE DID NOT GO AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER From judicial review application seek evidence to do judicial review application,,

This evidence above before judiciary, eg FEDJCAB document, denying evidence before it, utter breach of Article 6 denying evidence before it,,,,why I went to police day1 ,eg

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

COTTER/BIGGER DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM.

Visit court 5.12.2017 Mr Blair states your not looking at files, showing us ignoring your applications, make application to Cotter who will also ignore application . Could not do judicial review application as evidence withheld, ,LOOK AT JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018 BY COTTER. , where Jack I contacted your office, copy to Cotter, where he now replies scancotterlate, utterly aware out of time to do judicial review application HOWEVER withheld evidence,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],

We ask police series of questions where they demand money to answer, so comprimise,,,,,,why did I come to you day 1,,,,,do you have any evidence I came solely as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, if you do please supply. We ask police again simple question, could you copy Jack into reply in 7 days. PCC Ms Mountstevens copied today,,,,we have miscarriage of justice we ask you [PCC] to ensure police answer question. With no reply in 7 days I ask you Jack to ask police,before taking matter into my own hands.

FURTHER CONSIDERATION WITH POLICE

1/ When in a difficult position just ignore applications eg complaint 1.6.2020 after nearly 6 months no reply , complaint 17.10.2020 also ignored, and further details in scan evidence 6

CONCLUSION

1/ I am asking State to provide Legal Aid, to remove restraining order, from statute from day 1 of order, have to inform police and courts if they have any objections to removal of COURT OF APPEAL order, where non issued,no objection , if they have now Jack ask them in 7 days to inform you Jack. SO ASKING FOR REMOVAL WHERE PARTIES HAVE NO OBJECTION TO REMOVAL.The police and PCC Ms Mountstevens have duty of care to ensure that money is not wasted. If you have evidence in 7 days to oppose application back to the court, inform Jack and me in 7 days please. At all stages Cotter/Admin court/court of appeal,,,police via statute had chance to DISPUTE FACTS OF my application,,,eg acknowledgement of service and todays application to remove restraining order,,,at court of appeal where police made no objection. As female barrister/judge stated if they did Legatt LJ in mood he was in would have awarded costs against you, AS TIME SPENT Can I refer to Leggatt LJ judgement , and correspondence to police to inform me if they objected to application back to the court,,,,todays issue . There was no objection,,,however accept today Jack police/Mountstevens may raise objections, of return to the court, where ask them to inform you in 7 days, with copy of email to me please, why they object to application, need to show EVEN POLICE DO NOT OBJECT TO TODAYS APPLICATION. WHERE SEEK LEGAL AID

2/ What was judgement,,,,,,I went to police day 1 as SOLELY ,,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer,,,,is this correct,,,WE ASK POLICE,,,if so can you please supply evidence to Jack, Talked to female barrister and judge,,,compelling evidence above, plus as Insp O Mahony states you did not know if criminal offence malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, by court staff not sending applications to Denyer, or Denyer just ignoring. As judge stated court staff have nothing to do with,,,judgements of Denyer,,,so court issue can not be you went day 1 as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, judgements of Denyer nothing to do with court staff.

3/ SIMPLE QUESTION WE HAVE RESTRAINING ORDER AS ALLEGATIONS VEXATIOUS AGAINST POLICE WHERE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT ALLEGATIONS,,,,SHOWS CORRUPTION PLUS UTTER BREACH OF ECHR CASE LAW,,,,BY COTTER/BIGGER/LEGATT,,,,,,,,,,,,, eg ,,,,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....THEY HAVE POLICE ADMITTING IN OWN WORDS,,,,AS JUDGE SAID IS THIS JUDICIARY [LEGATT] PROTECTING THEIR OWN. JUST ONE OUTSTANDING QUESTION,,,,YES JUST ONE ASKING FOR YEARS EVEN IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS UNDER

CPR 32 Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED ,,

,DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 COMPELLING EVIDENCE ABOVE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS FOR YEARS THE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE .;;;;or was itsolely as ,,,,dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer.As female barrister/judge stated,,,,you have asked police was the FEDJCAB document sent to police,,,,was this in the pre action protocol document for judicial review,,,,shows why you went day 1,,,,,police may say, as judge said i work on facts,,,not documents he sent,,,he sent,,,,police can answer if they want, not asking today,,,,, JUST ONE QUESTION WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE AND APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,,AND THEREFORE VIA STATUTE COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO.

FURTHER CONSIDER TODAY QUESTIONS IN SCAN EVIDENCE 6

SCAN EVIDENCE 2 THE LEGAL AID STATUTE

JACK YOU WILL NEED EVIDENCE TO REFER TO Rt Hon BUCKLAND AND OMBUDSMAN

What is issue, please see SCAN EVIDENCE 1 AND 4 ,,,,, where we ask State to provide Legal Aid .We have asked lawyers [x100] for years, told by one lawyer,,,,, lawyers will not want to act due to content, you will be brushed off by others, eg they will say too busy, no one on facts, can reject your cry for help , from email reply ,,,,,firms public law lawyers not free to act at present, ,,,,,,,,,,LATER in day, ,call is your public law lawyers taking on new work,,,,,yes ,,,,,, can I put you through ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,contact Bristol Law Center at pre judicial review stage, Jack you are aware in email to you, lawyers and this centre covered in email today , asking for help. In recent request have reply from Bristol Law Centre ,,,,,,,told you last time not taking on new work,,,,, we may so ask why they have website, if for 2 years,,,,,,not taking on work, covered in this email if they want to comment to you Jack . Similar with Pro Bono Unit [London] will not now use them. Badly let down, even later again at court of appeal stage. They were asking court of appeal for more time, court of appeal were understanding, believe they gave 4 extensions to do application, at end court of appeal stated this is final extension, the email sent to Pro Bono Unit . WE GET REPLY AFTER THIS FINAL DATE saying could not find suitable barrister, good job I took advice of retired district judge ,advised do initial application ,can add further evidence to do full application your self,under,,,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,which was done,,,why i went to police day 1, police admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, we sent replyto your alleged appeal, where we admit appeal not lodged. Retired judge,, I will not do I have retired, so you can lodge with court of appeal on time, as let down by Pro Bono Unit ,,,,at last minute have to serve incomplete application, state to court of appeal ,,,,appeal as at 1.7.2018 with application to Legatt LJ to make order so I could obtain further evidence, please see scan 10547, which he ignored, utter breach of Article 6,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,Jack understand you know legal worker Dr Gupta where raised issue,,,NOT making any allegations , states I did send email to you,,,can not trace,,,could well have gone from his records, if still have ask him to forward to you in 7 days. JACK I PLEASE ASK ,,,,, State to provide Legal Aid. . What are my Human Rights, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,skeletal argument below…

WHAT IS THE HUMAN RIGHT ISSUE IN RESPECT TO LEGAL AID ,,,,,,,,,,,,

C. Legal aid

1. Granting of legal aid

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid).

a/ ,,,,Right and access to a court 81. The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76 et seq.). 82. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 83. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim

• b/ A right that is practical and effective . The right of access to a court must be “practical and effective” (Bellet v. France, § 38; Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76-79). For the right of access to be effective, an individual must “have a clear, practical opportunity to challenge an act that is an interference with his rights” (Bellet v. France, § 36; Nunes Dias v. Portugal (dec.)

c/ In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:….

Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court.

d/ . In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings which prevented the applicant from enjoying such access, and determines whether the applicant was made to bear an excessive burden on account of such errors. Reference criteria have been laid down for assessing whether it is the applicant or the competent authorities who should bear the consequences of any errors (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 90-95, § 119). Where errors were made before

e/ Content: civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge (Fayed v. the United Kingdom, § 65; Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], § 46).,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

FACTS

The judicial review application, fee except, at end of proceedings State issue restraining order ,solely as I appealed ,JUDGEMENT UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT [IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION,,IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE WE ADMIT ONE NOT LODGED,,,,YOU HAVE FURTHER IN THIS DOCUMENT WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 WHERE TODAY ASK POLICE TO CONFIRM WHY I WENT TO THEM DAY 1] ,seek to remove order the court demands money, utter breach ,,,, Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court.,,,,,the judiciary make order knowing I do not have money to appeal..as they corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, another issue the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings,,,,,,consider application that Legatt ignored and follow up correspondence scan10547 , where in utter breach of Article 6,,, ,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,, Legatt just ignored application.

I have fundamental basic rights of access to a court , however can not do due to the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62); We have Master [level of judge at Court of Appeal] confirming he would accept application however demanding 528.00 to hear application.,,,nearly my pension for a month,,,, I am a pensioner can not afford that money. Of course I can not expect State to give Legal Aid where little or no prospect of success. What was application in judicial review, pasted in scan evidence 1 today, , untouched , eg as lawyer stated quoted in application ,,,,, where are we Russia /China, We have retired district judge saying not judicial language however calling HHJCotter and his court staff bastards, as in Profuma case collusion between court and police.

We have Avon Somerset Police ADMITTING IN OWN WORDS

a/ IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION WE ADMIT WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

b/ We sent reply to your appeal where we admit one not lodged

c/ We have just one outstanding issue,,,,why I went to police day 1 , where ask police to confirm, we know as female barrister and judge stated who saw my website,,police ignore,,,,,,would be turkeys voting for Xmas, they ignore, asking for years, also question served under live proceedings, Admin court/court of appeal

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which POLICE in questions ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Coming to end of my life, these questions if need be answered in magistrates court, collecting 5L cans of old oil to throw in police station doorway before sent to prison to die,,,,severe heart condtion.,rejected simple correction surgery. Accept problem can I refer to your HISTORIC Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Further when ISSUE in proceedings,POLICE in ,utter breach of Article 6 ignore correspondence

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

I ASK TODAY WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THE COURTS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS [DID NOT KNOW IF HHJDENYER OR WAS IT COURT STAFF NOT SENDING APPLICATIONS/ CORRESPONDENCE TO HIM,,,]THIS IN INSP O MAHONY ENCLOSED REPLY SCAN 10594 OR WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS,,,,,,DISSATISFIED OVER THE YEARS OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,,IF THIS IS STANCE CAN YOU SEND EVIDENCE TO JACK LOPRESTI MP AND COPY ME INTO REPLY IN 7 DAYS PLEASE.

SCAN EVIDENCE 4 THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE REFUND OF COURT FEE

SCAN EVIDENCE 4 OMBUDSMAN ISSUE

THIS IS PART OF EMAIL TO JACK LOPRESTI MP ,,,SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH FULL EMAIL THE REST OF EMAIL CAN BE FOUND IN WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM. SPECIFIC ELEMENT SCAN EVIDENCE 4 ONLY SENT TO THE COURT TODAY ……THEIR SOLE ISSUE

ISSUE ARISES FROM CO/1731/2018 WHERE MASTER [level of judge] GIVES PERMISSION TO MAKE APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT. NEED TO EXPLAIN TO MEDIA POLICE ARE DEFENDANTS AND COURTS [HMCS ] JUST A INTERESTED PARTY. THE COURTS AS SUCH LIKE RATS IN A SEWER SOMETIME AGO,,,,DO NOT REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED THIS IS ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE….DO NOT AGREE ,,,,,,,,WHAT ARE ISSUES

POLICE [judiciary state A/ B/ vexatious however police in own words admit allegations]

A/ THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 INSP O MAHONY ADMITS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

B/ IN EVIDENCE ,,,SCAN EVIDENCE 1 POLICE FURTHER ADMIT WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHEN NO APPEAL LODGED

C/ THE ONLY OUTSTANDING ISSUE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 THIS COVERED IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 WITH DETAILED EVIDENCE NO NEED TO REPEAT HERE

COURT [THE OMBUDSMAN SOLE ISSUE]

A/ HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2917 SEEK REFUND OF FEE

Jack sole issue that you have been involved with for years, NOW hope before ombudsman, refund of court fee as application of 6.12.2017 not read by HHJCotter.Simple question they refuse to answer WAS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 READ BY HHJCOTTER ???????????

Jack must be first time do not know HMCS defense to ombudsman issue YOU DO NOT KNOW SO CAN NOT REFER UNTIL YOU KNOW COURTS STANCE. HAVE ASKED SAME QUESTIONS IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS AT JUDICIAL REVIEW AND COURT OF APPEAL STAGE TO POLICE AND COURTS ,,,UNDER

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which HMCS in their questions I asked …. ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Coming to end of my life, these questions if need be answered in magistrates court, collecting 5L cans of old oil to throw in court doorway before sent to prison to die,,,,severe heart condtion. Best outcome to die in police custody after arrest to show what is going on. Accept problem can I refer to your HISTORIC Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Further when ISSUE in proceedings,CPR 32,,,,IGNORE,,,,COURT ALSO in ,utter breach of Article 6 ignore correspondence

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

SKELETAL ARGUMENT OF ISSUE

Have restraining order as i appealed HHJCotters/Biggers identical wrong judgement. Stated vexatious to make allegations against police, in scan evidence 1 in own words police admit allegations made. The appeal stands on its own, however in judgement it states facts of case in Cotters judgement, however did Cotter read application,FROM BELOW TOLD HE DID NOT READ,,,,,,,,.READ WRONG PAPERS,,,,application HE MADE ????? FORGERY,

1/November 2017 send court N244 form plus note to HHJCotter where he asks me to make official application and to pay fee, Visit court 5.12.2017 to obtain evidence to do application to the court, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,eg where lady was more than helpful went to get files, then Mr Blair comes running out saying, your not looking at files, we refuse WHO IS WE ,,HHJCOTTER

opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,Blair,,,make application to Cotter who will also ignore request utter breach of Article 6.which Cotter did,,

2/Demand old N244 form deface write on it not to be sent to Cotter until new N244 send with application next day, 6.12.207,,,made under ,,,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,PAID FEE ON THESE CONDITIONS ,,,,, application sent next day via email.,6.12.2017

3/ Series of emails confirming agreement,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS for example 7.12.2017

In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. IGNORED emails,,,

5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17

6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time

7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59

21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00.

29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,.

Visit court again asking same questions, talk to manager of PSU [known now support through court] who talks to courts Mr Hunt, where Hunt lies to PSU manager states will confirm in 10days if above LISTED EMAILS/ TIME in file, for example application of 6.12.2017 under ,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS IS IT IN FILE.

AGAIN BELOW UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 MS PAWSLEY REFUSES EVEN TODAY TO ANSWER QUESTION HUNT STATED TO PSU HE WOULD ANSWER AS HUNT CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. JUST LIED TO PSU

4/ For example from application 6.12.2017 and other emails utterly aware why i went to police day 1, as retired District Judge stated after seeing Cotters judgement,,,,,not judicial language however they are utter bastards, he did not read application, visit court,,,,told we did not send to Cotter,removed from file. If did not send what was N244 form sent to Cotter, one Blair/Cotter made up and forged my signature,,,asked for copy of defaced N244 form plus one considered by Cotter, of course if Cotter forged my signature you can see why court ignored my request, under ,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,and in live proceedings before Admin court and court of appeal under,,,

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

5/ Told not read, Jan 2018,,,seek refund of court fee, stages complain,,,to Resolver,,,to ombudsman. Court refuses to repay fee only thing we get which QC female judge and barrister stated is intelectual insolence they state we looked in fee section of 6.12.2017 no fee was paid,,,NO FEE REQUIRED FROM ECHR CASE LAW under ,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS

QUESTIONS

1/ DID HHJCOTTER READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017

NO,,,,,SEEK REFUND OF COURT FEE

YES….THEN NO APPLICATION TO OMBUDSMAN eg HE READ APPLICATION ,,,,HOWEVER AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 SO HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM egHE HAS FEDJCAB DOCUMENT THE DOCUMENT POLICE WANTED DAY 1 EXPLAINING MY COMPLAINT

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

2/ BASIC QUESTION DID YOU GET APPLICATION EMAIL OF THE 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER ,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,

YES SO YOU OBTAINED APPLICATION

NO,,,,JACK I CAN SEND COURT RECEIPTS IF THIS IS COURT DEFENCE

3/ Or is defence we will not pay as no fee sent on the 6.12.2017 then via statute in 2/ no fee is required via Case Law. Only reply we have obtained is ,,,,,,,,,, I didn’t find evidence of a properly filed application, with a fee, dated 6 December 2017.,,,,,from statute no fee required. The courts could have resolved issue as I stated in live proceedings at Admin and court of appeal stage eg

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

However all correspondence ignored , tried recently please see court reply as Pawsley corrupts and frustrates the judicial process I ASK AGAIN ANSWER QUESTIONS

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing.bristol.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

23/06/2020 17:19

1

Inbox

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your correspondence received in our office on 5 June 2020. Please accept my apologies for the delay in response but I did not have sight of your email until last week due to national issues with our IT equipment.

You have written to the court on several occasions to both myself and Mr Edward Hunt on this very matter. We have previously addressed the questions put to us and we have nothing new we can usefully add.

Any further correspondence in relation to this matter will not be responded to, but will be placed on your file.

Yours sincerely

Jane Pawsey

As you can see again going back to proceedings in Admin /court of appeal just ignore correspondence utter breach of Article 6

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,

Jack simple question to them did you get application 6.12.2017 as AGREED with court [Blair] under,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,WAS IT READ BY HHJCOTTER. WAS COTTER AWARE OF APPLICATION UNDER ADORISIO ,,YES HE WAS FROM JUDGEMENT

CAN I PLEASE ADDRESS ONLY REPLY WE HAVE FROM Mr Redgrave please see scan redgrace,,,,

I didn’t find evidence of a properly filed application, with a fee, dated 6 December 2017.UNDER CASE LAW NO FEE REQUIRED eg Adorisio,,, ,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

CAN I PLEASE ADDRESS REDGRAVES REPLY IN TOTAL AS SHOWS UTTER CORRUPTION OF HMCS COTTER AND REDGRAVE what does he omitAs for years ignoring applications and correspondence ,back to 2010 my website launched, www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com . The court asks for removal of website or CONSEQUENCES I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY CORRUPT AND BENT JUDGE DENYER . Emails stored on Outlook express, not in cloud, need to back up , due to possible litagation over libel. For example courts Mr Fowler called corrupt and bent, trying to get evidence to do HISTORIC judicial review, where he states ,,,,,your letters will not be answered , not read, just filed.....utter breach of Article 6, of the Human Rights Act ,,,,,, [IDENTCAL TO PAWSLEYS LETTER AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS] The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,,

Compuwave take on work to back up emails. On invoice they give program to view backuped emails. Program does not work , where Compuwave state was working when you left shop. B26YM042 issued, comes to arbitration , starts late, where parties agree to settle later. AGREED ABOVE FACTS CONFIRMED WITH SCAN REDGRAVE HOWEVER REDGRAVE OMITS FOLLOWING,,,,AS HE CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATES THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. ,The settlement sent to court, matter settled, wrong program was given on invoice,note Compuwave covered in this document TODAY , if facts not correct ask them to email you Jack. DJWatson asks what was position of person at Compuwave who signed settlement , this emailed to DJWatson by Compuwave, email copy to me, please see COURTS FILE history, however from scan Redgrave can i just add one email that Redgrave omitted from his history,,,as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process,,,the email settlement to court .....

PHILIP JONES <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

23/12/2015 09:59

12

5

Scan10246.JPG

CLAIM NUMBER B26YM042 HEARING 5.1.2016

Could you please put before a judge as soon as possible, to vacate hearing 5.1.2016. I accept as in AOIBS346 Jones v N Bristol NHS Trust , for medical records, DJBrittan would not accept settlement and told both parties to attend court. This again was a settlement request from defendants a few days before second hearing, and i informed hospital lawyer, that settlement was nonsense, however they now give me everything requested from day 1. [identical today]

In todays issue, from tab 4 these instructions to read emails are utterly different from instructions given 21.12.2015, from tab 6 my email to defendants, where asked if tab 4 correct, which obtained no reply, as defendants ignored email, proceedings issued. Again a few days before hearing defendants ask to settle, as court aware no papers 14 days before hearing by defendants. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UNQUOTE

RECEIPT therefore obtained by Bristol county court…below

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>

23/12/2015 09:59

1

Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court

We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days.

If your email is regarding a complaint, please allow 10 working days for your concerns to be investigated and a response provided. For further guidance please refer to the EX343 on the Justice Website.

Top Tips

• Send your documents once and do not duplicate a copy in the Post,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

As Redgrave HMCS states in scanredgrave , due to mediation starting late , I recorded mediation , agreed would settle after mediation, settlement sent scan 10246 attached to above email, above with court receipt,,,,obtained above by court ,,,,. Heard nothing so recorded call to court ,,,ask ,do I have to go to hearing over settled claim, ,,,, we have asked HHJDenyer to remove from hearing date. from above settled, told HHJDenyer removed case from hearing list , matter settled, no need to attend hearing ,,,,,, consider now Denyers deception and corruption, , where of course no one turns up, therefore case was dismissed .Appeal for oral hearing matter settled ,,,, send recorded delivery , copy of tape sent , not to turn up,, see signed for, where appeal application dismissed corrupting and frustrating the judicial process, as scan Redgrave states. . MATTER SETTLED. NOW SEE WHAT BLACKMAIL THREAT CONSEQUENCES MEANT AS RESTAINING ORDER ISSED AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT BUT THIS IS A SETTLED CASE BETWEEN PARTIES WERE TOLD NOT TO COME TO HEARING,,,,WALKED INTO A TRAP,,,,,DO WE HAVE IDENTICAL SITUATION TODAY RESTRAING ORDER UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT

JACK DO NOT WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME COURT TODAY MAY SAY,,,I HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR YEARS ,,,,,APPLICATION 6.12.2017 WAS READ ,,,NO REFUND OF FEE,,,SO IT WAS READ SO COTTER KNOWS WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY1 ,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE AND APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS eg 6.12.2020 EMAIL

CONTACT PHILIP.JONES88@BTINTERNET.COM

This section expands issues in 2016, however the MAIN issue , same issue ignoring applications relate to 2013 issue.

We have response from Sg Price ,Avon Somerset Police ,,,,, insufficient evidence, malfeasance in public office defined by CPS as,,,,,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, We have court order to make applications to the Bristol county court, where court/HHJDenyer ignores, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,malfeasance in public office. Court confirms orally they will commit malfeasance in public office told HHJDenyer had confimed applications would be ignored, ..............................

IS THIS NOT INFORMING COTTER,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS APPLICATIONS BEING IGNORED

A/ THERE IS DOCUMENT 6.12.2017 DEFINED DOCUMENT TITLE SEEKING PERMISSION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER,,,NOT ADDRESED IN JUDGEMENT SO WAS READ ?????COTTER WHERE IS YOUR JUDGEMENT ON APPLICATION ???????

B/ ,,,DOCUMENT 6.12.2017 ,,,,REQUESTED BY POLICE DAY 1 [feb 2017]THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT COPIED AGAIN BEFORE IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT, FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW,,,AGAIN BEFORE COTTER

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red to Sgt Price ,eg why I went to police,,, this is subsection of FEDJCAB complete, defined just FEDJCAB eg,,,,, why I went to police

SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appication are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.[CAN I ADD SEE APPENDIX 2][JACK TODAY NOV 2020 WILL ENCLOSE THIS DOCUMENT] DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,

FROM 6.12.2017 APPLICATION

CONTACT PHILIP.JONES88@BTINTERNET.COM

This section expands issues in 2016, however the MAIN issue , same issue ignoring applications relate to 2013 issue.

We have response from Sg Price ,Avon Somerset Police ,,,,, insufficient [NO] evidence, malfeasance in public office defined by CPS as,,,,,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, We have court order to make applications to the Bristol county court, where court/HHJDenyer ignores, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,malfeasance in public office.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

EMAIL 21.12.2017 CAN SEE WHY CORRUPT AND BENT HUNT ALTHOUGH PROMISED MANAGER AT PSU REPLY IN 10 DAYS AS HE CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATES THE JUDICIAL PROCEES REFUSES TO CONFIRM IF IN FILE,,,MADE UNDER Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,

APPEAL AGAINST MR KROUWEL LETTER OF 5.12.2017 [this was email of 21.12.2017]

SKELETAL ARGUMENT

1/ Picketing at Bristol county court barrister told me to make complaint to police, malfeasance in public office, plus AGAIN perjury issue, warned police may try to brush you off.

2/ Clearly being brushed off by Sgt Price,, visit recorded,,,,,,,,,,,,,civil issues, make complaint to court, where I inform her I could not make a complaint.;;;;;;[CRIMINAL OFFENCE JCIO CAN NOT INVESTIGATE] tpld malfeasance not a criminal offence.stated on tape ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where I state are you saying you refuse to investigate, where Sgt Price backs down, requests documents sent to her, eg CPS document, ,,,,,,,criminal offence, judges/police/courts convicted. [recently own police convicted Ibramahimi case]

3/Get reply from PCBird, ,,,,,I am investigating your allegations of malfeasance in public office, make complaint to HMCS, from 2/ aware I could not make a complaint. Accept i have been betrayed by Sgt Price, as wished to sweep under carpet as warned by barrister. .

4/ So complain to police, get reply from Mr Galloway,,,,,,advice was correct to complain to HMCS. Further states no evidence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed also by our third party.

5/ Statutory route to appeal. Asking police questions for appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application ,,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staff, admit applications made, which were ignored by the court. Have email from police saying if doing appeal need to enclose also our appeal claim form. Further asking police why statutory regulations of IPCC not followed in investigations, reference leaflet sent to me. ..........

SO ALL THESE DOCUMENTS READ CLEAR WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS DETAILED EVIDENCE IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 WHERE ASKING POLICE TO CONFIRM TO YOU JACK WHY I WENT TO THEM DAY 1,,,SO COTTER READ WE ASK FROM ABOVE HOW HE COMES TO JUDGEMENT,,,I WENT TO POLICE AS WAS JUST DISSATISFIELD WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,??????????????????? OR ASK ARE YOU CORRUPT AND BENT

COURT IN CATCH 22 SITUATION eg The court may wish to say not read,,,under ADORISON seek refund of fee,,,,or was read,,,,so Cotter utterly aware why i went to police day1. The courts in a catch 22 situation,,,,seek again today, asking HMCS to answer questions below,Jack you can then see merits if you feel fit to refer to ombudsman. via statute, I can not refer asking you to refer to ombudsman. We will not get a reply collecting cans of old oil to throw in court doorway,,,every week until sent to prison to die, severe heart condition. Chilling from Crown court judge who saw my website,,,could get we can not find file,,,the N244 missing from file ect,,,,

These same questions below in judicial review and in court of appeal live proceedings under

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which HMCS ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Accept problem can I refer to your Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply.

a/ On 5.12.2017 the court N244 form was defaced, withdrawn, wrote on it not to send to HHJCotter until new N244 was sent with new application sent ,,,eg under

Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,can we have copy of defaced N244 form and actual N244 presented to HHJCotter ,,,,ASKING FOR 3 YEARS EVEN IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS UNDER CPR 32,,,ADMIT FACTS,,,IGNORE AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE JUDICIAL PROCESS

b/ Did you get application of the 6.12.2017 made under …..Adorisio ????

Simple question did HHJCotter read application of the 6.12.2017 IF NOT SEEK REFUND OF COURT FEE,,,,was made under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,

The N244 defaced until new N244 plus application sent to the court

As female QC barrister and judge stated who saw my website HHJCotter aware of 6.12.2017 application from his judgement , All we obtained from court,looked in court fee records no evidence of application 6.12.2017 on system,,,, was identical reply much later in scan redgrave,,

I didn’t find evidence of a properly filed application, with a fee, dated 6 December 2017. NO FEE REQUIRED AS FEMALE BARRISTER AND JUDGE STATED INTELLECTUAL INSOLENCE SAY WE LOOKED IN FEE SECTION,,APPLICATION NOT THERE,,,NO FEE REQUIRED VIA CASE LAW,,, Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,YOU WILL SEE THE COURT AGREED 5.12.2017 PROCEDURE USED

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS…

SYNOPSIS

1/ Note sent to HHJCotter with court N244 form, where he asks to pay fee to consider an application. Visit court 5.12.2017 as retired District Judge stated, you have made 2 applications to remove restraining order, ignored by the court,,,,[IGNORING OTHER APPLICATIONS BACK TO 2010 ,,YOU WILL SEE LATER 2018 2 MORE APPLICATIONS IGNORED THIS TIME BY HHJCOTTER in judicial review application as i state this is issue of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, still going on in 2018,,,corrupt and bent Cotter states i went to police as ,,,,dissatisfied with judgements over the years of Denyer, as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process,,,DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS JUDGEMENTS] you need to do here in your official application, an application to remove restraining order,this could be thrown at you for years if not removed.

2/ Seek under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,for evidence to do application where courts Mr Blair states 5.12.2017 your not looking at files showing us ignoring your applications, or details of B26YM042 the restraining order issue eg asked is settlement of B26YM042 in file. . Told make application to HHJCotter who will also ignore your request, clearly conspiracy Blair already knew tactics. ,,,utter breach from above of Article 6, Cotter ignored application as Blair said he would. The issue followed up in email of the 7.12.2017….,,,,,We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please …

3/ Demand on the 5.12.2017 the court N244 form , please see format in scanN244 eg what I want court to do,,,,deface it write on it not to sent to HHJCotter until under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,A ,NEW N244 SENT [TO REPLACE DEFACED N244 FORM] AND ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, further arguments and evidence to the domestic court WAS SENT

,,,,[eg Adorisio v Netherlands ]

SENT VIA EMAIL NEXT DAY 6.12.2017

4/ Sent application under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,,6.12.2017 via email, court receipt,WE KNOW COURT OBTAINED ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, email of 7.12.2017 STATED,,

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.[email IGNORED] ,,

4/ Follow up email 21.12.2017 to make sure the removal of restraining order before HHJCotter,,,,eg

Goodafternoon,

We are putting together documents for 2018.

1/ We have application to remove, restraining order, before HHJCotter…..

This email also ignored so visit the court to obtain answers,to make sure application before Cotter, under Adorisio ,,,,,told a reply in due course. Heated argument over ECHR concept of Inequalties of Arms, for example NBT [North Bristol NHS Trust, ] their involvement in scan evidence 5 ,,,again this document sent to them today , if they want to make a comment to you Jack on facts. ,,NBT ,lawyer from emails to me,,,,NUMEROUS TIMES ,,we made application to the court that morning, then later,,,just had reply,,,,ON SAME DAY,,,,I CAN NOT GET ANY REPLIES. Still court ignores me,,,,utter breach of Article 6 …

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias

However ACCEPT covered years ago in courts Mr Fowlers email,,,,your correspondence will not be read, not answered just filed. ,,,,UTTER BREACH ARTICLE 6

5/ Take up issue of Ineqalities of Arms again in email of the 29.12.2017 ,further in that email,,,

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

,,[Cotter aware of application in 2 parts on the 6.12.2017 ,,,under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,,I cite application 6.12.2017 which had to be split in 2 due to size,,,I CONCLUDE EMAIL 29.7.2017]

CAN JACK HAVE REPLY VIA EMAIL IN 7 DAYS,,,,,,COPY TO ME VIA EMAIL…,,,WITH NO REPLY IN 7 DAYS WILL ASSUME COURT REFUSES TO REPLY. ,,IGNORED

COTTER AWARE OF EMAIL 7.12.2017 eg 1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.[email IGNORED] ,,AWARE OF N244 REMOVED WHAT N244 DID HE READ ????ONE HE MADE UP

6/ Can I now draw things together we know from scan cotterlate he read EMAIL OF 29.12.2017 , which he had to do ,,,

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,

As several lawyers/barristers stated Cotter is aware of emails of the 5 and 6 [the application] and 7 .12.2017. and they cite,,

Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court [COTTER ] must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

From scan cotter late, admits all dates in his judgement wrong,,,,we may ask what drugs/intoxication he was on. ,,,,further as retired District Judge stated,,,,after seeing judgement,,,,,not judicial language however they are utter bastards,,,he had not read 6.12.2017 application made under

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,no reference to removal of restaining order

7/ Went to court told ,,,,we did not send to Cotter . Ask for refund of fee, the ombudsman issue. As female barrister and judge stated,,,interlectual insolence court stance we looked in our fee section no fee paid 6.12.2017,,,,,but no fee required from ECHR case law..

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,

Again as several lawyers/barristers have stated,,,,if court believed in goodwill a fee was required, and consider… Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

WHY DID COURT NOT ASK FOR A FEE.

8/ Comes under a Resolver complaint , where court just ignores for years correspondence , where ask you Jack to refer to ombudsman. We go via statute ,,,complaint,,,,to Resolver ,,,to ombudsman , where court corrupts and frustrates the judicial process, as Fowler stated years ago, utter breach of Article 6 ,,,we will ignore your correspondence, will not be read just filed. Escalate issue before you can refer Jack to ombudsman, please see scan redgrave enclosed.

SO TODAY AGAIN ASK

1/ Did you get application/N244 form the replacement of defaced N244 form on the 6.12.2017,as agreed with Blair. Made under,,,Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,if answer is no simple solution for ombudsman,,,,can send you Jack court receipts.....was it read

2/ If not read could you explain to Jack why refund of fee not paid....Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,

3/ Can we have copy of defaced N244 form and actual N244 considered by Cotter.

4/ Why is above important,,,we have restraining order because of vexatious comments about police,,,,where in scan evidence 1 police in own words admit allegations. In scan evidence 1 to complete appeal ask police again in own words to confirm why i went tothem day 1. As it were iceing on cake we have judgement,,,,facts of case in Cotters judgement copied by Bigger,,,BUT COTTER WE WILL SHOW DID NOT READ APPLICATION,,,,OR IF STATING I DID THEN CORRUPT AND BENT DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM,,,We have Crown court judge,,,,judiciary protecting their own,,,or numerous lawyers/barristers,,,,Legatt LJ already judged case without looking at facts as he protects judiciay who are corrupt and bent...LAWYERS CITE SHARING,,

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

The selected background to B26YM042 in scan redgrave,as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process ,facts correct...REDGRAVE BENT AND CORRUPT WHAT HAVE YOU FAILED TO DISCLOSE ONE EMAIL AND COURT RECEIPT ABOVE.

CONCLUSION

1/ We need to get court to confirm did you get email application of the 6.12.2017 YES OR NO … made under,,,,,,

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,HAVE ASKED FOR YEARS EVEN UNDER LIVE PROCEEDINGS,,,,, Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

,NO,,,,,,,,,,,THEN WHAT IS CONSEQUENCE BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL. COTTER READ WRONG PAPERS,,,,LEGATT l LJ IN JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT COPIED BY HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT BUT COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. WE HAVE BARRISTERS WHO SAW MY WEBSITE eg FEMALE MANCHESTER,,,,MALE BIRMINGHAM,,,CITING SAME CASE,,, Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt LJ had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAB document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal ,LETS SEE IF THEY STATE WE DID NOT GET 6.12.2017 APPLICATION THEN CAN SUPPLY COURT RECEIPTS PLUS FURTHER EVIDENCE SENT TO THE COURT THIRD PARTY AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED LETS SEE IF THEY STATE THIS CAN SHOW FURTHER DISHONESTY FROM OTHER EVIDENCE WE HAVE,,,,SEEK REFUND OF FEE AS NOT READ .IS DEFENCE NOT READ AS NO FEE ENCLOSED FROM CASE LAW,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ….NO FEE REQUIRED.

2/ YES…THEN COTTER AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1,,AWARE N244 DEFACED WITH NEW N244 PLUS APPLICATION ,,FROM ABOVE DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM. FURTHER AWARE APPLICATION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER WHY WAS IT NOT CONSIDERED THAT’S WHAT I PAID FOR.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

SCAN EVIDENCE 5 THE NBT ISSUE [NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST]

1/ NBT left me disabled, in chronic pain, ,,,,,,further in later inguinal hernia surgery a disaster, as failed in a few days …... later court application was for medical records, and to put via statute a message in medical records , and travel expensives. Comes before DJWatson at hearing , makes court order,,,where he asks defendants third party for statement , where case then struck out in papers supplied by NBT,,,,[statement utterly untrue]where ask for oral hearing. Just before second hearing defendants ask to settle, supply medical records, pay travel expenses, and agree to put statement in medical records eg .,,,,,ACCEPT MY CLAIM Defendants send their settlement to the court, rejected by DJBrittan, [ Brittan in claim a long time ago asked me to leave court so he could discuss case with then defendants,,,,,,where took up issue with then defendants lawyer with reply ,,,we would not be seen discussing case behind your back with Brittan for you to exploit later ,,,,said have to catch plane can not talk,,,,excuse made not to talk to Brittan ] where NBT above case comes before again DJWatson.

Before from file had recording for example from radiology that their medical records not disclosed, said 6 MONTHS BEFORE RESOLVE ISSUE WHERE NBT JUST STATE YOUR CLAIM STRUCK OUT BY DJWATSON ,,,,, WILL NOT SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS WILL NOT TALK TO YOU

For example in NBT case defendants asked to settle, A FEW DAYS BEFORE second HEARING At hearing they requested that judgement reads i acted unreasonably, this was rejected by the court, Ms Smith for defendants would not let it drop, I could not get into conversation, as DJWatson right hand raised in my direction,,,,,NO COMPLAINT OVER DJWATSON. DJWatson stated as in judgement he had read file and would not state this, eg I WAS ACTING UNREASONABLY aware 6 months ago asked to settle,,,,now suppling 6 months later medical records,,,putting statement in medical records ,,,paying travel expenses. CAN I REFER TO RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE IN APPLICATION 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER TODAYS ISSUE NOT RELATED TO NBT WHERE STATED NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER BRISTOL COURT ARE UTTER BASTARDS. VIEW BACKED UP BY JUDICIARY PLEASE SEE MAIN TEXT TODAY . NBT LAWYER Ms SMITH LAWYER CALLED A BITCH,,,WITH FOLLOW UP APOLOGY BY ME AGAIN NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE. FROM MAIN TEXT MEDIA COVERED IF Ms Smith wants to contest content Jack,,,Today as in 3 appeals to remove restraining order,, I refer to ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY please see below]

Athough matter determined by court , i had not acted unreasonably, its cited by HHJDenyer in a restraining order MADE because I acted unreasonably , as I appealed DJWatsons judgement, appeal,,,,,, medical records still outstanding, travel expenses not paid and refusal to put statement in my medical records, ,,,,,,,. Further cites claim v Compuwave,, please see details in scan evidence 4,,,,,where we have again case settled, where told not therefore to attend hearing, as matter settled, it had been removed by Denyer from hearing date, where as no one turned up, case dismissed, where seek to appeal,,,,the recording with court not to attend sent to Denyer,where appeal dismissed. AGAIN PART OF RESTRAINING ORDER AS I APPEALED.

2/ In next year 2018 make application for more medical records,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DATES LATER THAN PREVIOUS CASE THEREFORE COULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN PREVIOUS POC, [PARTICULARS OF CLAIM.] NBT again refuse to release, where HHJCotter strikes out claim,,,,???????????????????i As retired district judge stated,,,,you make application to the court,,,,goes on computer system,TAKES TIME,,,,then goes to a PRE OR DISTRICT JUDGE FOR DIRECTIONS. WHY ON SAME DAY SENT TO HHJCOTTER THE DAY YOU LODGED PROCEEDINGS,,,,IS IT A CASE DO NOT ISSUE HIS PROCEEDINGS SEND TO ME FIRST TO SEE IF I CAN FIND A LOOPHOLE TO STRIKE OUT, in papers. As various barristers/lawyers state,,,,,was struck out as abuse of process,,,,Blair aware of previous claim did he take straight away saying should have been included in previous POC,,,REASON STRUCK OUT..] Appeal , get hearing date, where Cotters clerk then states have had long talk with NBT over defence, …..hearing date agreed with NBT removed from list, WE HAVE AGREED WAY FORWARD. . WHAT HAS THIS CORRUPT COURT ORGANISED WITH NBT ????

3/ So application N244 to court to find out what was agreed with NBT ,,,,,IGNORED , ,,,,,WENT TO COURT TOLD COURT WILL NOT REPLY TO APPLICATION

SEE TODAYS ISSUE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018. ,,,,,THIS APPLICATION IGNORED

LETTER 25.2.2018,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WITH APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I will from start today make a stance, i will not tolerate any fresh nonsense defendants lawyer Ms Smith puts before the court. I REQUEST BY 5.00 PM 26.2.2018 SHE SENDS TO ME VIA EMAIL HER COMMENTS TO THIS ORDER.WITHOUT THIS WILL REQUEST AN ADJOURNMENT SO I CAN AT A LATER DATE PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN TERMS OF ALLEGATIONS FILED AFTER I SEE DEFENCE .

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,

Are we going to have the utter nonsense as in OBS08441 which i won where DJWatson states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do you want to come back after i get you a defence, …..

ALREADY CASES WHERE IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 HAVE NO DEFENCE TO MY CLAIM

4/ No defence therefore,,,,,can I please cite POC…]PARTICLARS OF CLAIM]

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in DEFENDANTS medical records.

LEGAL BASIS ,,,,,1/ ,No evidence required in terms of obtaining medical records, in terms of putting statement in medical records, please see statutory regulations of NHS ,,,,,,the defendants must allow if requested for plaintiff to add statement to his medical records.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Comes before HHJRalton , Jack you can not get involved in court judgements, not asking you to, todays application to you primary for legal aid., nothing to do with NBT, Ralton states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,had very long discussion with Cotter over this case,,,[Cotter makes judgement,,,i appeal,,,why is Ralton discussing case with Cotter,,,,may I suggest todays issue,,,,Bigger makes judgement,,,did he ask Legatt LJ to issue restraining order] ,,,Ralton states reason he struck out as your POC utterly incomprensible he did not know what you wanted court to do,,,,????????????????????FOR MEDIA YOU HAVE POC ABOVE YOU MAKE DEDUCTIONS DO YOU KNOW WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO

5/ NBT agree to supply medical records of set day taken cited in the POC, plus put statement in medical records. Get letter of third party understanding of medical records, however as statute do not get at this stage copy of medical records taken on day. Ask to look at medical records, from recording statement not in file. Ask for actual records TAKEN ON CITED DATE FROM HOSPITAL FILE REFUSED BY NBT. From judgement if not supplied can made application back to the court. Talk to PSU, [know now support through court…..covered them today in this document…if they wish to contact in 7 days you Jack,,,,. They talk to court staff at Bristol county court,,,,,where must admit court staff were good trying to help. Agreed court staff/ PSU to write letter to HHJRalton,,,,,,eg should I under a N244 court form ask for order to release medical records taken on cited day, informed his judgement ignored,,,,explained discussed with court/PSU they recommended letter to him. As several people barristers/judges stated,,,,, Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

Could understand in reply ….not allowed to give legal advice,,,where you could have made application with new N244 form,,,,,however can I refer to todays issue,,IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,STILL GOING ON WHERE COURT STATES IN RECORDING AT COURT,,,,,,,HHJRALTON HAS NO COMMENT TO MAKE,,,AWARE HIS ORDER NOT ADHERED TO

SCAN EVIDENCE 6

FURTHER EVIDENCE OF POLICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS

1/ Obtain letter scan police june enclosed. A letter retired District Judge called appaling, ITS ,,undated ,,,,,incomprenensible ,,,,in utter breach of ECHR [criminal limb ] Case Law.

357. The requirements related to the burden of proof from the perspective of the principle of the presumption of innocence provide inter alia, that it is for the prosecution to inform the accused of the case that will be made against him or her, so that he or she may prepare and present his or her defence accordingly, and to adduce evidence sufficient to convict him or her (Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, § 77; Janosevic v. Sweden, § 97).

Article 6 § 3 of the Convention “3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: (a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him; (b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence; (c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; (d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;

The allegations of alleged criminal offence not defined,,,what are your allegations,,, to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him; and where is the ,,,,, principle of the presumption of innocence provide inter alia, that it is for the prosecution to inform the accused of the case that will be made against him or her, so that he or she may prepare and present his or her defence accordingly, and to adduce evidence sufficient to convict him or her (Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, § 77; Janosevic v. Sweden, § 97).

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have KNOWLEDGE and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed

This issue raised in letter below, 26.5.2020 ,,,ignored by police, therefore as ignored, official complaint to them 1.6.2020...WHICH THEY IGNORED IS THIS SIMILAR TACTICS AS ASKING WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 IN MEETING WITH SGT PRICE AS REPLY WOULD BE FATAL TO POLICE TACTICS ,,,WE WILL JUST IGNORE. JACK CAN I PLEASE ASK THEM FOR REPLY TO YOU JACK IN 7 DAYS WITH COPY TO ME. SURE THEY WILL IGNORE WHERE PLEASE ASK YOU JACK TO ASK FOR A REPLY TO COMPLAINT OF THE 1.6.2020. YOU WILL REQURE EVIDENCE IN PRESENTATION TO RT HON BUCKLAND

Clearly police mind made up,,,,already judged case ,,,,,if this behaviour continues ,,,WHAT BEHAVIOUR where is,,, the principle of the presumption of innocence provide inter alia, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Can I refer to Antisocial behaviour is defined as 'behaviour by a person which causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to persons not of the same household as the person' (Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003 and Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 ).

Police have judged case well ask police to inform you Jack of evidence they have of antisocial behaviour,,,in 7 days with copy of email to me. Again Jack with no reply ask you to ask them,,,have they a criminal case,,,,no,,,is this not harassment

31 Bibury Ave

Bristol

BS346DF

26.5.2020

Dear Ms Domalewaka.

Can I refer to your letter which retired district judge stated was ,,,,,,,,utterly incomprehensible , undated, information he stated he would expect to be included. who made complaint, what is complaint, when was complaint made, when was first date you tried to contact me can you please supply information before the 1.6.2020 by email. , . This will be included in document being prepared in last month, for my MP. Situation where retired district judge who saw my website ,suggested my MP collating evidence before presenting to government justice minister Rt Hon Buckland. The document nearly ready to be sent to Jack, [Jack Lopresti MP] , however will wait until 1.6.2020 for your reply, if any.. Can say as with other correspondence ,even YOU ignored,,,,As with Insp O Mahony letter where she confirmed police in IPCC investigation did not follow IPCC regulations , informed her would not discuss case , until written reply from her, will not discuss todays situation with you without reply first, require a email so we know police stance before contacting Jack.

We have had letter from court of appeal that Master [judge at court of appeal] given permission to appeal court order, , and legal advice that we can proceed against you via ECHR , believed via BREXIT route not open, told not so.

As I said letter to Jack in advanced stage,,,,eg ,,,,,informing local/national press what is going on….draft document extracts …eg

2/ Great interest in the Profuma affair, as a young man purchased the blue covered Lord Denning report, still have it , where corruption between police and the courts eg , my main interest was Stephen Ward, however at this time my letters to Christine Keeler and the press,,,,,for example letter from national newspaper ,,,,,,Ms Keeler was not innocent party in this, see copy of Holland magazine advert ,,,,,see 8mm film 18 dollars ,,,, only homosexuals do this see Christine Keeler take penis in rectum,,, Also aware of Tom Mangold ex BBC journalist , from start involved in Profuma affair,[ via Daily Express , will forward this document to paper, ] with his recent recollections after BBC recent showing the Profuma story, on BBC series, will ask the BBC to forward this document also to him. Jack [Lopresti MP ] from our recent timetable sought replies from police and HMCS [ HM court service ] , if questions not answered we requested you to contact them.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

WILL USE SEVERAL TIMES CAN WE DEFINE TERM OETICARF ,,Overwhelming Evidence Tactically Ignore Correspondence As Reply Fatal

We have case where police are defendants and civil courts are interested party, police can not answer question,,,,,why did I come to you on day 1 , and court can not answer question ,,,,did HHJCotter read revised application of 6.12.2017 , made under Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

LETS STATE FACTS ASK QUESTION WAS I RIGHT SAYING POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS. POLICE ADMIT THEY DID NOT. WAS I RIGHT SAYING POLICE SENT REPLY 24.7.2017 TO ALLEGED APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED. JUST LOOK AT KROUSELS LETTER AS ASKING QUESTIONS TO DO THE APPEAL

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply,[ TO QUESTIONS ] and can do appeal to you

FINAL ISSUE JACK SO WE WILL HAVE IN POLICE OWN WORDS ADMITTING MY APPLICATION BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL IN FULL ,,,IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE APPLICATION ,,,WE ALREADY HAVE IN OWN WORDS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION AND WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL,,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS ,,[,CORRUPT POICE HAD LETTER FROM COURT,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,]WHEN NO APPEAL LODGED. IS THIS NOT AS WHEN STEVEN WARD PROSECUTED IN PROFUMA CASE ,,,AS CORRUPTION BETWEEN POLICE AND COURTS. WE HAVE JUST ONE OUTSTANDING ISSUE WHERE REQUIRE POLICE IN OWN WORDS TO CONFIRM WHY I WENT TO THEM ON DAY ONE,,,,,,AS FEMALE QC BARRISTER AND JUDGE STATED,,WHO SAW MY WEBSITE THERE IS GENERALLY A CORNERSTONE ISSUE IN CASE. SAY SITTING AS A JUDGE DEFENDANT SEEN LEAVING BANK AFTER ROBBERY BUT CASE FAILS AS DEFENDANT ON DAY IN CLOSED PRISON,,,,IN YOUR CASE CORNERSTONE ISSUE WHY YOU WENT TO POLICE ON DAY 1,,,,AND IT WAS NOT AS ,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENT OF HHJDENYER,,,,YOU HAVE RECORDING DAY 1 RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE WHERE I STATE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS, REASON I WENT TO POLICE WE HAVE HHJCOTTER CONFIRMING MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE ,WE HAVE POLICE SAYING NOT OUR PROBLEM COMPLAIN TO JCIO, WE HAVE JCIO SAYING POLICE WRONG, VIA STATUTE WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS IF CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS,,,,JCIO,,,

We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )SGT PRICE ON RECORDING STATES SHE WOULD NOT GIVE TO OFFICER TO INVESTIGATE IF NOT A CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,WHERE BRUSHED OFF BY POLICE,,AS WARNED BY BARRISTER WHO SAW ME PICKETING AT THE COURT from COPWATCH

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……

,POLICE STATE YOU STATED IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION PRACTICE STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,BUT DENYER RETIRED IN 2017. IT’S A OETICARF WHERE POLICE CAN NOT,,,WILL NOT ANSWER QUESTION WHERE SEEK JACK YOUR HELP. AS FINAL NAIL IN THEIR COFFIN AS THEN WOULD HAVE COMPLETE APPLICATION IN OWN WORDS ADMITTED BY POLICE. SO WE CAN SAY TO LEGAL AID BOARD THIS IS JUDGEMENT OF HHJBIGGER ,,,,ITS WRONG IN EVERY ASPECT ADMITTED BY DEFENDANTS POLICE IN OWN WORDS……UNQUOTE .back to your letter

Can I address your letter, retired district judge who saw my website asks, can you confirm in writing allegations of anti social behaviour, further stated it appears police have already judged this case,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if this behaviour continues ?????? WHAT BEHAVIOUR ,,,,which we will take further with Jack,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. We have one neighbour who vandalised my property, ON MY OWN LAND erected barrier to stop him damaging new trees purchased/planted , is this what your talking about, can not be,,,, allegations that his mail stolen and damaged,,,,,have Royal Mail plastic sleeve,,,,,,,,,,,,,,found open and damaged,,,,I did not damage anything,as found was dispatched to them, in terms of stolen mail, asked you to contact S Glos Council , email day 1 asked for instructions where told to post back to them, where council confirm obtained, WHAT ARE YOUR ALLEGATIONS. This can not be issue all calls in and out recorded, where this matter raised by you, [police] and concluded sometime ago, eg from recording all material delivered as found, and parking pass already sent to council over week ago. WHAT ARE YOU ALLEGATIONS Your letter a utter nonsense , undated letter, states do not contact neighbour, no thought of ever doing, WE HAVE LETTER POSTMARKED 30.4.2020 FROM THEM,,,,,,WHY ARE THEY CONTACTING ME. Why would I contact common working class people, I will stand my ground sometime ago postman stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this ,neighbour had problems with neigbours before they moved here,,,,assume was local,,,, SINCE HERE LOOKING FOR TROUBLE……………THEY HAVE COME TO RIGHT PLACE WHERE APPEAR POLICE TAKEN THEIR SIDE ,,,,,IF BEHAVIOUR CONTINUES ,,,WHAT BEHAVIOUR.

You state problem getting in touch was this on phone, problem with phone downstairs,,,,,BT coming after Covid clears, can you supply date/time,,,,know several times,,,,number withheld rings about 5 times then rings off, as time I moved upstairs to answer, can collate with CCTV with day and time and my arms raised outside as did not give me time to answer.

As I stated giving you 7 days to reply,can state you ignored my letter with no email,,,,,, then to send to Jack, as district judge plans,long term, with cover in letter to Jack to IPCC, PCC, national /local newspapers ,police and courts, look forward to your reply.

As retired district judge stated clearly you had judged case, is this victimization as proceedings against you, you allege anti social behaviour as judge said instead of judging case, suggest you arrest and put your allegations to a court. , what are allegations when were they made, when was first day you tried to contact. In old case the mail issue as a separate issue again what were allegations, when were they made, and what was first day you tried to contact me, as judge stated interesting in both cases to see time before allegations made and when you tried to contact.

P JONES ….this was 1.6.2020 LETTER IN FULL police receipt to above letter STILL WAITING FOR REPLY TO COMPLAINT

2/ Retired District Judge suggested could relate to neighbour issue,eg Bird. In discussion this raises other issues,,,,,required for media….

HISTORY

a/ Threat of violence from Bird ,,, recorded on VoiceCam,,,he ,takes a police caution. Can I refer to police response we will not come out again over this neighbour dispute,,,is this not as recent Ebrahimi case where your officers jailed as they ignored complaints of criminal behaviour, can you confirm to Jack still your stance.

b/ For years leaving rubbish in front of my garage. Coming home a boy approx. 12 yo stopped me stated as soon as you went out your neighbour vandalising your property, cutting down hedge. Coming home neighbour a few doors away laughing. Report to police Patchway police station , again recorded on VoiceCam,,,told rarely home best to contact via email to organise contact. Police arrived OVER 2 weeks later state talked to neighbour,,,,,he stated cut down by travellers ,,,,they then come back offering to correct defect replanting.

c/ Start get on regular basis letters for them,,,,,,,,for example on CCTV shows me taking letters to them where abused. Later get letters, as abused, threats of violence, so left on van,eg underneath windscreen wipers. Then get damaged letters in Royal Mail bag,,,,,they state on bag ,,,found open and damaged on Royal Mail plastic bag.

d/ Then get parking permit ,,,,,name on letter unknown,,,,not Bird . Email council where told to return to them, which was done they confirm obtained.

e/ Then get letter from Bird saying I had stolen parking pass, then recorded call from police about stolen item, where told from recording returned to South Glos Council,,,,i had Royal Mail proof of posting. Angry as assumed council had reported me to police I had stolen ,,,,can I quote their reply,,,,we obtained, you returned we did not communicate with anyone.

f/ As retired District Judge stated,,,,,how did Bird know the parking pass was with you ?????????did he plant on you,,,,,,as other letters for him, and then complain to police, I had stolen ,,,waste of their time, over series of mail non delivery. THE COUNCIL STATE WE MADE NO CONTACT OVER MATTER,,,,ASKED QUESTION BEFORE JACK PERHAPS POLICE CAN ANSWER QUESTION. HOW DID YOU KNOW I HAD STOLEN PASS IN THEIR ALLEGATION

g/ In complaint 1.6.2020 complain about antisocial behaviour, ask police do you want Royal Mail bag,,,,found open and CONTENTS damaged…from above complaint just ignored. We have if police want to see CCTV trespass on my property kicking gates open and leaving tree branches in front of my garage,,,summer 2020,,,from above anti social behaviour informed you what was occurring,,,. WE ASK TODAY HAVE YOU TALKED TO HIM OR ARE POLICE HAPPY FOR THIS TO CONTINUE. ..CAN YOU CONFIRM AS IN EBRAHIMI CASE .WE WILL NOT COME OUT,,,. RECENTLY again on CCTV not leaving cut down branches between fence and my hedge which he vandalised , but again entering my property,,,leaving on path on entrance to house. DO YOU MAINTAIN NOT UNSOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ,,,FURTHER IN TERMS OF ECHR CASE LAW THE CONCEPT OF INEQUALITY OF ARMS,,,,IS BIRDS BEHAVIOUR ACCEPTABLE WELL LETS CONSIDER WITH ALLEGATIONS MADE BY POLICE AGAINST ME,,,,,ALREADY DETERMINED BY POLICE INVOLVED IN ANTI SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR. WHAT ARE YOU ALLEGATIONS PLEASE INFORM JACK IN 7 DAYS….BIRD IS A BUILDER ,,,PLEASE SEE PHOTO 195 WHERE HE WASHES OUT VAN AND SWEEPS SAND OUTSIDE MY PROPERTY ,,,ASSUME HAPPY FOR THIS TO OCCUR. THIS OF COURSE EXPLAINED IN YOUR CONTACT WITH ME,,,,I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY INSPECTOR WE WILL NOT COME OUT OVER YOUR DISPUTE WITH BIRD HOWEVER WILL ACT FOR HIM PARKING PASS ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR SO HE CAN DO ANYTHING ,,,CUT DOWN MY HEDGE AND THEY ARE HAPPY WITH THIS….WE INFORM MEDIA….SO HE CAN VANDALISE MY PROPERTY STILL EVEN IN LAST few WEEKS LEAVE BRANCHES ON MY PATH, CAN SWEEP SAND OUTSIDE MY PROPERTY AND YOU DO NOT CONSIDER ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR……YOU MAKE ALEGATIONS OF MY ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ????YOU HAVE CHANCE INFORM JACK IN 7 DAYS,,,,AND FURTHER STOP PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE, MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE,,,,INFORM JACK IN 7 DAYS WHY I CAME TO YOU DAY 1

/ THE SECOND INCIDENT

a/ HMCS payed me 150.00 compensation as they refused to issue proceedings , due to alleged restraining order in place. There was no order in place, assume HHJBigger had told Salford county court not to issue, Bigger at Admin court Cardiff, . Where Bigger behind my back asked court of appeal to issue restraining order. In my website produce list of people on restraining order, just to confirm not on list for any reader

b/ Then get months later string of offensive threating emails from Rosa Malagac . There is vindictive website indicating her case and on court order restraining order list. I do not know woman, know nothing of her case, however my site cited with this NEW google site. Due to continue string of emails from her contact the police. All calls in/out recorded where police ask how they contact her. From recording accept police very busy, would it help when they are in her area on ANOTHER job they talk to her. Police state what is address, where state do not know, however Court of Appeal issued order, they would have address, next thing told taking no action, where get further string of emails from her.

c/ She now states talked to Avon Somerset Police where told you have mental health problems , you are delusionary in your allegations. Make complaint to police who made these libel allegations. What were allegations DELUSIONARY ?????

1/ In a IPCC investigation you did not follow IPCC regulations,,you admit this ,,,see scan 10594

2/ You sent reply to appeal where one not lodged,,you admit this scan 10475/10494 You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you….YOUR REPLY OF 24.7.2017 CAN NOT BE REPLY TO AN APPEAL

3/ We have one outstanding issue why I came to you day 1,,,was it malfeasance in public office as court ignoring correspondence and applications for years,,,you asked day one to send CPS document [FEDJCAB] to you,,,,further as told you via statute could not take to JCIO as they confirmed as a criminal offence, complaints as JCIO state must be made to you via statute as criminal offence ,,,your utterly wrong as judiciary saying complain to JCIO. ask again for you Jack if they refuse to answer my question ,ask you to ask them please ,,,why I went day 1

They inform Ms Malagac that my allegations are delusionary,,,if delusionary ask them to inform you Jack in 7 days WHY DELUSINARY AND why I went to them day 1. As Insp O Mahony states in my complaint did not know if staff not sending applications to Denyer, or Denyer ignoring,,,,malfeasance in public office. The police know a criminal offence, malfeasance in public office, know judgement wrong,,,,take to JCIO , know via statute they could not investigate, and only a short time before over same offence their officers jailed [Erahami ]

CONCLUSION

a/ Can you please supply reply to complaint 1.6.2020 to Jack in7 days, eg what are allegations of antisocial behaviour,,,,how did you know i had parking pass, [WA S IT BIRD PLANTING EVIDENCE ON ME,,,PUTTING IN MY LETTER BOX,,,,STRANGE MANY LETTERS AT THIS TIME PUT THROUGH MY LETTER BOX CLEAR OUTSIDE 31 BIBURY STRANGE NOTHING SINCE]are you happy for cited antisocial behaviour of Bird to continue. [never thought of this as female barrister and judge stated,,,,in scan evidence 1 we cite PCBird...as barrister stated is he related in any way to your neighour Bird ,,,conflict of interest?????]

b/ Who made allegations of ,,,delusinary ,,,and can you cite events where come to this conclusion please

THE ISSUES TO POLICE

a/ Why did i come to you day 1 when barrister told me to make complaint when seen by Sgt Price

b/ Can we please have replies to complaints, where as in a/ the police attitude,,,,if we ignore correspondence he will go away, as of 1.6.2020 and 17.10.2020

c/ Can they confirm for media as in Ebrahimi case that in criminal /antisocial behaviour if you make complaint we will ignore.

ISSUE MAIN,,,,ARISES FROM CO/1731/2018 WHERE MASTER [level of judge] GIVES PERMISSION TO MAKE APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT. NEED TO EXPLAIN TO MEDIA POLICE ARE DEFENDANTS AND COURTS [HMCS ] JUST A INTERESTED PARTY. THE COURTS AS SUCH LIKE RATS IN A SEWER SOMETIME AGO,SAY ,,,DO NOT REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS ,,,,, COURT ASKED US IF WE WANT TO COMMENT ON EVIDENCE ,,,NO THIS IS ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE….DO NOT AGREE ,,,,,,,,THE POLICE ALSO AT ALL STAGES MADE NO COMMENT TO THE COURT,,,,WHAT ARE ISSUES

POLICE [judiciary state A/ B/ vexatious however police in own words admit allegations, their correspondence before judiciary, this is identical as in Profuma affair, great interest of mine,,,,COLLUSION BETWEEN POLICE AND JUDICIARY]],

A/ THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS SCAN EVIDENCE 1 INSP O MAHONY ADMITS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

B/ IN EVIDENCE ,,,SCAN EVIDENCE 1 POLICE FURTHER ADMIT WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHEN NO APPEAL LODGED. POLICE CORRESPONDENCE BEFORE 22.7.2017 STATES IF DOING AN APPEAL WE REQUIRE OUR OFFICIAL APPEAL FORM NO APPEAL FORM SENT TO 7.8.2017 WHERE POLICE/PCC MOUNTSTEVENS STATE WE WILL IGNORE APPEAL,,,,eg YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE FOR YEARS BACK TO 2010 MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE WHERE POLICE AND JUDICIARY HAVE COURT LETTER,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US,,,

C/ THE ONLY OUTSTANDING ISSUE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 ..[THEY ARE UTTERLY AWARE A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE SO IGNORE REQUEST,,,,THIS REQUEST WAS MADE IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE Admin court and court of appeal, under,, CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts,,,,,why I came to you day 1

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which POLICE in questions ignored… ,IS THIS COMMON EVENT.....Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,isolated incident,,????consider complaint 1.6.2020 , 17.10.2020 please see details scan evidence 6 where after 6 months police ignore complaint

COURT [THE OMBUDSMAN SOLE ISSUE PLEASE SEE SCAN EVIDENCE 4]

A/ HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2917 ADMITTED BY JUDICIARY SEEK REFUND OF FEE

Jack sole issue that you have been involved with for years, NOW before ombudsman, refund of court fee as application of 6.12.2017 not read by HHJCotter.Simple question they refuse to answer in papers WAS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 READ BY HHJCOTTER I ASKED COURT ???????????

Jack must be first time do not know HMCS defense to ombudsman issue YOU DO NOT KNOW SO CAN NOT REFER UNTIL YOU KNOW COURTS STANCE. HAVE ASKED SAME QUESTIONS IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS AT JUDICIAL REVIEW AND COURT OF APPEAL STAGE TO COURTS ,,,UNDER

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which COURT in their questions ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Coming to end of my life, these questions if need be answered in magistrates court, collecting 5L cans of old oil to throw in police station doorway before sent to prison to die,,,,severe heart condtion., simple surgery rejected Stress of arrest best result to expose corruption if die in police custody. Accept problem can I refer to your HISTORIC Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Further when ISSUE was in proceedings,POLICE in ,utter breach of Article 6 ignore correspondence

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

QUESTIONS

1/ WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE I CAME AS SOLELY DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER IFYOU HAVE CAN YOU DISCLOSE TO JACK

SYNOPSIS

Have permission from Master [level of judge at court of appeal ] to make an application back to the court.

TODAY UNDER ECHR CASE LAW SEEK REPLY IN 7 DAYS FROM POLICE TO MY MP JACK LOPRESTI WITH COPY TO ME.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, FROM ECHR,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,]VERY SIMPLE QUESTION THE POLICE ELEMENT WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 SIMPLE QUESTION WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR YEARS BACK TO 2010 ,AS JCIO STATE VIA STATUTE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE WE COULD NEVER INVESTIGATE. OR WAS IT MALFREASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS SOLELY OVER THE YEARS I WAS ,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE IT WAS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER OVER YEARS COULD YOU PLEASE SUPPLY EVIDENCE TO MY MP JACK LOPRESTI ,IN 7 DAYS WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME,,,HAVE ASKED POLICE BEFORE WHILE IN PROCEEDINGS under

CPR 32 Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

WHERE THEY IGNORED CORRESPONDENCE WHILE IN PROCEEDINGS ASK RECENTLY WHERE DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION, FINAL ELEMENT OF CASE REQUIRED THEN BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL. HAVE REMAINDING EVIDENCE IN POLICE OWN WORDS

FACTS

JUDICIARY ALLEDGE IT WAS VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE, HOWEVER BECAUSE MADE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED, WHAT WERE ALLEGATIONS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION eg LETS QUOTE ACTUAL APLICATION

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA.[IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal,you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL]WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA[end of quote judicial reriew]

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed,

Can I refer as cited this further also was in judicial review application /pre action protocol document for judicial review [2017] ,,,, from local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office],

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, admitted in scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions,to obtain evidence to do THE appeal you would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017

EVIDENCE BELOW WHERE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT APPLICATION THEY ADMIT WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT MADE

This evidence below before judiciary, denying evidence before it, utter breach of Article 6 denying evidence before it,,,,,eg

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

WHAT ARE REGUATIONS OF IPCC IN THEIR INVESTIGATION

Regulations IPCC [independent police complaint commission] in a police investigation.,,,,sent to me ALSO CITED ON INTERNET

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

PLEASE SEE INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 WHERE ADMIT POLICE NEVER TALKED TO ME eg DID NOT FOLLOW 1PCC REGULATIONS

LETS LOOK AT OTHER ALLEGATION IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,

Many years ago courts ignoring applications, and correspondence, had call one evening,,,,,well spoken male ,,,I do not approve of a one of your old applications to MY court,,,,[a district judge ?????] however will not stand by where corruption is going on HHJDenyer, and court out to get you, they have made a mistake, they have removed applications, however one in new case still on system in PRESENT case,,,,,,[8 years ago]. Visit court talk to Mr Blair,,,,recorded,,,all I state just checking to see applications in file,,,,,from recording ask nothing else,,,live case,,,we get reply,,,,nothing to do with me I check your applications, make sure you have evidence of being fee except,ect, and put in tray behind me,,,,,no one making allegations ,,,,is he responsible for removal of applications???. Is this not identical to Watergate,,,where Woodward/Bernsteine at Washington Post in deductions state we never asked about this, .....did not make any allegations the courts removing applications.However we know even later OBS80441 that applications, date/stamped by the court missing from file,,,,as at hearing a case I won, DJWatson states something very very odd here.

Courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence, pickit at court ,please see scan picket, barrister advised contacting police malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for many years, . WE HAVE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE COURT WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US AND CITED LAWYER CORRESPONDENCE WHOSE ALSO CORRESPONDENCE WAS IGNORED , had document applications date/stamped by court ignored ect ect . Police state you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office,courts ignoring applications/correspondence,for years, from above evidence comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,THEY HAVE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS. We have email from Mr Fowler [Bristol county court] in respect to statute CPR Part 32 Notice to Admit Facts ,,,,where he states your correspondence will not be read, not answered just filed, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,also

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,]

From above nonsense stated to police in email 22.7.2017 you have come to judgement in IPCC investigation, , and have not followed IPCC regulations, when do you alledge you talked to me, asked further 11 questions eg ,,,have you talked to lawyer from above,,,,stating with no reply by the 28.7.2017 would assume there would be no reply and would then do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017. We then get police letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal I have made no appeal, waiting for reply to questions, the above history not in dispute can I refer to police letter scan 10475/10494,,,police admit,,,

eg,,You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,, of sweeping under the carpet…..You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.

SO SAYING POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE I HAVE NOT LODGED ONE ,,,,THE JUDICIARY STATE MY CLAIM VEXATIOUS,,,,THEREFORE ISSUE RESTRAINING ORDER WHERE BEFORE IT HAS ABOVE EVIDENCE WHERE POLICE ADMIT ALLEGATIONS WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA,,,or is this like Profuma case collusion between police and judiciary.MY STATEMENTS TRUE ADMITTED BY POLICE,,lets consider a Crown court judge who saw my website,,,,stated not making any allegations however people in media may ask is this judiciary protecting their own

LETS CONSIDER WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1

THE EVIDENCE

Can i refer to another female judge and barrister who saw my website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com who stated in general there is cornerstone issue in case. Stated take theoretical example i sit as judge, defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, however case fails as defendant in closed prison on this date, your case why you went to police day 1. May seem strange however have sympathy with police, courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence, picket at court ,where barrister advises who i gave leaflet to, scanpicket to report to police malfeasance in public office courts ignoring applications for years and correspondence. Seen by Sgt Price where asked to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office, and insert in it my complaint, the FEDJCAB complete document. Given by her then to PCBird, who contacts Bristol county court, where told not issue for police, only route a complaint to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office]

This is where we have problem, under

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,]

And in proceedings at all stages, eg HHJCotter/Admin court Cardiff/Court of appeal while in live proceedings parties as they frustrate and corrupt the judicial process just ignore all correspondence [police and HMCS]

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

What did I ask, who at Bristol county court told PCBird to complain to JCIO. Playing Devils Advocate will we get it was HHJDenyers clerk,,,,where he will state,,,,remember getting call,,,,PCBird stated did not give me full allegations, only said Mr Jones was unhappy with conduct of Denyer,,,,I therefore informed PCBird therefore to complain to JCIO. WHAT DID PCBIRD INFORM THE COURT,,,,,WHO DID HE TALK TO. POLICE IGNORE UNDER CPR 32,,,,,WE DO NOT KNOW ANSWERS IS PCBIRD GOING TO SAY,,,,I TALKED TO X AT THE COURT EXPLAINED I HAD A COMPLAINT OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE YOU IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,, WHERE TOLD NOTHING TO DO WITH COURT,,,,COMPLAIN TO JCIO. HOWEVER IF X AT COURT AWARE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AWARE CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,THEN AWARE VIA STATUTE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE COULD NOT COMPLAIN TO JCIO. LETS TAKE JUDICIARY STANCE FURTHER YOU WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH SOLELY OVER JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER. AS FEMALE JUDGE AND BARRISTER STATED IN JUDGEMENT HHJCOTTER STATES,,,,,CRIMINAL OFFENCE,,,AND JUDICIARY STANCE,,, POLICE CORRECT TO ADVISE TO CONTACT JCIO. HOWEVER COTTER AWARE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE COULD NOT REFER TO JCIO STATING YOU WENT AS ,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER. IF THIS IS CASE POLICE WERE WRONG,,,AS FEMALE BARRISTER STATED,,,,IF YOU WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OVER THE YEARS OF DENYER,,,,JCIO CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT THIS,,,AS STATUTE ONLY ROUTE TO APPEAL THESE JUDGEMENTS. FURTHER IF TRUE,,,AS FEMALE BARRISTER STATED,,,,YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOWN DOOR,,,,THIS WAS NOT EVEN CRIMINAL JUDGEMENTS THEY WERE CIVIL CASES,,,,POLICE CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT COURT JUDGEMENTS. FURTHER AS BARRISTER STATED WHY IS SGT PRICE WASTING POLICE TIME ASKING PCBIRD TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS ,,,,,,,I WAS UNHAPPY WITH VARIOUS CIVIL COURT JUDGEMENTS,,,AS SHE SAID SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD WE CAN DO NOTHING,,,,YOU NEED TO APPEAL BACK TO THE CIVIL COURT.

Was it malfeasance in public office as courts for years ignoring applications and correspondence ,a criminal offence, and via statute as they confirm JCIO we could never investigate complaint, as criminal offence, ,,,,judiciary state should have complained to JCIO. ?????? OR WENT TO POLICE AS SOLELY ......DISSATISFIED WITH PREVIOUS NUMEROUS JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,nonsence ????????????????

A STORY MADE UP BY HHJCOTTER TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ???????????? ask police today who did PCBird talk to ??

a/ Court for years ignoring applications and correspondence , picket at court SCAN picket, where barrister advised contacting defendants, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, record conversation with Sgt Price where agreed to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and insert my complaint in terms of this CPS document. Defined the FEDJCAB complete document,[ Fatal Evidence Document Judiciary Corrupt And Bent.] eg

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red to Sgt Price ,eg why I went to police,,, this is subsection of FEDJCAB complete, defined just FEDJCAB eg,,,,, why I went to police

SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appication are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.[CAN I ADD SEE APPENDIX 2,,,,,used today same document title Appendix 2 for reference] DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,

ASKED DEFENDANTS WHILE IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS , TO CONFIRM ABOVE DOCUMENT WAS ONE SENT TO THEM eg WHY I WENT TO THEM,,,,UNDER,,

CPR 32 Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED ,,,

RECENTLY ASK AGAIN ,WAS THIS THE DOCUMENT SENT AS REQUESTED BY SGT PRICE WHERE DEFENDANTS DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION.

b/ Letter delivered by hand, Patchway police station,,,, receipt, please see scan 13.4.2017 eg what did i say,,,

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

You have been supplied with CPS document on malfeasance in public office , where you asked to explain how it relates to my complaint. If you need more information please contact me, When picketing at court, as you know barrister told me to report to you malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications over many YEARS , as you stated would not be given to anyone to investigate if not a criminal offence, lawyer informs me a legal name its ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,misconduct in public office , where he informs me your officers jailed recently over this criminal offence , ,plus above perjury issue.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

ASKED DEFENDANTS AGAIN IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS PLUS RECENTLY AS ABOVE WAS THIS THE DOCUMENT LETTER SENT AS REQUESTED BY SGT PRICE WHERE AS ABOVE DEFENDANTS DEMAND MONEY TO ANSWER QUESTION.

c/ The FEDJCAB in pre action protocol document for judicial review, served on parties on the 16.9.2017 . Further the pre action protocol document had to be produced via statute set paragraphs please see scan annexA for regulations eg paragraph 7 defined in Annex A scan the issue,,, NEED TO INFORM COURT OF ISSUE,,,what did I state…

paragraph 7/ THE ISSUE [from preaction protocol document]

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

d/,,,,From pre action protocol statute document, give warning to HHJCotter,,,,,….eg

If practice of ignoring applications continues then next step, European court ECHR

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS] UNQUOTE

Above in email cited in MY note to Cotter 17.11.2017 via email, there were no emails to court, 14.11.2017 .In Cotters judgement states email 14.11.2017 where asking for nearly 3 years ,,,,is this cited email of 17.11.2017 ……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS],WHY I WENT TO POLICE,,,,where HMCS just ignore correspondence utter breach of Article 6. ....

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,] and CPR 32,,,

They ignore as clear to Cotter why i went to police, day 1, and know Cotter read as quoted in his judgement. How does this bent judge go from,,,,[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]........to DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ???????????????????

e/ From ,,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,my court email of 21.12.2017

APPEAL AGAINST MR KROUWEL LETTER OF 5.12.2017

SKELETAL ARGUMENT

1/ Picketing at Bristol county court barrister told me to make complaint to police, malfeasance in public office, plus AGAIN perjury issue, warned police may try to brush you off.

2/ Clearly being brushed off by Sgt Price,, visit recorded,,,,,,,,,,,,,civil issues, make complaint to court, where I inform her I could not make a complaint.;;;;;;[CRIMINAL OFFENCE JCIO CAN NOT INVESTIGATE] tpld malfeasance not a criminal offence.stated on tape ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where I state are you saying you refuse to investigate, where Sgt Price backs down, requests documents sent to her, eg CPS document, ,,,,,,,criminal offence, judges/police/courts convicted. [recently own police convicted Ibramahimi case]

3/Get reply from PCBird, ,,,,,I am investigating your allegations of malfeasance in public office, make complaint to HMCS, from 2/ aware I could not make a complaint. Accept i have been betrayed by Sgt Price, as wished to sweep under carpet as warned by barrister. .

4/ So complain to police, get reply from Mr Galloway,,,,,,advice was correct to complain to HMCS. Further states no evidence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed also by our third party.

5/ Statutory route to appeal. Asking police questions for appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application ,,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staff, admit applications made, which were ignored by the court. Have email from police saying if doing appeal need to enclose also our appeal claim form. Further asking police why statutory regulations of IPCC not followed in investigations, reference leaflet sent to me.

6/ On the 22.7.2017 send email as police ignoring request for data, can I quote end of that email,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume with no email reply [to questions] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there will be no reply and can do appeal to you.h,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

....

7/

77

Can I refer to female judge and barrister STATES ,,,,,HHJCotter was never going to grant your aplication,,,,turkeys voting for Xmas, inviting police in to investigate criminal behaviour,,,,,Cotter states you went to police as dissatisfied WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER, FROM ABOVE HOW DOES HE COME TO THIS JUDGEMENT,,,CORRUPT AND BENT MAKES UP STORY. AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER CALLING THEM BASTARDS

There is at Bristol county court a [PSU] unit now know as Support Through Court ,[STC] visit with Ms Sell where manager at STC takes up issues with courts Mr Hunt. Agreed that Hunt he would confirm ,documents lodged with court, and therefore read by Cotter.[have copied STC into todays email if they want to comment to you Jack] ,so would know read by Cotter and considered,,, ,,,,,from Case Law ,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,,Hunt although promised to STC manager he would confirm, request ignored, take up issue with court manager Ms Pawsey,,,where we get IDENTICAL REPLY as one made by Fowler years ago,,,,your correspondence will not be read, not answered just filed,,,,utter breach as before of Article 6,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],

f/ CAN I PLEASE CITE JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION MARCH 2018

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored……UNQUOTE

WE HAVE BENT AND CORRUPT HHJBIGGER COMING TO IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT as COTTERS.

Again as judge stated ,,,Bigger was never going to grant application turkeys voting for Xmas, inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour.

The application in judicial review was made to Admin court Birmingham , as for years Cardiff ignoring applications/correspondence also, made under Application Practice Directives 54d.5.2 ,. From Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS , ,,the FEDJCAB complete document , the recording with Sgt Price , the pre action protocol for judicial review document sent to Birmingham court, no doubt why I went day 1 to police. I have asked under CPR directive 32.18 Notice to Admit Facts, NOW LIVE THEN IN ADMIN COURT ,,,Birmingham court , we have proof of posting sent, did you get,,,did you forward to Cardiff,,,,asked Cardiff court what documents were forwarded to your court from Birmingham, where both courts ignore correspondence, again utter breach of Article 6,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,

A barrister who saw my website cited application in judicial review,,,,,,from above

Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

VERY CLEAR WHAT ISSUE IS WHAT DID I SAY IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.,,,,,CONSIDER COTTERS JUDGEMENT ,,,,YOU WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,,,,HOWEVER AS BARRISTER SAID DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 SO ISSUE CAN NOT BE ,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER IN 2018 AS ISSUE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 CAN BE NOTHING TO DO WITH DENYERS JUDGEMENT HE WAS NOT AT COURT IN 2018. RETIRED

g/ Considers Biggers judgement , copy of Cotters judgement.

We already have police from above in own words admitting in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and sent reply to an appeal,,,,,you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office the courts for years ignoring applications/correspondence ,,,where we have court stating,,,,we ignored your applications come and talk to us. . We have one outstanding issue,,,,,why I went to police day 1,,,,

WILL USE SEVERAL TIMES CAN WE DEFINE TERM OETICARF ,,Overwhelming Evidence Tactically Ignore Correspondence As Reply Fatal

We have case where police are defendants and civil courts are interested party, police can not answer question,,,,,why did I come to you on day 1 , and court can not answer question ,,,,did HHJCotter read revised application of 6.12.2017 , made under Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,

As I state police can not reply , look at judgement of Bigger, IDENTICAL copy of Cotters judgement went to police malfeasance in public office as courts for many years ignoring applications and correspondence.FROM ABOVE DID NOT GO AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER From judicial review application seek evidence to do judicial review application,,

This evidence above before judiciary, eg FEDJCAB document, denying evidence before it, utter breach of Article 6 denying evidence before it,,,,why I went to police day1 ,eg

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

COTTER/BIGGER DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM.

Visit court 5.12.2017 Mr Blair states your not looking at files, showing us ignoring your applications, make application to Cotter who will also ignore application . Could not do judicial review application as evidence withheld, ,LOOK AT JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018 BY COTTER. , where Jack I contacted your office, copy to Cotter, where he now replies scancotterlate, utterly aware out of time to do judicial review application HOWEVER withheld evidence,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],

We ask police series of questions where they demand money to answer, so comprimise,,,,,,why did I come to you day 1,,,,,do you have any evidence I came solely as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, if you do please supply. We ask police again simple question, could you copy Jack into reply in 7 days. PCC Ms Mountstevens copied today,,,,we have miscarriage of justice we ask you [PCC] to ensure police answer question. With no reply in 7 days I ask you Jack to ask police,before taking matter into my own hands.

FURTHER CONSIDERATION WITH POLICE

1/ When in a difficult position just ignore applications eg complaint 1.6.2020 after nearly 6 months no reply , complaint 17.10.2020 also ignored, and further details in scan evidence 6

CONCLUSION

1/ I am asking State to provide Legal Aid, to remove restraining order, from statute from day 1 of order, have to inform police and courts if they have any objections to removal of COURT OF APPEAL order, where non issued,no objection , if they have now Jack ask them in 7 days to inform you Jack. SO ASKING FOR REMOVAL WHERE PARTIES HAVE NO OBJECTION TO REMOVAL.The police and PCC Ms Mountstevens have duty of care to ensure that money is not wasted. If you have evidence in 7 days to oppose application back to the court, inform Jack and me in 7 days please. At all stages Cotter/Admin court/court of appeal,,,police via statute had chance to DISPUTE FACTS OF my application,,,eg acknowledgement of service and todays application to remove restraining order,,,at court of appeal where police made no objection. As female barrister/judge stated if they did Legatt LJ in mood he was in would have awarded costs against you, AS TIME SPENT Can I refer to Leggatt LJ judgement , and correspondence to police to inform me if they objected to application back to the court,,,,todays issue . There was no objection,,,however accept today Jack police/Mountstevens may raise objections, of return to the court, where ask them to inform you in 7 days, with copy of email to me please, why they object to application, need to show EVEN POLICE DO NOT OBJECT TO TODAYS APPLICATION. WHERE SEEK LEGAL AID

2/ What was judgement,,,,,,I went to police day 1 as SOLELY ,,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer,,,,is this correct,,,WE ASK POLICE,,,if so can you please supply evidence to Jack, Talked to female barrister and judge,,,compelling evidence above, plus as Insp O Mahony states you did not know if criminal offence malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, by court staff not sending applications to Denyer, or Denyer just ignoring. As judge stated court staff have nothing to do with,,,judgements of Denyer,,,so court issue can not be you went day 1 as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, judgements of Denyer nothing to do with court staff.

3/ SIMPLE QUESTION WE HAVE RESTRAINING ORDER AS ALLEGATIONS VEXATIOUS AGAINST POLICE WHERE POLICE IN OWN WORDS ADMIT ALLEGATIONS,,,,SHOWS CORRUPTION PLUS UTTER BREACH OF ECHR CASE LAW,,,,BY COTTER/BIGGER/LEGATT,,,,,,,,,,,,, eg ,,,,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....THEY HAVE POLICE ADMITTING IN OWN WORDS,,,,AS JUDGE SAID IS THIS JUDICIARY [LEGATT] PROTECTING THEIR OWN. JUST ONE OUTSTANDING QUESTION,,,,YES JUST ONE ASKING FOR YEARS EVEN IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS UNDER

CPR 32 Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,CORRESPONDENCE IGNORED ,,

,DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 COMPELLING EVIDENCE ABOVE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS FOR YEARS THE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE .;;;;or was itsolely as ,,,,dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer.As female barrister/judge stated,,,,you have asked police was the FEDJCAB document sent to police,,,,was this in the pre action protocol document for judicial review,,,,shows why you went day 1,,,,,police may say, as judge said i work on facts,,,not documents he sent,,,he sent,,,,police can answer if they want, not asking today,,,,, JUST ONE QUESTION WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE AND APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,,AND THEREFORE VIA STATUTE COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO.

FURTHER CONSIDER TODAY QUESTIONS IN SCAN EVIDENCE 6

SCAN EVIDENCE 2 THE LEGAL AID STATUTE

JACK YOU WILL NEED EVIDENCE TO REFER TO Rt Hon BUCKLAND AND OMBUDSMAN

What is issue, please see SCAN EVIDENCE 1 AND 4 ,,,,, where we ask State to provide Legal Aid .We have asked lawyers [x100] for years, told by one lawyer,,,,, lawyers will not want to act due to content, you will be brushed off by others, eg they will say too busy, no one on facts, can reject your cry for help , from email reply ,,,,,firms public law lawyers not free to act at present, ,,,,,,,,,,LATER in day, ,call is your public law lawyers taking on new work,,,,,yes ,,,,,, can I put you through ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,contact Bristol Law Center at pre judicial review stage, Jack you are aware in email to you, lawyers and this centre covered in email today , asking for help. In recent request have reply from Bristol Law Centre ,,,,,,,told you last time not taking on new work,,,,, we may so ask why they have website, if for 2 years,,,,,,not taking on work, covered in this email if they want to comment to you Jack . Similar with Pro Bono Unit [London] will not now use them. Badly let down, even later again at court of appeal stage. They were asking court of appeal for more time, court of appeal were understanding, believe they gave 4 extensions to do application, at end court of appeal stated this is final extension, the email sent to Pro Bono Unit . WE GET REPLY AFTER THIS FINAL DATE saying could not find suitable barrister, good job I took advice of retired district judge ,advised do initial application ,can add further evidence to do full application your self,under,,,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,which was done,,,why i went to police day 1, police admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, we sent replyto your alleged appeal, where we admit appeal not lodged. Retired judge,, I will not do I have retired, so you can lodge with court of appeal on time, as let down by Pro Bono Unit ,,,,at last minute have to serve incomplete application, state to court of appeal ,,,,appeal as at 1.7.2018 with application to Legatt LJ to make order so I could obtain further evidence, please see scan 10547, which he ignored, utter breach of Article 6,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,Jack understand you know legal worker Dr Gupta where raised issue,,,NOT making any allegations , states I did send email to you,,,can not trace,,,could well have gone from his records, if still have ask him to forward to you in 7 days. JACK I PLEASE ASK ,,,,, State to provide Legal Aid. . What are my Human Rights, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,skeletal argument below…

WHAT IS THE HUMAN RIGHT ISSUE IN RESPECT TO LEGAL AID ,,,,,,,,,,,,

C. Legal aid

1. Granting of legal aid

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid).

a/ ,,,,Right and access to a court 81. The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76 et seq.). 82. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 83. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim

• b/ A right that is practical and effective . The right of access to a court must be “practical and effective” (Bellet v. France, § 38; Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76-79). For the right of access to be effective, an individual must “have a clear, practical opportunity to challenge an act that is an interference with his rights” (Bellet v. France, § 36; Nunes Dias v. Portugal (dec.)

c/ In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:….

Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court.

d/ . In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings which prevented the applicant from enjoying such access, and determines whether the applicant was made to bear an excessive burden on account of such errors. Reference criteria have been laid down for assessing whether it is the applicant or the competent authorities who should bear the consequences of any errors (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 90-95, § 119). Where errors were made before

e/ Content: civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge (Fayed v. the United Kingdom, § 65; Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], § 46).,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

FACTS

The judicial review application, fee except, at end of proceedings State issue restraining order ,solely as I appealed ,JUDGEMENT UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT [IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 POLICE ADMIT APPLICATION,,IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE WE ADMIT ONE NOT LODGED,,,,YOU HAVE FURTHER IN THIS DOCUMENT WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 WHERE TODAY ASK POLICE TO CONFIRM WHY I WENT TO THEM DAY 1] ,seek to remove order the court demands money, utter breach ,,,, Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court.,,,,,the judiciary make order knowing I do not have money to appeal..as they corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, another issue the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings,,,,,,consider application that Legatt ignored and follow up correspondence scan10547 , where in utter breach of Article 6,,, ,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,, Legatt just ignored application.

I have fundamental basic rights of access to a court , however can not do due to the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62); We have Master [level of judge at Court of Appeal] confirming he would accept application however demanding 528.00 to hear application.,,,nearly my pension for a month,,,, I am a pensioner can not afford that money. Of course I can not expect State to give Legal Aid where little or no prospect of success. What was application in judicial review, pasted in scan evidence 1 today, , untouched , eg as lawyer stated quoted in application ,,,,, where are we Russia /China, We have retired district judge saying not judicial language however calling HHJCotter and his court staff bastards, as in Profuma case collusion between court and police.

We have Avon Somerset Police ADMITTING IN OWN WORDS

a/ IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION WE ADMIT WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

b/ We sent reply to your appeal where we admit one not lodged

c/ We have just one outstanding issue,,,,why I went to police day 1 , where ask police to confirm, we know as female barrister and judge stated who saw my website,,police ignore,,,,,,would be turkeys voting for Xmas, they ignore, asking for years, also question served under live proceedings, Admin court/court of appeal

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which POLICE in questions ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Coming to end of my life, these questions if need be answered in magistrates court, collecting 5L cans of old oil to throw in police station doorway before sent to prison to die,,,,severe heart condtion.,rejected simple correction surgery. Accept problem can I refer to your HISTORIC Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Further when ISSUE in proceedings,POLICE in ,utter breach of Article 6 ignore correspondence

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

I ASK TODAY WHY DID I COME TO YOU DAY 1 WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE THE COURTS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS [DID NOT KNOW IF HHJDENYER OR WAS IT COURT STAFF NOT SENDING APPLICATIONS/ CORRESPONDENCE TO HIM,,,]THIS IN INSP O MAHONY ENCLOSED REPLY SCAN 10594 OR WAS IT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS,,,,,,DISSATISFIED OVER THE YEARS OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,,IF THIS IS STANCE CAN YOU SEND EVIDENCE TO JACK LOPRESTI MP AND COPY ME INTO REPLY IN 7 DAYS PLEASE.

SCAN EVIDENCE 4 THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE REFUND OF COURT FEE

SCAN EVIDENCE 4 OMBUDSMAN ISSUE

THIS IS PART OF EMAIL TO JACK LOPRESTI MP ,,,SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH FULL EMAIL THE REST OF EMAIL CAN BE FOUND IN WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM. SPECIFIC ELEMENT SCAN EVIDENCE 4 ONLY SENT TO THE COURT TODAY ……THEIR SOLE ISSUE

ISSUE ARISES FROM CO/1731/2018 WHERE MASTER [level of judge] GIVES PERMISSION TO MAKE APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT. NEED TO EXPLAIN TO MEDIA POLICE ARE DEFENDANTS AND COURTS [HMCS ] JUST A INTERESTED PARTY. THE COURTS AS SUCH LIKE RATS IN A SEWER SOMETIME AGO,,,,DO NOT REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED THIS IS ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE….DO NOT AGREE ,,,,,,,,WHAT ARE ISSUES

POLICE [judiciary state A/ B/ vexatious however police in own words admit allegations]

A/ THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 INSP O MAHONY ADMITS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

B/ IN EVIDENCE ,,,SCAN EVIDENCE 1 POLICE FURTHER ADMIT WE SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHEN NO APPEAL LODGED

C/ THE ONLY OUTSTANDING ISSUE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 THIS COVERED IN SCAN EVIDENCE 1 WITH DETAILED EVIDENCE NO NEED TO REPEAT HERE

COURT [THE OMBUDSMAN SOLE ISSUE]

A/ HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2917 SEEK REFUND OF FEE

Jack sole issue that you have been involved with for years, NOW hope before ombudsman, refund of court fee as application of 6.12.2017 not read by HHJCotter.Simple question they refuse to answer WAS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 READ BY HHJCOTTER ???????????

Jack must be first time do not know HMCS defense to ombudsman issue YOU DO NOT KNOW SO CAN NOT REFER UNTIL YOU KNOW COURTS STANCE. HAVE ASKED SAME QUESTIONS IN LIVE PROCEEDINGS AT JUDICIAL REVIEW AND COURT OF APPEAL STAGE TO POLICE AND COURTS ,,,UNDER

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

which HMCS in their questions I asked …. ignored…Lets ask again with reply to you Jack in 7 days,with no reply Jack ask you to ask them. Coming to end of my life, these questions if need be answered in magistrates court, collecting 5L cans of old oil to throw in court doorway before sent to prison to die,,,,severe heart condtion. Best outcome to die in police custody after arrest to show what is going on. Accept problem can I refer to your HISTORIC Mr Cobbs letter,,,,will write again to Bristol county court, Jack can not force them to reply. Further when ISSUE in proceedings,CPR 32,,,,IGNORE,,,,COURT ALSO in ,utter breach of Article 6 ignore correspondence

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,

SKELETAL ARGUMENT OF ISSUE

Have restraining order as i appealed HHJCotters/Biggers identical wrong judgement. Stated vexatious to make allegations against police, in scan evidence 1 in own words police admit allegations made. The appeal stands on its own, however in judgement it states facts of case in Cotters judgement, however did Cotter read application,FROM BELOW TOLD HE DID NOT READ,,,,,,,,.READ WRONG PAPERS,,,,application HE MADE ????? FORGERY,

1/November 2017 send court N244 form plus note to HHJCotter where he asks me to make official application and to pay fee, Visit court 5.12.2017 to obtain evidence to do application to the court, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,eg where lady was more than helpful went to get files, then Mr Blair comes running out saying, your not looking at files, we refuse WHO IS WE ,,HHJCOTTER

opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,Blair,,,make application to Cotter who will also ignore request utter breach of Article 6.which Cotter did,,

2/Demand old N244 form deface write on it not to be sent to Cotter until new N244 send with application next day, 6.12.207,,,made under ,,,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,PAID FEE ON THESE CONDITIONS ,,,,, application sent next day via email.,6.12.2017

3/ Series of emails confirming agreement,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS for example 7.12.2017

In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done. IGNORED emails,,,

5.12.2017 timed 16.17 court receipt 16.17

6.12.2017 timed 15.33 15.35 15.45 court receipt same time

7.12.2017 timed 9.58 court receipt 9.59

21.12.2017 timed 11.00 court receipt 11.00.

29.12.2017 timed 4.22 know court had as HHJCotter admits he read as made under Adorisio,,,,,.

Visit court again asking same questions, talk to manager of PSU [known now support through court] who talks to courts Mr Hunt, where Hunt lies to PSU manager states will confirm in 10days if above LISTED EMAILS/ TIME in file, for example application of 6.12.2017 under ,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS IS IT IN FILE.

AGAIN BELOW UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 MS PAWSLEY REFUSES EVEN TODAY TO ANSWER QUESTION HUNT STATED TO PSU HE WOULD ANSWER AS HUNT CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. JUST LIED TO PSU

4/ For example from application 6.12.2017 and other emails utterly aware why i went to police day 1, as retired District Judge stated after seeing Cotters judgement,,,,,not judicial language however they are utter bastards, he did not read application, visit court,,,,told we did not send to Cotter,removed from file. If did not send what was N244 form sent to Cotter, one Blair/Cotter made up and forged my signature,,,asked for copy of defaced N244 form plus one considered by Cotter, of course if Cotter forged my signature you can see why court ignored my request, under ,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,and in live proceedings before Admin court and court of appeal under,,,

CPR regulations PART 32 EVIDENCE

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

5/ Told not read, Jan 2018,,,seek refund of court fee, stages complain,,,to Resolver,,,to ombudsman. Court refuses to repay fee only thing we get which QC female judge and barrister stated is intelectual insolence they state we looked in fee section of 6.12.2017 no fee was paid,,,NO FEE REQUIRED FROM ECHR CASE LAW under ,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS

QUESTIONS

1/ DID HHJCOTTER READ APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017

NO,,,,,SEEK REFUND OF COURT FEE

YES….THEN NO APPLICATION TO OMBUDSMAN eg HE READ APPLICATION ,,,,HOWEVER AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY 1 SO HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM egHE HAS FEDJCAB DOCUMENT THE DOCUMENT POLICE WANTED DAY 1 EXPLAINING MY COMPLAINT

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case,or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

2/ BASIC QUESTION DID YOU GET APPLICATION EMAIL OF THE 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER ,,,,,,,,,,,Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,

YES SO YOU OBTAINED APPLICATION

NO,,,,JACK I CAN SEND COURT RECEIPTS IF THIS IS COURT DEFENCE

3/ Or is defence we will not pay as no fee sent on the 6.12.2017 then via statute in 2/ no fee is required via Case Law. Only reply we have obtained is ,,,,,,,,,, I didn’t find evidence of a properly filed application, with a fee, dated 6 December 2017.,,,,,from statute no fee required. The courts could have resolved issue as I stated in live proceedings at Admin and court of appeal stage eg

Notice to admit facts

32.18

(1) A party may serve notice on another party requiring him to admit the facts, or the part of the case of the serving party, specified in the notice.,,,,,,,,,,,

However all correspondence ignored , tried recently please see court reply as Pawsley corrupts and frustrates the judicial process I ASK AGAIN ANSWER QUESTIONS

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing.bristol.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

23/06/2020 17:19

1

Inbox

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your correspondence received in our office on 5 June 2020. Please accept my apologies for the delay in response but I did not have sight of your email until last week due to national issues with our IT equipment.

You have written to the court on several occasions to both myself and Mr Edward Hunt on this very matter. We have previously addressed the questions put to us and we have nothing new we can usefully add.

Any further correspondence in relation to this matter will not be responded to, but will be placed on your file.

Yours sincerely

Jane Pawsey

As you can see again going back to proceedings in Admin /court of appeal just ignore correspondence utter breach of Article 6

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,

Jack simple question to them did you get application 6.12.2017 as AGREED with court [Blair] under,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,WAS IT READ BY HHJCOTTER. WAS COTTER AWARE OF APPLICATION UNDER ADORISIO ,,YES HE WAS FROM JUDGEMENT

CAN I PLEASE ADDRESS ONLY REPLY WE HAVE FROM Mr Redgrave please see scan redgrace,,,,

I didn’t find evidence of a properly filed application, with a fee, dated 6 December 2017.UNDER CASE LAW NO FEE REQUIRED eg Adorisio,,, ,,, Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,

CAN I PLEASE ADDRESS REDGRAVES REPLY IN TOTAL AS SHOWS UTTER CORRUPTION OF HMCS COTTER AND REDGRAVE what does he omitAs for years ignoring applications and correspondence ,back to 2010 my website launched, www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com . The court asks for removal of website or CONSEQUENCES I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY CORRUPT AND BENT JUDGE DENYER . Emails stored on Outlook express, not in cloud, need to back up , due to possible litagation over libel. For example courts Mr Fowler called corrupt and bent, trying to get evidence to do HISTORIC judicial review, where he states ,,,,,your letters will not be answered , not read, just filed.....utter breach of Article 6, of the Human Rights Act ,,,,,, [IDENTCAL TO PAWSLEYS LETTER AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS] The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,,

Compuwave take on work to back up emails. On invoice they give program to view backuped emails. Program does not work , where Compuwave state was working when you left shop. B26YM042 issued, comes to arbitration , starts late, where parties agree to settle later. AGREED ABOVE FACTS CONFIRMED WITH SCAN REDGRAVE HOWEVER REDGRAVE OMITS FOLLOWING,,,,AS HE CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATES THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. ,The settlement sent to court, matter settled, wrong program was given on invoice,note Compuwave covered in this document TODAY , if facts not correct ask them to email you Jack. DJWatson asks what was position of person at Compuwave who signed settlement , this emailed to DJWatson by Compuwave, email copy to me, please see COURTS FILE history, however from scan Redgrave can i just add one email that Redgrave omitted from his history,,,as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process,,,the email settlement to court .....

PHILIP JONES <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

23/12/2015 09:59

12

5

Scan10246.JPG

CLAIM NUMBER B26YM042 HEARING 5.1.2016

Could you please put before a judge as soon as possible, to vacate hearing 5.1.2016. I accept as in AOIBS346 Jones v N Bristol NHS Trust , for medical records, DJBrittan would not accept settlement and told both parties to attend court. This again was a settlement request from defendants a few days before second hearing, and i informed hospital lawyer, that settlement was nonsense, however they now give me everything requested from day 1. [identical today]

In todays issue, from tab 4 these instructions to read emails are utterly different from instructions given 21.12.2015, from tab 6 my email to defendants, where asked if tab 4 correct, which obtained no reply, as defendants ignored email, proceedings issued. Again a few days before hearing defendants ask to settle, as court aware no papers 14 days before hearing by defendants. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UNQUOTE

RECEIPT therefore obtained by Bristol county court…below

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>

23/12/2015 09:59

1

Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court

We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days.

If your email is regarding a complaint, please allow 10 working days for your concerns to be investigated and a response provided. For further guidance please refer to the EX343 on the Justice Website.

Top Tips

• Send your documents once and do not duplicate a copy in the Post,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

As Redgrave HMCS states in scanredgrave , due to mediation starting late , I recorded mediation , agreed would settle after mediation, settlement sent scan 10246 attached to above email, above with court receipt,,,,obtained above by court ,,,,. Heard nothing so recorded call to court ,,,ask ,do I have to go to hearing over settled claim, ,,,, we have asked HHJDenyer to remove from hearing date. from above settled, told HHJDenyer removed case from hearing list , matter settled, no need to attend hearing ,,,,,, consider now Denyers deception and corruption, , where of course no one turns up, therefore case was dismissed .Appeal for oral hearing matter settled ,,,, send recorded delivery , copy of tape sent , not to turn up,, see signed for, where appeal application dismissed corrupting and frustrating the judicial process, as scan Redgrave states. . MATTER SETTLED. NOW SEE WHAT BLACKMAIL THREAT CONSEQUENCES MEANT AS RESTAINING ORDER ISSED AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT BUT THIS IS A SETTLED CASE BETWEEN PARTIES WERE TOLD NOT TO COME TO HEARING,,,,WALKED INTO A TRAP,,,,,DO WE HAVE IDENTICAL SITUATION TODAY RESTRAING ORDER UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT

JACK DO NOT WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME COURT TODAY MAY SAY,,,I HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR YEARS ,,,,,APPLICATION 6.12.2017 WAS READ ,,,NO REFUND OF FEE,,,SO IT WAS READ SO COTTER KNOWS WHY I WENT TO POLICE DAY1 ,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE AND APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS eg 6.12.2020 EMAIL

CONTACT PHILIP.JONES88@BTINTERNET.COM

This section expands issues in 2016, however the MAIN issue , same issue ignoring applications relate to 2013 issue.

We have response from Sg Price ,Avon Somerset Police ,,,,, insufficient evidence, malfeasance in public office defined by CPS as,,,,,,,,,,,,,wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, We have court order to make applications to the Bristol county court, where court/HHJDenyer ignores, wilfully neglecting to perform their duty,,,,,malfeasance in public office. Court confirms orally they will commit malfeasance in public office told HHJDenyer had confimed applications would be ignored, ..............................

IS THIS NOT INFORMING COTTER,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS APPLICATIONS BEING IGNORED

A/ THERE IS DOCUMENT 6.12.2017 DEFINED DOCUMENT TITLE SEEKING PERMISSION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER,,,NOT ADDRESED IN JUDGEMENT SO WAS READ ?????COTTER WHERE IS YOUR JUDGEMENT ON APPLICATION ???????

B/ ,,,DOCUMENT 6.12.2017 ,,,,REQUESTED BY POLICE DAY 1 [feb 2017]THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT COPIED AGAIN BEFORE IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT, FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW,,,AGAIN BEFORE COTTER

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red to Sgt Price ,eg why I went to police,,, this is subsection of FEDJCAB complete, defined just FEDJCAB eg,,,,, why I went to police

SCOPE OF OFFENCE,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appication are sent to him to pervert the course of justice.[CAN I ADD SEE APPENDIX 2][JACK TODAY NOV 2020 WILL ENCLOSE THIS DOCUMENT] DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC application sent to the court

As female QC barrister and judge stated who saw my website HHJCotter aware of 6.12.2017 application from his judgement , All we obtained from court,looked in court fee records no evidence of application 6.12.2017 on system,,,, was identical reply much later in scan redgrave,,

I didn’t find evidence of a properly filed application, with a fee, dated 6 December 2017. NO FEE REQUIRED AS FEMALE BARRISTER AND JUDGE STATED INTELLECTUAL INSOLENCE SAY WE LOOKED IN FEE SECTION,,APPLICATION NOT THERE,,,NO FEE REQUIRED VIA CASE LAW,,, Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,YOU WILL SEE THE COURT AGREED 5.12.2017 PROCEDURE USED

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS…

SYNOPSIS

1/ Note sent to HHJCotter with court N244 form, where he asks to pay fee to consider an application. Visit court 5.12.2017 as retired District Judge stated, you have made 2 applications to remove restraining order, ignored by the court,,,,[IGNORING OTHER APPLICATIONS BACK TO 2010 ,,YOU WILL SEE LATER 2018 2 MORE APPLICATIONS IGNORED THIS TIME BY HHJCOTTER in judicial review application as i state this is issue of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, still going on in 2018,,,corrupt and bent Cotter states i went to police as ,,,,dissatisfied with judgements over the years of Denyer, as he corrupts and frustrates the judicial process,,,DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS JUDGEMENTS] you need to do here in your official application, an application to remove restraining order,this could be thrown at you for years if not removed.

2/ Seek under The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,,,,],,,,,,,,,,,,for evidence to do application where courts Mr Blair states 5.12.2017 your not looking at files showing us ignoring your applications, or details of B26YM042 the restraining order issue eg asked is settlement of B26YM042 in file. . Told make application to HHJCotter who will also ignore your request, clearly conspiracy Blair already knew tactics. ,,,utter breach from above of Article 6, Cotter ignored application as Blair said he would. The issue followed up in email of the 7.12.2017….,,,,,We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please …

3/ Demand on the 5.12.2017 the court N244 form , please see format in scanN244 eg what I want court to do,,,,deface it write on it not to sent to HHJCotter until under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,A ,NEW N244 SENT [TO REPLACE DEFACED N244 FORM] AND ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, further arguments and evidence to the domestic court WAS SENT

,,,,[eg Adorisio v Netherlands ]

SENT VIA EMAIL NEXT DAY 6.12.2017

4/ Sent application under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,,6.12.2017 via email, court receipt,WE KNOW COURT OBTAINED ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, email of 7.12.2017 STATED,,

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.[email IGNORED] ,,

4/ Follow up email 21.12.2017 to make sure the removal of restraining order before HHJCotter,,,,eg

Goodafternoon,

We are putting together documents for 2018.

1/ We have application to remove, restraining order, before HHJCotter…..

This email also ignored so visit the court to obtain answers,to make sure application before Cotter, under Adorisio ,,,,,told a reply in due course. Heated argument over ECHR concept of Inequalties of Arms, for example NBT [North Bristol NHS Trust, ] their involvement in scan evidence 5 ,,,again this document sent to them today , if they want to make a comment to you Jack on facts. ,,NBT ,lawyer from emails to me,,,,NUMEROUS TIMES ,,we made application to the court that morning, then later,,,just had reply,,,,ON SAME DAY,,,,I CAN NOT GET ANY REPLIES. Still court ignores me,,,,utter breach of Article 6 …

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias

However ACCEPT covered years ago in courts Mr Fowlers email,,,,your correspondence will not be read, not answered just filed. ,,,,UTTER BREACH ARTICLE 6

5/ Take up issue of Ineqalities of Arms again in email of the 29.12.2017 ,further in that email,,,

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

,,[Cotter aware of application in 2 parts on the 6.12.2017 ,,,under Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,,I cite application 6.12.2017 which had to be split in 2 due to size,,,I CONCLUDE EMAIL 29.7.2017]

CAN JACK HAVE REPLY VIA EMAIL IN 7 DAYS,,,,,,COPY TO ME VIA EMAIL…,,,WITH NO REPLY IN 7 DAYS WILL ASSUME COURT REFUSES TO REPLY. ,,IGNORED

COTTER AWARE OF EMAIL 7.12.2017 eg 1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.[email IGNORED] ,,AWARE OF N244 REMOVED WHAT N244 DID HE READ ????ONE HE MADE UP

6/ Can I now draw things together we know from scan cotterlate he read EMAIL OF 29.12.2017 , which he had to do ,,,

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,

As several lawyers/barristers stated Cotter is aware of emails of the 5 and 6 [the application] and 7 .12.2017. and they cite,,

Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court [COTTER ] must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

From scan cotter late, admits all dates in his judgement wrong,,,,we may ask what drugs/intoxication he was on. ,,,,further as retired District Judge stated,,,,after seeing judgement,,,,,not judicial language however they are utter bastards,,,he had not read 6.12.2017 application made under

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,no reference to removal of restaining order

7/ Went to court told ,,,,we did not send to Cotter . Ask for refund of fee, the ombudsman issue. As female barrister and judge stated,,,interlectual insolence court stance we looked in our fee section no fee paid 6.12.2017,,,,,but no fee required from ECHR case law..

Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,

Again as several lawyers/barristers have stated,,,,if court believed in goodwill a fee was required, and consider… Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

WHY DID COURT NOT ASK FOR A FEE.

8/ Comes under a Resolver complaint , where court just ignores for years correspondence , where ask you Jack to refer to ombudsman. We go via statute ,,,complaint,,,,to Resolver ,,,to ombudsman , where court corrupts and frustrates the judicial process, as Fowler stated years ago, utter breach of Article 6 ,,,we will ignore your correspondence, will not be read just filed. Escalate issue before you can refer Jack to ombudsman, please see scan redgrave enclosed.

SO TODAY AGAIN ASK

1/ Did you get application/N244 form the replacement of defaced N244 form on the 6.12.2017,as agreed with Blair. Made under,,,Goc v Turkey.. Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,, ADORISIO et al v NETHERLANDS ,,,,if answer is no simple solution for ombudsman,,,,can send you Jack court receipts.....was it read

2/ If not read could you explain to Jack why refund of fee not paid....Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to su

SCAN EVIDENCE 5 THE NBT ISSUE [NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST]

1/ NBT left me disabled, in chronic pain, ,,,,,,further in later inguinal hernia surgery a disaster, as failed in a few days …... later court application was for medical records, and to put via statute a message in medical records , and travel expensives. Comes before DJWatson at hearing , makes court order,,,where he asks defendants third party for statement , where case then struck out in papers supplied by NBT,,,,[statement utterly untrue]where ask for oral hearing. Just before second hearing defendants ask to settle, supply medical records, pay travel expenses, and agree to put statement in medical records eg .,,,,,ACCEPT MY CLAIM Defendants send their settlement to the court, rejected by DJBrittan, [ Brittan in claim a long time ago asked me to leave court so he could discuss case with then defendants,,,,,,where took up issue with then defendants lawyer with reply ,,,we would not be seen discussing case behind your back with Brittan for you to exploit later ,,,,said have to catch plane can not talk,,,,excuse made not to talk to Brittan ] where NBT above case comes before again DJWatson.

Before from file had recording for example from radiology that their medical records not disclosed, said 6 MONTHS BEFORE RESOLVE ISSUE WHERE NBT JUST STATE YOUR CLAIM STRUCK OUT BY DJWATSON ,,,,, WILL NOT SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS WILL NOT TALK TO YOU

For example in NBT case defendants asked to settle, A FEW DAYS BEFORE second HEARING At hearing they requested that judgement reads i acted unreasonably, this was rejected by the court, Ms Smith for defendants would not let it drop, I could not get into conversation, as DJWatson right hand raised in my direction,,,,,NO COMPLAINT OVER DJWATSON. DJWatson stated as in judgement he had read file and would not state this, eg I WAS ACTING UNREASONABLY aware 6 months ago asked to settle,,,,now suppling 6 months later medical records,,,putting statement in medical records ,,,paying travel expenses. CAN I REFER TO RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE IN APPLICATION 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER TODAYS ISSUE NOT RELATED TO NBT WHERE STATED NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER BRISTOL COURT ARE UTTER BASTARDS. VIEW BACKED UP BY JUDICIARY PLEASE SEE MAIN TEXT TODAY . NBT LAWYER Ms SMITH LAWYER CALLED A BITCH,,,WITH FOLLOW UP APOLOGY BY ME AGAIN NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE. FROM MAIN TEXT MEDIA COVERED IF Ms Smith wants to contest content Jack,,,Today as in 3 appeals to remove restraining order,, I refer to ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY please see below]

Athough matter determined by court , i had not acted unreasonably, its cited by HHJDenyer in a restraining order MADE because I acted unreasonably , as I appealed DJWatsons judgement, appeal,,,,,, medical records still outstanding, travel expenses not paid and refusal to put statement in my medical records, ,,,,,,,. Further cites claim v Compuwave,, please see details in scan evidence 4,,,,,where we have again case settled, where told not therefore to attend hearing, as matter settled, it had been removed by Denyer from hearing date, where as no one turned up, case dismissed, where seek to appeal,,,,the recording with court not to attend sent to Denyer,where appeal dismissed. AGAIN PART OF RESTRAINING ORDER AS I APPEALED.

2/ In next year 2018 make application for more medical records,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DATES LATER THAN PREVIOUS CASE THEREFORE COULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN PREVIOUS POC, [PARTICULARS OF CLAIM.] NBT again refuse to release, where HHJCotter strikes out claim,,,,???????????????????i As retired district judge stated,,,,you make application to the court,,,,goes on computer system,TAKES TIME,,,,then goes to a PRE OR DISTRICT JUDGE FOR DIRECTIONS. WHY ON SAME DAY SENT TO HHJCOTTER THE DAY YOU LODGED PROCEEDINGS,,,,IS IT A CASE DO NOT ISSUE HIS PROCEEDINGS SEND TO ME FIRST TO SEE IF I CAN FIND A LOOPHOLE TO STRIKE OUT, in papers. As various barristers/lawyers state,,,,,was struck out as abuse of process,,,,Blair aware of previous claim did he take straight away saying should have been included in previous POC,,,REASON STRUCK OUT..] Appeal , get hearing date, where Cotters clerk then states have had long talk with NBT over defence, …..hearing date agreed with NBT removed from list, WE HAVE AGREED WAY FORWARD. . WHAT HAS THIS CORRUPT COURT ORGANISED WITH NBT ????

3/ So application N244 to court to find out what was agreed with NBT ,,,,,IGNORED , ,,,,,WENT TO COURT TOLD COURT WILL NOT REPLY TO APPLICATION

SEE TODAYS ISSUE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018. ,,,,,THIS APPLICATION IGNORED

LETTER 25.2.2018,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WITH APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I will from start today make a stance, i will not tolerate any fresh nonsense defendants lawyer Ms Smith puts before the court. I REQUEST BY 5.00 PM 26.2.2018 SHE SENDS TO ME VIA EMAIL HER COMMENTS TO THIS ORDER.WITHOUT THIS WILL REQUEST AN ADJOURNMENT SO I CAN AT A LATER DATE PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN TERMS OF ALLEGATIONS FILED AFTER I SEE DEFENCE .

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,

Are we going to have the utter nonsense as in OBS08441 which i won where DJWatson states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do you want to come back after i get you a defence, …..

ALREADY CASES WHERE IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 HAVE NO DEFENCE TO MY CLAIM

4/ No defence therefore,,,,,can I please cite POC…]PARTICLARS OF CLAIM]

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in DEFENDANTS medical records.

LEGAL BASIS ,,,,,1/ ,No evidence required in terms of obtaining medical records, in terms of putting statement in medical records, please see statutory regulations of NHS ,,,,,,the defendants must allow if requested for plaintiff to add statement to his medical records.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Comes before HHJRalton , Jack you can not get involved in court judgements, not asking you to, todays application to you primary for legal aid., nothing to do with NBT, Ralton states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,had very long discussion with Cotter over this case,,,[Cotter makes judgement,,,i appeal,,,why is Ralton discussing case with Cotter,,,,may I suggest todays issue,,,,Bigger makes judgement,,,did he ask Legatt LJ to issue restraining order] ,,,Ralton states reason he struck out as your POC utterly incomprensible he did not know what you wanted court to do,,,,????????????????????FOR MEDIA YOU HAVE POC ABOVE YOU MAKE DEDUCTIONS DO YOU KNOW WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO

5/ NBT agree to supply medical records of set day taken cited in the POC, plus put statement in medical records. Get letter of third party understanding of medical records, however as statute do not get at this stage copy of medical records taken on day. Ask to look at medical records, from recording statement not in file. Ask for actual records TAKEN ON CITED DATE FROM HOSPITAL FILE REFUSED BY NBT. From judgement if not supplied can made application back to the court. Talk to PSU, [know now support through court…..covered them today in this document…if they wish to contact in 7 days you Jack,,,,. They talk to court staff at Bristol county court,,,,,where must admit court staff were good trying to help. Agreed court staff/ PSU to write letter to HHJRalton,,,,,,eg should I under a N244 court form ask for order to release medical records taken on cited day, informed his judgement ignored,,,,explained discussed with court/PSU they recommended letter to him. As several people barristers/judges stated,,,,, Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

Could understand in reply ….not allowed to give legal advice,,,where you could have made application with new N244 form,,,,,however can I refer to todays issue,,IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,STILL GOING ON WHERE COURT STATES IN RECORDING AT COURT,,,,,,,HHJRALTON HAS NO COMMENT TO MAKE,,,AWARE HIS ORDER NOT ADHERED TO

SCAN EVIDENCE 5 THE NBT ISSUE [NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST]

1/ NBT left me disabled, in chronic pain, ,,,,,,further in later inguinal hernia surgery a disaster, as failed in a few days …... later court application was for medical records, and to put via statute a message in medical records , and travel expensives. Comes before DJWatson at hearing , makes court order,,,where he asks defendants third party for statement , where case then struck out in papers supplied by NBT,,,,[statement utterly untrue]where ask for oral hearing. Just before second hearing defendants ask to settle, supply medical records, pay travel expenses, and agree to put statement in medical records eg .,,,,,ACCEPT MY CLAIM Defendants send their settlement to the court, rejected by DJBrittan, [ Brittan in claim a long time ago asked me to leave court so he could discuss case with then defendants,,,,,,where took up issue with then defendants lawyer with reply ,,,we would not be seen discussing case behind your back with Brittan for you to exploit later ,,,,said have to catch plane can not talk,,,,excuse made not to talk to Brittan ] where NBT above case comes before again DJWatson.

Before from file had recording for example from radiology that their medical records not disclosed, said 6 MONTHS BEFORE RESOLVE ISSUE WHERE NBT JUST STATE YOUR CLAIM STRUCK OUT BY DJWATSON ,,,,, WILL NOT SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS WILL NOT TALK TO YOU

For example in NBT case defendants asked to settle, A FEW DAYS BEFORE second HEARING At hearing they requested that judgement reads i acted unreasonably, this was rejected by the court, Ms Smith for defendants would not let it drop, I could not get into conversation, as DJWatson right hand raised in my direction,,,,,NO COMPLAINT OVER DJWATSON. DJWatson stated as in judgement he had read file and would not state this, eg I WAS ACTING UNREASONABLY aware 6 months ago asked to settle,,,,now suppling 6 months later medical records,,,putting statement in medical records ,,,paying travel expenses. CAN I REFER TO RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE IN APPLICATION 6.12.2017 MADE UNDER TODAYS ISSUE NOT RELATED TO NBT WHERE STATED NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER BRISTOL COURT ARE UTTER BASTARDS. VIEW BACKED UP BY JUDICIARY PLEASE SEE MAIN TEXT TODAY . NBT LAWYER Ms SMITH LAWYER CALLED A BITCH,,,WITH FOLLOW UP APOLOGY BY ME AGAIN NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE. FROM MAIN TEXT MEDIA COVERED IF Ms Smith wants to contest content Jack,,,Today as in 3 appeals to remove restraining order,, I refer to ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY please see below]

Athough matter determined by court , i had not acted unreasonably, its cited by HHJDenyer in a restraining order MADE because I acted unreasonably , as I appealed DJWatsons judgement, appeal,,,,,, medical records still outstanding, travel expenses not paid and refusal to put statement in my medical records, ,,,,,,,. Further cites claim v Compuwave,, please see details in scan evidence 4,,,,,where we have again case settled, where told not therefore to attend hearing, as matter settled, it had been removed by Denyer from hearing date, where as no one turned up, case dismissed, where seek to appeal,,,,the recording with court not to attend sent to Denyer,where appeal dismissed. AGAIN PART OF RESTRAINING ORDER AS I APPEALED.

2/ In next year 2018 make application for more medical records,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DATES LATER THAN PREVIOUS CASE THEREFORE COULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN PREVIOUS POC, [PARTICULARS OF CLAIM.] NBT again refuse to release, where HHJCotter strikes out claim,,,,???????????????????i As retired district judge stated,,,,you make application to the court,,,,goes on computer system,TAKES TIME,,,,then goes to a PRE OR DISTRICT JUDGE FOR DIRECTIONS. WHY ON SAME DAY SENT TO HHJCOTTER THE DAY YOU LODGED PROCEEDINGS,,,,IS IT A CASE DO NOT ISSUE HIS PROCEEDINGS SEND TO ME FIRST TO SEE IF I CAN FIND A LOOPHOLE TO STRIKE OUT, in papers. As various barristers/lawyers state,,,,,was struck out as abuse of process,,,,Blair aware of previous claim did he take straight away saying should have been included in previous POC,,,REASON STRUCK OUT..] Appeal , get hearing date, where Cotters clerk then states have had long talk with NBT over defence, …..hearing date agreed with NBT removed from list, WE HAVE AGREED WAY FORWARD. . WHAT HAS THIS CORRUPT COURT ORGANISED WITH NBT ????

3/ So application N244 to court to find out what was agreed with NBT ,,,,,IGNORED , ,,,,,WENT TO COURT TOLD COURT WILL NOT REPLY TO APPLICATION

SEE TODAYS ISSUE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018. ,,,,,THIS APPLICATION IGNORED

LETTER 25.2.2018,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WITH APPLICATION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I will from start today make a stance, i will not tolerate any fresh nonsense defendants lawyer Ms Smith puts before the court. I REQUEST BY 5.00 PM 26.2.2018 SHE SENDS TO ME VIA EMAIL HER COMMENTS TO THIS ORDER.WITHOUT THIS WILL REQUEST AN ADJOURNMENT SO I CAN AT A LATER DATE PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN TERMS OF ALLEGATIONS FILED AFTER I SEE DEFENCE .

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,

Are we going to have the utter nonsense as in OBS08441 which i won where DJWatson states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do you want to come back after i get you a defence, …..

ALREADY CASES WHERE IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 HAVE NO DEFENCE TO MY CLAIM

4/ No defence therefore,,,,,can I please cite POC…]PARTICLARS OF CLAIM]

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in DEFENDANTS medical records.

LEGAL BASIS ,,,,,1/ ,No evidence required in terms of obtaining medical records, in terms of putting statement in medical records, please see statutory regulations of NHS ,,,,,,the defendants must allow if requested for plaintiff to add statement to his medical records.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Comes before HHJRalton , Jack you can not get involved in court judgements, not asking you to, todays application to you primary for legal aid., nothing to do with NBT, Ralton states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,had very long discussion with Cotter over this case,,,[Cotter makes judgement,,,i appeal,,,why is Ralton discussing case with Cotter,,,,may I suggest todays issue,,,,Bigger makes judgement,,,did he ask Legatt LJ to issue restraining order] ,,,Ralton states reason he struck out as your POC utterly incomprensible he did not know what you wanted court to do,,,,????????????????????FOR MEDIA YOU HAVE POC ABOVE YOU MAKE DEDUCTIONS DO YOU KNOW WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO

5/ NBT agree to supply medical records of set day taken cited in the POC, plus put statement in medical records. Get letter of third party understanding of medical records, however as statute do not get at this stage copy of medical records taken on day. Ask to look at medical records, from recording statement not in file. Ask for actual records TAKEN ON CITED DATE FROM HOSPITAL FILE REFUSED BY NBT. From judgement if not supplied can made application back to the court. Talk to PSU, [know now support through court…..covered them today in this document…if they wish to contact in 7 days you Jack,,,,. They talk to court staff at Bristol county court,,,,,where must admit court staff were good trying to help. Agreed court staff/ PSU to write letter to HHJRalton,,,,,,eg should I under a N244 court form ask for order to release medical records taken on cited day, informed his judgement ignored,,,,explained discussed with court/PSU they recommended letter to him. As several people barristers/judges stated,,,,, Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer,

Could understand in reply ….not allowed to give legal advice,,,where you could have made application with new N244 form,,,,,however can I refer to todays issue,,IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,STILL GOING ON WHERE COURT STATES

END OF LETTER TO JACK LOPRESTI NOV 2020

........................................................................,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

b/ Who made allegations of ,,,delusinary ,,,and can you cite events where come to this conclusion please

QUESTIONS TO HMCS [HM court service]

QUESTION 1 WHAT EVIDENCE WAS ON FILE WHERE SALFORD CC WOULD NOT ISSUE MY CLAIM DUE TO ALLEGATIONS OF RESTRAINING ORDER IN PLACE

QUESTION 2 TO HMCS WAS THE FEDJCABcomplete AND ABOVE 5/ 7/THE ISSUE...IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT 2017 . FURTHER POLICE COULD DISPUTE FACTS WE DID DEFEND FACTS , CAN YOU COMFIRM POLICE MADE NO DEFENCE AS INFORMED YOU IN EMAIL OF 17.11.2017.DID YOU GET EMAIL OF 17.11.2017. COTTER KNOWS FACTS POLICE ADMIT FACTS , CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM WHEN HHJDENYER RETIRED ,,,,EXACT DATE PLEASE

QUESTION 3 TO HMCS YOU STATE WE DID NOT GET APPLICATION 6.12.2017 AND IN 2017 WE WERE UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017. MADE UNDER Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,. CAN YOU CONFIRM STANCE AND WILL NOT PAY REFUND OF FEE. WE ACCEPT YOU CAN NOT PAY AS LEGATT LJ STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT YOUR SAYING WE DID NOT GET AND THEREFORE COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017

QUESTION 4 TO HMCS DID YOU GET EMAILS OF 5 ,,, 7,,,21 AND 29.12.2017. OR ARE YOU MAKING ALLEGATIONS THAT MY COURT RECEIPTS ARE FORGERIES. WE ASK ALTHOUGH IN JUDGEMENT COTTER CITES EMAIL OF 29.12.2017 eg what did I say ,,,29.12.2017

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,

SO COTTER AWARE I DEFACED N244 FORM AND AMENDMENT SENT ,,,, Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,. WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS FURTHER .

a/ Cotter aware defaced N244 form, can we have copy of form defaced, in email 7.12.207 aware of new N244 form and new amended application. ,,,,can we have copies of these, eg what did Cotter consider in judgement . Further aware of application 6.12.2017 as admits read email of 29.12.2017...where I state in email,,, ARE THESE IN FILE You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.,,FROM EMAIL

You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December.LEGGATT LJ STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HMCS STATE HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 WHAT DID HE READ AN APPLICATION HE PRODUCED FORGED MY SIGNATURE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

COTTER STATES EMAILS AFTER 5.12.2017 WHICH HE READ CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPIES OF THESE,,,,KNOWS AMENDMENT SENT LETS SEE WHAT WAS BEFORE HIM IN AMENDMENT TO COME TO CONCLUSION I WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.

AS QC JUDGE AND BARRISTER STATED COTTER AND LATER HHJBIGGER WAS NEVER GOING TO GRANT YOUR APPLICATION,,,,TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS WOULD BE INVITING POLICE IN TO THEIR COURTS TO EXPOSE THEIR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR. ....]

QUESTION 5 TO HMCS AGAIN COURT RECEIPT HOWEVER IS THE EMAIL 13.7.2018 AND 19.7.2018 IN FILE OR HAS COURT OF APPEAL REMOVED. (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,I ASKED IN APPLICATION TO LOOK AT FILES,,,,,IGNORED BY COURT OF APPEAL SO PRESENTED EVIDENCE FOR CONSIDERATION

HMCS Question 6 ,,,, is email address correct…7.12.2017 DID YOU GET EMAIL .HAVE ASKED HMCS NOW FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS,,,,DID YOU GET EMAIL,,,ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES WHERE THEY JUST IGNORE…UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,,OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT,,,,CAN NOT ANSWER AS TODAY AS FATAL FOR HMCS eg ,,,HMCS WERE AWARE OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 BINNED ,CAN NOT ANSWER AS WOULD SHOW COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 AND LEGATT STATING THE FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,,WHAT DID COTTER READ A DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED.

So we ask court QUESTION 7 did you obtain above emails, DEC 2017 7, 21.29 OF DEC can we have copy of N244 that HHJCotter considered, eg what I wanted HHJCotter to do, and paid for, all correspondence ignored since Jan 2018,will try again today, ombudsman would need evidence in his/her consideration ,,,,,,,,,,,,,did HMCS obtain application of 6.12.2017 , or were they aware of possible application of 6.12.2017, eg did you obtain email,7.12.2017,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Email 7.12.2017 eg……………

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

We know N244 I wrote on application,,,[,,recorded],,,, removed, not to send to HHJCotter, What did Cotter read,,,A N244 AND DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.CAN WE HAVE COPY OF APPLICATION PAID FOR PLUS N244FORM IN AMENDED APPLICATION

QUESTION 8 TO HMCS IN B26YMO42 AGAIN WE HAVE COURT RECEIPT FOR SETTLEMENT AS DEFENDANTS ASKED TO SETTLE ,,,EMAIL TOMLIN ORDER AS THEY REQUESTED SENT. WAS THE APPLICATION TO REMOVE CASE FROM HEARING OBTAINED WITH SIGNED STATEMENT FROM COMPUWAVE ,,,,,CASE SETTLED,,,,,IF YES WHY WAS IT NOT REMOVED FROM HEARING LIST. .FURTHER IS APPLICATIONS 26.2.2017 26.10.2017 TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER ARE THESE IN FILE.

QUESTION 9 to HMCS do you have any reason to believe scan appendix 2 that HMCS did not stamp this document, eg is court stamp forgery. So we have my applications ignored, lawyers application ignored, my MPs correspondence on issue ignored. WE HAVE COURT CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE COME AND TALK TO US.HOW CAN POLICE STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

QUESTION 10 TO HMCS.see 14th time asked. From recording Mr Blair states our Mr Till sent your application for oral hearing to Cardiff court, co/1/2013. Is this application in file, or has court removed. How do Bristol court record that documents transferred to another court, how does Cardiff court record delivery from a different court. Does Bristol court have any record of applications made With respect to my emails did Ms Weaver every supply replies, if so can we please have replies.

QUESTION 11 TO HMCS ,,,,,THERE WERE APPLICATIONS TO REMOVE THIS ORDER ON THE 26.2.2016 AND 26.10.2016 6.12.2017 ARE THESE IN FILE OR HAVE THEY BEEN REMOVED,,,,WHERE THERE FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE ASKING YOU IF YOU REQUIRE ANYTHING FURTHER IN 2 EARLIER APPLICATIONS AS I FOLLOWED UP AS APPLICATIONS IGNORED.

QUESTION 12 to HMCS do you have any reason to believe that HMCS did not stamp this document, SCAN APPENDIX2 eg court stamp is forgery. So we have my applications ignored, lawyers application ignored, my MPs correspondence on issue ignored. WE HAVE COURT CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE COME AND TALK TO US.HOW CAN POLICE STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

QUESTION 13 TO HMCS ,,Can I refer to paragraph f 1/ where court of appeal in judgement stated ,,,why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork, again see TODAYS question asked over 20 times. In judgement Cotter cites email of the 14.11.2018,,,,,[can not be 2018 what drugs/intoxication was he on] assume 17.11.2017. No emails of 14.11.2017, if HMCS maintain these 2 emails are ones of 14.11.2017 can I please have copy. Can you please confirm should be 17.11.2017 emails were recited on the 17.11.2017 from evidence ALREADY COPIED from pre action protocol document, eg WHY I went to police,eg,,,,

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]

THIS CITING IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOLLOWED BY NEXT STEP THE ECHR

QUESTION 14 TO HMCS,,,,again asked over 20 times,,,,. We know Cotter obtained,,email 7.12.2017 , see above HMCS receipt,,,,email 7.12.2017,,,,

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,

So aware after 5.12.2017 amendment would be sent , not to send to Cotter until new application sent, aware of 7.12.2017 email as quoted in 29.7.2017 , so aware application not complete. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, a line was put through old N244 form. Can we please have the N244 considered by HHJCotter, and can we please have copy of application considered by HHJCotter, we know old N244 removed, what was N244 considered, and can we have copy of application amendment which Cotter knows existed, Cotter states emails after 5.12.2017 sent,,,,,,can we have copies of these please

LETS SEE DOCUMENT AFTER 5.12.2017 WHERE COTTER COMES TO JUDGEMENT YOU WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.A GREAT WORRY AS RECENTLY HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED MAY NEVER GET WITH HMCS FOR EXAMPLE,,,,WE CAN NOT FIND FILE

QUESTION 15 TO HMCS DID COTTER REPLY TO COURT APPLICATION, FEB 2018 IF SO CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF REPLY. IN TERMS OF HHJRALTON AGAIN WE HAVE RECEIPT FOR EMAIL DID YOU GET AND DID HHJRALTON ISSUE ANY REPLY AS INFORMED HIM MEDICAL RECIRDS NOT SUPPLIED.

QUESTION 16 TO HMCS CAN YOU SUPPLY DATA UNDER Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). ,,,,,,,,,,,,,SENT TO BIRMINGHAM COURT .CAN YOU CONFIRM SENT TO HHJBIGGER eg ,,,,WHAT WAS BEFORE BIGGER . APPLICATION TO BIGGER TO LOOK AT FILES. .CAN YOU CONFIRM IGNORED IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.

QUESTION 17 TO HMCS IS THE EMAIL OF 13.7.2018 AND 19.7.2018 IN FILE. FURTHER WAS EVIDENCE BELOW IN EMAIL OF THE 19.7.2018 eg you had scan 10594 where police admit in their IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations

3/ We went to police after picketing at court over again as applications ignored, still going on from above, barrister told me to report to police malfeasance in public office as ignoring applications, from first correspondence to police,FEDJCAB,,EG

.,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications , reason went to police as courts ignoring applications. so no doubt in judicial review application , can i please quoted page 2 of judicial review application.,,,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,

4/ Numerous applications ignored over time and as JCIO stated complaint malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, criminal offence, and we can not investigate, further as cases over long period of time if an issue we could investigate it would be out of time, which makes nonsense of judgement you complained over HHJDenyer judgements, [no ignoring applications]and should have taken to JCIO, [no they could not investigate as JR application ]please put email eclosed from JCIO , also please put on file enclosed email .HHJBidder states police acted correctly , so they can ignore statutory regulations in their investigations, and send reply to an appeal, where THEY ADMIT NOT LODGED

TAB21.

QUESTION 18 to HMCS what evidence was in file in November 2018 for you to believe a restraining order was in place, CAN I REFER TO RECORDED CALL TO YOU IT DOES NOT RELATE TO ORDER OF 2016.

QUESTION 19 TO HMCS. DID POLICE OR HMCS EVER MAKE ANY APPLICATIONS TO ANY COURT DISPUTING ANY OF MY APPLICATIONS. . WE DID GET FROM YOU,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SORRY VERY LATE OUT OF TIME IN COURT OF APPEAL STAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE WE WILL NOT ISSUE ANY DOCUMENTS UNLESS ORDER FROM JUDGE ,ITS AN ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE WE DO NOT WISH TO BE INVOLVED. CAN YOU CONFIRM EMAIL SEEKING INFORMATION TO DO REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER WAS ALSO IGNORED, AGAIN YOU HAD NO COMMENT TO MAKE. IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.

QUESTION 20 TO HMCS ,,Can you confirm police allegation in question 11 to police ,and who was person who supplied information to police. In terms of co/1/2018 why was I not allowed to do application, can I refer to my complaint, after you stated,,,,,,,,,court lawyer prepared papers.

e/ We ask final question to HMCS number 21 We had no reply to question is fee 528.00. Can I refer to HMCS document

Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.

Eg to vary, amend order, Master stated HMCS would consider new application.

Can I request CPS that document today is forwarded to a judge. We have in utterly cowardly way Legatt quoting restraining order of 2016, where in 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 applications to remove. We know why ignored, as at hearing DEFENDANTS ASKED THAT JUDGEMENT STATED THIS. THIS REJECTED BY DJWATSON MY 3 APPLICATIONS UNDER

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]

HMCS RECENTLY VIA COMPENSATION PAID 150.00 IF I LODGED AT COURT WOULD THE COURT OBTAIN TRANSCRIPT,,,,IF IT SHOWED APPLICATION REJECTED BY DJWATSON WOULD COURT REPAY THE 150.00

eg GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today,]

IS IT ALRIGHT TO JUDGES TO MAKE COWARDLY ATTACKS

We have issue of court of appeal application, as computer crash emailed court to obtain application at conclusion of hearing, again emails ignored. Court states binned after hearing as regulations. Judge advised from a theoretical point of view true, however this was just a warning to back up, if you required offered to pay cost of return there was no reason why your request not made, further if not doing court had duty to inform you, so you could ask for sections you require to be photocopied, with you paying court copy fees. DO YOU HAVE OWN COPY OF APPLICATION IF SO FREE OF CHARGE CAN YOU COPY FILE ACCEPT POSTAGE /PACKING CHARGE

QUESTIONS TO POLICE

QUESTION ONE TO POLICE WAS THE ABOVE FEDJCABcomplete AND SCAN 13.4.2017 DOCUMENT SENT TO SGT PRICE. We have receipt from Patchway police station WAS THE FEDJCABcomplete AND ABOVE 5/ DETAILS OF MATTER 7/THE ISSUE...IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW. DID YOU ISSUE ANY DEFENCE TO HMCS.

QUESTION 2 TO POLICE MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS, IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE AS YOU ARE AWARE IN EBRAHIMI CASE WHERE YOUR OFFICERS JAILED, IS IT TRUE VIA STATUTE JCIO ]judicial conduct investigation office ] could not investigate as a criminal offence,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) ……………………

JCIO STATE from website,,,,,,,,,,,, …

Can I complain to you because I believe a judge is involved in corruption or has committed fraud?

No. Such allegations would be a matter for the police.

You were utterly aware of this from barristers citing as recently before your offices jailed Duffy/Passmore in the Ebrahimi case, with identical issue as today, as criminal allegations ignored.

QUESTION 3 TO POLICE DID I COME TO YOU AS FEDJCABcomplete AND PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW DOCUMENT AS HMCS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. CAN I REFER TO RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE WHERE ISSUE CITED BY INSP O MAHONY ,,,EG WILL WE GET COURT STAFF SAY ,,,WE SENT APPLICATIONS TO HHJDENYER,,,,,,AND DENYER SAYING,,,NEVER SEEN APPLICATIONS. JUDICIARY STATE I WENT SOLELY MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE,,,AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AWARE RECORDING/PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SHOWS OTHERWISE ,,,,,COTTER CORRUPT AND BENT DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM,,,to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .... HOWEVER ASKING YOU DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE I CAME TO YOU AS MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIFC OFFICE,,,,,,,,,,,AS SOLELY DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.

QUESTION 4 TO POLICE THE ISSUE TO POLICE COVERED IN QUESTIONS BELOW,,,THESE IN DETAIL WILL BE CITED LATER, CAN I PLEASE ASK POLICE HOWEVER TO ANSWER AS TABLE BELOW SIMPLE ANSWER ,,,YES/NO eg

DID I COME TO YOU MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE

AS FOR YEARS COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND PERJURY ISSUE YES NO

ARE THESE CRIMINAL OFFENCES AND THEREFORE VIA STATUTE YES NO

COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO

IN INVESTIGATION CAN YOU CONFIRM YOU DID NOT YES NO

FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

CAN YOU CONFIRM IF MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS FINAL APPEAL YES NO

CAN YOU CONFIRM I CAME TO YOU MALFEASANCE NOT MISFEASANCE YES NO

QUESTIONS TO POLICE 5 RELATES TO QUESTION 4

,

1/ Early 2017 as barristers advice did I come to you, malfeasance in public office, as for years courts ignoring applications, where Sgt Price asked me to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it related to my complaint to police, we did not know OFFENDERS HMCS staff not sending applications to HHJDenyer or HHJDenyer ignoring applications malfeasance in public office ignoring applications as explained by your Insp O Mahony please see scan 10594.

2/ Do you have any evidence I came to you as ,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied over judgements of HHJDenyer, if so can you please disclose.

3/ PCBird in letter confirms went over offence malfeasance in public office, further perjury issue, can you please confirm criminal offence, and therefore via statute could not complain to JCIO.

4/ Can I refer to IPCC summary regulations , and Insp O Mahonys letter, scan 10594 , can you confirm you did not follow IPCC regulations. Eg Mr Galloway never contacted me.

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

5/ From your letter 5.12.2017 ,,,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

Further you sent correspondence if doing appeal had to enclose a police appeal form. Can you confirm on the 24.7.2017 you had no police appeal form, however you maintain email of the 22.7.2017 was final appeal, although you admit from letter 5.12.2017 I would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017 if you ignored email of the 22.7.2017 .

Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140

oduces evidence ,,,,on this day defendant in closed prison,,,in your case CORNERSTONE why you went to defendants, if it was criminal offences ,perjury,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, [FEDJCAB] ,,,then could not take TO JCIO as JCIO stated . Follows police advice was wrong to take to JCIO. . This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit my email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,

Further police state told from HMCS [Bristol county court ] judges immune from prosecution, however ask police in the FEDJCABcomplete document as I went through complete document, was this pasted to you

t take TO JCIO as JCIO stated . Follows police advice was wrong to take to JCIO. . This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit my email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,

Further police state told from HMCS [Bristol county court ] judges immune from prosecution, however ask police in the FEDJCABcomplete document as I went through complete document, was this pasted to you

QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED]

Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140

Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380

Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32

Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451

Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702

Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226

Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91

Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747

Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245

County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429

Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387

Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505

Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067

Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]

QUESTION 7 TO POLICE WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 DO YOU WISH TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER CONFIRMING IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.

QUESTION 8 TO POLICE CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM MY EMAIL OF 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL TO YOUR DEFENCE ,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHICH CAME UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS eg EVEN IN DOCUMENT SENT TO YOU COURT STATED WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US. FROM YOUR LETTER 5.12.2017 CAN I QUOTE,,,

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

DO YOU MAINTAIN EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL ?????????????

Question 9 to police summary…. from officers statement allegations ,,,,can you confirm neighbour reported alleged crime to you, travellers vandalising property, can you please confirm when he reported. . Can I ask ,,,,you were aware from allegations of neighbour, of my property being vandalised, when was incident recorded by you, and why did it take 2 weeks to contact me. Further why did it take 2 officers to attend, further considering time sending 2 officers, did you enquire from neighbours if they saw anything. Further will try after your reply to trace boy as witness, neighbour wasting police time, eg place card in shop, with 100.00 award taken from my state pension, if fails could use say Evening Post ,local TV channels leave 100.00 with them from my pension, so they can pay boy after publicity for conviction,,,,waste of police time. Further with your reply can display allegations of neighbour with travellers at library.

QUESTION 10 TO POLICE. YOU WERE INFORMED DO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBIITY FOR LOST MAIL PLEASE DO VIA EMAIL. IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL , IN ADMINISTRATION COURT IN COURT OF APPEAL YOU HAD CHANCE TO DISPUTE FACTS eg from court of appeal,,, The court via order asked me to serve numerous documents, eg court letter 26.7.2018 order to serve, eg,,,,,,,respondents [police/HMCS] are not required to take any action at the permission stage, unless directed by the court .In all cases however the respondents is permitted and encouraged to file brief written statement setting out any reasons why permission should be refused in whole or in part.,,,,,,, The parties made no statement, as in judicial review application and in pre action protocol document, they accept facts., Can you confirm you issued no correspondence with the courts, if you did can we please have copy,,,,,you accepted facts. From High court judge who saw my website, advised if you had at any stage then Legatt would have awarded costs. Can you further confirm you made no objection to removal of restraining order.

QUESTION 11 TO POLICE ,,PCBird states I contacted HMCS and was told judges/staff at HMCS immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue, malfeasance [misconduct] in public office ignoring applications for years, was via JCIO , who told you this , can we have date and person who supplied information, see asked 14 times

Goodafternoon,

CAN WE PLEASE DEFINE THIS DOCUMENT AS DOCUMENT DEC 2019

INTRODUCTION , Police ask what questions do you want answered. Sections in attachments relate to ombudsman issue, then overview of the whole, required by lawyers when in court. We have issue as events have taken over where now my MP involved, he requests my address in each contact 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL,Bristol Evening Post involved, , HMCS [HM court system] involved ,ombudsman involved , CASE NUMBER C2097203 as we seek further extended answers from you . Further via general election know actual MP, therefore can do this document as we know MP, to send correspondence to. From my website

www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com document this named DOCUMENT DEC 2019 posted if facts untrue we await litagation. I make no apology for name dropping , retired district judge, QC a female barrister and judge, and even High court judge ect who contacted,,,,,after seeing my web site. Can I please refer to previous complaint to you, which was removed with apology, as turned out to be complaint against contractor you appointed not police, where settled later positive outcome via litagation. can I refer to email to your Insp O Mahony,,,,,,,,,,,,not only removal and apology, but I stated you did not give me good service, it was EXCELLENT service thank you In that complaint required information relating to historic issue. Where Insp O Mahony kindly supplied information, today we seek more information. So we have todays issue plus historic issue.

1/ Todays present issue complaint , before we return to historic issue,,, left home and about 30 mins later at library realised I had not locked back door. Coming home as going out that evening from library, to lock door, a boy about 12 years old stopped me and stated as soon as you went out, your neighbour came in and vandalised your property, neighbour a few doors away when I came home laughing talking to someone. . Reported matter to police, where officers came after 2 weeks delay . So as no misunderstanding have for say,, Bristol Evening Post recording at Patchway police station, where police told rarely home, gave email address told to email when they wished to contact, today suggest no excuse 2 week delay. . We are told by police, your neighbours property also being vandalised by travellers , on this day, he warned them off, where he reported issue to police. This does not ring true, good relationship with travellers as male officer aware,,,,,,seen him at library, on Fridays travellers for years are at Patchway library on course, where I am every Friday, no conflict.

Question 9 to police summary…. from officers statement allegations ,,,,can you confirm neighbour reported alleged crime to you, travellers vandalising property, can you please confirm when he reported. . Can I ask ,,,,you were aware from allegations of neighbour, of my property being vandalised, when was incident recorded by you, and why did it take 2 weeks to contact me. Further why did it take 2 officers to attend, further considering time sending 2 officers, did you enquire from neighbours if they saw anything. Further will try after your reply to trace boy as witness, neighbour wasting police time, eg place card in shop, with 100.00 award taken from my state pension, if fails could use say Evening Post ,local TV channels leave 100.00 with them from my pension, so they can pay boy after publicity for conviction,,,,waste of police time. Further with your reply can display allegations of neighbour with travellers at library on Fridays. Further can I refer to people in greenhouses should not throw stones, could well be one night travellers may throw brick throw vehicles windows in neighbours forecourt if matter not resolved.

2/ Accept paper can not name anyone, however ask paper to consider running story allegations of travellers vandalising property ,did any see anything ,100.00 award, which I could leave in cash with newspaper

3/ Need to cite historic document of 2017,can I please paste,,,,,,that,,, I had sympathy with police, they did investigate, malfeasance in public office courts ignoring applications for years, perjury issue where contacted Bristol county court, where told judges/ staff immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue was via JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office], told we can not help you. However as they state, JCIO ,via statute as criminal offences could not investigate,

Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )

further from CPS [crown prosecution service ] document on malfeasance in public office,,,, HMCS were corrupting and frustrating the judicial process, misleading the police, as we ask police today,in one of questions, ,,as judges convicted,,,eg police mislead by HMCS, ,,,,,one of questions asked today,,,

QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PASTED FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU AGAIN CITED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE]

· Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140

· Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380

· Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32

· Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451

· Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702

· Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226

· Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91

· Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747

· Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245

· County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429

· Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387

· Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505

· Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067

Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]

bent.com

, Entitled to legal aid ,however no one would take on as it involved corruption in the court,,eg ,,,,,,we deal with judiciary every day do not want to take on,had to do judicial review application on my own. We obtain judgement where need advice…….. to show point long lists of legal firms in email ,copied my MP into email , saying if someone could advise to please contact and copy my MP into reply, no replies as before. Position now court has confirmed they would look at new application ,have given reference number , however due to fee required can not even do application myself. Can I refer to human right act under Article 6

126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:……..

We have watertight case from below , from Insp O Mahonys letter where you will see police admit my claim, .All I have is my state pension, can not afford 528.00.We have moral issue of lawyers, we have barrister who said he would consider papers if a lawyer sent papers to him. We do however need further information, before I take matter into my own hands, as with damage to my property, with further help from paper,,,,, as coming to end of my life, no one now left to give home to where ask paper to give to deserving people. The police are aware historically as taking matters in to my own hands with cardiac arrest while in police custody where moved to hospital Planned cardiac surgery declined, hope to die in police custody, over historic issue, to expose and obtain removal of judges. This is not issue of allegations the whole issue is of FACTS ADMIITTED BY POLICE/HMCS [HM court service] . You may say ,which raises other issues for paper, why not ask lawyer ,via Legal Aid, to act, in 2017 tried told numerous times , NO MORAL FIBER this is issue of corruption at the court we deal with these people every week we do not want to take them on ,,,,went outside area where no help. We have emailed same people again, copied MP asking if someone could please help,with present issue before court of appeal, as we had reply from court of appeal, where Master confirmed he would accept application ,,,,DO WE HAVE A WATERTIGHT CASE TO GO BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL CAN NOT DO MYSELF DUE TO COURT FEE 528.00 breach of Article 6,,,,,,,,,With legal aid could return to court.

So ask questions do I have watertight case, where have most of evidence today, however seeking final nail for Legal aid board. With legal aid they would pay court fees. So will show I have watertight case,will ask MP to send papers to Legal aid board, for granting of legal aid.

If need be at end will take matters into my own hands, eg arrested every week ,before sent to prison. We have friend who is terminally ill, agreed to drive me to police station/court where have 5l tins of paint given to me when she moved by Ms Bowyer please see scan 10573 to throw in doorways to show injustice,,,, in prison,,,,3 ,websites for each judge,,,startes for 99p/year ,,,,, can name judges in websites eg www.HHJCottercorruptand bent.com . Contacted graffiti artist , he has 4 friends on same night different parts of Bristol can paint on public buildings www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com,,,,,shoplifting every week to get to prison ,,,,.

4/ As ombudsman and MP stated they can not get involved in court judgements, as you can see already ombudsman issued a reference, In historic case element already had compensation of 150.00 over another element.

THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE. . The ombudsman process in Appendix 4 Tactically HMCS [HM court service] have made a big mistake, statute ,,,,complain to court,,,,,not satisfied go to Resolver, not satisfied escalate, not satisfied send evidence to your MP to look at merits of case to see if he will refer to ombudsman,,,,,,,,,,,,,,coming up to 2 years, still at Resolver stage, where HMCS wanted to go direct to ombudsman , now inform ombudsman we want to go to escalate stage first. Well you want to go to escalate stage , then I require information to do escalate application. If direct to ombudsman then I would not have input into questions asked, eg can not dictate questions put to HMCS ,the ombudsman would have been conducting his/her investigations as they feel fit. Further seek answers under ,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Application to Bristol county court 6.12.2017 via email, HMCS stance we did not get and in 2017 HMCS were utterly unaware of possible application. OMBUDSMAN ISSUE eg as not read not considered ask for refund of fee.

FACTS Note sent to HHJCotter with N244 form, eg what I want court to do, please see sample of form in scan N244, where asked to pay fee. Retired district judge advised a new N244 form and application, under

Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,

Advised to seek information to do application at the court where visit recorded, 5.12.2017, Mr Blair refused to supply evidence needed for my claim to succeed, utter breach of Article 6 eg refused to let me obtain evidence from file

,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Further had printer problem so would do after 5.12.2017, so evidence withheld, from recording just let me see N244 form for record need to leave message on it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,application, not to be sent to HHJCotter, until amendment sent.

On way home visited library sent email, for years saying to HMCS did you get email.

FOR MR BLAIR

At library BT site has been down , will email tonight at home.

Required as you will see to change a few dates in new revised application eg if sent now third party could say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,we were not aware until 4.00 pm could not be expected to say today if we wish to add a comment for HHJCotter,

P JONES

Playing Devils Advocate have asked over 10 times to HMCS did you get email,,,court receipt below WHERE WE ASK AGAIN TODAY

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>

05/12/2017 16:17

1

To:

E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

To:

E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

Sent

Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court

Please retain this email as confirmation that your document has been received.

We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days.

If your email is regarding a complaint, please allow 10 working days for your concerns to be investigated and a response provided. For further guidance please refer to the EX343 on the Justice Website.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Application emailed 6.12.2017,,,retired judge advised as no reply to 5.12.2017 email to email 7.12.2017,,eg

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.

AGAIN COURT RECEIPT

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>

07/12/2017 09:59

1

To:

E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

To:

E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

Sent

Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court

Please retain this email as confirmation that your document has been received.

We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days.

If your email is regarding a complaint, please allow 10 working days for your concerns to be investigated and a response provided. For further guidance please refer to the EX343 on the Justice Website.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Still no reply, as email 21.12.2017 and 29.12.2017,,,CONSIDER MR FOWLERS LETTER YOUR ENQUIRES WILL NOT BE ANSWERED JUST FILED. Consider email of 29.12.2017

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,

DID ANYONE READ THIS EMAIL IF THEY DID AWARE OF NEW APPLICATION AFTER 5.12.2017 YES HHJCOTTER READ EMAIL

Can I refer to Lord Goldring judgement many years ago,,,,utterly legally flawed hearing your appeal without transcript, although getting verdict very badly wrong not reason to grant judicial review,,Srickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132, and award to Bristol court of 500.00 would be quashed, [never forgiven for judgement] why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork] As every date wrong in judgement of 9.1.2018, we may ask what drugs/intoxication was Cotter on. , need evidence to do application to Administration court, can I refer to scan Cotter late where Cotter confirms he read email 29.12.2017 so aware of amendment of 6.12.2017 sent.

HOW CAN HMCS STATE WE WERE NOT AWARE OF APLICATIONS THEY HAVE FROM ABOVE COURT RECEIPTS COTTER AWARE OF AMENDED APPLICATION. OR ARE HMCS SAYING RECEIPTS ARE FORGED WE SEEK THEIR REPLIES. OMBUDSMAN ISSUE NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS. SIMPLE QUESTION WERE HMCS AWARE OF APPLICATION. COTTER READ EMAIL 29.12.2017 SO AWARE OF AMENDED APPLICATION.

HMCS WANT TO CALL BLACK IS WHITE I ACCEPT CAN NOT ANSWER MY CORRESPONDENCE,AS THEY CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS,,,,,,IS EMAIL 7.12.2017 ON SYSTEM WE HAVE COURT RECEIPT,,,????????????????? IF THEY ADMIT COMPELLING EVIDENCE AND REPAY FEE THEN AWARE LEGATTS JUDGEMENT AT COURT OF APPEAL IN TATTERS eg IN JUDGEMENT FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION. WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS BARRISTERS WHO CONTACTED ME ALL OVER THE COUNTRY CITING,,

,,,,,who saw my website,, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,REASON TO GRANT APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT.We have had High court judge asking question,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing an appeal –REJECTED ON JUDGEMENT OF COTTER BUT COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION ,,,WHAT DID HE READ A DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED,,,FURTHER COTTERS JUDGEMENT ON FACTS WRONG eg WHY I WENT TO POLICE.

5/ Can I cite female QC barrister and judge who saw my website, who stated there is cornerstone issue in cases [Cotters is that I went to police malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, one of questions asked to police do you have any evidence to show this,,,NO ] barrister stated say I am sitting as a judge, [of course would never come to hearing] defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, at hearing Counsel for defendant states not my client on this day, my client in closed prison, in your case why you went to police, cornerstone issue, If it was malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, and Eaga perjury issue, both criminal offences, so police advice we can not investigate, take to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] was wrong, and Cotters judgement in TATTERS.,,,,NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE JCIO via statute state can not investigate they are criminal allegations as they confirmed, via statute can not investigate, .

Barrister told me to report matter to police malfeasance in public office HMCS ignoring applications for years, plus Eaga perjury issue, Sgt Price asks for CPS [crown prosecution service ] document on malfeasance in public office and to explain my complaint, later defined the FEDJCAB complete document, a subsection defined FEDJCAB document [fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent] eg

CPS DOCUMENT IN BLACK PASTE,,,, MY COMMENTS WERE IN RED as FORMAT sent to Sgt Price WHY I WENT TO POLICE

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

AlSO SENT TO POLICE LETTER SCAN APPENDIX 9 enclosed

Pre action protocol document for judicial review had to be produced via statute please see scan Annex A. [my application paragraphs]

5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, scan 10389, [SAME REFERENCE TODAY] to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants,[eg police] warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

ALSO FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL STATUTE ANNEX A TITLE

11/ THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY ,,,

BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.

SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED 1 AND 13.2.2013 RELATE TO SCAN APPENDIX 2.

.In questions asked today we say to police/HMCS was FEDJCABcomplete in pre action protocol for judicial review , was via statute pre action protocol document paragraphs titles denoted by CPR was par 5 and 7 and 11 citings above in pre action protocol document. We then ask was Cotter denying evidence in front of him, utter breach of Article 6 . ,,,,,,,,,, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....

Can I refer to actual judicial review application,,,,

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

THIS IS NOT APPLICATON AGAINST COURT

You will see simple question to police did I come to you malfeasance in public office as courts for years ignoring applications, we ask police/HMCS are above in file for pre action protocol document, we ask police do you have any evidence I came to you as malfeasance n public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer. Look at police letter scan 10594 where Insp O Mahony confirms recorded call with police we did not know offender, was it HMCS staff who did not send applications to Denyer, or Denyer. Consider above application in judicial review,,,, . ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

BUT DENYER RETIRED IN 2017 SO MY APPLICATION CAN NOT RELATE TO DISSATISFACTION OF DENYER,,,,IT STATES ,,,,even today applications ignored.

6/ Application in judicial review..

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote]

Can I refer to IPCC [independent police complaints commission] regulations

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

Can I refer to scan 10594 where police admit IPCC regulations not followed,in this IPCC investigation, eg Galloway never talked to me. Can I refer to scan 10475 10494 where police admit on the 22.7.2017 I state in email ,, with no replies to 11 questions, eg have you contacted lawyer whose application ignored, , have you talked to my MP, .look at scan Appendix 2 ect , whose application to court also ignored, would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017, ,,what did police state in above letter,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

,so email 24.7.2017 can not be an appeal, WAITING FOR REPLY TO 11 QUESTIONS

Can I refer as barrister cited to me,,,case law,,,

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed

Can I refer as cited further also in judicial review application ,,,, to local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017

SO APPICATION JUDICIARY STATE IS VEXATIOUS ??????????????

POLICE ADMIT FACTS . OR ISSUE FOR EVENING POST ,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.can I refer to citing IN TEXT ,,,,,is this High court judges protecting their own.

WE MAY ASK CONSIDER WWW.CORRUPTIONAVONSOMERSETPOLICE.COM IF JUDGEMENT OF COTTER BIGGER LEGATT CORRECT WHY HAVE POLICE NOT STARTED LITAGATION FOR LIBEL.

HMCS … ANSWER QUESTION WE HAVE ASKED IN THIS DOCUMENT BELOW ,,,ASKED FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

FURTHER ASK POLICE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS

From questions with already obtained evidence from police/HMCS can show Biggers judgement wrong in every aspect. We have restraining order because you appealed these facts. We have further questions in respect to police email also. Look at Biggers judgement,,,the facts of case not in Cotters judgement, did not read application, did not go to police malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer, and you had legal basis of claim.

7/ a/ The references will be sent in further email, we ask for reply to questions by the 14.1.2018. With no replies ask my MP to ask for reply, as would need evidence on merits of claim before he sends papers to the Legal Aid board.

b/ The questions tabulated under questions to HMCS /POLICE in references email can parties please reply as this tabulated document.

c// With replies can do escalate stage to HMCS , before it goes to ombudsman .Today under no circumstances will I be involved in correspondence, just need replies to do escalate stage.

d/ Could parties if reply do via email, if need to do via letter could you please email to confirm letter on its way.

e/ We ask final question to HMCS number 21 We had no reply to question is fee 528.00. Can I refer to HMCS document

Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.

Eg to vary, amend order, Master stated HMCS would consider new application.

Can I request CPS that document today is forwarded to a judge. We have in utterly cowardly way Legatt quoting restraining order of 2016, where in 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 applications to remove. We know why ignored, as at hearing DEFENDANTS ASKED THAT JUDGEMENT STATED THIS. THIS REJECTED BY DJWATSON MY 3 APPLICATIONS UNDER

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]

HMCS RECENTLY VIA COMPENSATION PAID 150.00 IF I LODGED AT COURT WOULD THE COURT OBTAIN TRANSCRIPT,,,,IF IT SHOWED APPLICATION REJECTED BY DJWATSON WOULD COURT REPAY THE 150.00

eg GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today,]

IS IT ALRIGHT TO JUDGES TO MAKE COWARDLY ATTACKS

We have issue of court of appeal application, as computer crash emailed court to obtain application at conclusion of hearing, again emails ignored. Court states binned after hearing as regulations. Judge advised from a theoretical point of view true, however this was just a warning to back up, if you required offered to pay cost of return there was no reason why your request not made, further if not doing court had duty to inform you, so you could ask for sections you require to be photocopied, with you paying court copy fees. DO YOU HAVE OWN COPY OF APPLICATION IF SO FREE OF CHARGE CAN YOU COPY FILE ACCEPT POSTAGE /PACKING CHARGE

CAN WE PLEASE DEFINE THIS DOCUMENT AS DOCUMENT DEC 2019

INTRODUCTION , Police ask what questions do you want answered. We have issue as events have taken over where now my MP involved, he request address in each contact 31 BIBURY AVE BRISTOL, , HMCS [HM court system] involved ,ombudsman involved , CASE NUMBER C2097203 as we seek further extended answers from you . Further via election know MP, can do this document as we know MP, From my website

www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com I make no apology for name dropping , retired district judge, QC a female barrister and judge, and even High court judge ect who contacted,,,,,after seeing my web site. Can I please refer to previous complaint to you, which was removed with apology, can I refer to email to your Insp O Mahony,,,,,,,,,,,,not only removal and apology, but I stated you did not give me good service, it was EXCELLENT service thank you. This was a issue where as I could not move ambulance staff had to break in to remove me to hospital, in hospital for 4 days, coming home just small piece of wood over broken glass, where water entered my home. As Insp O Mahony stated ,ambulance staff contacted us as security issue, we arranged for WHOLE window to be boarded up, however contractors are not police staff, they are independent of police. Of course complaint against police utterly without merit , removed, where matter settled via litagation with contractor. Via regulations Insp O Mahony stated to close case, via regulations need to talk to you , NOTE THIS IN RESPECT TO HISTORIC ISSUE LATER, where I stated due to historic issue would not talk until I obtained reply to questions. In text have questions in respect to your email above, ,however further questions answers required by my MP ombudsman and me. . In terms of this different historic case, we ask questions please see below, plus again asking questions not only to you, but HMCS concerning historic case. The reply in ambulance case in scan 10594 from Insp O Mahony over historic issue, eg reply to my questions. From start must be made clear under no circumstances will there be any discussion, WITH ANY PARTY just require replies please to questions so I can do escalate stage , then we can go to ombudsman, and my MP, over this issue ,,,,ISSUE with ombudsman has NOTHING TO DO WITH COURT JUDGEMENTS, as MP /ombudsman stated if it did they could not help, please note ombudsman have issued reference number already above. The ombudsman process in Appendix 4 Tactically HMCS have made a big mistake, statute proceedure ,,,,complain to court,,,,,not satisfied go to Resolver, not satisfied escalate, not satisfied send evidence to your MP to look at merits of case to see if he will refer to ombudsman,,,,,,,,,,,,,,coming up to 2 years, still at Resolver stage, where HMCS wanted to go direct to ombudsman , now inform ombudsman we want to go to escalate stage first. Well you want to go to escalate stage , then I require information to do escalate application. If direct to ombudsman then I would not have input into questions asked, eg can not dictate questions put to HMCS ,the ombudsman would have been conducting his/her investigations as they feel fit. Further seek answers under ,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

2/ Bristol Evening Post covered in this reply. The present complaint to police relates to vandalisation of my property. Coming home a boy of about 12 stopped me saying, your next door neighbour vandalising your property. Accept paper can not name anyone, however offering 100.00 award if people come forward as witness, eg did anyone see vandalisation taking place. . . Would leave 100.00 cash from my pension with paper. We seek further help from Bristol Evening Post as coming to end of my life, no one now left to give home to where ask paper to give to deserving people. The police are aware historically as taking matters in to my own hands with cardiac arrest while in police custody where moved to hospital Planned cardiac surgery declined, hope to die in police custody, over historic issue, to expose and obtain removal of judges. This is not issue of allegations the whole issue is of FACTS ADMIITTED BY POLICE/HMCS [HM court service] . You may say ,which raises other issues for paper, why not ask lawyer ,via Legal Aid, to act, in 2017 tried told numerous times , NO MORAL FIBER this is issue of corruption at the court we deal with these people every week we do not want to take them on ,,,,went outside area where no help. We have emailed same people again, copied MP asking if someone could please help,with present issue before court of appeal, as we had reply from court of appeal, where Master confirmed he would accept application ,,,,DO WE HAVE A WATERTIGHT CASE TO GO BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL CAN NOT DO MYSELF DUE TO COURT FEE 528.00 breach of Article 6,,,,,,,,,With legal aid could return to court.

Granting of legal aid

123. However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

124. The question whether or not Article 6 requires the provision of legal representation to an individual litigant will depend upon the specific circumstances of the case (ibid.; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 61; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, § 48). What has to be ascertained is whether, in the light of all the circumstances, the lack of legal aid would deprive the applicant of a fair hearing (ibid., § 51). [ note ,,,can not get hearing without legal aid due to ,,financial situation of litigant,,,please see 126]

126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

So ask questions do I have watertight case, where have most of evidence today, however seeking final nail for Legal aid board. With legal aid they would pay court fees. So will show I have watertight case,will ask MP to send papers to Legal aid board, for granting of legal aid.

If need be at end will take matters into my own hands, eg arrested every week ,before sent to prison. We have friend who is terminally ill, agreed to drive me to police station/court where have 5l tins of paint given to me when she moved by Ms Bowyer by Ms Bowyer please see scan 10573 to throw in doorways to show injustice,,,, in prison,,,,3 ,websites for each judge,,,startes for 99p/year ,,,,, can name judges in websites eg www.HHJCottercorruptand bent.com . Contacted graffiti artist , he has 4 friends on same night different parts of Bristol can paint on public buildings www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com,,,,,shoplifting every week to get to prison ,,,,.

3/ Need to cite historic document of 2017,,,,that,,, I had sympathy with police, they did investigate, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, perjury issue where contacted Bristol county court, where told judges/ staff immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue was via JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office], we will not help you. However as they state, JCIO ,via statute as criminal offences could not investigate,

Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )

further from CPS [crown prosecution service ] document on malfeasance in public office,,,, HMCS were corrupting and frustrating the judicial process, misleading the police, as we ask police today,in one of questions, ,,as judges convicted,,,eg police mislead by HMCS, ,,,,,one of questions asked today,,,

QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PASTED FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU AGAIN CITED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE]

Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140

Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380

Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32

Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451

Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702

Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226

Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91

Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747

Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245

County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429

Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387

Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505

Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067

Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]

bent.com

4/ May help in historic issue if we consider a possible skeletal argument to judgement of Legatt LJ , to tease out issues,then to supply more detail. THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE AS IT WERE ,,JUST A BRICK IN THE WALL………..HOWEVER UTTERLY NOT INVOLVED IN JUDGEMENTS. FATAL TO HMCS. Eg Legatts judgement states facts of case in Cotters judgement , but Cotter did not read application, read wrong papers, .as numerous barristers cited Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legaatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants,. Lets clear up an issue of possible HMCS defence , we did not get email of 6.12.2017 application and in 2017 utterly unaware of possible application, sole issue for ombudsman . CITED BY COTTER NOTE SENT IN NOV 2017 HOWEVER ALSO IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IT CONTAINED THE ISSUE TODAY

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]

NEXT STEP THE ECHR [eur court of human rights]

So was never an issue over JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.

MERITS OF APPLICATION BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL

4. 1/ COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 ,READ WRONG PAPERS WHAT DID HE READ. LEGATTS LJ JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION. MANY BARRISTERS HAVE CITED, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legaatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants,. We have application via email to HHJCotter, on the 6.12.2017. with replacement N244 form, recording at court 5.12.2017,,,,,N244 old form to be removed, write on N244 form, amendments to follow, where pay court fee,,,,,,Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court , HMCS stance we never obtained application and HMCS in 2017 were utterly unaware of possible application, of 6.12.2017?????????OMBUDSMAN ISSUE as seek refund of fee as application removed. I ACCEPT HMCS CAN NOT ACCEPT OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE AS LEGATT LJ STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION.,, EVIDENCE LATER TO OMBUDSMAN ,,,,SO HMCS,defence ,,,WE WERE UNAWARE OF APPLICATION ??????NONSENCE

Email 7.12.2017 STATED

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.

DID HMCS OBTAIN EMAIL OF 5.12.2017 6.12.2017 and 7.12.2017 SO AWARE OF NEW AMENDED APPLICATION UNDER GOC,,,,,OF 6.12.2017 AND NEW N244 FORM,,,,HMCS STANCE WE DID NOT GET APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 AND IN 2017 HMCS WERE UTTERLY UNAWARE OF APPLICATIONOF 6.12.2017 YES YOU WERE AWARE AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE SAID NOT JUDICIAL LANGUAGE HOWEVER THE BASTARDS HAVE REMOVED APPLICATION ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN eg SEE court receipt

Bristol County, E-Filing <e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk>

07/12/2017 09:59

1

Your email has been safely received by the Bristol County Court

Please retain this email as confirmation that your document has been received.

We will endeavour to process or respond to your email within 5 working days. However please note that if your document requires referral to a Judge you may not get a reply for up to 15 working days,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,END OF COURT RECEIPT EVIDENCE

We have recording at court of 5.12.2017 that N244 removed not to send to Cotter, replacement to follow, with amended application.

We have problems with Cotters judgement ,what drugs /intoxication was he on, [reference judgement of Lord Goldring many years ago why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork] as every date wrong in judgement of 9.1.2018, need evidence to do application to Administration court, can I refer to scan Cotter late

[THIS AS OBTAINED DAMAGED BY ROYAL MAIL CAN I REFER TO RECORDING WITH HMCS DEMANDING FEE IF REPLACED] where Cotter in judgement confirms correct ONE date should have been 29.12.2017 for email, WHICH HE READ ,,,what did it state,,,

Email 29.12.2017 , under ECHR [European court of human rights, ] concept of Equality of arms , where long running issue with concept, with HMCS in cases defendants can get replies same day, my questions just ignored,,,,where for example in AOIBS346 /746 defendants ask questions, where we have replies for example ,,,, Ms Smith,,,,asked court this morning, [same day] ,,Smith court have replied, they state,,,,,,,,,,,where my enquires ignored for years can I quote HMCS Mr Fowler old reply for information to do judicual review ,,,,,,will just be filed this court will not reply just file, as they did 5 7 12 29 dec 2017….utter breach of Article 6 ,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

EMAIL 29.12.2017 STATED

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,

Eg was asking did you get emails of 5, 6, 21, 29 of Dec,2017,,

BUT CORRUPT AND BENT COTTER ADMIT HE READ EMAIL OF 29.12.2017 ,,,eg NEW N244 FORM WITH AMENDMENT,,,WE HAVE BEEN ASKING CAN WE SEE N244 CONSIDERED CAN WE SEE AMENDMENT CONDIDERED .HMCS CAN NOT REPLY AS WOULD ADMIT APPLICATION 6.12.2017 OBTAINED. FURTHER IF DID NOT OBTAIN THEN COTTER DID NOT HAVE A N244 FORM eg WHAT I AM ASKING COURT TO DO ,,,DID NOT CONSIDER APPLICATION WHERE I REQUIRE REFUND OF FEE. HMCS CAN NOT REFUND FEE AS LEGATT LJ IN JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT. All I would need to do in application Cotter did not read application of 6.12.2017 , Legatt mind already made up states facts of case in Cotters judgement. IN APPLICATION TO LEGATT AWARE OF THIS WHERE ASK FOR ORDER TO LOOK AT FILE TO DO MY APPLICATION,,after my investigations ,,,EG IS EMAILS 7.12.2017 IN FILE ,,,,SCAN 10547 WHICH LEGATT IGNORED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS, AS HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED ,,,,GENERAL PUBLIC MAY ASK IS THIS PUBLIC SCHOLBOY JUDGES PROTECTING THEIR OWN

THR WHOLE CASE FALLS HERE DID NOT READ APPLICATION HOWEVER TO CONCLUDE LEGATT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT…IS THIS A DOCUMENT COTTER PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS…

4. 2/ ISSUE DID NOT GO TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,WE HAVE ROYAL MAIL PROFF OF POSTING WHERE TAPE RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE SENT TO BIGGER WITH FEDJCABCOMPLETE DOCUMENT,,,, ,Can I cite female QC barrister and judge who saw my website, who stated there is cornerstone issue in cases [Cotters is that I went to police malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, one of questions asked to police do you have any evidence to show this,,,no] barrister stated say I am sitting as a judge, [of course would never come to hearing] defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, at hearing Counsel for defendant states not my client on this day, my client in closed prison, in your case why you went to police, cornerstone issue, If it was malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, and Eaga perjury issue, both criminal offences, so police advice we can not investigate, take to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office] was wrong, and Cotters judgement in TATTERS.,,,,NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE JCIO via statute state can not investigate they are criminal allegations as they confirmed, via statute can not investigate, . Not withstanding this did not go to police as ,,,malfeasance in public office dissatisfaction with judgement of HHJDenyer, can I refer to FEDJCAB document below this in pre action protocol document for judicial review document also the pre action protocol document had to be produced via CPR statute Annex A please see scan annex A paragraphs scan eg par 5 and 7 eg statute define 7/ the issue YES THE ISSUE

AlSO SENT TO POLICE LETTER SCAN 13.4,2017 enclosed APPENDIX 9 THIS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT BEFORE COTTER WHERE HE STATES YOU WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER BEFORE COTTER/BIGGER HOW DO YOU COME TO JUDGEMENT I WENT AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER from pre action protocol paragraphs,,,COTTER YOUR CALLING BLACK IS WHITE YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT FROM SCAN ANNEX A STATUTE PARAGRAPHS

5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, scan 10389, [SAME REFERENCE TODAY] to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants,[eg police] warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

ALSO FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL STATUTE ANNEX A TITLE

11/ THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY ,,,

BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.

SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED 1 AND 13.2.2013 RELATE TO SCAN APPENDIX 2.

.In questions asked we say to police/HMCS was FEDJCABcomplete in pre action protocol for judicial review , was via statute pre action protocol document paragraphs titles denoted by CPR was par 5 and 7 and 11 citings above in pre action protocol document. We then ask was Cotter denying evidence in front of him, utter breach of Article 6 .

The judgement of Cotter is utter breach of Article 6 to deny evidence before him,,,

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....

We ask police do you have any evidence I came to you malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer.

4 3/ IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST POLICE WHERE THEY ADMIT MY COMPLAINT PLEASE SEE SCANS 10594 10475 10494 ,

Can I refer to IPCC [independent police complaints commission] regulations

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

4 4/ Cotter /Bigger wrong to say legal basis of claim not indicted , can I refer to advice from retired judge, make issue clear to judiciary as soon as possible, line one page one of judicial review application, . Can I refer to local barrister and judge paper on malfeasance in public office,,,,

Can I refer as cited this further also was in judicial review application ,,,, from local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, admitted in scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017

WHAT DID POLICE STATE IN LETTER SCAN 10494/75

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

SO APPICATION JUDICIARY STATE IS VEXATIOUS ??????????????

POLICE ADMIT FACTS . OR ISSUE FOR EVENING POST ,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.

MORE DETAIL

a/ Application today that application is not heard by Legatt LJ please, [we have High court judge stating making no allegations, however ,,,,general public may ask with compelling evidence,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own, of course we do not know judiciary education] ,although from Legatts order he would solely judge the further application, , the Master at court of appeal ,,,,no promises stated ,,,would be read by another judge or Legatt. as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of Legatt from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,I went to police as malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer however in email 13.7.2018 Legatt sent the FEDJCAB document,

DID NOT GO TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AS NUMEROUS BARRISTERS CITED ,,, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legaatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,starting point,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS NOT ONLY DID COTTER NOT READ APPLICATION CASE FALLS HERE ON FACTS,,, eg why I went to defendants,.please see b/

b/ , lets consider Legatts judgement. THE FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WHICH STATES I WENT TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER UTTER NONSENCE EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL UNTRUE

Can I refer to email of the 13.7.2018 under Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court , where FEDJCAB document sent to Legatt,,,,

Can I please refer to initial recorded conversation with Sgt Price where asked to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office, [NOT MISFEASANCE AS STATED IN JUDGEMENT] which I dissected eg FEDJCABcomplete document BEFORE ALL JUDGES eg

eg CPS DOCUMENT IN BLACK PASTE,,,, MY COMMENTS WERE IN RED as FORMAT sent to Sgt Price WHY I WENT TO POLICE

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

AlSO SENT TO POLICE LETTER SCAN APPENDIX 9 enclosed

Can I cite female QC barrister and judge who saw my website, who stated there is cornerstone issue in cases cited above .

For years Bristol/Cardiff courts ignoring applications, where had enough picket at court, leaflet handed out scan picket mainly over case 2YJ03757. Barrister told me to stop and report matter to police, seen by Sgt Price, where she asks for me to paste CPS [crown prosecution service] paper on malfeasance in public office and insert in text my complaint to police, later defined the FEDJCABcomplete document, subsection defined FEDJCAB, which shows issue FEDJCAB,,[,fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent]. Cited above

The FEDJCAB in pre action protocol document for judicial review, further via statute this document had to be produced via CPR paragraphs under Annex A, please see scan ANNEX A eg MY ACTUAL APPLICATION ABOVE eg PARAGRAPHS 5 AND 7 ,,,

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

ALSO FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL STATUTE ANNEX A

11/ THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY

BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy.

SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED 1 AND 13.2.2013 RELATE TO SCAN APPENDIX 2.

THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SERVED BY EMAIL 16.9.2017 TO HMCS AND POLICE.

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).So ask in questions to police/HMCS today was FEDJCAB PAR 5 AND 7 IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW.

Where Cotter states in judgement ,,you went malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer. What he is doing is denying evidence in front of him utter breach of Article 6.

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....

Application to HHJBigger ,,in judicial review , quotes,below in judicial review application to Bigger…………….,,eg

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

THIS IS NOT APPLICATON AGAINST COURT,,,,end of quote]

[can I refer before next quote to above,,,,,[malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

So issue why I went to police malfeasance in public office, where ,HMCS state Denyer retired in 2017, so malfeasance in public office allegation CAN NOT RELATE TO JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,STATE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 ????????????NEXT QUOTE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION.

THE ISSUE

1/ With facts you will see where events relate to this application against police,. You will see advised by barrister to contact police over criminal activity, picketing at court over 2YJ03757, ongoing new issues,,,. . We have reply no evidence of criminal activity, ,,,,, Wednesbury unreasonableness. Statute regulations in any investigations not followed, never contacted by investigation officer. Appeal allowed,,,, so ask questions [11 questions ] plus others ,,,,when did investigation officer contact me, all calls in/out recorded no mobile phone., emails ignored Required as in appeal form had to tick boxes statutory regulations were followed, ask when, all correspondence ignored. So email to defendants if you do not answer questions by 28.7.2017 would do appeal to you.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[further list these 11 questions in judicial review application, ]eg ,,,,questions asked ,,

QUESTION 2 Have you interviewed Mr Till. ? [suggest in all these questions , no, no investigations undertaken. ] Had call assume from a district judge, as he talks about my court and other applications to the court. He states ,,,,,,,,,,,,do not approve of some of your applications to my court however will not stand by while corruption is going on, HHJDenyer/court out to get you, they have made a mistake, and forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing, 2YJ03757 From transcript of previous claim, which I won, 7 documents date/stamped by court as received removed from file, from transcript, DJWatson,,,,,,,,,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,,,,,,,,. As aware of corruption, court out to get me recorded conversation with Mr Blair at court. From recording he states yes only one now on computer records, Mr Till was told to send to Administration court Cardiff. We have judicial review judgement I had not asked for oral hearing to correct earlier judgement, this recording proves I did make application, although only proff required these date/stamped by court as received . So ask Bristol/Cardiff court for statement, it proves my case for the court of appeal.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,How does Mr Till make records of things he sends, how does Cardiff court make records of documents received. From file is there any record of this application, for example although all correspondence ignored, it would be fatal to court of appeal judgement, confirming a miscarriage of justice if any record of these applications. For example we ask why note on file in Cardiff not to discuss and to refer enquires to court manager Ms Weaver . We have string of emails to Ms Weaver ignored. Suggested to Sg Price a member of police staff in Cardiff obtain file, and look at records of obtaining documents, From recording not sure in malfeasance claim, did Mr Till ignore court order to ask HHJDenyer again for oral hearing, The court would never accept an application [date/stamped by court] if it did not have the court order . The court order clearly states to make application to HHJDenyer. Mr Till deals with appeals did he ignore court order by not sending to HHJDenyer, eg offence of malfeasance in public office, he is in charge of appeals, he has duty to send application to HHJDenyer, or did he send, and HHJDenyer ignored and told him to send to Cardiff court. Suggest if HHJDenyer did this then malfeasance in public office, from above definition of offence ,,,,,,,,,,,,failure to perform his duty,,,,. The issue with Mr Till taken up AT THIS TIME WITH COURT MANAGER MR FOWLER UNDER COMPLAINT HOWEVER COMPLAINT IGNORED numerous follow up emails ignored. Complaint as enquire what did Mr Till do, however did not know about malfeasance at this time. Did Sg Price make this investigation. ,,,,END OF QUOTE

Can I refer to confirmation from police/ HMCS these quotes in judicial review application, [the question asked in document DEC2019 today, under Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,]

Can I refer to police letter scan 10594 where police confirm the issue from tape recording of meeting with Sgt Price , eg is the malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, a Denyer or staff issue, eg in this case in 2013

The female QC stated Cotter/Bigger was never going to grant application as turkeys voting for Xmas, ,,,,inviting police in to investigate their courts criminal behaviour.

From court of appeal state, Biggers judgement the facts of case , no you just copied Cotters wrong judgement ,,,did you read application, judge stated recently my clerk prepares application,,,did clerk cite that issue is dissatisfaction with judgement of Denyer.

c/ Best way to combine next issues in one paragraph eg it was vexatious to make allegations against police, [which they admit] and nowhere was it shown legal basis of claim. Retired district judge stated, retired, will not do application ,however make issue clear to judiciary asap, eg the actual application pasted,,,

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote]

Can I refer to IPCC [independent police complaints commission] regulations

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

Can I refer to scan 10594 where police admit IPCC regulations not followed,in this IPCC investigation, eg Galloway never talked to me. Can I refer to scan 10475 10494 where police admit on the 22.7.2017 I state in email ,, with no replies to 11 questions, eg have you contacted lawyer .look at scan Appendix 2 ect , whose application to court also ignored, would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017, ,,what did police state in above letter,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

,so email 24.7.2017 can not be an appeal.

Can I refer as barrister cited to me,,,case law,,,

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed

Can I refer as cited further also in judicial review application ,,,, to local judge and barrister paper on malfeasance[misconduct ]in public office,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police ,,,correlate with actual judicial review application, in a IPCC investigation admit we did not follow IPCC ,regulations ,we never talked to you, scan 10594 and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged scan 10475 10494,,,eg we obtained your email 22.7.2017 where it stated with no answer to questions, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL AS POLICE MAINTAIN IN REPLY OF 24.7.2017

SO APPICATION JUDICIARY STATE IS VEXATIOUS ??????????????

POLICE ADMIT FACTS . OR ISSUE FOR EVENING POST ,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.can I refer to citing above ,,,,,is this High court judges protecting their own.

WE MAY ASK CONSIDER WWW.CORRUPTIONAVONSOMERSETPOLICE.COM IF JUDGEMENT OF COTTER BIGGER LEGATT CORRECT WHY HAVE POLICE NOT STARTED LITAGATION FOR LIBEL.

HMCS … ANSWER QUESTION WE HAVE ASKED IN THIS DOCUMENT BELOW ,,,ASKED FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

FURTHER ASK POLICE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS

From questions with already obtained evidence from police/HMCS can show Biggers judgement wrong in every aspect. We have restraining order because you appealed these facts. We have further questions in respect to police email also.

MAIN TEXT

INTRODUCTION

Litagation issue against police , not court just interested third party, can I please refer to internet site Copwatch, cited to me by barrister, and ask to correlate with todays application.

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……

PARAGRAPH a/ In previous police complaint b/ [please see paragraph e / below ] required information over complaint a/ ,also today in paragraph e/ ,,,,, in respect to todays new complaint denoted c/ in again paragraph e/ ,,,,,also require again also further information from complaint a/. Its evidence required by ombudsman, and my MP,,,, we have set questions. . MP would require answers as asked him to refer on merits of case to ombudsman and the Legal Aid Board, eg these are facts where Mr Jones seeks legal aid, judgement from ombudsman. . You will see also asking HMCS [HM court service ] questions again answers required by my MP and ombudsman, and myself as related to future litigation. Master at court of appeal confirmed I could make application,to remove order, however seek data to do application, , HMCS have ignored emails as I seek data, so todays application. . You will see HMCS have withheld this evidence for 2 YEARS NOW WHERE WE TRY AGAIN TODAY.REMIND PARTIES OF

,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

HMCS IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6

Further delay as HMCS [court of appeal ]has ignored my recent emails, utter breach of Article 6 ,withholding evidence, , however enough is enough as time has come to address issue.

We ask for reply to questions by 14,.1.2020 , with no reply could I please ask my MP to write to parties, as MP would need merit evidence before he refers to various agencies, eg ombudsman,,,,legal aid board ect,,,,

We require for my present MP Jack Lopresti, answers from police, to questions before he refers matter to the Legal Aid board. CAN NOT GET LEGAL AID WHERE ASK MP FOR HELP ...FOR EXAMPLE WILL SEE BARRISTER STATED QUALIFIED TO DO DIRECT ACCESS THIS CASE NOT SUITABLE FOR DIRECT ACCESS ,,,,WOULD CONSIDER PAPERS TO ACT IF A LAWYER SENT PAPERS TO HIM The Legal Aid board and barrister would require,,,,,for example , § his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). ,,eg ECHR [europeaon court of human rights ] case law eg …[Can I please refer to scan Annex C in pre action protocol for judicial review where could not obtain representation ]

Granting of legal aid

123. However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

124. The question whether or not Article 6 requires the provision of legal representation to an individual litigant will depend upon the specific circumstances of the case (ibid.; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 61; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, § 48). What has to be ascertained is whether, in the light of all the circumstances, the lack of legal aid would deprive the applicant of a fair hearing (ibid., § 51).

126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid).

a/ ,,,,Right and access to a court 81. The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76 et seq.). 82. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 83. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim

b/ A right that is practical and effective . The right of access to a court must be “practical and effective” (Bellet v. France, § 38; Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76-79). For the right of access to be effective, an individual must “have a clear, practical opportunity to challenge an act that is an interference with his rights” (Bellet v. France, § 36; Nunes Dias v. Portugal (dec.)

c/ In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:…….. : the excessive amount of security for costs in the context of an application to join criminal proceedings as a civil party (Aït-Mouhoub v. France, §§ 57-58; García Manibardo v. Spain, §§ 38-45); excessive court fees (Kreuz v. Poland, §§ 60-67; Podbielski and PPU Polpure v. Poland, §§ 65-66; Weissman and Others v. Romania, § 42; Georgel and Georgeta Stoicescu v. Romania, §§ 69-70, and conversely, Reuther v. Germany (dec.)). In these cases the Court considered the question of court fees that had been imposed prior to the institution of civil proceedings and had had the effect of hindering access to a court at first instance or at a subsequent stage of the proceedings for applicants who were unable to pay. In Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings [by Legatt LJ] could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court. In cases concerning court fees, the litigant’s conduct should also be taken into accout (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 120);

The state may state we have 3 judges who came to same conclusion that plaintiffs application was vexatious. We have however a High court judge who saw my website asking a question,,,,,,,,,,,[DO NOT KNOW EDUCATION] ,,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own. Consider judgement in scan 10551 with police/HMCS evidence today. ,,,WILL SHOW JUDICIARY JUDGEMENTS WRONG ADMITTED BY PARTIES. POLICE ALREADY ADMIT CLAIM,,,WILL SHOW I WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ]IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS, PERJURY ISSUE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES VIA STATUTE CAN NOT TAKE AS THEY CONFIRM TO JCIO.

1/ Yet another female QC judge and barrister states cornerstone issue why you went to police. As she expands gives theoretical example, say defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, however sitting as a judge Counsel for defendant states not my client was in closed prison on this date. In your case why you went to police. For years HMCS ignoring my applications, picket at court, handing out in and outside court scan picket, where barrister told me to report this issue malfeasance [misconduct ] in public office to police, barrister stated also report Eaga perjury issue, . Recording at police station, why I went to police., from recording,,,,,,,,,,,,ignoring applications for years. Sgt Price requests CPS document on malfeasance in public office and requests via this to explain my complaint , the FEDJCABcomplete document. This FEDJCABcomplete in pre action protocol document for judicial review, further the pre action protocol document had to be produced via CPR template Annex A paragraphs, see scan Annex A , where paragraph 5 called details of matter,,,,,paragraph 7 is called the issue,,,,,section,,,THE DETAILS OF …THESE IN the pre action protocol for judicial review served on police/HMCS ON THE 16.9.2017 by email.

5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to HMCS , particularly Bristol county court [ BCC ], ignored, although enclosed in one case [scan 10389 today] order to make application to the court, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore request to obtain evidence to do applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants, warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

THE DETAILS OF ANY DOCUMENT CONSIDERED RELEVANT AND NECESSSARY

BCC [Bristol county court] Applications 1 and 13.2.2013, 26.2.2016 2.3.2016 26.10.2016 if a reply to application could you please confirm in email, then send copy. ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;END OF QUOTE

SO TRYING TO CONFIRM FOR YEARS APPLICATIONS IGNORED

Did not go to police as malfeasance in public office, as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, further as JCIO state as criminal offences could not take to JCIO. Police utterly aware of this with a earlier identical Ebrahimi case, where their officers jailed, eg ignoring allegations of criminal behaviour. Simple issue as we ask questions, are the above facts correct , from pre action protocol document, did I come to you malfeasance [misconduct] in public office as HMCS ignoring applications for years, further we ask police do you have any evidence I came to you as malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer. SIMPLE QUESTION ABOVE YES OR NO

The FEDJCABcomplete sent to HHJBigger, plus recording with Sgt Price, you can not deal with a corrupt and bent judge . EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT OF A BENT JUDGE ,,STATES WENT MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. SO WE HAVE IF WE ACCEPT THIS CORRUPTION I GO TO SGT PRICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SHE WASTES POLICE TIME ASKING PC BIRD TO INVESTIGATE. I AM SURE IF THIS WAS TRUE SHE WOULD HAVE SAID,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NOTHING TO DO WITH POLICE NOT EVEN CRIMINAL CASE

Can I refer to judicial review application to Bigger,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored…..end of quote

THIS IS ISSUE OF APPLICATIONS IGNORED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE

In terms of issue why I went to police could not be more clear , further as High court judge recently stated, you stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored…..end of quote

Bigger states scan 10551,,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer ,,,,

BUT FROM APPLICATION BIGGER AWARE ISSUE STILL GOING ON IN 2018 .HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED ,,,,,BUT DENYER RETIRED IN MID 2017 ,,,,,SO APPLICATION ISSUE WHAT EVER IT IS DOES NOT RELATE TO DENYER AS RETIRED WELL BEFORE 2018 WHERE YOU CORRELATE MALFEASANCE ISSUE STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,,CAN NOT RELATE TO DENYER ,,,RETIRED IN 2018

2/ Bigger states vexatious to make claim against police, well we may ask look at www.corruptionavonsomersetpolice.com consider judiciary 3 judgements , why have police not started litigation for libel. What was claim before judiciary,,,,

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, [ I TODAY ADD IN BLUE,,, police, stated you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office of court ignoring applications,,,,,calling black is white,,,,where they have EVIDENCE scan appendix 2 lawyers correspondence that even their applications ignored, my MPs correspondence ignored,,,and court correspondence, ADMITTING eg,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US, COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS ] you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

Bigger look at police statement scan 10594 ,,,we did not follow IPCC regulations. Look at police letter of 5.12.2017 scan 10475 10494 its in my judicial review application,,,,YOUR UTTERLY AWARE police state

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

So police send letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,I have made no appeal eg POLICE,,,,,,,,,,, we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, where police have court letter ,,,,we ignored your applications for years come and talk to us,,,so we have question in above application,,Cotter/Bigger come to identical judgement that it was vindictive and vexatious to make application. So I ask Bigger [accept no answer here] in a IPCC investigation, its perfectly acceptable for police to ignore IPCC regulations, further police admit we sent reply to your appeal where you have made no appeal. SO IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED. NO BIGGER I WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR ANSWER I WILL NOT ACCEPT JUDGEMENT FROM YOU WHO IS CORRUPT AND BENT.,,,,DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU. I SENT YOU RECORDING OF INITIAL MEETING WITH SGT PRICE ,,,your in ,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,eg or to falsely deny [evidence] their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....BIGGER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT AS JUDGE/BARRISTER STATED YOU WOULD NEVER GRANT APPLICATION TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS INVITING POLICE IN TO INVESTIGATE YOUR COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR.

3/ Bigger you state legal basis of claim never stated,,,,,?????????????????

SO TO SUMMARIZE FOR MEDIA ,,,HISTORIC COMPLAINT TO POLICE THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE INSP O MAHONY CONFIRMS POLICE IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS SCAN 10594 . SECONDLY MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL,,,,I STATE WOULD DO ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. PLEASE SEE SCAN 10475 10494

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed,

Can I quote another local judge and barrister , her article on malfeasance in public office,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police we ask media,,, in a IPCC investigation admit did not follow IPCC regulations and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged.

BIGGER I WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR ANSWER AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS WHAT YOU ARE DOING AS CORRUPT AND BENT AS TO DENY EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF YOU

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....

d/ . In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings [WE CITE PROCEDURE ERRORS OF LEGATT LJ UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE ECT IF HE DID NOT IGNORE APPLICATION SCAN 10547 WOULD NEVER COME TO HIS JUDGEMENT AS WE SEEK EVIDENCE TODAY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN 2017 HOWEVER HMCS MR BLAIR,,,,,,,,,YOUR NOT LOOKING AT FILES TO GAIN EVIDENCE OF US IGNORING YOUR APPLICATIONS,,,,BEFORE EMAIL REQUEST FOR DATA WHERE HMCS MR FOWLER IN LETTER,,,,,,,,,,,YOUR REQUEST WILL NOT BE ANSWERED JUST FILED,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,from ECHR ,, which prevented the applicant from enjoying such access, and determines whether the applicant was made to bear an excessive burden on account of such errors. Reference criteria have been laid down for assessing whether it is the applicant or the competent authorities who should bear the consequences of any errors (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 90-95, § 119). Where errors were made before

e/ Content: civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge (Fayed v. the United Kingdom, § 65; Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], § 46).

f/ Principles of interpretation: The principle whereby a civil claim must be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised fundamental principles of law; the same is true of the principle of international law which forbids the denial of justice. Article 6 § 1 must be read in the light of these principles (ibid., § 35).

The issue for ombudsman HMCS state we did not get EMAIL application of 6.12.2017 and in period 5.12.2017 to 1.1.2018 we were utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017 ,and therefore will not repay court fee. THIS DOES NOT RELATE TO COURT JUDGEMENTS AS HMCS STATE WE NEVER OBTAINED AND LATER UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017

We get utter frustration and corruption of the judicial process as for nearly 2 years HMCS ignore request to obtain evidence , which followed from HMCS Mr Fowler,,,,,,,,,,your enquires for data to do applications, will not be answered just filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6.

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

So in application to Legatt LJ at court of appeal, state application as at 1.7.2018 , AS SEEK EVIDENCE WITHHELD BY HMCS (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

where make application to obtain data, via inspection of files, to complete application, please see scan 10547 from court application to Legatt eg on court form N161. Which Legatt LJ ignored to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. . In application stated as at 1.7.2018 , as try to get evidence to do application,,,,,TODAY STILL TRYING TO GET THIS EVIDENCE,,,,stated that application of 6.12.2017 not considered by Cotter, court maintain they did not get, so what was application HHJCotter considered , ONE HE PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.WE TRY TODAY TO FIND EVIDENCE Legatt LJ in judgement states facts of case in HHJCotter judgement , however Legatt AWARE, Cotter did not read application, we have had 2 independent barristers from Birmingham and Manchester who saw my website, cited Sharing v Preston CC

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to police , [WE SAY TO POLICE TODAY ,,,WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE I CAME TO SEE SGT PRICE AS MAFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. ]as CPS FEDJCAPcomplete document shows fatal evidence. FEDJCABcomplete its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 LEGATT AT THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,HE KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER WAS OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS AND PERJURY ISSUE CRIMINAL OFFENCES VIA STATUTE COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO. FURTHER HAS SCAN 10475 10494 AND 10594 WHERE POLICE ADMIT MY CLAIM

QUESTION 5 TO HMCS AGAIN COURT RECEIPT HOWEVER IS THE EMAIL 13.7.2018 and 19.7.2018 IN FILE OR HAS COURT OF APPEAL STARTED TO REMOVE EVIDENCE . (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,I ASKED IN APPLICATION TO LOOK AT FILES,,,,,IGNORED BY COURT OF APPEAL SO PRESENTED EVIDENCE UNDER GOC ,,, FOR CONSIDERATION

Legatt LJ has application to obtain evidence, please see scan 10547 . Only recently a High court judge who saw my website,,,,MAKING VERY CLEAR TO SAY BRISTOL EVENING POST,,,not making any allegations, however suggesting could the general public think public school boy judges protecting there own,when in prison could be headlines in the Bristol Evening Post. , Was there a procedure error, as Legatt ignored application to obtain data, IF HE DID NOT JUST IGNORE MY APPLICATION COULD HAVE SHOWN COTTER READ THE WRONG PAPERS ,,,THE READER WILL ASK QUESTION PLEASE SEE BELOW WHAT DID HE READ,,,so I could do application to the court of appeal. Eg,,,,,,in respect to obtaining legal aid,, . From Article 6,,,In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings ,,,you will see Cotters judgement utter nonsence with just one of questions today to police,,,did i come to you malfeasance in public office,court for years ignoring applications and perjury issue,,,,these are criminal offences and via statute can not take to JCIO IS THIS CORRECT,,,,,SEE QUESTION TODAY 2 AND 3 TO POLICE

HMCS stance will be to ombudsman,,,we did not get application of 6,12.2017 and in period up to 1.1.2018 HMCS were utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017 , however HHJCotter from judgement letter ,scan cotterlate aware of application as cites my email of the 29.12.2017 , aware therefore new N244 form and amended application 6.12.2017 under Goc . With evidence withheld could show HMCS stance [issue for ombudsman] we did not get application of 6.12.2017 however was aware of it, Legatt aware trying to get information via court order to get evidence, however via procedural errors committed during the proceedings to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ignored application.

QUESTION 4 TO POLICE THE ISSUE TO POLICE COVERED IN QUESTIONS BELOW,,,THESE IN DETAIL WILL BE CITED LATER, CAN I PLEASE ASK POLICE HOWEVER TO ANSWER AS TABULATED TABLE BELOW SIMPLE ANSWERS ,,,YES/NO eg

DID I COME TO YOU MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE

AS FOR YEARS COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS AND PERJURY ISSUE YES NO

ARE THESE CRIMINAL OFFENCES AND THEREFORE VIA STATUTE YES NO

COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO

IN INVESTIGATION CAN YOU CONFIRM YOU DID NOT YES NO

FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS

CAN YOU CONFIRM IF MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS A FINAL APPEAL YES NO

QUESTIONS TO POLICE 5 RELATES TO QUESTION 4

,

1/ Early 2017 as barristers advice did I come to you, malfeasance in public office, as for years courts ignoring applications, where Sgt Price asked me to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office ,,[FEDJCAB complete] and show how it related to my complaint to police, we did not know OFFENDERS eg HMCS staff not sending applications to HHJDenyer or HHJDenyer ignoring applications malfeasance in public office ignoring applications as explained by your Insp O Mahony please see scan 10594.

2/ Do you have any evidence I came to you as ,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied over judgements of HHJDenyer, if so can you please disclose.

3/ PCBird in letter confirms went over offence malfeasance in public office, further perjury issue, can you please confirm criminal offence, and therefore via statute could not complain to JCIO.

4/ Can I refer to IPCC summary regulations , and Insp O Mahonys letter, scan 10594 , can you confirm you did not follow IPCC regulations. Eg Mr Galloway never contacted me.

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

5/ From police letter 5.12.2017 ,,,,, You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

Further you sent correspondence,,,,,, if doing appeal had to enclose a police appeal form. Can you confirm on the 24.7.2017 you had no police appeal form, however you maintain email of the 22.7.2017 was final appeal, although you admit from letter 5.12.2017 I would do appeal on after the 28.7.2017 if you ignored email of the 22.7.2017 .

PARAGRAPH b/ Ombudsman and my MP can not get involved in court judgements,. The ombudsman issue does not relate to any judgements. We have already had compensation from HMCS from a much later event ,[customer investigations investigation ] however a related later issue today. .Can I quote my response to police complaint investigation paragraph e,,,,b/ complaint….you did not give me good service it was excellent service, thank you. . WE ACCEPT ALTHOUGH COMPELING EVIDENCE TODAY HMCS CAN NOT CONCEDE TODAYS COMPLAINT . HOWEVER ASK OMBUDSMAN IF HMCS CONTINUE THEN ISSUE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN RESPECT TO COSTS. A BARRISTER STATED HMCS HOWEVER MAY TAKE STANCE LESS OF 2 EVILS WE WILL REFUND FEE CLOSE OMBUDSMAN CASE AND REFUSE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TOAY HOWEVER CASE AT COURT OF APPEAL POSSIBLE ECHR WE NEED ANSWERS PLEASE,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I CITE

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

You will see require to do application to ombudsman ,scan appendix 4 stages, complain,,,Resolver stage,,,escalate stage,,,,, ombudsman. only today at Resolver stage, need evidence to do ESCALATE STAGE APPLICATION , eg today just cite for example parts of email of 7.12.2017 if HMCS state we never obtained, need in escalate stage ,to enclose full email. , court receipt, will then go to ombudsman, HMCS can not concede today, Application by email to Bristol county court 6.12.2017, as problem with printer, could not do in papers, done therefore by email, (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,recording at court 5.12.2017 with Mr Blair that previous correspondence note to be removed , confirmed as I wrote on the N244 form,not to send to HHJCoter,application removed, please see sample N244 form attached scan N244 eg what I want court to do, and new application would be emailed on the 6.12.2017, with new N244 form,,,,eg what I want court to do, , Court fee paid 5.12.2017, emailed court 5.12.2017 when I came home confirming agreement, application emailed 6.12.2017, A retired district judge suggested I email next day 7.12.2017,,,,,,,after application emailed to HMCS on the 6.12.2017. to ensure HMCS had application of 6.12.2017 and the 6.12.2017 application would be one considered by HHJCotter. , eg one paid for. …

, E-Mail Server <philip.jones88@btinternet.com>

07/12/2017 09:58

1

To:

e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk]

title URGENT FOR MR BLAIR

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

HMCS Question 6 ,,,, is email address correct 7.12.2017 …DID YOU GET THIS EMAIL SO YOU WERE AWARE OF NEW N244 AND APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 .HAVE ASKED HMCS NOW FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS,,,,DID YOU GET EMAIL,,,ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES WHERE THEY JUST IGNORE CORRESPONDENCE… The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. ,,,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,,OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT,,,,CAN NOT ANSWER AS TODAY AS FATAL FOR HMCS AS LEGATTS STATES FACTS OF CASE IN COTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,, eg ,HMCS to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ....,,HMCS ,,,,WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THIS APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017

No reply , so email again 21.12.2017 and 29.12.2017, we know HMCS obtained the 29.12.2017 email as cited in judgement of 9.1.2018. What was in

email 29.12.2017,,,,,,,,,,

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

As soon as retired district judge saw judgement stated not judicial language however,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the bastards have removed application from file of the 6.12.2017. Record at court……………we did not send to HHJCoter,[NOT WE DID NOT GET] not an issue please see Ms Bowyers sworn statement scan 10573, and later court stance we never obtained application, by email, and HMCS were utterly unaware in period 6.12.2017 -31.12.2017 of possible application of 6.12.2017. QUESTION 7 TO HMCAS did you get email of 6.12.2017 application , email 5.12.2017 ,,,,7.12.2017 21.12.2017 we know you obtained email of 29.12.2017 ,,,eg

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[from judgement therefore HMCS and HHJCotter aware of amendment application on/after the 6.12.2017]

So we ask HMCS QUESTION 7 did you obtain above emails, DEC 2017 7, 21.29 OF DEC can we have copy of N244 that HHJCotter considered, eg what I wanted HHJCotter to do, and paid for, all correspondence ignored since Jan 2018,will try again today, ombudsman would need evidence in his/her consideration ,,,,,,,,,,,,,did HMCS obtain application of 6.12.2017 , or were they aware of possible application of 6.12.2017, eg did you obtain email, 5.12.2017 7.12.2017,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Email 7.12.2017 eg……………

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

We know N244 I wrote on application,,,[,,recorded],,,, removed, not to send to HHJCotter, What did Cotter read,,,A N244 AND DOCUMENT HE PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. [WHERE WE ASK FOR REPAYMENT OF COURT FEE AS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 PAID FOR NOT CONSIDERED. EG court stance,,,, WE WERE UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. PLAYING DEVILS ADVOCATE AS WE AWAIT REPLY IS COURTS PAWSLAY/HUNT GOING TO SAY WE REPLIED BY LETTER TO EMAIL 7.12.2017 SAYING WE DID NOT OBTAIN ,email application of 6.12.2017 ,,, … CAN YOU PLEASE EMAIL APPLICATION AGAIN,,,,,,,,,,,HOWEVER DOING THIS ADMITTING WE WERE AWARE OF APPLICATION OF THE 6.12.2017 from 7.12.2017 email OR ARE YOU SAYING ASKING FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS IS EMAIL IN FILE. SUGGEST IS EMAIL ADDRESS CORRECT HOWEVER DO YOU MAINTAIN WE DID NOT OBTAIN. ANSWER QUESTION WE HAVE ASKED YOU FOR NEARLY 2 YEARS AS YOU CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

This was issue to ombudsman where I require my MP to refer matter to the ombudsman, regulations of ombudsman. APPENDIX 4

By law, we can only look at complaints about UK government departments and other UK public organisations if a Member of Parliament (MP) refers the complaint to us.

MPs will consider all complaints, no matter how big or small - from problems with a benefit or tax office to concerns you have about the DVLA or an immigration issue.

We have ombudsman regulations,, complain to defendants in todays issue HMCS ,,,,,not satisfied take up issue with Resolver ,,,,,,not satisfied ask to escalate,,,,,not satisfied ask MP to look at merits of case and ask him/her to refer to us, can not refer your self.. We get after many months at Resolver stage, MY correspondence ignored , eg is email 7.12.2017 in file,,,where copy ombudsman/MP into correspondence via email, saying to HMCS with no reply in 14 days, will assume HMCS do not want to go to escalate stage and wish to refer to ombudsman directly. Email ignored, so ask my MP to please refer to ombudsman. We get reply from ombudsman that HMCS contacted them saying we want to go NOW to escalate stage, the ombudsman in letter of 9.9.2019 request I take escalate stage,. I need evidence to do this application, eg my application in escalate stage , however do not have evidence to do . WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO OBTAIN SINCE BEGINNING OF 2018 NEARLY 2 YEARS AGO IN COURT MATTER TO OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION. The OMBUDSMAN issue today relates to period 5.12.2017 to 1.1.2018. We have simple question, HMCS state we will not refund court fee , we never obtained application of 6.12.2017 and in period 6.12.2017 to 1.1.2018 we were utterly unaware of a possible application of 6.12.2017, sole issue for ombudsman.

PARAGRAPH C/ As you can see the refund of fee not related to any court judgement, court stance we never obtained, and utterly unaware of a possible application of the 6.12.2017 in 2017………….. ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN.

PARAGRAPH d/ We accept my MP can not get involved in court judgements, however the court of appeal state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement, however BRISTOL COURT ADMITS HE DID NOT READ AND DID NOT CONSIDER ALTHOUGH AWARE OF APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 ……TODAY WE ASK WHAT DID HE READ ,,,,A DOCUMENT COTTER PRODUCED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.IN JUDGEMENT ADMITS HE OBTAINED EMAIL 29.12.2017 SO AWARE OF NEW N244 FORM AND NEW DOCUMENT APPLICATION

PARAGRAPH e/ Need to clarify so no confusion we had 3 complaints to police,,,a/ b/ c/ [c/ relevant today to Evening Post as we seek witness]

a/ complaint The issue here

1/ Barristers advice after picketing at court, to go to police malfeasance in public office as HMCS for years ignoring application and Eaga perjury issue. Recorded visit,,,, Patchway police station meeting with Sgt Price from recording,,,,,,never heard of malfeasance in public office, [no complaint here against Sgt Price] , asked to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office with reason correlated now why i come to police, the FEDJCABcomplete document sent, Sgt Price states ,,,would not give to officer to investigate, if not a criminal offence from recording . . From recoding of visit as explained do not know if HMCS staff reason for malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, for years, as did not send applications to HHJDenyer just binned , or HHJDenyer ignored. From scan 10594 Insp O Mahony confirms conversation issue malfeasance in public office, why I went to police.,,,eg problem Denyer or court staff. The FEDJCABcomplete enclosed in pre action protocol for judicial review sent via email of the 16.9.2017 to police and HMCS, eg so no doubt the pre action protocol document contained the FEDJCAB document why I went to police, . . Sgt Price from recording had asked if court could investigate, where told no, a criminal offence

QUESTION ASKED BEFORE IN TEXT TO POLICE,NOT ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN JUST FOR MP AS HE COLLATES EVIDENCE FOR LEGAL AID BOARD ON MERITS OF CASE.,,NOT ASKING MP TO JUDGE MERITS OF CASE JUST SAYING TO LEGAL AID THESE ARE FACTS OF CASE. DID I COME TO POLICE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS COURTS FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS???? COULD YOU PLEASE CONFIRM ,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE I CAME TO YOU AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS I WAS JUST DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE I DID JUST COME OVER THIS ISSUE,,DISSATISFIED,,,,, COULD YOU DISCLOSE IN 14 DAYS TO ME AND COVER MY MP IN EMAIL PLEASE. CAN I QUOTE FEMALE BARRISTER AND JUDGE WHO SAW MY WEBSITE WE HAVE CORNERSTONE ISSUE IN CASES. ,,

,,,,we have cornerstone issues,as she stated take a theoretical case defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, case comes before me as judge,,,however Council produces evidence ,,,,on this day defendant in closed prison,,,in your case CORNERSTONE why you went to defendants, if it was criminal offences ,perjury,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, [FEDJCAB] ,,,then could not take TO JCIO as JCIO stated . Follows police advice was wrong to take to JCIO. . This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit my email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,

Further police state told from HMCS [Bristol county court ] judges immune from prosecution, however ask police in the FEDJCABcomplete document as I went through complete CPS document, was this pasted to you, question 6 to police.

QUESTION 6 TO POLICE WAS CITED DOCUMENT BELOW IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM CPS DOCUMENT FEDJJCAB complete SENT TO YOU IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO AWARE JUDGES NOT IMMUNE[ CPS LIST OF PEOPLE CONVICTED]

Coroner (1675) R v Parker 2 Lev 140

Constable (1703) R v Wyatt 1 Salk 380

Accountant in the office of the Paymaster General (1783) R v Bembridge 3 Doug K.B. 32

Justice of the Peace (1791) R v Sainsbury 4 T.R 451

Executive or ministerial officer (1819) R v Friar 1 Chit.Rep (KB) 702

Gaoler (1827) R v Cope 6 A%E 226

Mayor or burgess (1828) Henly v Mayor of Lyme 5 Bing 91

Overseer of the poor (1891) R v Hall 1 QB 747

Army officer (1914) R v Whitaker 10 Cr.App.R.245

County Court registrar (district judge) (1968) R v Llewellyn-Jones 1 Q.B.429

Police officer (1979) R v Dytham 69 Cr.App.R.387

Council maintenance officer (1995) R v Bowden 4 All E.R 505

Local councillor (2004) R v Speechley [2004] EWCA Crim 3067

Member of the Independent Monitoring Board for prisons (2010) R v Belton R v Belton[2010]

MAKE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR TODAY NOT ASKING FOR OFFICERS TO BE JAILED,,,,THEY WERE TOLD FROM PCBIRDS STATEMENT,,,,CONTACTED COURT OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHERE HMCS INFORM US NOT ISSUE FOR YOU TO INVESTIGATE ALL COMPLAINTS SHOULD BE MADE TO JCIO. SURE POLICE DEFENCE TOLD WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE WHERE TOLD MR JONES TO COMPLAIN TO JCIO,,,,,WHERE THEY JCIO STATE NO WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE.

QUESTION 7 TO POLICE WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 DO YOU WISH TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER CONFIRMING IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.

QUESTION 8 TO POLICE CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM MY EMAIL OF 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL TO YOUR DEFENCE ,,,,YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHICH CAME UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS eg EVEN IN DOCUMENT SENT TO YOU COURT STATED WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US. FROM YOUR LETTER 5.12.2017 CAN I QUOTE,,,

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

DO YOU MAINTAIN EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL ?????????????

Case B26YMO2 told remove your web site www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com or consequences, which consequence was to issue in vexatious and vindictive way restraining order. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY CORRUPT AND BENT HHJDENYER. We ask HMCS ,[ also Bristol Evening Post can ring Compuwave Bristol ] was this a case where i required to back up my emails, for protection of possible libel as today. Can i cite just one example as i sought evidence for judicial review, with email from Bristol courts Mr Fowler,,,,,your emails to obtain evidence to do court applications, will just be filed, not answered ,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,

,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

STILL GOING ON THIS PRACTICE TODAY AT COURT OF APPEAL

You can not just copy and paste emails . Program given which did not work, Compuwave state was working when you left.As soon as proceedings issued ,from email,,,,state we gave wrong program, from email further ask me to now please conclude with court, correct program supplied. . Emailed settlement with request that matter removed from hearing. Next thing i know struck out, it did go to hearing. We have been asking for years as trying to get restraining order removed did you get settlement emailed, the issue cited AGAIN in that email of 7.12.2017,THAT I ASSUME YOU WILL STATE WE DID GET…or did you get settlement email, which Cotter was aware of, [part application of 6.12.2017 was to remove restraining order] .What did i say in email of 7.12.2017 besides

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

4/ We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please

HMCS may say today, ,,,,Denyer in order told parties to attend hearing, but this does not make sense as Compuwave complain to me as issue went to hearing ,so they ALSO utterly unaware of hearing. Is this another email that HMCS state we did not get, reason it did go to hearing, no one turned up, left judge no option but to strike out, where you appealed ,where Denyer issued restraining order as you appealed. . So application 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 and now 6.12.2017 to remove order ignored. So need Denyers permission to issue any proceedings reason B26YMO42 number used in application

QUESTION 8 TO HMCS IN B26YMO42 AGAIN WE HAVE COURT RECEIPT WAS THE APPLICATION TO REMOVE CASE FROM HEARING OBTAINED WITH SIGNED STATEMENT FROM COMPUWAVE ,,,,,CASE SETTLED,,,,,IF YES WHY WAS IT NOT REMOVED FROM HEARING LIST. . What was TODAYS issue, i went to police,,,, barristers advice, as for years the courts ignoring applications, malfeasance in public office ,and perjury issue. Sgt Price asks me to paste CPS document on malfeasance in public office and insert why I came to police,, defined the FEDJCABcomplete document eg [fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent].The FEDJCAB in pre action protocol for judicial review document, why I went to police, .EMAILED TO POLICE AND COURT ON THE 16.9.2017 ,,,,SO CORRUPT AND BENT COTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE , quotes from pre action protocol document backing up FEDJCAB document ..pre action document further via statute had to be produced under Annex A template paragraphs eg paragraph 7 what did CPR statute state under paragraph 7 title.,,,.the issue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

.

QUOTE 1 / from pre action protocol document ,,,,,,,,,,,,7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

2/ , QUOTE 2 FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court,scan 10389 again today, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see scan appendix 2 [this document today November 2019, referenced again as appendix 2] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore request as I sought data, , to do application, malfeasance in public office. [eg from above Fowlers email]

QUESTION 9 TO HMCS REFERENCE SCAN APPENDIX 2 HAVE YOU ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THE COURT STAMP AND DATE ARE FORGIES.

WORTH NOTING HERE,,,,,,,,,,,,,, make application 2YJ03757 for oral hearing, have Royal Mail proof of posting slip to prove made, , Bristol court state we did not get, lawyers state to court we have proof made, we will ask to do out of time, no dispute made, you had also sent application copy to defendants, where lawyer states our correspondence to court just ignored,,,you need judicial review,,,, from application get court order scan 10389 to make application back to the court, 2 applications made, note date/stamped by court, scan appendix 2, to then forward to a judge.

You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see scan appendix 2 with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal,

WE HAVE SAME ISSUE TODAY WITH COURT OF APPEAL JUDGES DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THEM UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6

While waiting for court of appeal, ,had call ,,,,,...do not approve of a few isolated applications you made to my court, however will not stand by while corruption is going on HHJDenyer /court out to get you if you check at court, they have made a mistake and forgotten to remove one of your applications for oral hearing. Record at court office true, Mr Till who deals with appeals told, sent to Administration court Cardiff. IT PROVES MY CASE I HAD ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING. So ask Bristol/Cardiff court to confirm, all correspondence ignored, where i made complaint, eg we have order from higher court to ask Denyer again, for oral hearing, date/stamped by court as taken by hand. Complaint did Mr Till send this application to HHJDenyer, or was there Mr Till ignoring court order, eg breaching court order, many follow up emails,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ALL IGNORED WHERE WE HAVE COURT OF APPEAL SAYING I HAD NOT ASKED FOR ORAL HEARING TO CORRECT. Read my website if facts not correct why have court not sued for contempt of court.

,SO WE HAVE ROYAL MAIL PROOF OF POSTING WE HAVE 2 APPLICATIONS [REASON FOR THIS SECOND ONE RECORDED CONVERSATION WITH CARDIFF COURT LAWYER MR GARDINER WHERE EXPLAINED NO REPLY TOLD TO DO APPLICATION AGAIN DATE AND STAMPED BY COURT, appendix 2 scan ,,,,HOWEVER COURT STANCE WE DID NOT GET ANY OF THESE 3 applications , although proof sent, or are HMCS saying appendix 2 scan a forgery.

WE HAVE IDENTICAL SITUATION TODAY WHERE THIS TIME RECEIPT NOT COURT STAMP BUT EMAIL REPLY FROM THIS CORRUPT COURT STATING YOUR EMAIL RECEIVED

OMBUDSMAN HAS IDENTICAL PROBLEM TODAY WE HAVE THIS TIME EMAIL OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 AND LATER RELATED EMAILS WHERE THIS COURT STATES WE DID NOT OBTAIN 6.12.2017 APPLICATION AND UTTERLY UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 in 2017 ….WHERE WE HAD APPLICATIONS BEFORE DATE/STAMPED BY THE COURT appendix 2 ,,,in court file or removed by corrupt HMCS/judges. Now saying utterly unaware of numerous emails.

QUOTE 3 from pre action protocol document, in application the FEDJCAB document as requested by Sgt Price to confirm why I went to police,,,

Letter also sent 13.4.2017, please see scan appendix 9 attachment, why I went to police.

Court maintain via Cotter ,,, utter nonsense you went to police malfeasance in public office... as ,,,,unhappy with judgements of HHJDenyer ????? ,,,READ THE FEDJCAB,,,,READ PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT ABOVE ONLY A CORRUPT JUDGE WOULD COME TO THIS VERDICT. AS HIGH COURT JUDGE SAID COTTER WAS NEVER GOING TO GRANT THIS APPLICATION IT WAS TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS INVITING POLICE IN TO INVESTIGATE HIS COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

In Insp O Mahonys enclosed letter scan 10594 she admits my judicial review application , police never contacted me. IPCC regulations not followed

The second element is covered in police letter of the 5.12.2017

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

Clearly no appeal made 22.7.2017 however on the 24.7.2017 police send letter in reply to my email 22.7.2017 saying our reply to your appeal, I had made no appeal.

SO TO SUMMARIZE FOR MEDIA ,,,HISTORIC COMPLAINT TO POLICE THIS WAS A IPCC INVESTIGATION WHERE INSP O MAHONY CONFIRMS POLICE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS. SECONDLY MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL,,,,I STATE WOULD DO ON/AFTER 28.7.2017.

Can i cite local barrister and judge article on malfeasance in public office,,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have i been wronged by police we ask media,,, in a IPCC investigation admit did not follow IPCC regulations and sent a reply to an appeal where admit one not lodged.

b/ complaint to police b / Had fall at home, ambulance staff had to break in ,they contact police to make house secure. Hospital 4 days, coming home small piece of wood over hole in window , water entered home, complaint to police. Insp O Mahony excellent service, confirms contractor they contacted was told to board up whole window, complaint removed, apology to InspO Mahony where she states I need to talk before case closed.[see IPCC regulations above] I refused to talk until questions were answered,,,,over historic a/ complaint, eg did police follow IPCC regulations, in their investigation of historic case where she sent enclosed statement, confirming IPCC regulations were not followed, scan 10594 .

c/ the third complaint to police,,, Clearly from Insp O Mahony letter and police records there was utterly no grounds of complaint against police , in b/… the complaint related to contractors police appointed, where issue settled in the courts in my favour against contractor.. We have from police complaint form today , little space to make complaint today, , as they state what are questions you require replies to,,, Via todays complaint again need further answers to par e a/ complaint, above the historic issue. Police were withholding evidence where as today, used tactically to ask questions, where Insp O Mahony requested to answer questions. My MP would require historic evidence on merits of case before he refers to ombudsman , and his enquiry to legal aid board as he sends evidence from police and HMCS as i seek legal aid.

Todays present issue complaint , before we return to historic issue,,, left home and about 30 mins later at library realised I had not locked back door. Coming home as going out that evening from library, to lock door, a boy about 12 years old stopped me and stated as soon as you went out, your neighbour came in and vandalised your property, neighbour a few doors away when I came home laughing. Reported matter to police, where officers came after 2 weeks delay . So as no misunderstanding have for say,, for Evening Post recording at Patchway police station, where police told rarely home, gave email address told to email when they wished to contact, today suggest no excuse 2 week delay. . We are told by police, your neighbours property also being vandalised by travellers , on this day, he warned them off, where he reported issue to police. This does not ring true, good relationship with travellers as male officer aware,,,,,,seen him at library, on Fridays travellers for years are at Patchway library, where I am every Friday, no conflict.

Question 9 to police summary…. from officers statement allegations ,,,,can you confirm neighbour reported alleged crime to you, travellers vandalising property, can you please confirm when he reported. . Can I ask ,,,,you were aware from allegations of neighbour, of my property being vandalised, when was incident recorded by you, and why did it take 2 weeks to contact me. Further why did it take 2 officers to attend, further considering time sending 2 officers, did you enquire from neighbours if they saw anything. Further will try after your reply to trace boy as witness, neighbour wasting police time, eg place card in shop, with 100.00 award taken from my state pension, if fails could use say Evening Post ,local TV channels leave 100.00 with them from my pension, so they can pay boy after publicity for conviction,,,,waste of police time. Further with your reply can display allegations of neighbour with travellers at library on Fridays. Further can I refer to people in greenhouses should not throw stones, could well be one night travellers may throw brick throw vehicles in neighbours forecourt.

PARAGRAPH f/ We need to give just skeletal argument here, evidence required by my MP before he contacts the legal aid board. Evening Post also can see issues, when we get replies,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ombudsman would also require evidence up till January 2018.

Can I refer to correspondence from the start with police,where I stated I had sympathy ,,,,,,,,,,we investigated your complaint malfeasance in public office,ignoring applications for years, Eaga perjury issue, . We contacted Bristol county court staff where told incorrect investigation route ,police can not investigate, complain to JCIO, although can I cite CPS document, in pre action protocol document, part of FEDJCABcomplete document cited, quote from CPS ,,,,where judges convicted, and as JCIO state we can not investigate via statute.

Need only events as relevant,,,,minimal evidence,,,,.

1/ Case comes before court of appeal in Eaga case, comes before Lord Golding, ,,why can Bristol county court, not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without a transcript , although getting verdict very badly wrong not reason to grant judicial review, ,,Strickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA 1132 , however the award to HMCS OF 500.00 quashed never forgiven for judgement.

2/ Case 2YJ03757. where refer reader for detail to my website,www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com . Issue comes before corrupt DJBritton. Same judge in Eaga case who asked me to leave so he could discuss case with Eagas lawyer,,,,,Eaga later,correspondence,,,,,,we refused made excuse had to catch a plane, would not be discussing with Brittan for you to exploit later,,,,Brittan stated ,,,,,,so very nice of you to come from Newcastle to see us,,,love in between them. From website see judgement utterly without merit, Brittan states claim incomprehensible,,,[note same allegations in 2018 claim below] where Brittan in judgement states way claim should have been made, look at POC [particulars of claim in my website ] where judgement is IDENTICAL TO WAY CLAIM WAS MADE. This was identical claim as others v Royal Mail for lost recorded delivery correspondence, now enough was enough as stated abuse of process, 2YJ03757 V Royal Mail , same POC as in 9BS 08798,,,,OBS08441 ,CLAIMS 2 AND 3, . So i state abuse of process, This is abuse of process, identical to claims even BEFORE 9BS08798 , 9BS08798 and claims 2 and 3 in OBS08441, ask DJBrittan to strike out , abuse of process, told not interested,will not consider, force issue with barristers internet site document in bundle ,on abuse of process which contained from internet,,as I stated in application , extension of Henderson v Henderson

eg GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65 ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts [as we have today,]

Where told have you full transcript ,of GoreWood, no, then i will just ignore application evidence, and application today your making to me,Brittan going to any length to corrupt and frustrate judicial process. NOTE BRITTAN IS SAME JUDGE IN EAGA CASE where asked me to leave so he could discuss case with defendants.

WORTH NOTING AT THIS POINT I MADE APPLICATION FOR TRANSCRIPT OF THIS CASE LAWYERS MADE APPLICATION I MADE APPLICATION AGAIN TO COURT OF APPEAL IN THIS 2013 CASE AS TODAYS APPLICATION YEARS LATER TO LEGATT WHICH WAS IGNORED, IT APPEARS THE COURTS DO NOT WANT EVIDENCE BEFORE ANY COURT,,,, THIS COURTS CORRUPTION .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WE HAVE SAME ISSUE TODAY

CAN I SITE SCAN FATAL EVIDENCE TO STOP ANY ALLEGATIONS FROM HMCS. IN 2003 CASE COMES BEFORE DJSTEWART BROWN SHE ASKS ABOUT CONTRADICTION IN ROYAL MAIL REGULATIONS eg WE ARE IMMUNE AND WE CAN ALTER REGULATIONS AS WE FEEL FIT, WHERE I DISCUSSED IN 2003 WITH ROYAL MAIL WHERE AGREED I CXOULD RECOVER LOST IN PROCEEDINGS. THIS SCAN FATAL EVIDENCE IN PAPERS FOR 2YJ03757, WAS NEVER RAISED AT HEARING HOWEVER BRITTAN STATES THEY ARE IMMUNE. KNOWING UNTRUE FROM SCAN FATALEVIDENCE. WHAT IS TODAYS ISSUE ABOUT IGNORING APPLICATIONS WHERE APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSCRIPT IGNORED

[FOR YEARS THE COURT CORRUPTING AND FRUSTATING THE JUDICIAL PROCESS AS LAWYERS/BARRISTERS STATE ALL YOU HAD TO SAY UNDER HENDERSON v HENDERSON …AN ABUSE OF PROCESS] ,,,,,,,,,,,, where application to HHJDenyer for oral hearing, ignored, contact lawyer out of my depth where ask for 30..00 said not sourced to give legal aid, would try to get oral hearing for you. Later told by lawyer our request also ignored,no paperwork issued from Bristol , you need judicial review, becomes co/1/2013. The Administration court confirms facts scan 10389 where from this order, told to make from order application date/stamped by HMCS made for oral hearing, please see scan appendix 2.[this was second one from recorded conversation with Cardiff courts lawyer,Mr Gardiner told to ask again previous application ignored] Had call court out to get you,do not approve of a few of your applications, however will not stand by when corruption is going on, they have made mistake still one application on system. Record at court , talk to Mr Blair ,,,,,,nothing to do with me I take your applications, check in order, place our copy in basket and stamp your copy. Mr Blair from recording, confirms our Mr Till sent to Admin court Cardiff. We have asked Cardiff court for many years is this document, [other 2 removed] in file,although date stamped by court, just ignored, recently from Cardiff court,,,THERE IS NOTE on file,,,,not to discuss contents with you to contact Ms Weaver for information, who ignored emails,,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 3

).

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

A party to the proceedings must have the possibility to familiarise itself with the

evidence before the court, as well as the possibility to comment on its existence, contents and authenticity in an appropriate form and within an appropriate time (Krčmář andOthers v. the Czech Republic, § 42; Immeubles Groupe Kosser v. France, § 26),

YOU WILL SEE COMMON STANCE APPLICATION TO COURT TO LOOK AT FILES or REQUESTING DATA FROM FILE JUST IGNORED

Take up issue with Mr Gardiner , please see his reply, in scan Gardiner.

APPENDIX 2 scan IN COURT DOCUMENTS BUNDLE . WE GET AS YOU WILL SEE TODAY JUDGE DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,IN JUDGEMENT YOU NEVER MADE APPLICATION FOR ORAL HEARING YOUR CORRUPT DENYING EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU APPENDIX 2 PLUS OTHER 2 APPLICATIONS DATE/STAMPED BY COURT and ROYAL MAIL proof of posting

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION

QUESTION 10 TO HMCS.see 14th time asked over the years, . From recording Mr Blair states our Mr Till sent your application for oral hearing to Cardiff court. Is this application in file, or has court removed. How do Bristol court record that documents transferred to another court, how does Cardiff court record delivery from a different court. Does Bristol court have any record of applications made With respect to my emails did Ms Weaver every supply replies, if so can we please have replies.

3/ We are asked to remove my website, or consequences, which was in vindictive act to issue restraining order, This corrupt court if facts untrue sue for libel , if you maintain allegations utterly without merit. Have restraining order citing B26YM042 and AOIBS346/746. Again detail in website, the issue with B26YM042 cited above. The other case to obtain medical records, put statement in medical records, and travel expenses. Defendants asked me to settle, supplied medical records, agreed to put statement in medical records, paid travel expenses, asked to settle where DJBrittan rejected defendants settlement. I SUGGEST BRISTOL EVENING POST IN BOTH CASES ASK DEFENDANTS DID YOU ASK TO SETTLE,,, CONCEDE MY CLAIM AS I HAVE ASKED COURT WHAT DID I DO WRONG .FOR YEARS

Applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 ignored by HMCS. You can see why as in all applications cited,,,

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]

FROM HEARING DEFENDANTS ASKED THAT JUDGEMENT READS I ACTED UNREASONABLY REJECTED BY DJWATSON AS HE STATED WAVING IN FRONT OF MS SMITH THEIR LAWYER MY SKELETAL ARGUMENT,,.WE HAVE ASKED FOR TRANSCRIPT,,,,APPLICATION IGNORED BY HMCS. SUGGEST EVENING POST ASK MS SMITH,,DEFENDANTS LAWYER ,,AS MY SKELETAL ARGUMENT,,,AT FIRST HEARING BEFORE DJWATSON DID HE STATE RESOLVE OUTSIDE. I OPENED DOOR FOR MS SMITH WHERE SHE LATER CONFIRMS IN EMAIL YOU DID I DID NOT WANT TO TALK TO YOU TO SETTLE TOLD YOU TO GO AWAY,,,MUST BE ON TRANSCRIPT AS INSIDE COURT.,,,,,, EMAILED,,,,, STUPID YOU MUST SUPPLY MEDICAL RECORDS,,,,,,,WHERE TOLD NO IN EMAIL,,,,,THEN 6MONTHS LATER ASKED TO SETTLE,,,THERE WAS ONLY ONE PARTY ACTING UNREASONABLY. ,

DENYER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT

QUESTION 11 TO HMCS ,,,,,THERE WERE APPLICATIONS TO REMOVE THIS ORDER ON THE 26.2.2016 AND 26.10.2016 ARE THESE IN FILE OR HAVE THEY BEEN REMOVED,,,,WHERE THERE FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE ASKING YOU IF YOU REQUIRE ANYTHING FURTHER,,,

4/ For years court ignoring applications ,malfeasance in public office, date/stamped by court for example appendix 2 ect. Picket at court still going on, hand out leaflet citing 2YJ03757 evidence,scan picket ,barrister told me to report malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years issue, plus perjury issue to police, seen by Sgt Price .Requested to paste CPS paper on malfeasance on public office and insert in text how it relates to my complaint, eg why I went to police, the FEDJCABcomplete document above . From recording of visit to Sgt Price states would not give to officer to investigate if not a criminal offence,,by definition I could not refer to JCIO. In Insp O Mahonys letter scan 10594 confirms conversation, eg went over malfeasance in public office, from recording we had problem,[cited by Insp O Mahony] as quoted in recorded conversation with Sgt Price,,,as we do not know if court staff problem, or HHJDenyer….from recording will HHJDenyer say I never saw applications, or court staff saying we did send, Denyer ignored. . Malfeasance in public office a criminal offence, as Sgt Price states on recording would not give to PCBird if not a criminal offence. So police aware could not refer to JCIO [judicial conduct investigation office], via statute. FURTHER BEFORE OWN OFFICERS JAILED FOR SAME OFFENCE SO KNOW CRIMINAL OFFENCE

QUESTION 4 AND 5 TO POLICE JUST RECAP TO POLICE ASK POLICE DID I COME TO YOU MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS HMCS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. AS CRIMINAL OFFENCE AGREE COULD NOT REFER TO JCIO. REMEMBER ONLY A SHORT TIME BEFORE IDENTICAL ISSUE OF OWN OFFICERS IN BIJAN EBRAHIMI CASE WHERE AVON SOMERSET POLICE OFFICERS DUFFY/PASSMORE JAILED MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE FOR IGNORING REPORTS OF CRIMINAL OFFENCES.

5/ Police state you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, and perjury issue, state to them JUDGEMENT comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,eg no sensible person would come to that judgement, issue taken up years before with my MP, COURT IGNORING APPLICATIONS where court ignored even MPs correspondence,,,,[,Mr Cobb in MPs office] letter,,,,I will write to Bristol court again, can not force them to reply,,,,appendix 2 case 2YJ03757 arose as HHJDenyer ignored application, lawyer said he could help, where told by lawyer our correspondence ALSO ignored, you need a judicial review. The Administration court reply in scan 10389 where 2 applications made for oral hearing ignored, see appendix 2 or are HMCS today saying court stamps forged ??????.

QUESTION 12 to HMCS do you have any reason to believe that HMCS did not stamp this document, appendix 2 eg court stamp is forgery. So we have my applications ignored, lawyers application ignored, my MPs correspondence on issue ignored. WE HAVE COURT CORRESPONDENCE,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE COME AND TALK TO US.HOW CAN POLICE STATE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

6/ Pre action protocol for judicial review , contained the FEDJCABcomplete document,,,, the pre action protocol document had to be produced via statute Annex A paragraphs ,see scan annex a , under paragraph 7 THE ISSUE I stated as explained above,

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE ALSO COTTER IN EMAIL 17.11.2017 TOLD ,,, POLICE HAD NO COMMENT ON PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT. COTTER AWARE OF THIS PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENTS POLICE ACCEPT FACTS

QUESTION 13 TO HMCS ,,Can I refer to paragraph f 1/ where court of appeal in judgement stated ,,,why can Bristol court not issue proper paperwork, again see TODAYS question asked over 20 times. In judgement Cotter cites email of the 14.11.2018,,,,,[can not be 2018 what drugs/intoxication was he on] assume 17.11.2017. No emails of 14.11.2017, if HMCS maintain these 2 emails are ones of 14.11.2017 can I please have copy. Can you please confirm should be 17.11.2017 emails were recited on the 17.11.2017 from evidence ALREADY COPIED from pre action protocol document, eg why I went to police,eg,,,,

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]

THIS CITING IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL FOLLOWED BY NEXT STEP THE ECHR

7/ Application to HHJCotter to issue judicial review, police defendant,,,

a/ From above police admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, see text and scan 10594 10475 10494

b/ As police state you can appeal our judgement you have no evidence of malfeasance [misconduct ] in public office ignoring applications for years, and perjury issue. If appealing need to submit our appeal form,with application .So ask questions in email 22.7.2017 ,,,have you talked to my MP,,,,,have you talked to lawyer whose application was ignored,,,,,saying in 22.7.2017 email with no reply would do appeal,,,,on/after the 28.7.2017,,,,[the 11 questions in judicial review document] . Police send letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,,I have made no appeal,,,,no appeal form submitted, I said would do on/after the 28.7.2017.

WE ASKED QUESTION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION THE POLICE CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT ISSUED WHERE THEY ADMIT BOTH ISSUES. THE ISSUE YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS,,,WE HAVE COURT DOCUMENTS SAYING,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS

c/ HHJCotter asks me to pay fee to consider application, recorded visit at court with Mr Blair on the 5.12.2017, as printer problem inform him final application would be sent next day via email, (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

visited court to pay fee, and obtain information to do amended application ,,,Mr Blair states you not looking at file, where from recording state compromise just want N244 form,,, wish to put on record a message on N244 form, not to send application to HHJCotter, application would follow from Goc above reference, call in library on way home eg 5.12.2017…. .email when at library that afternoon,

05/12/2017 16:17

1

To:

e-filing@bristol.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk

FOR MR BLAIR

At library BT site has been down , will email tonight at home.

Required as you will see to change a few dates in new revised application eg if sent now third party could say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,we were not aware until 4.00 pm could not be expected to say today if we wish to add a comment for HHJCotter,

P JONES

. Application sent via email 6.12.2017, On visit 5.12.2017 to protect myself recorded, ask for N244 FORM write on it not to be sent to HHJCotter application to follow. Retired district judge who saw my website advised to email FURTHER next day after application sent by email, 6.12.2017 so on the 7.12.2017 to ensure application paid for is one emailed on the 6.12.2017 and one sent to HHJCotter eg email 7.12.2017

Email 7.12.2017 title URGENT FOR MR BLAIR

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Follow up emails 21.12.2017 and 29.12.2017 ignored, we know HMCS obtained the one of 29.12.2017 as cited in judgement of Cotter… eg what did email say,,,29.12.2017

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,

.You are aware [efiling] of much detail eg emails in December 2017 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,5, 2 on 6 and one on the 7 of December. End of quote from email

SO HHJCOTTER AWARE OF NEW N244 AND NEW APPLICATION.ON/AFTER THE 5.12.2017 .THE SOLE ISSUE FOR OMBUDSMAN COTTER AWARE FROM ABOVE 2 EMAILS OF 6.12.2017 application

QUESTION 4 TO HMCS, again asked over 20 times,,,, Are the emails 5.12.2017 7.12.2017 and 21.12.2017 in file, can you confirm also email of 29.12.2017 in file. AWARE OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 Cotter accepts HMCS had email 29.12.2017,,,,scan cotterlate however you state application of 6.12.2017 we did not get, and in 2017 utterly unaware of possible application of the 6.12.2017. ,,,,are you saying we did not get ones of the 7.12.2017 ect , although Cotter aware of them from 29.12.2017 email,,,,,,,,that email existed,,6.12.2017, ,,Kerojarvi v Finland ,,,,,,,court must exercise diligence for an appellant not represented by a lawyer

For a long time, can refer to correspondence with HMCS , for example reply from Mr Fowler your enquires to obtain evidence will be ignored, just filed, utter breach of Article 6,,,,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Can I refer to correspondence with HMCS where I cited the ECHR concept of Equality of Arms, medical records case above where again applications ignored, where defendants lawyer from emails [several] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,my application this morning to court , just had reply from court ,where judge agreed,,,,,,,,,,,,so they can get replies same day, from above 5.12.2017 6.12.2017 21.12.2017 applications ask confirmation that email in file, so raise issue in email of 29.12.2017 which we know Cotter read,,,

Goodevening

This enquiry via .................... ECHR case law.

EQUALITY OF ARMS

Equality of arms 277. The principle of “equality of arms” is inherent in the broader concept of a fair trial. The requirement of “equality of arms”, in the sense of a “fair balance” between the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

As you can see HMCS would not reply to enquire where other people could get a reply same day, for example we know court obtained email 7.12.2017, asked for confirmation, just ignored,.

d/ As soon as retired district judge saw judgement said not judicial language however the bastards have removed application 6.12.2017 from file. Go to court,,,,, record again ,,,,,,,,,,,,we did not send to HHJCotter,con firmed in Ms Bowyers statement scan 10573.This is issue for ombudsman HMCS stance ,,,,we never obtained application of 6.12 2017 and utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017 in 2017, where HHJCotter cites evidence in judgement, where he cites email of the 29.12.2017 WHICH CITES APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. We have tried from January 2018 to obtain from HMCS did you get for example email of the 5.12.2017 and 7.12.2017. This is sole issue for ombudsman,,,,HMCS stance we never obtained application of 6.12.2017 and in 2017 were utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017….we did not get application by email 6.12.2017 ,,,assume will say,,,we did not get email of 7.12.2017,,,we did not get email 21.12.2017 .Lets say 1 in 100 emails go missing, are HMCS saying we did not obtain any,,,,,probability 100 x 100 x 100 A MILLION TO ONE AS WE PRESENT EVIDENCE TO OMBUDSMAN,,5.12.2017 EMAIL ALSO

e/ Remember the FEDCABcomplete in pre action protocol document, consider the pre action protocol document had to be produced via statute Annex A paragraphs , under paragraph 7 THE ISSUE ECT I stated

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

Further under paragraph 5/ details of matter,,,,of Annex A statute ,,in pre action protocol before Cotter,,on way application must be made,,,,see scan annex a

5/ DETAILS OF MATTER,,, The issue for years applications to Bristol county court [ BCC ]ignored, although enclosed with application is court order to make application to the court, to then forward to a judge. You will see from this practice historically a miscarriage of justice, eg my copy applications date/stamped by court, please see appendix 2 [SAME REFENCE TODAY] with judgement in papers ,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, and could not appeal, as a barrister stated where are we Russia/China. .with appendix 2 plus other documents in bundle. , . On the 23.11.2016 Bristol county court confirmed they would ignore applications, malfeasance in public office. Picketing at court before barrister told me to stop make complaint to defendants, warned they may try to brush you off, please see below ,under UK COP WATCH, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

You can see retired judge called them bastards, again not judicial language however the CORRUPT AND BENT HHJCOTTER STATES I WENT TO POLICE AS UNHAPPY WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER HOW CAN HE SAY THIS FROM ABOVE . As barrister and judge said only recently who saw my website, Cotter was never going to grant this application ,turkeys voting for Xmas, as would be inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour eg malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, as he makes up fairy story.,,I went to police dissatisfaction over judgements of HHJDenyer Judgement repeated by administration court and court of appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,many lawyers/barristers cite the fairy story as in Hans Christian Andersons The Kings new Clothes where UTTER ILLOGICAL JUDGEMENT JUST TAKEN AS FACT THEN REPEATED. .I SENT BIGGER RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE PLUS FEDJCAB complete DOCUMENT. As barrister stated , why is Sgt Price giving to PCBird to investigate, she states from recording,,,,,if not criminal offence would not give case to officer to investigate, CAN NOT TAKE TO JCIO . IF WE ACCEPT COTTERS CORRUPT JUDGEMENT I WENT TO POLICE AS UNHAPPY WITH DENYERS JUDGEMENTS,,,,IF TRUE Sgt Price may i suggest should have said,,,,,I can do nothing about court judgements, not issue for police,

QUESTION 14 TO HMCS,,,,again asked over 20 times,,,,. We know HMCS obtained,,email 7.12.2017 , see above HMCS receipt,,,,email 7.12.2017,,,,STATED

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.

,

We know Cotter read email 29.12.2017 as facts repeated again,,,eg

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent, can you please give me a reply to these cited emails above,

So aware after 5.12.2017 amendment would be sent , not to send to Cotter until new application sent, aware of 7.12.2017 email as quoted in 29.7.2017 , aware application not complete. , a line was put through old N244 form. Can we please have the N244 considered by HHJCotter, and can we please have copy of application considered by HHJCotter, we know old N244 removed, what was N244 considered, and can we have copy of application . LETS SEE DOCUMENT AFTER 5.12.2017 WHERE COTTER COMES TO JUDGEMENT YOU WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.A GREAT WORRY AS RECENTLY HIGH COURT JUDGE STATED MAY NEVER GET WITH HMCS FOR EXAMPLE,,,,WE CAN NOT FIND FILE

PARAGRAPH g/ Application 27.2.2018 again to Bristol court after proceedings cited below issued,, Note again asking for new medical records at a date after settlement of AOIBS346/746 ,where same defendants refuse again to supply, where restraining order issued by corrupt Denyer. ,,,what have I done wrong just asking for medical records,,,WE MAY ASK WHICH PARTY IS ACTING UNREASONABLY THE CORRUPT AND BENT HOSPITAL TRUST LAWYER FORCEING ME AGAIN TO GO FOR LITAGATION TO GET MEDICAL RECORDS.

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records………………………END OF QUOTE

Within hours struck out by HHJCotter. Assume Cotter instructed staff, never issue his claims, send to me to see if I can strike out, I make application for oral hearing, where in days call from Cotters clerk, saying long discussion with defendants lawyer, agreement made, we will issue court hearing date in due course. What was discussed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,do not have a defence,,,,

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,

Cotter ignores application, WHAT WAS DECIDED WITH DEFENDANTS again we have court receipt that HMCS obtained application , IGNORED eg malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years. Comes before HHJRalton,states ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I,,had long talk with HHJCotter, reason he struck out as claim utterly incomprehensible . INCOMPREHENSIBLE LIKE YOU HAVE EVIDENCE IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL HOWEVER YOU COME TO JUDGEMENT I WENT TO POLICE AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENT OF DENYER,,,,WE MAY ASK WHAT STAGE OF DEMENTIA ARE YOU AT ????????? stricking out ,,, Eg INCOMPREHENSIBLE OR JUST VINDICTIVE/VEXATIOUS ,,IS THIS UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE ???????????????????????????

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records………………………

Defendants at hearing state we will send medical records taken as at 24.7.2015 , never obtained, talk to PSU [personal support unit] at Bristol court, They talk to HMCS staff agree that I email HHJRalton, email ignored.

QUESTION 15 TO HMCS DID COTTER REPLY TO COURT APPLICATION, FEB 2018 IF SO CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF REPLY. IN TERMS OF HHJRALTON AGAIN WE HAVE RECEIPT FOR EMAIL DID YOU GET AND DID HHJRALTON ISSUE ANY REPLY AS INFORMED HIM MEDICAL RECIRDS NOT SUPPLIED.

Contact Mr Blair to obtain evidence from file to do the judicial review, Mr Blair states no ,,,,,your not looking at files to obtain evidence of us ignoring your applications, over the years, make application to HHJCotter who will ignore. Utter breach of Article 6 by Blair/Cotter.

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

Application to Bristol court 15.3.2018 to obtain data to do my judicial review, eg..i stated

3/ For court to allow under supervision for me to read files OBS08441 /2YJ03757/ B26YM042 at the court. For court staff to supply information, as requested. [eg malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years]

Utter breach of Article 6 HHJCotter ignores application as Mr Blair said he would. Contact my MP where we get reply after nearly 2 MONTHS , EG SCAN Cotterlate.. Where to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process asks me to ask Mr Blair, knowing he had said no.

BETWEEN COTTER/BLAIR HMCS CONFIRMING ,, the appellant WOULD NOT have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,,,,,,,,,,,,,, would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ..... Make new application to court where told no, seeking evidence already had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, as no lawyer to help. . Practice continued withholding evidence please look at scan 10573

UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6

,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Do we have reason to believe Cotter is corrupt and bent,

Objective approach

242. It must be determined whether, quite apart from the judge’s conduct, there are ascertainable facts which may raise doubts as to his impartiality. When applied to a body sitting as a bench, it means determining whether, quite apart from the personal conduct of any of the members of that body, there are ascertainable facts which may raise doubts as to the impartiality of the body itself. This implies that, in deciding whether in a given case there is a legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge (Morel v. France, §§ 45-50; Pescador Valero v. Spain, § 23) or a body sitting as a bench (Luka v. Romania, § 40) lacks impartiality, the standpoint of the person concerned is important but not decisive. What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (Wettstein v. Switzerland, § 44; Pabla Ky v. Finland, § 30; Micallef v. Malta [GC], § 96).

Consider pre action protocol document, eg the FEDJCAB document, consider also in pre action protocol document, had to be done under CPR Annex A template paragraphs the issue under paragraph 7 title the issue, ,,,,,,,COTTER WHAT IS ISSUE

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.,,,,,,

CONSIDER SAME DOCUMENT PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT,,ABOVE PAR 5 CITED and THE DETAILS OF,,,see scan annex a..

Consider emails, he is aware from email of 29.12.2017 , which he read , so aware of amended application 6.12.2017. where HMCS stance we did not get and in 2017 utterly unaware of possible application of 6.12.2017,,,,Consider email 21.12.2017

APPEAL AGAINST MR KROUWEL LETTER OF 5.12.2017

SKELETAL ARGUMENT

1/ Picketing at Bristol county court barrister told me to make complaint to police, malfeasance in public office, plus AGAIN perjury issue, warned police may try to brush you off.

2/ Clearly being brushed off by Sgt Price,, visit recorded,,,,,,,,,,,,,civil issues, make complaint to court, where I inform her I could not make a complaint.;;;;;;tpld malfeasance not a criminal offence.stated on tape ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where I state are you saying you refuse to investigate, where Sgt Price backs down, requests documents sent to her, eg CPS document, ,,,,,,,criminal offence, judges/police/courts convicted. [recently own police convicted Ibramahimi case]

3/Get reply from PCBird, ,,,,,I am investigating your allegations of malfeasance in public office, make complaint to HMCS, from 2/ aware I could not make a complaint. Accept i have been betrayed by Sgt Price, as wished to sweep under carpet as warned by barrister. .

4/ So complain to police, get reply from Mr Galloway,,,,,,advice was correct to complain to HMCS. Further states no evidence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed also by our third party.

5/ Statutory route to appeal. Asking police questions for appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application [10389 ],,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staff, admit applications made, which were ignored by the court. Have email from police saying if doing appeal need to enclose also our appeal claim form. Further asking police why statutory regulations of IPCC not followed in investigations, reference leaflet sent to me.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

WHERE COTTER STATES YOU WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT ] IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,NO I DID NOT PROVED FURTHER IN RECORDING WITH SGT PRICE,,,MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. From above what did it state,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, ,

Carry on quote…from ECHR

This implies that, in deciding whether in a given case there is a legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge (Morel v. France, §§ 45-50; Pescador Valero v. Spain, § 23) or a body sitting as a bench (Luka v. Romania, § 40) lacks impartiality, the standpoint of the person concerned is important but not decisive. What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (Wettstein v. Switzerland, § 44; Pabla Ky v. Finland, § 30; Micallef v. Malta [GC], § 96).

Can I show Cotter is corrupt and bent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (Wettstein v. Switzerland, § 44; Pabla Ky v. Finland, § 30; Micallef v. Malta [GC], § 96

Consider striking out MEDICAL RECORDS CLAIM ,,STATES … claim utterly incomprehensible, ????????????????????????????

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records………………………

IS IT UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLR

Consider application to obtain evidence to do judicial review application, only obtained as my MP involved. COTTER YOUR NOT ONLY CORRUPT AND BENT BUT YOUR IN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6

Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

As barrister and judge stated Cotter never going to grant application, turkeys voting for Xmas as would be inviting police in to investigate his COURTS criminal behaviour.Your utterly corrupt and bent, you are to deny evidence before you, why I went to police,,,,,,,,,,,,I told you to consider with pre action protocol document. ,,,,,,, to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

PARAGRAPH h/…Had to do judicial review application, with evidence withheld, utter breach of article 6, as Cotter with held evidence in files to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. .

,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Please see in scan Appendix 8, in page 2 of judicial review application, as historic problems with Bristol/Cardiff court ignoring applications, made judicial review application to Birmingham court ,practice directive 54.D 5.2 note application to Birmingham eg citing 2YJ03757 with HHJBrittans judgement that claim ,,,,,,utterly incomprehensible,,,HAVE WE HEARD THIS BEFORE FROM ABOVE,,,,as I stated a judiciary error as retired district judge said, Brittan states in N460 way claim should be made, from my website you have my claim and Brittans N460,,,,THEY ARE IDENTICAL,THIS IS SAME JUDGE IN EAGA CASE ASKED ME TO LEAVE SO HE COULD DISCUSS CASE WITH EAGA. EAGA,,later,,,,WE STATED WE HAD TO CATCH A PLANE WE DID HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO DISCUSS WITH BRITTAN HOWEVER WOULD NOT BE SEEN DISCUUSING CASE BEHIND YOUR BACK FOR YOU TO EXPLOIT. .Retired district judge stated I have retired, will not do application, however asap let judiciary know issues,eg

Page 1 APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Page 2 judicial review application stated ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

THIS IS NOT APPLICATON AGAINST COURT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,end of quote

WHY I WENT TO POLICE

Birmingham court reject my application, , they send to Cardiff Administration court. Under further evidence sent to court, ;; Under (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57).; the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,

add further data, as in N461 form application,,,,ask to consult court files via court order in application to Birmingham court

We asked Birmingham court for confirmation that this data sent to you, under Goc v Turkey ….., we asked Cardiff was it sent to you, you know response emails ignored.

So in application to Administration court , state,,on N461 form ,,,, ask for order to obtain evidence, via looking at files, ,,,, for example is email 7.12.2017 in file, eg Cotter aware of application 6.12.2017, has Cotter to frustrate and corrupt the judicial process removed from file. In judicial review application, consider evidence above, consider citing,,,in judicial review application,,,WHY I WENT TO POLICE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,eg

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment ……………….[remainderabove]

END OF QUOTE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION.

THIS IS ISSUE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS STILL GOING ON IN 2018,,,,NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER .WE CITE ISSUE FROM ABOVE JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION EG . ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even .today applications ignored [NOTHING TO DO WITH COURT JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER]

Pre action protocol of 2017 sent to HHJBigger, IT HAS FEDJCAB IN DOCUMENT FURTHER IN THIS DOCUMENT

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

From judicial review application,,,…………

Also sent tape of recording with Sgt Price.

WE GET CORRUPT AND BENT BIGGER ,,,,I WENT TO POLICE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURT SOLELY AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF DENYER.

HHJBigger to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ignores application, to look at file, utter breach of Article 6,,,

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

as again as barrister and judge stated was never to be granting this application ,,,turkeys voting for Xmas as inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour….and issues judgement scan 10551.

QUESTION 16 TO HMCS CAN YOU SUPPLY DATA UNDER Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). ,,,,,,,,,,,,,SENT TO BIRMINGHAM COURT .CAN YOU CONFIRM SENT TO HHJBIGGER eg ,,,,WHAT WAS BEFORE BIGGER . APPLICATION TO BIGGER TO LOOK AT FILES. .CAN YOU CONFIRM IGNORED IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.

a/ Showing corruption and collusion between Cotter /Bigger We have IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT scan 10551 , HHJBigger stated he will not take no for answer, no I will not ALSO as retired judge stated above not judicial language however the bastards have removed application 6.12.2017 from file, and from later emails as my advice HMCS later aware of application of 6.12.2017 , Cotter aware as quotes email of the 29.12,2917, BUT HMCS STATE COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION 6.12.2017 what did he read ??????????????????????????????????????? I will not use bad language, however again not judicial language, I will not take no for answer ,,BIGGER YOUR CORRUPT AND BENT AS COTTER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I SENT YOU COPY OF TAPE WITH SGT PRICE SENT YOU PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 2017 SO AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE ALL YOU ARE DOING AS CORRUPT AND BENT IS TO DENY EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF YOU. FURTHER YOUR SO BENT YOU HAVE EVIDENCE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, falsely deny their existence,[EVIDENCE] this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....,

b/ From pre action protocol document, which includes the FEDJCAB document, as police stated send FEDJCAB to show why you come to us, and further in that pre action protocol document as CPR regulations

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

Your corrupt and bent, Did not go to police as unhappy with judgements of HHJDenyer,,,numerous citing before Bigger including the FEDJCAB document.

Look at Cotters judgement,,,,malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence,,,so could not complain to JCIO, as they stated, ,,,,,,,,,again in JUDICIAL REVIEW application cited WHAT BIGGER READ WE SAY READ OR DID HE TALK TO COTTER AND COPY COTTERS WRONG JUDGEMENT,,,,,what did I say in judicial review application ,,,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of……………….

WE ASK IF NOT CORRUPT AND BENT HOW YOU COME TO judgement I WENT TO POLICE ,,,,MALFEASANCE [MISCONDUCT] IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,,YOUR BENT CAN I REFER TO APPLICATION TO YOU,,,eg

,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE )

Bigger your corrupt and bent remember application as retired judge stated ,,,make issue clear to court as soon as possible, what was application, can I paste,,,REMIND BIGGER AGAIN

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, [ I TODAY ADD IN BLUE,,, police, stated you have no evidence of malfeasance in public office of court ignoring applications,,,,,calling black is white,,,,where they have EVIDENCE scan appendix 2 lawyers correspondence that even their applications ignored, my MPs correspondence ignored,,,and court correspondence, ADMITTING eg,,WE IGNORED YOUR APPLICATIONS COME AND TALK TO US, COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS ] you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]

Bigger look at police statement scan 10594 ,,,we did not follow IPCC regulations. Look at police letter of 5.12.2017 its in my judicial review application

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do my appeal to you.

So police send letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,I have made no appeal eg we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, where police have court letter ,,,,we ignored your applications for years come and talk to us,,,so we have question in above application,,Cotter/Bigger come to identical judgement that it was vindictive and vexatious to make application. So I ask Bigger [accept no answer here] in a IPCC investigation, its perfectly acceptable for police to ignore IPCC regulations, further police admit we sent reply to your appeal where you have made no appeal. NO I WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR ANSWER I WILL NOT ACCEPT JUDGEMENT FROM YOU WHO IS CORRUPT AND BENT. .

PARAGRAPH I ,,,So application to court of appeal. Again Bristol court refused FURTHER application to look at files, again utter breach of article 6, eg what application did Cotter read when he made judgement January 2018,,,,ect. Please see scan 10547 application in N161 form which Legatt LJ ignored, to protect corrupt judiciary, again utter breach of Article 6. Please see application to Legatt as I state as at 1.7.2018. Application to look at files ignored, so as ,,,,

(Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,,,,,,,,,

So need to expand argument in email 19.7.2018,,,,stating leave document in file, what was in email of 19.7.2018 [FULL EMAIL IN APPENDIX3 MP where Legatt LJ aware waiting for reply to application to obtain evidence to do application to court of appeal, as stated initially,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this was just appeal at 1.7.2018.

QUESTION 17 TO HMCS IS THE EMAIL OF 19.7.2018 IN FILE. FURTHER WAS EVIDENCE BELOW IN EMAIL OF THE 19.7.2018

3/ We went to police after picketing at court over again as applications ignored, still going on from above, barrister told me to report to police malfeasance in public office as ignoring applications, from first correspondence to police,FEDJCAB,,EG

.,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications , reason went to police as courts ignoring applications. so no doubt in judicial review application , can i please quoted page 2 of judicial review application.,,,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,

4/ Numerous applications ignored over time and as JCIO stated complaint malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, criminal offence, and we can not investigate, further as cases over long period of time if an issue we could investigate it would be out of time, which makes nonsense of judgement you complained over HHJDenyer judgements, [no ignoring applications for years]and should have talked to JCIO, [no they could not investigate as JR application ]please put email eclosed from JCIO , also please put on file enclosed email .HHJBidder states police acted correctly , so they can ignore statutory regulations in their investigations, and send reply to an appeal, where THEY ADMIT NOT LODGED TAB21.

Note Legatt LJ has the FEDJCAB document why I went to police in that email, so this corrupt judge knows I did not go to police as ,,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of Denyer. ..end of quote

Legaatt states

a/ Facts of case in Cotters judgement, we have had NUMEROUS lawyers/barristers quoting ,,,,,who saw my website,, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,REASON TO GRANT APPLICATION BACK TO THE COURT.We have had High court judge asking question,,,,is this public school boy judges protecting their own. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing an appeal –Legatt in application has FEDJCAB document, has the 7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants [POLICE] who refuse to investigate.

Another judge/barrister from above stated cornerstone issue why you went to police,PLUS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,JCIO can not investigate criminal allegations.

The judgement of Bigger utterly wrong in every aspect, will prove with replies today, if not bad enough Legatt issues restraining order because I appealed .

All money claims as explained in synopsis must go through Salford county court. In November 2018 try to issue a claim, [not related to todays issues] please see synopsis. Court refuse to issue saying restraining order in place from ADMINISTRATION COURT CARDIFF. NO ORDER MADE TOLD TO CONTACT THIS COURT ,,,EMAILS IGNORED. THERE AROSE NO ORDER WHERE HMCS PAY 150.00 COMPENSATION,,,THEY ISSUE CLAIM,,,,,DEFENDANTS SETTLE WHEN CLAIM ISSUED. In Biggers judgement states restraining order in place, we may ask did Bigger call Legatt,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I forgot to do restraining order quoted in my judgement can you please do for me,,,the issue in

QUESTION 18 to HMCS what evidence was in file in November 2018 for you to believe a restraining order was in place, CAN I REFER TO RECORDED CALL TO YOU IT DOES NOT RELATE TO ORDER OF 2016.

PARAGRAPH J Wish to get restraining order removed, contact MP , with copy of email, where large number of lawyers emailed to see if could help under Legal Aid, NO, the day obtained judgement, 24.1.2019 had emailed HMCS and police to confirm application would be made to remove, as Legatts order, further as Legatts order asked in 7 days if any objection to application by police/HMCS. And to inform me by email. , no reply. As order after 7 days, no reply, hard copy application sent to HMCS 1.2.2019, proff of posting obtained. . From internet 2 entries one in lower case, one in upper case type ,,,,,,,,,,,fee to change/amend order…..50.00 sent with application 1.2.2018. eg from further HMCS document

•Application to vary (amend/change) a judgment (or order), suspend enforcement or suspend a warrant of possession or stay at High Court £50.

Eg to vary, amend order

Via (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,further evidence sent where HMCS demands 528.00 to remove restraining order. In Legatts LJ order states he would hear application, where issue challenged 1.2.2019 day 1 under ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

………………..2/ CONSEQUENCES

a/ We ask Legatt LJ that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of Legatt LJ from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAPcomplete document , plus scan 13.4.2017 [same reference today] letter,in Appendix 1 , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAPcomplete in pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

further

b / Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly Legatt LJ had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as he stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process ,……………………

The court of appeal Master replies no promises,however states application to remove restraining order would be done by Legatt OR another judge , demands 528.00 to remove. Email to HMCS to obtain evidence to do application…

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 3

asking for information, did you get email of the 13.7.2018 and 19.7.2018 , in it has FEDJCAB document,,,,,,,,,,,,in that email cite tab 21 which is scan 10475 and 10594 so Legatt LJ aware of claim in judicial review eg police send reply to appeal where from police letter accept no appeal made . Indicate contradictions in court fee ask for confirmation,,,,,,,,,,,,EMAIL IGNORED.

QUESTION 10 TO POLICE. YOU WERE INFORMED DO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBIITY FOR LOST MAIL PLEASE DO REPLIES VIA EMAIL. IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL , IN ADMINISTRATION COURT IN COURT OF APPEAL YOU HAD CHANCE TO DISPUTE FACTS eg from court of appeal,,, The court via order asked me to serve numerous documents, eg court letter 26.7.2018 order to serve, eg,,,,,,,respondents [police/HMCS] are not required to take any action at the permission stage, unless directed by the court .In all cases however the respondents is permitted and encouraged to file brief written statement setting out any reasons why permission should be refused in whole or in part.,,,,,,, The parties made no statement, as in judicial review application and in pre action protocol document, they accept facts., Can you confirm you issued no correspondence with the courts, if you did can we please have copy,,,,,you accepted facts. From High court judge who saw my website, advised if you had at any stage then Legatt would have awarded costs. Can you further confirm you made no objection to removal of restraining order.

QUESTION 19 TO HMCS. DID POLICE OR HMCS EVER MAKE ANY APPLICATIONS TO ANY COURT DISPUTING ANY OF MY APPLICATIONS. . WE DID GET FROM YOU,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SORRY VERY LATE OUT OF TIME IN COURT OF APPEAL STAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE WE WILL NOT ISSUE ANY DOCUMENTS UNLESS ORDER FROM JUDGE ,ITS AN ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE WE DO NOT WISH TO BE INVOLVED. CAN YOU CONFIRM EMAIL SEEKING INFORMATION TO DO REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER WAS ALSO IGNORED, AGAIN YOU HAD NO COMMENT TO MAKE. IF REPLY CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY.

Issue to get refund of fee as application 6.12.2017 not considered, at Resolver stage , police wanted to go direct to ombudsman , now change mind want to go to escalate stage first. Stance we did not get application 6.12.2017 and in 2017 utterly unaware of it.

PARAGRAPH K We can draw threads together,,,FOR ,removal of restraining order,,. Issue for ombudsman, and Legal Aid board, HOWEVER issue to ombudsman does not relate to judgements of the court, eg merits of case. Need further information,,

QUESTION 11 TO POLICE ,,PCBird states I contacted HMCS and was told judges/staff at HMCS immune from proceedings, and way to deal with issue, malfeasance [misconduct] in public office ignoring applications for years, was via JCIO , who told you this , can we have date and person who supplied information, see asked 14 times

QUESTION 20 TO HMCS ,,Can you confirm police allegation in question 11 to police ,and who was person who supplied information to police. In terms of co/1/2018 why was I not allowed to do application, can I refer to my complaint, after you stated,,,,,,,,,court lawyer prepared papers.

From another legal source sent under a loophole

Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".

The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers

AS MY MP CAN NOT GET INVOLVED IN JUDGEMENTS OF THE COURT. ONLY ISSUE APPLICATION 6.12.2017 NOT READ BY HHJCOTTER ADMITTED BY COURT ,,, AGREED WITH COURT REFERED TO OMBUDSMAN FOR REPAYMENT OF FEE,,,,eg RESOLVER INVESTIGATION AT END. . WE HAVE JUDGEMENT OF LEGATT LJ HHJCOTTER JUDGEMENT IS COMPELLING EVIDENCE,,MIND MADE UP SHARING V PRESTON CC [2012] but COTTER ,DID NOT READ APPLICATION 6.12.2017 ,,DID NOT GO TO POLICE OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER WENT OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES therefore COULD NOT REPORT TO JCIO ,,SEE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT, WHICH WAS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL AND BEFORE LEGATT,,,, EMAIL 13.7.2018. WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST POLICE INSP O MAHONY ADMIT MY CLAIM. BECAUSE I APPEALED RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED. CAN NOT AFFORD FEE TO APPEAL LEGAL AID LAWYERS WILL COVER THEM IN EMAIL. ONLY OPTION TO OFFEND eg SHOPLIFTING TO RAISE INJUSTICE TO MEDIA IN MAGISTRATES COURT ,INFORMED LOCAL PAPER .ASK QUESTIONS APPENDIX 1 AND ASK PSU FOR HELP

philip.jones88@btinternet.com

22/08/2019 10:11

1818

1.5 MB

Scan10494.JPG

895.3 KB

Scan10475.JPG

1.4 MB

Scan10063.JPG

1.1 MB

Scan10573 (2).JPG

1.5 MB

Scan10551.JPG

1.3 MB

Scan10594.JPG

574.4 KB

Scan10345.JPG

21.9 KB

APPENDIX 1 COURT OF APPEAL document satjuly.docx

13.5 KB

appendix2final.docx

7.8 KB

APPENDIX 3 The issue for years applications to Bristol county court.docx

14.4 KB

APPENDIX 4 COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE HMCTS.docx

1010.7 KB

APPENDIX 7 FOR LEGAL PROFESSION SKELETAL ARGUMENT OF EVENTS WHERE ASK FOR LEGAL HELP OR SUGGESTIONS FOR ADVICE.docx

35.5 KB

fatalevidencedenyer APPENDIX 8.doc

14.5 KB

APPENDIX 9.docx

1.3 MB

cotterlate 001.jpg

943.1 KB

Scan10246.JPG

723.1 KB

APPLCATION2013 001.jpg

9.5 KB

APPENDIX 10 ALSO SENT SCAN 10573.docx

Show all 18 Attachments

Save all as ZIP

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES DEFENDANTS CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON SOMERSET POLICE INTERESTED PARTY HMCS CASE NUMBER CO/2018;/1731 NEW NUMBER 2019/PI/11025,,,Jack we ask parties to do replies via email, and copy you in reply

EMAIL TO JACK LOPRESTI MP

Jack Goodmorning,

Can i start thanking your staff for help,where court has just paid 150,00 compensation over a side issue relating to todays issue, therefore was able with this evidence to advance further arguments today . please see below.

We cite today numerous times Human Rights Article 6 regulations,,eg

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

A party to the proceedings must have the possibility to familiarise itself with the

evidence before the court, as well as the possibility to comment on its existence, contents and authenticity in an appropriate form and within an appropriate time (Krčmář andOthers v. the Czech Republic, § 42; Immeubles Groupe Kosser v. France, § 26),

Jack you can not get involved or ombudsman or as Resolver stated in our regulations, , in court judgements ,,, just asking today 2 small side issues , NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS ,,,one as Appendix 4 regulations for you to present this document to ombudsman,,,, was a Resolver investigation, where court state we have no further comment to make, and agree end stage for you to refer to ombudsman, . ,,,,, issue ONE of repayment of court fee, Court agreed you can as Appendix 4 refer case to ombudsman, as will not take up review section, as in Resolver investigation they have no further comment to make, eg application i had paid for, 6.12.2017 removed to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process . Courts Mr Hunt in email ,,We have no record of receiving an application from you via email on 6 December 2017,,,, [as you will see Appendix 7, court utterly aware of application quotes it in judgement ] .The ombudsman would need this background document however . From Appencix 4 have gone through stages complain,,,,not resolved,,,go to Resolver,,,,court states we have no further comment to make,next stage not relevant and agreed case you can refer to ombudsman as Appendix 4, and will not go through next steps as Appendix 4.

Further asking you , ISSUE 2 today for you, to present this document with answers from parties to requested questions ,,,,,please see Appendix 1 ,,,,require answers to questions for you to present document to the Legal Aid board ,,,,,therefore they would be aware of full merits what evidence do you have where you seek help,.Would be aware i had made applications, with no offers of help, as i ask lawyers /agencies to confirm no offers of help today, We had asked them in 2017 , no reason to believe they can help, now ,can inform legal aid board no help avaliable. The issue for them/lawyers in Appendix 7 , with fuller evidence if required in www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com. The issue for legal aid board,,,,,

However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

The question whether or not Article 6 requires the provision of legal representation to an individual litigant will depend upon the specific circumstances of the case (ibid.; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 61; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, § 48). What has to be ascertained is whether, in the light of all the circumstances, the lack of legal aid would deprive the applicant of a fair hearing (ibid., § 51).

However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). ,in the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:….

Entitled to legal aid with it no court fees payable, however without legal aid due to circumstances need to pay court fee, ,can not afford fee,,,,so can not get access to the court...

In terms of answers also covered Chief Constable , as reply required by legal aid board, eg grounds, …his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid). for example reason I came to police. As High Court judge stated, who saw my website, this whole judiciary case fails, if you went to police over criminal offences, ,,,,the reason I went to police,,,,, picket at court ignoring applications for years, barrister told me to report malfeasance in public office to police, a criminal offence, in recording of meeting , Sgt Price asked for dissection of CPS document on malfeasance in public office,with my comments to be incerted in text,,,eg , the FEDJCAB document,,, FEDJCAB document was also in pre action protocol document, and the pre action protocol document ,,,,had to be produced, via CPR statute ,,,template paragraphs, under Annex A, under paragraph 7,CPR call,,,,,,,,,,, THE ISSUE,,,, eg reason I went to police,,,,,

PAR 7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

We ask Chief Constable,questions,,,this document to PCC Ms Mountstevens , where asked to discuss with Chief Constable, a miscarriage of justice,,,,,for example do you have any evidence as court judgements,,,,,I came to you as malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJDenyer, if you have can we please have evidence, if you have no evidence as judge stated above, the judiciary case in tatters. And we have miscarriage of justice. Please read rest of document can not appeal as can not afford fee,entitled to legal aid, can not find anyone to help.Where ask you to contact legal aid board please with this document.[ further questions Appendix 1]

Ask court of appeal questions, Appendix 1 ,where require in one aspect need reply from judge,,,in general ,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , .eg ECHR ,,,,court stated can make application back to them,,,,This court have ignored these questions, remind them of Article 6 above again. We further cover PSU Bristol for help ,please see Appendix 1, and have covered the Bristol Evening Post ,big story, however do not have full facts yet as ombudsman report very important, first brick in wall. This document as i comprehend events mainly however produced for much later for use in magistrates court when before it, as via shoplifting every week can raise issue,,,,,in end in prison,,,,can not afford fee ,,,entitled to legal aid ,they can not help, ,denied access to a court, .Lets outline events in bullet points, in Appendix 7, for lawyers , Legal Aid Board and Evening Post and PCC Ms Mountstevens where ask her to pass the whole document to Chief Constable P JONES

2/ Eaga case comes before Lord Goldring with judgement,,,,,although getting judgement very badly wrong not a reason to grant judicial review..,,, Srickson v Preston county court EWCA 1132 [2007] ,,,why can the Bristol court not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing your appeal in Bristol without a transcript, and the award to Bristol court of . 500.00 quashed ,,,,never forgiven for this judgement .

3/ For years the courts ignore applications, outlined in my website. We obtain blackmail request from court,,,, to remove website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com or consequences ,,,,which was to issue restraining order in Feb 2016. Applications to remove 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 ignored, and you will see later 6.12.2017 application also ignored. Reason ignored to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process as HHJDenyer quoted AOIBS346/746 , HOWEVER at hearing of this case North Bristol NHS Trust [ NBT ]asked that judgement reads I actaed unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson, as DJWatson stated,,,,you asked to settle,,, therefore in all my applications quoted ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue, eg I had appealed as medical records ect still outstanding ,,,look at enclosure ,,,restraining order they ASK to settle and supply medical records,,every right to appeal ]

. We have applications numerous times for transcript ,,ignored by court. As you will see ask court today,,,,,,,,,,,,Appendix 1 ,, will pay for transcript ,,,have money from court recent compensation, please see below,,,,,,, if it shows as above DJWatson rejected application, I ACTED UNREASONABLY ,,,the court will refund fee….I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY .The details in attached statement,,,called restraining order, emailed to parties and court of appeal again 28 .6.2019 saying if facts untrue to email me/court Applications 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 6.12.2017 to remove this restrainding order ignored, where i stated,,,,,WHAT HAVE I DONE WRONG

HHJDenyer also quoted as main case of issue of restraining order B26YM042. Compuwave produced program that would not work, as soon as proceedings issued stated we gave wrong program,,,,,, settled therefore ,they gave correct program, asked by email for hearing to be vacated, and settlement Tomlin order sent to court ,Was this removed from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, [as we will ask again application 6.12.2017] ,,,as comes before hearing as naturally struck out as parties did not attend court,so appeal,,,,matter ,settled,,,. NEED TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER ,,,,,VIA The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , .,

So keep asking is the settlement email on file,or did HHJDenyrt remove,,,, will return to again as you will see the later email of 7.12.2017 below,,,where raise issue again…7.12.2017 ,,,similar problem as you will see as asking if email 7.12.2017 in file,,,the end of email,,,7.12.2017

,,,,,,4/ We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please IGNORED

Picket at court 2016 where barrister told me to stop, and report issue to police, malfeasance in public office , court ignoring applications for years, , barrister said aware of your website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com also report the Eaga perjury issue.

4/ Record visit with Sgt Price ,barrister stated on internet was CPS document on malfeasance in public office, which I took to police. Sgt Price asked me to paste CPS document , and insert my comments for her consideration,why I went to police , later defined FEDJCAB document,,,,just start below [CPS document in black my comments were in red]

WHY I WENT TO POLICE

FEDJCAB DOCUMENT eg why I went to police sent to Sgt Price ,,,,

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications

WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

We further state TODAY if Chief Constable disputes above to inform you Jack,,,,see Apprndix 1 questions.,,,WHY I WENT TO POLICE

Also sent letter enclosed of 13.4.2017, further of relevance Sgt Price states on recording ,,,,, will not give to officer if not a criminal offence, so therefore aware could not take to JCIO. [judicial conduct investigation office]

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) ……………………….what I was advised to do

JCIO STATE from website,,,,,,,,,,,, …

Can I complain to you because I believe a judge is involved in corruption or has committed fraud?

No. Such allegations would be a matter for the police.

5/ Sgt Price accepts perjury and malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years criminal offences as she gives to PCBird,. PCBird contacts Bristol county court where told the way of dealing with these criminal offences is via JCIO. ????????? PCBird also states we have no evidence anyway,malfeasance in public office ,ignoring applications, ,ALSO THIRD PARTY CONFIRMED THIS ,,,, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. We have Jack [Lopresti MP] ,,,your Mr Cobbs correspondence ignored, over issue, we have lawyers application ignored, we have numerous documents date stamped by the court, please see enclosure date/stamped by the court ignored, called applcation 2013 made as court order i scan 10063,,,we have correspondence from the court,,,,,WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS COME TO COURT TO DISCUSS WITH US. In terms of cited enclosed application date/stamped by court,,,application 2013... ,had call do not approve of a few of your applications to my court, however will not stand by when corruption is going on, they have made mistake still one of your applications ignored in 2YJ03757 in file. Record at court yes just one,Mr Blair states on recording ,,,,,,,,,,,,our Mr Tile sent to Administration court Cardiff. Make complaint to Bristol court, please see enclosure there was court order to send to HHJDenyer scan 10063 . Application,,,,, complaint ignored by Bristol court, take up issue with court lawyer in Cardiff, please see reply.

See we have asked 32 times,,,,Bristol court on recording stated [Mr Blair] ,,,,,,,,,,,Mr Till sent to Cardiff, where we ask Cardiff,,,,,,,,,,,,did you obtain. Take up issue with court lawyer,Cardiff ,, please see email enclosed. Court staff [Cardiff] inform me later note on file ,,,,NOT TO DISCLOSE CONTENT OF FILE WITH ME,,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6.,,,,,, The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37)., Warned by barrister may be brushed off.eg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

UK COP WATCH

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……

6/ Need to say I as stated day 1 sympathy with police, they try to investigate criminal offences, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, perjury issue, where Bristol court states way to deal with issue is via JCIO where police stance, today ,, we did nothing wrong, we were told correct way was via JCIO.

BUT THIS BRISTOL COURT IS CORRUPT AND BENT THEY ARE AWARE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES,,,, PERJURY ,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO,,,,,AND AS JCIO STATE ITS AN ISSUE FOR POLICE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES

7/ NOTE ,,,We reference letter from Insp O Mahony scan 10594 …need to clarify issue not related today. I had fall at home where ambulance services had to break in. Ambulance staff contact police as property not secure, coming home after 4 days, a small piece of wood over broken glass, and water entered property. Complain to police where informed from recording instructed contractor to board up whole window, where I remove complaint, and thank Insp O Mahony for excellent service. She states as regulations I need to talk to you, to close case, where I stated I refuse to talk until I get answers to todays issue before you Jack. Where again excellent service where she confirms defendants did not follow IPCC regulations in todays issue, please see below.

Take up issue with IPCC, [todays issue] now one of their investigations, please see letter enclosed from Insp O Mahony scan 10594 where she admits IPCC regulations not followed in their IPCC investigations .

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

In enclosed letter of Insp O Mahony scan 10594 ,,, police admit in todays IPCC investigation IPCC regulations were not followed. Further admit in letter 5.12,2017 …scan 10475/10494

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.

Police maintain email 22.7.2017 was appeal,,,,eg police maintain ,we had no evidence of perjury or malfeasance in public office IGNORING APPLICATIONS ,,,I however I have made no appeal, facts explained in judicial review application..I STATE WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER THE 28.7.2017

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]

Wish to do a police appeal, ask questions above plus others , 11 in total where say in email 22.7.2017 with no reply to questions , would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017 that we had no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, ,,,,,where police send letter 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal,,,,I have made no appeal. Go back to IPCC where told you need a judicial review

8/ Entitled to legal aid, however could not find anyone for help. Contacted Avon law centre, Pro Bono Unit, Bristol university pro bono unit ect also. .

9/ Pre action protocol document contained the FEDJCAB document , SO CORRUPT AND BENT JUDICIARY UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE ,,,further pre action protocol had to be produced via CPR statute paragraphs template Annex A eg under par 7 what was ,,,,,,,,,,,,the issue as CPR asked…INPREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT

PAR 7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

Further in pre action protocol document the issue stated again so no doubt,,

We have for many years Bristol county court BCC ignoring applications, for example, please see appendix 1 at end of this document, where also human rights issue here as court refused to give me a defence, note document stamped/dated by court, a case i won.Please see appendix 2 where court order to ask HHJDenyer for oral hearing, ignored , told via court order to make second application, note this receipt for second application again date/stamped by the court, appendix 2. Ignored ,resulting in miscarriage of justice,,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence he made application to correct, .

Application 26.2.2016 again ignored, picketing at court where barrister told me to stop, stated a commercial lawyer not my direct field, you have good new claim ,clinical negligence, wait until out of time to issue proceedings and then take to the ECHR, eg for example

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]

Pre action protocol document emailed to police and court on the 16.9.2017 , where from CPR directives court/police given chance to dispute facts, did not dispute, accepted facts. . From pre action protocol document police did not dispute facts , as informed HHJCotter in email 10.12.2017,,,eg why I went to police [the defendants].

There was pre action protocol for judicial review ,,,,,,,,ignored by police.

10.12.2017 email to court ,,,,,,,,,, There was pre action protocol for judicial review ,,,,,,,,ignored by police. …….SO HHJCOTTER AWARE OF PRE ACTION PROTOCOL ,,,WHY I WENT TO POLICE ,,,,FACTS NOT DISPUTED.

10 / Due to restraining order need to ask court to issue proceedings. Send note in email 17.11.2017 with N244 form eg,,,,I STATE , ,,,Picketing at Bristol county court, barrister told me to stop, told not my direct field however complain to police, clear evidence malfeasance in public office. Further in new excellent claim ,,,,,,where cite again reference from pre action protocol document,,,,.

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS] ,,,,,,HHJCOTTER UTTERLY WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE,,,,,, where HHJCotter asks for fee. Retired judge who saw my website , said also we want restraining order removed, court may throw this at you later,,,,,THIS WAS EXCELLENT ADVICE . Visit court 5.12.2017 had problem with laptop , pay fee visit RECORDED ask for N244 in file,,,write on N244 not to be sent to HHJCotter,application removed, application to follow next day, after repair to laptop, or could do at library. [facts on recording] ,,,,,,,

(Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

. Application 6.12.2017 emailed, with new N244 form where in order required,section ,,,,,,,,,,,,I ,,state application also for removal of restraining order Judge advised emailing next day to ensure application I had paid for considered by HHJCotter, of 6.12.2017 eg

07/12/2017 - 09:58 email ,,,,[NOTE FROM ABOVE THIS EMAIL 7.12.2017 ASKED IF SETTLEMENT EMAIL,,,,B26YM042 ON FILE]…….7.12.2017 EMAIL

1/ In application yesterday requested that page one of N244 lodged previously was removed and replaced with document sent to you yesterday. Can you please confirm done.,,,,,,,,IGNORED SO ,,,

Email 21.12.2017,,, Goodafternoon,

1/ We have application to remove, restraining order, before HHJCotter. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IGNORED SO

Email 29 12.2017 where I state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[WE KNOW COTTER OBTAINED EMAIL AS QUOTED IN JUDGEMENT PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENT]

11/ Retired judge cited in judicial review ,,,,

It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed,Was also referred to local judge and barristers paper on malfeasance in public office,,,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Have I been wronged by defendants, ,,, criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. HAVE I BEEN WRONGED WE ASK ,,,, we have a IPCC investigation, they admit we did not follow IPCC regulations, I am allowed to appeal their judgement,,,,,we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, and perjury issue, [where court states we ignored applications come and talk to us,,,,police stance we have no evidence of perjury, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness] where in letter 5.12.2017 admit I emailed asking for data to do appeal, ,,,,,, we had no evidence malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, saying with no reply would do appeal on/after 28.7.2017,,,,then writing on the 24.7.2017 saying we took your appeal as email 22.7.2017. I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL

HAVE I BEEN WRONGED OR ARE CORRUPT AND BENT JUDICIARY HAPPY THIS OCCURRED,,,,, IN IPCC INVESTIGATION THEY CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO APPEAL WHEN ONE NOT LODGED ,,,APPEAL THAT WE HAD NO EVIDENCE FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,WE HAVE COURT SAYING WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS

12/ As soon as retired judge saw judgement stated not judiciary language however the bastards have removed application 6.12.2017 from file, record at court ,true,,, not sent, barrister stated should not be recording inside court get statement, court ignored correspondence,,,so,,,, please see Ms Bowyers sworn statement, courts Mr Hunt in email also admit not sent to HHJCotter…

We have no record of receiving an application from you via email on 6 December 2017,,,

,IN JUDGEMENT OF 9.1.2018 HHJCOTTER CITES EMAIL 3.1.2018 [FROM ABOVE LORD GOLDRING,,,,WHY CAN THIS COURT NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK] PLEASE SEE ENCLOSE WHERE HHJCOTTER ADMITS MISTAKE ITS EMAIL 29.12.2017,,,WHERE AWARE FROM THAT EMAIL APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 AND FROM ABOVE I CITE AGAIN

Email 29 12.2017 where I state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

For example recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair where i wrote on N244 form amendment would be sent to application, not to sent to HHJCotter until amendment sent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[WE KNOW COTTER OBTAINED EMAIL AS QUOTED IN JUDGEMENT PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENT]

Application for repayment of fee ignored, as application I paid for of 6.12.2017 not sent to HHJCotter, ,,,comes before Resolver, and only in last few weeks the court agree as Appendix 4 regulations, Jack you can refer to ombudsman, as court have no further comment to make,,,as I stated nothing to do with judgements. Ombudsman will look at case all I can see is a defence ,,,,,you have to pay for HHJCotter to hear. Yes I paid for 6.12.2017 application,,,,eg removal of restraining order,,,,,utterly ignored in judgement Mr Hunt,,,.

We have no record of receiving an application from you via email on 6 December 2017,,,

13/ HHJCotter states I went to police as ,,,dissatisfied over judgements of HHJDenyer, and should have gone to JCIO,,,,,,,,,,,,??????????,,,,,LOOK AT FEDJCAB DOCUMENT, LOOK AT PAR 7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

LOOK AT ALSO IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS] ,,,,,,HHJCOTTER UTTERLY WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE,,,,,,

POLICE DO NOT DISPUTE FACTS,,,EXPLAINS WHAT IS GOING ON,,,, FED ,IS A ,,,,,FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT,,,,,,AND JCAB ,,,,JUDICIARY [COTTER] CORRUPT AND BENT.

As barrister stated much later ,,,,,was never going to grant application, as HHJCotter corrupts and frustrates judicial process,,,,would be turkeys voting for xmas ,,,,inviting police in to investigate his courts criminal behaviour over years ignoring applications, malfeasance in public office.

14/ This application 6.12.2017 mainly to remove restraining order, in a few weeks time even if permission not given to issue proceedings , , could issue judicial review application as restraining order expired. . To get evidence to do judicial review ask court questions,,,,eg is email 7.12.2017 on file,,,,COURT/HHJCOTTER AWARE THEREFORE APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 ,,,aware therefor application of 6.12.2017 ,,,,,,, all correspondence ignored. Ask Mr Blair to look at file, WHAT WAS APPLICATION SENT TO HHJCOTTER CAN WE SEE THE N244 ,,,,WAS APPLICATION AND N244 ONE HHJCOTTER PRODUCED. TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. ???? where told your not looking at files showing us ignoring applications, make application to HHJCotter who will ignore, proved correct. Jack I contacted you, also copied court into email where we do now get a reply to contact Mr Blair ,,,,,aware said no,,,aware THEREFORE utter breach of Article 6. ,,between Cotter/Blair,,,stopping , ,,,,,,,parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , ., ,

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom,

The reply to application after 2 months SCAN and application to Administration court already made,.,,,would be now out of time was this COTTERS PLAN. ???????

15/ Application to Admin court Cardiff, court sent pre action protocol document of 16.9.2017 , eg FEDJCAB,,,,In N161 form, under further applications ask to look at files to obtain evidence, eg applications ignored,,,is email 7.12.2017 in file,,,,. What was application considered by HHJCotter,,,,was it something he produced to pervert the course of justice, did he forge my signature,,,,,did Mr Hunt Mr Blair produce document. ,,,,on the N244 wrote on it on the 5.12.2017 not to be sent to HHJCotter, application removed, will send next day document /new N244 form, which was done. We ask what N244 WAS CONDIDERED BY HHJCOTTER, eg WHAT I WANTED COURT TO DO. AS IN JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER THERE IS NO MENTION OF REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER WHICH WAS MAIN APPLICATION I HAD PAID FOR AS STATED IN APPLICATION 6.12.2017,,,,,WE HAVE EMAIL NEXT DAY 7.12.2017 WHERE COURT UTTERLY AWARE OF ABOVE FACTS. HHJBigger corrupts and frustrates the judicial process, ignores my application as he protects HHJCotter. We obtain HHJBiggers judgement enclosed which is IDENTICAL TO WRONG HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT . REMEMBER HHJCOTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION 6.12.2017 HOWEVER VIA CORRUPTION AND CONCLUSION COME TO IDENTICAL JUDGEMENT. ….BIGGER,,,,,I WENT TO POLICE AS DISSATISFACTION WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ??? WE HAVE WITH COTTER AND BIGGER UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ,,,,SENT FEDJCAB DOCUMENT,,,,PARTIES DO NOT DISPUTE FACTS,,,CONSIDER PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT,,,,,DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THEM TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

JACK WE ASK CHIEF CONSTABLE WE HAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE ,,,WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE I CAME TO YOU ,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ??????????????????????????????

16/ Application to court of appeal, where order to serve numerous documents, ,,,,eg letter of 26.7.2018 ,,,,no mandatory order to reply, however can I quote from court papers served,,,,,,,,,,,,,IN ALL CASES HOWEVER THE RESPONDS IS PERMITTED AND IS ENCOURAGED TO FILE A BRIEF WRITTEN STATEMENT SETTING OUT ANY REASONS WHY PERMISSION SHOULD BE FEFUSED IN WHOLE OR IN PART. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

We have asked parties / defendants/court of appeal if any replies were made, emails ignored, utter breach of Article 6,,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,

IMPORTANT HERE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT ,,, ,APPLICATION SENT TO HHJCOTTER AND HHJBIGGER AND LATER TO LEGATT LJ PARTIES COULD HAVE DISPUTED FACTS IN MY APPLICATION . COURT OF APPEAL STATED IF DEFENCE NOT RAISED NOW COULD NOT RAISE LATER. NO REPLY AT ALL FROM ANY PARTIES. ,,,PLEASE SEE EMAIL TO COURT AND PARTIES OF 4.10.2018 ATTACHED. LEGATT LJ AWARE THEREFORE PAPERS SERVED ON PARTIES AS COURT OF APPEAL ORDER WHERE PARTIES/COURT HAVE NO COMMENT TO MAKE ,,,

NOTE EMAIL ALSO CONTAINED THE FEDJCAB AND NOTE ASKING LEGATT LJ AS APPLICATION TO HIM OF 5.7.2018 TO LOOK AT FILES, ,,,,,,IGNORED WHERE LEGATT LJ AGAIN UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

,, IN COURT OF APPEAL APPLICATION,,,,ONLY RESPONSE,,,,COURT SAYING WE KNOW OUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE [court of appeal] WELL OUT OF TIME HOWEVER THIS IS ISSUE BETWEEN YOU AND POLICE ,,,THE COURT AS INTERESTED PARTY WE WILL NOT GET INVOLVED UNLESS COURT OF APPEAL MAKES ORDER FOR US TO BE INVOLVED.

PARTIES DO NOT DISPUTE FACTS WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS .DEFENDANTS ADMIT WE DID NOT FOLLOW IN THE IPCC INVESTIGATION,,, IPCC REGULATIONS ,,,,AND SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL YOU HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS WHEN YOU HAD MADE NO APPEAL

Need to raise another issue here,,,

Examples of failure to observe the equality of arms principle: this principle was found to have been breached in the following cases because one of the parties had been placed at a clear disadvantage: A party’s appeal was not served on the other party, who therefore had no possibility to respond (Beer v. Austria, § 19).

We informed parties do not take responsibility for lost mail, if any replies to email me, reason ask today,,,,did parties make any applications , we ask court of appeal please see Appendix 1,,,did any parties make any replies, if answer is no,,,,,,,,,,,,,then Legatt LJ aware parties do not offer any defence

WE ASK IN APPENDIX 1 QUESTIONS UNDER APPEAL BACK TO COURT OF APPEAL REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER,,, OR FOR MAGISTRATES COURT UNDER

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

FOR COURTS TO CONFIRM IF ANY RESPONSE WAS MADE.IF SO IN TERMS OF

Examples of failure to observe the equality of arms principle: this principle was found to have been breached in the following cases because one of the parties had been placed at a clear disadvantage: A party’s appeal was not served on the other party, who therefore had no possibility to respond (Beer v. Austria, § 19).

CAN I HAVE COPY OF RESPONSE PLEASE.

17/ From my website a barriste/judge contacted me ,,,,we have cornerstone issues, take a theoretical case defendant seen leaving bank after robbery, case comes before me as judge,,,however Council produces evidence ,,,,on this day defendant in closed prison,,,in your case CORNERSTONE why you went to defendants, if it was criminal offences ,perjury,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, [FEDJCAB] ,,,then could not take as they stated to JCIO. Follows police advice was wrong. This was a IPCC investigation, police [Insp O Mahony ] SCAN 10594 ,,,admit in this IPCC investigation we did not follow IPCC regulations, and admit email of 22.7.2017 ,,,it can not be an appeal,,,,,,from judge/barrister Ms Brunner paper,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,have I been wronged by defendants.

THIS UTTER FRUSTRATION AND CORRUPTION OF THE JUDICIAL PROCESS CONTINUES AS ASK SAME QUESTIONS IN COURT OF APPEAL APPLICATION N161 SECTION 10 UNDER OTHER APPLICATIONS,,,, TO LOOK AT FILES ,,,,,WHAT WAS APPLICATION CONSIDERED BY COTTER ect HOWEVER LEGATT LJ IGNORES APPLICATION. AS BARRISTER ASKED QUESTION,,,,,,,,,,,,IS THIS PUBLIC SCHOOLBOY JUDGES PROTECTING THEIR OWN WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE.

APPLICATION 5.7.2017 TO COURT OF APPEAL. ASK PARTIES FOR INFORMATION UNDER Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , ,,

THIS APPLICATION 5.7.2018 LEGATT LJ AWARE

PAR 8 THAT HHJCOTTER HAD NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. AWARE ASKING TO LOOK AT FILES TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE ,,,,AS I STATED APPEAL AS AT 1.7.2017 ,,,WHAT WAS THE N244 /APPLICATION CONSIDERED BY HHJCOTTER ,,,WAS IT ONE HE PRODUCED .HE DID NOT CONSIDER MY APPLICATION,OF 6.12.2017 ,,,ADMITTED BY COURT ,,,,,REASON TODAY COMPENSATION BEFORE OMBUDSMAN AS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 I PAID FOR NOT READ

APPLICATION 5.7.2017 TO COURT OF APPEAL. ASK PARTIES FOR INFORMATION UNDER Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , ,,,STATING WITH NO REPLY WOULD MAKE APPLICATION TO LEGATT LJ.[COURT OF APPEAL]

So application back to court to look at files, 13.7.2018 ,,,,asking to be sent to a judge that day,,,,email CONTAINED FEDJCAB DOCUMENT. SO LEGATT LJ AWARE WHY I WENT TO POLICE. Email 27.7.2018 contaned FEDJCAB document., as email 4.10.2018.

WE OBTAIN JUDGEMENT OF LEGATT LJ ,,,THE FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,,LEGATT LJ TOLD ADMITTED BY COURT ,,,HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017

We informed parties, after sending application to them of 5.7.2018 that if evidence requested was withheld would make application to Legaatt LJ ]eg court of appeal] in 7 days, eg email application 27.7.2018 was made,,,,,IGNORED

WHAT WAS APPLICATION OF THE 5.7.2018

Application to court of appeal…

SKELETAL ARGUMENT [as at 1.7.2018] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Lets look at this judgement paragraphs

PAR 1 /A ,,,,SO ISSUE AS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,page 2 ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence ignored,,,,,APPLICATIONS IGNORED ,,,,IN APPLICATION ALSO SAY STILL GOING ON IN 2018 GIVE EVIDENCE STILL NO REPLY TO APPLICATION 26.2.2018. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENT OFHHJDENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ITS ABOUT WE COULD NOT GET A JUDGEMENT . FAILURE TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION PAGE 22 TO 26 HHJBIDDER HAS QUESTIONS I ASK DEFENDANTS AFTER THEY SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE .,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO MY LAWYER WHO ALSO COULD NOT GET A REPLY, HAVE YOU TALKED TO PRO BONO UNIT,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT MANAGER,,EG 5 MONTHS LATER,,,;;WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE AS WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WANTED COURT TO DO,,,,MAY I SUGGEST DAY ONE ,,,,,EMAIL DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR APPLICATION,,,

PAR1 B ,,,,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) ……………………….

SIMPLE QUESTION ARE FACTS CORRECT LEGATT LJ HAS FEDJCAB DOCUMENT. WHAT DID I SAY IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,

FROM FEDJCAB FACTS CORRECT ,

FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]

THE FACTS ALSO CORRECT ADMITTED BY DEFENDANTS.

PLEASE LOOK AT INSP O MAHONYS LETTER SCAN 10594 THEY ADMIT THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION AND ADMIT IN LETTER OF 5.12.2017 SCAN10475/10494 THAT MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL,,,,I STATE WOULD DO ON/AFTER THE 28.7.2017. FROM LETTER ALSO ADMIT I WENT TO THEM OVER MALFEASANCE,,,,,NOT MISFEASANCE.

18/ Legatt LJ however rejects application, further via utter corruption issues a restraining order because I appealed.

Lets get this straight for media,,,,,,,,,,,this is claim where police are defendants, courts saying they did nothing wrong. So as they admit in a IPCC investigation,,,,,,no need to follow IPCC regulations, and can send reply to your appeal where defendants admit no appeal made,,,,,previous stated need to enclose our appeal form if appealing, on it HAS TO CONFIRM IPCC REGULATIONS FOLLOWED.

CORNERSTONE ISSUE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS,,,,FEDJCAB DOCUMENT,,,,COTTER/BIGGER/LEGATT IN FRONT OF THEM HAS FEDJCAB DOCUMENT ,,,,,,I DID NOT GO TO POLICE,,,,,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS DISSATISFIED BY JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. WOULD BE OF INTEREST AS ASK COURT OF APPEAL IF ANY CORRESPONDENCE FROM PARTIES TO COURT OF APPEAL,,,PLEASE SEE APPENDIX 1.

EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL THIS CORRUPTION

Also FEDJCAB ,,plus , PAR 7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

In preaction protocol ,,,,,,,,,,,also in email 21.12.2017 to HHJCotter was ,,

APPEAL AGAINST MR KROUWEL LETTER OF 5.12.2017

SKELETAL ARGUMENT

1/ Picketing at Bristol county court barrister told me to make complaint to police, malfeasance in public office, plus AGAIN perjury issue, warned police may try to brush you off.

2/ Clearly being brushed off by Sgt Price,, visit recorded,,,,,,,,,,,,,civil issues, make complaint to court, where I inform her I could not make a complaint.;;;;;;tpld malfeasance not a criminal offence.stated on tape ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where I state are you saying you refuse to investigate, where Sgt Price backs down, requests documents sent to her, eg CPS document, ,,,,,,,criminal offence, judges/police/courts convicted. [recently own police convicted Ibramahimi case]

3/Get reply from PCBird, ,,,,,I am investigating your allegations of malfeasance in public office, make complaint to HMCS, from 2/ aware I could not make a complaint. Accept i have been betrayed by Sgt Price, as wished to sweep under carpet as warned by barrister. .

4/ So complain to police, get reply from Mr Galloway,,,,,,advice was correct to complain to HMCS. Further states no evidence of malfeasance in public office, confirmed also by our third party.

5/ Statutory route to appeal. Asking police questions for appeal,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ISSUE NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. For example Galloway accepts in his letter ,,,, court order to make application ,,,,,, applications made to the court that were ignored, emailed on regular basis for reply to applications which court ignored, back to 2013, , I give evidence for example lawyers /MP also tried to get a reply to applications, which were ignored. Recording with court staff, admit applications made, which were ignored by the court. Have email from police saying if doing appeal need to enclose also our appeal claim form. Further asking police why statutory regulations of IPCC not followed in investigations, reference leaflet sent to me.

6/ On the 22.7.2017 send email as police ignoring request for data, can I quote end of that email,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,will assume with no email reply [to questions] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there will be no reply and can do appeal to you.

,

IS CORRUPT AND BENT JUDICIARY SAYING ,,,,I WENT OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,AS DISSARISFIED WITH JUDGEMENT OF HHJDENYER.

19/ Court of appeal not only reject application, where parties do not dispute facts, but issue restraining order because I appealed.

IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT HAVE FACTS NOT DISPUTED,,,,BUT JUDICIARY STATE YOU WENT TO DEFENDANTS AS MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DISSATISFIED WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER??????????????????WHERE ARE WE CHINA ,,,,RUSSIA,,,BUT WE HAVE THREE WITH WRONG JUDGEMENT ,,,,WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY OF THIS 30X 30X30 ,,,ONE IN 27000 OR DO WE HAVE CORRUPTION FROM TOP TO BOTTOM. WE HAVE THIS CORRUPT COURT ISSUING RESTRAINING ORDER AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT.

I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS AS DISSATISFIED BY JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. WENT OVER PERJURY ISSUE AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,,,AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES COULD NOT TAKE TO JCIO. WENT OVER MALFEASANCE NOT MISFEASANCE,,,,WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS,,,THEY ADMIT MY ALLEGATIONS,,,,WHERE ARE WE CHINA ,,RUSSIA.

20 / We obtain judgement of Legatt LJ on the 23.1,2019, as order informed parties via email 24.1.2019 of appeal against restraining order, hard copy application to court on the 1.2.2019. Application to Bristol court to obtain data again ignored to do application to remove restraining order, utter breach of Article 6. From internet,,,,one in large type other in lower case states,,,, fee to vary court order 50.00, which was sent 1.2.2019 with application. We had outstanding issue with Resolver over HHJCotter ignoring application of 6.12.2017 ,,,,,where now at stage to refer to ombudsman so contacted court of appeal again with further new evidence,,,,,,,,

(Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

In application stated……………..if I need to appeal restraining order Legatt LJ in order stated I must make application to him which I object to as I stated,,,,

We ask Legatt LJ that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,[[,BUT HE DID NOT READ MY APPLICATION CONFIRMED BY COURTS MR HUNT ]],but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAP document , plus 13.4.2017 letter,I,,, , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAP in pre action protocol document confirming facts ,as criminal offences could not take to JCIO.

Where court sends application to Master, ,,,,,comprehends application as Master states would be considered by Legatt LJ or another judge, supplies new claim number 2019/pi/11025 and demands over 500.00 to hear application to remove restraining order.

21/ Tried to issue proceedings at Salford court in November 2018. Where from recording court states we have been informed a restraining order in place, not one of Feb 2016,you need to pay fee. In discussion recorded ,,,,court states information from judges at Cardiff Administration court, told get statement from court, , before we will issue ,,,,my correspondence ignored. Jack [Lopresti MP] contacted you , your staff suggested options, where it becomes a Resolver investigation,,, after talking to PSU at Bristol county court. Where compensation paid by HMCS 150.00, claim issued ,defendants in this case then settled claim.

Note HHJBiggers judgement ,,,,,restraining order in place we could ask did he forget to make a new order, called Legatt LJ and asked him to make order.

22/ FEDJCAP document , plus 13.4.2017 letter,I,,, , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAP in pre action protocol document confirming facts ,as criminal offences could not take to JCIO.

Where court sends to Master, ,,,,,comprehends application as Master states would be considered by Legatt LJ or another judge, supplies new claim number 2019/pi/11025 and demands over 500.00 to hear application to remove restraining order.

21/ As a pensioner I do not have this money. Can I refer citings in respect to access to a court and legal aid

a/ ,,,,Right and access to a court 81. The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76 et seq.). 82. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 83. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim

· b/ A right that is practical and effective . The right of access to a court must be “practical and effective” (Bellet v. France, § 38; Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 76-79). For the right of access to be effective, an individual must “have a clear, practical opportunity to challenge an act that is an interference with his rights” (Bellet v. France, § 36; Nunes Dias v. Portugal (dec.)

c/ In the specific circumstances of a case, the practical and effective nature of the right of access to a court may be impaired, for instance: by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity:….by the prohibitive cost of the proceedings in view of the individual’s financial capacity: the excessive amount of security for costs in the context of an application to join criminal proceedings as a civil party (Aït-Mouhoub v. France, §§ 57-58; García Manibardo v. Spain, §§ 38-45); excessive court fees (Kreuz v. Poland, §§ 60-67; Podbielski and PPU Polpure v. Poland, §§ 65-66; Weissman and Others v. Romania, § 42; Georgel and Georgeta Stoicescu v. Romania, §§ 69-70, and conversely, Reuther v. Germany (dec.)). In these cases the Court considered the question of court fees that had been imposed prior to the institution of civil proceedings and had had the effect of hindering access to a court at first instance or at a subsequent stage of the proceedings for applicants who were unable to pay. In Stankov v. Bulgaria, § 5 the Court held that substantial court fees imposed at the end of proceedings could also amount to a restriction on the right to a court. In cases concerning court fees, the litigant’s conduct should also be taken into accout (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 120);

d/ . In examining the proportionality of a restriction of access to a civil court, the Court takes into account the procedural errors committed during the proceedings which prevented the applicant from enjoying such access, and determines whether the applicant was made to bear an excessive burden on account of such errors. Reference criteria have been laid down for assessing whether it is the applicant or the competent authorities who should bear the consequences of any errors (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], §§ 90-95, § 119). Where errors were made befor

e/ Content: civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge (Fayed v. the United Kingdom, § 65; Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], § 46).

f/ Principles of interpretation: The principle whereby a civil claim must be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised fundamental principles of law; the same is true of the principle of international law which forbids the denial of justice. Article 6 § 1 must be read in the light of these principles (ibid., § 35).

g/ . An effective right: the parties to the proceedings have the right to present the observations which they regard as relevant to their case. This right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually “heard”, that is to say duly considered by the trial court (Donadze v. Georgia, § 35). In other words, the “tribunal” has a duty to conduct a proper examination of the submissions, arguments and evidence adduced by the parties (Kraska v. Switzerland, § 30; Van de Hurk v. the Netherlands, § 59; Perez v. France [GC], § 80). In order for the right guaranteed by this Article to be effective, the authorities must exercise “diligence”: for an appellant not represented by a lawyer, see Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42;

Can I please refer to ,, procedural errors committed during the proceedings,by Legatt LJ. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it needs to be said, I accept more than likely this will become before magistrates court , however as retired district judge called Bristol court bastards, we need to say dealing with court of appeal that it is corrupt. From

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

A party to the proceedings must have the possibility to familiarise itself with the

evidence before the court, as well as the possibility to comment on its existence, contents and authenticity in an appropriate form and within an appropriate time (Krčmář andOthers v. the Czech Republic, § 42; Immeubles Groupe Kosser v. France, § 26),

even today do not have evidence as Legatt LJ ignores applications to ,,,,, make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,

eg what was application considered by HHJCotter,,,,,what was N244 HE CONSIDERERD,,,,,

PARTIES DO NOT DISPUTE FACTS WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS HOWEVER THIS CORRUPT COURT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT ….KNOWS COTTER DID NOT READ APPLICATION ,,,,I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS AS ,,,,DISSATISFIED OVER HHJDENYERS JUDGEMENT. THIS DOCUMENTS AS SERVED IN MY WEBSITE IF NOT CORRUPT SUE ME. I ASKED LEGATT LJ IN APPLICATION 5.7.2018 N161 FORM ,,OTHER APPLICATIONS TO LOOK AT FILES TO DO THIS APPLICATION AS COURTS UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 REFUSING TO SUPPLY DATA TO DO APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL.eg .IS EMAIL 7.12.2017 ON SYSTEM,,,,WHERE HHJCOTTER AWARE OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 WHERE FROM COURTS MR HUNT STATES APPLICATION 6.12.2017 HAD BEEN REMOVED. WE MAY ASK AS BARRISTER ASKED QUESTION IS THIS PUBLIC SCHOOL BOY JUDGES PROTECTING THEIR OWN AS LEGATT LJ IGNORES APPLICATION AS LOWER COURT DOING FOR YEARS.

We have legal aid issue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Legal aid

Granting of legal aid

123. However, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are practical and effective, in particular the right of access to a court. Hence, Article 6 § 1 may sometimes compel the State to provide for the assistance of a lawyer when such assistance proves indispensable for an effective access to court (Airey v. Ireland, § 26).

124. The question whether or not Article 6 requires the provision of legal representation to an individual litigant will depend upon the specific circumstances of the case (ibid.; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 61; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, § 48). What has to be ascertained is whether, in the light of all the circumstances, the lack of legal aid would deprive the applicant of a fair hearing (ibid., § 51).

126. However, the right in question is not absolute and it may therefore be permissible to impose conditions on the grant of legal aid based in particular on the following considerations, in addition to those cited in the preceding paragraph:

§ the financial situation of the litigant (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, § 62);

§ his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (ibid).

Hence, a legal aid system may exist which selects the cases which qualify for it. However, the system established by the legislature must offer individuals substantial guarantees to protect them from arbitrariness (Gnahoré v. France, § 41; Essaadi v. France, § 36; Del Sol v. France, § 26; Bakan v. Turkey, §§ 75-76

Effectiveness of the legal aid granted

However, assigning a lawyer to represent a party does not in itself guarantee effective assistance (Siaƚkowska v. Poland, §§ 110 and 116). The lawyer appointed for legal aid purposes may be prevented for a protracted period from acting or may shirk his duties. If they are notified of the situation, the competent national authorities must replace him; should they fail to do so, the litigant would be deprived of effective assistance in practice despite the provision of free legal aid (Bertuzzi v. France, § 30).

It is above all the responsibility of the State to ensure the requisite balance between the effective enjoyment of access to justice on the one hand and the independence of the legal profession on the other. The Court has clearly stressed that any refusal by a legal aid lawyer to act must meet certain quality requirements. Those requirements will not be met where the shortcomings in the legal aid system deprive individuals of the “practical and effective” access to a court to which they are entitled (Staroszczyk v. Poland, § 135; Siaƚkowska v. Poland, § 114 - violation).

Well lets address issues, entitled to legal aid, can we go back to paragraph 8 where we ask same lawyers again for help., see Appendix 1. This is not case of name and sham ,,,,,firms before may be busy ,and busy now. We just ask for reply, copy my MP into reply so can be sent in 7 days to Legal Aid board. We also ask for recommendations for others to contact, as need evidence say to magistrate ,,, we asked,,,,,option not open to get legal aid, reason before you…..

Access to court practical ,effective ,,,,,entitled to legal aid so court fee would be no problem .

Can I refer to barristers comment who saw my website,,,,,this whole issue why you went to defendants, from FEDJCAB document went over perjury,,,malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, as criminal offences could not take to JCIO. Defendants utterly aware as criminal offences , where defendants officers jailed as I stated in cited in email . They know criminal offence malfeasance in public office ,,,,know therefore could not go to JCIO. The legal board need to approve merits of case.

22/ So issue we seek legal help, assume can not obtain. We have issue with ombudsman over repayment of fee, from Mr Hunts email ,,,,,,application I paid for not sent to HHJCotter. We have utter corruption and conclusion as we have identical judgements as HHJCotter , however did not read application. We have all 3 courts as they corrupt and frustrate the judicial process,,,saying I went to defendants,.,,,malfeasance in public office as dissatisfied with judgements of HHJCotter,,,,utter nonsense take one example FEDJCAB ,,,. We have all 3 courts saying defendants did nothing wrong,,,,,,WHERE IN DOCUMENTS STATE IN YOUR IPCC INVESTIGATION WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND SENT REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED

WHERE ARE WE AS WE ASK FOR EXAMPLE EVENING POST RUSSIA CHINA

23/ Can not afford fee, leaving only option,,,shoplifting to expose these corrupt and bent courts to media via magistrates court. In terms of Ms Bowyers statement, only knew her via shopping, moved to Torquay,,,,left me many things,,,,including a 5L tin of red paint,,,,will throw in Bristol court doorway so can get to magistrates court to expose the corruption. First thing nothing to do with judgements, need ombudsman reply,,,with this can show,,,,Legatt LJ aware HHJCotter had not read application pf 6.12.2017, however in judgement states facts of case in Cotters judgement,,,aware of FEDJCAB ect, aware defendants admit my claim, aware defendants issued no defence to my claim, however stated I will issuer restraining order as you appealed,,,,WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA CHINA. My only option, with facts after reply to questions in Appendix 1. Can I refer to email to court of appeal of 28.6.2019, with copy to Bristol court , where as asking for years again,,,,,,can you ask HHJCotter in his judgement of 9.1.2018 is the cited email in judgement 14.11.2017 that contained,,

,,,Picketing at Bristol county court, barrister told me to stop, told not my direct field however complain to police, clear evidence malfeasance in public office. Further in new excellent claim ,,,,,,where cite again reference from pre action protocol document,,,,.

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]

IS THIS EMAIL OF 17.11.2017.NO EMAIL ON 14.11.2017,,,,LORD GOLDING ,,WHY CAN THIS COURT NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK.

Can I refer to paragraph 21, where Bristol court although utterly unhappy answering questions from PSU, could not do what they do to me, utter breach of Article 6

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France ,

PSU as usual excellent service suggested I just went to desk, where told what would be outcome, where they came with me to desk and asked questions,,,We ask them today,,,,for same help,,,email 6.12,2017 is it on file,,,,is email 7.12.2017…on file,,,what is N244 in file,,,,,,,,,,,

WE HAVE APPLICATION RETURNED DEMANDING MORE MONEY FROM COURT OF APPEAL WHICH I CAN NOT AFFORD. WE HAVE CORRUPT RHLJ LEGGATT [RL] PROTECTING THEIR OWN KNOWING IN APPLICATION 13.7.2018 WHICH HE IGNORED TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS THAT HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT WRONG EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL BIGGERS JUDGEMENT WRONG FROM FEDJCAB DOCUMENT .HHJBIGGER VIA COLLUSION WITH HHJCOTTER GIVES IDENTICAL JUDGEMENT TO COTTER. WE HAVE RL THE FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT COTTER IS CAB THE FEDJCAB IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL SENT TO HIM ON THE 16.9.2017 FURTHER PRE ACTION PROTOCOL HAD TO BE DONE VIA CPR REGULATIONS ANNEX A TEMPLATES,,,,EG,,

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

WE HAVE CORRUPT AND BENT JUDICIARY STATING YOU WENT AS YOU WERE UNHAPPY WITH HHJDENYERS JUDGEMENTS. ,CORNERSTONE WHY I WENT TO POLICE,,, RL UTTERLY AWARE FROM FEDJCAB ITS IN YES IN APPLICATION 13.7.2018 WHICH HE BINS ,,,ITS IN PREACTION PROTOCOL OF 16.9.2017,[,EXPLAINS EVERYTHING ITS FATAL AND JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT ] WENT AS JCIO/FEDJCAB STATED OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AND EAGA PERJURY ISSUE AND AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES JCIO CAN NOT INVESTIGATE. I STATED THIS IN APPEAL BECAUSE I STATED FACTS RL ISSUES RESTRAINING ORDER. TO STOP ME TAKING FORWARD ISSUES RESTRAINING ORDER BECAUSE I MADE APPEAL WHICH WAS TRUE. I CAN NOT AFFORD THIS TYPE OF MONEY THE TIME HAS COME TO START SERIES OF SHOPLIFTING GET BEFORE THE COURTS HOPE AT END TO END UP IN PRISON . DAY ONE POLICE ASK ME TO SEND CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AND DISSECT TO SHOW HOW IT RELATES TO MY CLAIM THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS AS I WAS UNHAPPY WITH JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES WITH PERJURY ISSUE COULD NOT TAKE AS Y THEY STATED TO JCIO AND WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS ,,,,DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY ADMIT MY CLAIM. THE FEDJCAB

THIS WAS IN APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL THAT WAS IGNORED

b/HHJBidder denying documents in front of him. States issues arose from HHJDenyers various judgements, which I did not appeal. [did appeals over years, applications ignored tabs 13 14 15 date stamped by court in judicial review application, WHICH MAKES NONSENSE IN DEFENDANTS REPLY NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE] ] This is complete utter nonsense, refer to page 2 of application ,its about many applications ignored and follow up emails ignored still going on in 2018. ,,,,,page 2 of application in judicial review stated

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Can I please refer to initial recorded conversation with Sgt Price where asked to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office, [NOT MISFEASANCE AS STATED IN JUDGEMENT] which I dissected eg FEDJCAB DOCUMENT

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my application PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[full document when appeal lodged] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

ISSUE IGNORING APPLICATIONS STILL GOING ON IN 2018 ,BRISTOL COURT UTTERLY AWARE OF 2018 APPLICATIONS FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION WHICH THEY AGAIN ARE AWARE OF JUST IGNORE] WE ASK WHERE ARE WE WITH THIS COURT WHERE FROM DAY 1 FROM ABOVE STATES TO DEFENDANTS ,,,, he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my application , CONSIDER PAGE 2 OF JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION IS IT NOT ABOUT APPLICATIONS IGNORED

Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

THIS IS ISSUE THAT HAS GONE ON FOR YEARS WHERE RHLJLEGGATT [RL] JUDGEMENT BRINGS THINGS ALL TOGETHER AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE WHO SAW THIS WEBSITE YEARS AGO SAID A JUDGEMENT WE CAN EXPLOIT. END OF QUOTE OF APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL

WHAT IS JUDGEMENT OF RL,,,,,,,I ISSUED RESTRAINING ORDER AS YOU APPEALED HHJBIDDERS JUDGEMENT. IN DIRECTLY RELATED ISSUE TO THIS RESTRAINING ORDER HMCS HAVE JUST PAID 150.00 COMPENSATION. EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL DID NOT GO TO POLICE[ DEFENDANTS] OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. WE HAVE FATAL EVIDENCE THAT WAS BEFORE THE COURTS THAT I WENT OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS FOR YEARS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS .AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES COULD NOT GO TO JCIO. DAY 1 DEFENDANTS SGT PRICE ASKED FOR DISSECTION OF CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, THE FEDJCAB PLUS DETAILS OF PERJURY ISSUE THE FEDJCAB ,,,,,,WHICH EXPLAINS EVERYTHING VIA TITLE FEDJCAB,,,eg ITS FATAL AND JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT [CAB] TODAY FATAL TO RL JUDGEMENT AND JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT .THE FEDJCAB [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT] THIS WAS BEFORE HHJCOTTER AND BIGGER AS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SENT TO COURT VIA EMAIL 16.9.2017. LATER A FURTHER SIDE ISSUE WITH DEFENDANTS OVER THIS PLEASE SEE DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONYS LETTER AND HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT. FURTHER PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT VIA STATUTE HAD TO BE VIA STATUTE CPR REGULATION PARAGRAPHS ANNEX A eg

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

WHERE HHJCOTTER/BIGGER AS CORRUPT AND BENT [CAB] STATE I WENT OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AS ANOTHER BARRISTER STATED THEY WERE NEVER GOING TO GRANT YOUR APPLICATION,,,,TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS AS WOULD BE INVITING DEFENDANTS TO INVESTIGATE THEIR COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR.FURTHER UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,TO DENY EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THEM, eg THE FEDJCAB, FURTHER HHJBIGGER STATES,,,,,IT WAS VEXIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS PAGE ONE LINE ONE IN MY JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION eg IN IPCC INVESTIGATION THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS, AND THEY SENT REPLY TO AN APPEAL, [eg WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE, IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS ] WHEN ONE NOT LODGED,,,,BELOW DEFENDANTS INSP M O MAHONY ADMIT ALLEGATIONS,

EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL AGAINST JUDGEMENT HHJBIGGER CAB

WORTH NOTING THE FEDJCAB BEFORE RL SENT BY EMAIL IN APPLICATION OF 13.7.2018 IRONIC WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS HE IGNORED APPLICATION.

FURTHER OF NOTE RL STATES FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT,,,BUT HE DID NOT READ APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 HE WAS AWARE OF APPLICATION HOWEVER FELT FIT TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE TO REMOVE IT FROM FILE

AS I STATED YEARS AGO CORRUPTION FROM TOP TO BOTTOM CORRUPT AND BENT [CAB] .WE HAVE BRISTOL COURTS MR HUNT IN EMAIL SAYING YOUR APPLICATION 6.12.2017 NOT ON COURT SYSTEM .....HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM SYSTEM ,,,BY HHJCOTTER OR COURT STAFF,,,,,,, MR HUNT ????.WE HAVE HHJCOTTER IN JUDGEMENT CITING EMAIL 29.7.2017 WHERE IN EMAIL AWARE OF APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 .IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION MR HUNT NOT ONLY HAVE PART OF THAT APPLICATION 6.12.2017 BUT HAS CONFIRMATION OF EMAIL APPLICATION 6.12.2017 GIVING TIME SET FROM EMAIL SCAN . AS THE CAB MR HUNT STATES WE DID NOT CONSIDER APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 WHERE I ASKED FOR REPAYMENT OF FEE WHERE HE FEELS FIT AS CAB TO NOT REPAY AS HE CONFIRMS IN EMAIL REMOVED FROM SYSTEM. NOW BEFORE RESOLVER

EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL ;;;;;;DETAILS BELOW,,,,, SIMPLE QUESTION PARTIES INFORMED OF CONTENT IN WEBSITE IF UNTRUE SUE ME FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT OR LIBEL,,,,AS ANOTHER BARRISTER SAID LETS SEE WHAT TACTICS COURT OF APPEAL USE TO STRIKE OUT THIS NEW APPLICATION

NOTE THIS SECTION THE REMOVAL OF WICKED RESTRAINING ORDER OF RL ,,,,,,THE REFERENCES CITED IN TEXT WHERE LAST ITEMS AT BOTTOM OF PAGE,,,,,,,YOU HAVE APPENDICES CITED DIRECTLY BELOW FOLLOWED BY TEXT WE AWAIT COURT OF APPEAL AGAIN ON EVIDENCE SUPPLIED TO STRIKE OUT AGAIN UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT

APPENDIX 1;;;;;;;; REASON PLAINTIFF WENT TO DEFENDANTS NOT CORRUPTED FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJCOTTER/HHJBIGGER TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS EG ALLEGATION AS WENT OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER ???????????????????????????????????????

WENT TO DEFENDANTS DAY 1 PICKET AT COURT ,,, TOLD BY BARRISTER TO REPORT 2 ISSUES TO DEFENDANTS. EAGA PERJURY ISSUE AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS. . SEEN BY SGT PRICE SHE ASKS ME TO DISSECT CPS DOCUMENT ON MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE,,, IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS AND TO SEND DETAILS OF EAGA PERJURY ISSUE. TO SHOW WHERE IT RELATES TO MY ALLEGATIONS , RECORDING OF VISIT WHERE RELEVANT LATER SHE STATES,,,,,IF NOT CRIMINAL OFFENCES WOULD NOT GIVE TO A MEMBER OF STAFF TO INVESTIGATE,,,WHERE PCBIRD INVESTIGATED SAYING WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS COMES UNDER WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS HE ASKED FOR SECOND JUDGEMENT WHICH CONFIRMED. HIS JUDGEMENT PLEASE SEE REF 1,,,LAWYERS APPLICATION IGNORED,,,. COURT ADMITS WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS WE DEFINE THIS DOCUMENT REQUESTED DAY 1 FEDJCAB [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIAL CORRUPT AND BENT] THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT

THIS DISSECTED CPS DOCUMENT FATAL TO JUDICIARY JUDGEMENTS ,THE DENOTED FEDJCAP DOCUMENT [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT] eg TODAY JUST START OF DOCUMENT THE FULL CPS DOCUMENT WAS IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION SENT TO PARTIES 16.9.2017 SO HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document , my comments were in red eg,,,,,

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Could not find transcript of Eaga case, misfiled, so sent a few days later, eg

31 Bibury Ave

Bristol BS346DF

13.4.2017

Good morning Sgt Price,

Can I issue apology for delay, in terms of Eaga perjury issue please find evidence, misfiled the transcript , have scanned just relevant pages, as you can see,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,my client does not know Ms Suggett or where these emails in his bundle come from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did district judge conclude,,,,a lawyer would not come all the way from Newcatle and lie to me, THESE EMAILS MUST BE FORGIES ,,,,,,when accused of perjury you can see letter where taunted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application, too late for you to do anything about it now. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

You have been supplied with CPS document on malfeasance in public office , where you asked to explain how it relates to my complaint. If you need more information please contact me, When picketing at court, as you know barrister told me to report to you malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications over many YEARS , ,plus above perjury issue. You were unaware of term malfeasance in public office, as you stated would not be given to anyone to investigate if not a criminal offence, lawyer informs me a legal name its ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,misconduct in public office , where he informs me your officers jailed recently over this criminal offence.

We have court ignoring correspondence,,,,,,openly saying we will ignore emails, as utterly bent and corrupt stopping me obtaining evidence, will be of interest in Cardiff Admin. court issue if one of your officers in Cardiff can obtain file ,do not expect you to travel to Cardiff, further as we discussed, is this a case against HHJDenyer /judges ignoring ,,,,,,,,,binning applications, or court staff malfeasance in public office ignoring not sending to a judge, or both working together .However we know in OBS08441 from my website, we have recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court where he confirms DJDaniels had ignored application, STATES THERE WILL BE NO REPLY TO APPLICATION ,as all he sent was just a note,,,,,Mr Jones should take up issue with judge at hearing,just igmored my application. We have no evidence not sent, you may have issue where staff say was sent and judges saying we did not see, the court utterly corrupt will not let me consult files, breach of Article 6.

P JONES

WE HAVE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SENT EMAIL TO HHJCOTTER 16.9.2017 AND PARTIES. THE FEDJCAB IN FULL WAS ENCLOSED IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT. .FURTHER WHAT OTHER EVIDENCE WAS BEFORE THE JUDICIARY. THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT HAD TO BE DONE VIA CPR PARAGRAPHS ANNEX A TEMPLATE eg CAN I CITE THEREFORE THIS ALSO BEFORE HHJCOTTER/HHJBIGGER ,,STATED FURTHER LATER STATED ,,,,, APPLICATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT [the pre action protocol paragraphs CPR template before HHJCOTTER/BIGGER]

6/ INTERESTED PARTIES

IPCC PO BOX 473 SALE M33 OBW 2017/086838 [IPCC]

NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST BRISTOL BS105NB [NBT]

BRISTOLCIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE 2 REDCLIFE ST BRISTOL BS16GR [BCC]

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

8/ THE DETAILS OF ACTION THAT DEFENDANTS ARE EXPECTED TO TAKE

We expect criminal offence to be investigated, the Home Office state all crimes should be investigated

THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT WE KNOW WAS BEFORE HHJCOTTER/HHJBIGGER BUT WAS ALSO BEFORE COURT OF APPEAL

So application 13.7.2018 to court of appeal

[[ CONTAINED FEDJCAB SO RL UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS FURTHER IN HIS JUDGEMENT STATES FACTS OF CASE IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT BUT HHJCOTTER READ WRONG APPLICATION BINNED APPLICATION 6.12.2017 PLEASE SEE REF 5. FURTHER HE IS AWARE FROM APPLICATION 13.7.2018 HHJCOTTER COMES UNDER BANNER CAB AS HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER FROM PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT . THE JUDICIARY ARE DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF IT TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 ]]

to obtain ,,,,,,,,,,,, relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

,,,APPLICATION ,IGNORED BY COURT OF APPEAL. IF LOOKING AT CONSPIRACY THEORY COULD SUGGEST COURT OF APPEAL IGNORING APPLICATION TO HIDE CORRUPTION OF HHJBIGGER/COTTER ……MY APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL BECAUSE OF THIS RESTRAINING ORDER MADE eg WHAT DID IT SAY

SKELETAL ARGUMENT [as at 1.7.2018] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Lets look at this judgement paragraphs

PAR 1 /A ,,,,SO ISSUE AS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,page 2 ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence ignored,,,,,APPLICATIONS IGNORED ,,,,IN APPLICATION ALSO SAY STILL GOING ON IN 2018 GIVE EVIDENCE STILL NO REPLY TO APPLICATION 26.2.2018. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENT OFHHJDENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ITS ABOUT WE COULD NOT GET A JUDGEMENT . FAILURE TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION PAGE 22 TO 26 HHJBIDDER HAS QUESTIONS I ASK DEFENDANTS AFTER THEY SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE .,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO MY LAWYER WHO ALSO COULD NOT GET A REPLY, HAVE YOU TALKED TO PRO BONO UNIT,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT MANAGER,,EG 5 MONTHS LATER,,,;;WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE AS WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WANTED COURT TO DO,,,,MAY I SUGGEST DAY ONE ,,,,,EMAIL DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR APPLICATION,,,

PAR1 B ,,,,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) Further these cases over a long period of time, so out of time to make complaint, defendants aware……………………………………….end of quote

CONCLUSION

DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER WENT OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES OF PERJURY, AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS OVER A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME AS JCIO STATED WE CAN NOT CONSIDER CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS, AND IF WE COULD YOUR OUT OF TIME AS WE HAVE 3 MONTH TIME LIMIT. ISSUE COVERED IN MY APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL WHERE I DISSECT HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT AS AT 1.7.2018. NOTE AS I STATED AS AT 1.7.2018,AS COURTS IGNORING CORRESPONDENCE TRYING TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE TO DO THIS APPEAL UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6. Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL, AS JCIO STATE AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE,,,,,AND EVEN IF WE COULD OUT OF TIME.

EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL AND BECAUSE I APPEALED RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED WHICH IS JUST VEXIOUS UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT ON THE FACTS

APPENDIX 2 IT WAS NOT VEXATIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS,DEFENDANTS ADMIT MY ALLEGATIONS therefore EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE APPEAL AGAINST HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT .IT FOLLOWS WITH APPENDIX 1 RESTRAINING ORDER MADE UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT ON THE FACTS BEFORE THE COURT

Retired district judge advised making issue clear to judiciary in any claim, asap, , therefore from page one line one of judicial application to HHJBigger ,,,,,,,,,,

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]

SO ABOVE VEXATIOUS UTTERLY WITHOUT MERIT,,,,,this is judiciary stance ,because you appealed we issued restraining order, challenged in todays application OR QUESTION TODAY ARE FACTS TRUE .I AM NOT ON TRIAL TODAY SIMPLE QUESTION FOR LATER USE,,,,DEFENDANTS IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL[ PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS ] WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.

FACTS Picket at court as court for years ignoring applications. Barrister told me to report to defendants malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, for years, still going on, plus Eaga perjury issue. PCBird states no evidence,I contact IPCC where complaint against defendants, so IPCC COMPLAINT,,,,,….Defendants Mr Galloway ,,,,,,state we have no evidence, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. Contact IPCC now one of their complaints, where supplied with IPCC regulations , these in judicial review application and court of appeal application. . Defendants state if doing an appeal need to complete our appeal form with your appeal. On appeal form, in judicial review /court of appeal applications, court aware have to tick boxes that IPCC regulations followed before defendants can consider any appeal .

Regulations of IPCC [summary]

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

IN LETTER BELOW LETTER FROM DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY

With regard to the letter which you left in Patchway front office for the attention of Sgt Price, I can confirm I have spoken directly with Sergeant Price. She said that she does recall speaking to you in the front office and tasking one of her officers to investigate a crime Malfeasance in a Public Office. However she cannot recall whether she ever received your letter. [THIS WAS ANOTHER COMPLAINT MUCH LATER OVER BOARDING UP OF WINDOW NOT RELATED TO TODAYS ISSUE,,,DUE TO FALL COULD NOT MOVE WHERE FIRESERVICE HAD TO BREAK IN AS I STATE NOT ISSUE TODAY,,,DO HAVE DEFENDANTS RECEIPT THAT THIS LATER LETTER WAS LEFT] She accepts that this will have been frustrating for you and as the Investigating Officer for your complaint, I offer my full and sincere apologies on behalf of the organisation that your letter was left unanswered.

Secondly, as requested I sent an e-mail to Hamish Galloway asking whether he had ever had cause to speak to you. Mr Galloway provided a response stating that;

1) He had no recollection of ever personally speaking to you

2) As a member of the Professional Standards office he had assessed a complaint from you (HC/CO/369/17) which was that an officer failed to investigate an allegation of malfeasance in public office by a Judge and officers from Bristol County Court.

3) Mr Galloway states that he recorded the complaint and then sent you a 'disapplication' letter on the basis that it was an abuse of the complaints process in that complaints/allegations against Judges and Court Officers are dealt with by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.

I understand that you then made a complaint against Mr Galloway (HC/CO/812/17) alleging corruption and malfeasance in public office. This complaint was also subject to disapplication on the grounds of being an abuse of the complaints process.

I hope this clears up your query with regard to Mr Hamish Galloway.

With regard to the boarding up of your window, I can confirm that I have listened to the audio for the call from Fire to Police in relation to the boarding up request and also the call from Police to Boing Rapid Secure in relation to the same.

I have ascertained that the Fire Service make the call to Police on behalf of the Ambulance Service. This is in line with the Joint Protocol agreement for persons collapsed behind closed doors. A request for boarding up is made for a wooden framed window 1200 by 400mm. Police then in turn call Boing Rapid Secure and request the same. I have listened to both calls and at no time is any mention made of when you may be returning from hospital. The duration of your stay in hospital is not mentioned at all. I can confirm that no police officers were dispatched to your property and that the only role of police in this matter was to request boarding up as requested by the Fire Service.

I hope that this investigation helps to resolve your queries and I hope you accept our apology with regard to your letter.,,,,,END OF LETTER

ADMIT IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.MR GALLOWAY NEVER TALKED TO ME ACCORDING TO HHJBIGGER VEXIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT . WE GIVE DEFENDANTS FINAL CHANCE DID YOU FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS ABOVE IF SO CAN I VIA EMAIL IN 7 DAYS HAVE DETAILS OF ALLEGED CONTACT,,,,,ALL CALLS IN OUT RECORDED COULD DEFENDANTS SEND COPY OF EMAIL IF ANY REPLY TO COURT OF APPEAL. WITH NO REPLY THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS EVIDENCE REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED WHERE DEFENDANTS DO NOT CHALLENGE FACTS. WHERE UTTER RIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT OF HHJBIGGER, AND EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE APPLICATION TODAY AS RESTRAINING ORDER AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT.

b/ From appendix 1 this was application over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years and Eaga perjury issue. Where Mr Galloway states we have no evidence, which comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness ,we ask 11 questions, these in judicial review application,,,,,have you talked to my MP,,,,,have you talked to lawyer where correspondence ignored,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT STAFF WHERE IN EMAIL STATE WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS,,,,asked TODAY to consider ref 1 enclosed today. Coming to be out of time, so email defendants 22.7.2017 saying with no reply to 11 questions, would have to do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017. There is no dispute about letter and contents,,,,

IN DEFENDANTS LETTER 5.12.2017 again in judicial review and court of appeal application, ADMIT CONTENTS MY EMAIL 22.7.2017 CAN NOT BE AN APPEAL TO DEFENDANTS, CAN I QUOTE DEFENDANTS LETTER 24.7.2017 ,,,,

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....

DEFENDANTS SENDS LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 SAYING REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL OF 22.7.2017 ,,,,I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL EMAIL STATED WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 CAN DO APPEAL TO YOU ISSUE BEFORE HHJBIGGER WHO STATES VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATION ,,,

SO IT WAS VEXIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS I AM NOT ON TRIAL,,,,,HOWEVER SIMPLE ISSUE IN DEALING WITH A IPCC COMPLAINT DEFENDANTS CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND DEFENDANTS MR CROUCH CAN SEND A REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHEN I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL.

SIMPLE QUESTION TO JUDICIARY YES MY APPLICATION WAS VEXIOUS,,,,,, DEFENDANTS CAN IF THEY WISH NOT ADHERE IN IPCC REGULATIONS IN AN IPCC INVESTIGATION AND CAN SEND A REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE DEFENDANTS ADMIT ONE NOT LODGED. SIMPLE QUESTIONS

WE HAVE FURTHER ISSUE AS DEFENDANTS COULD NEVER CONSIDER AN APPEAL ANYWAY AS IN DEFENDANTS APPEAL FORM NEED CONFIRMATION FROM PLAINTIFF THAT IPCC REGULATIONS WERE FOLLOWED,,,,,,,,,,,THEY DO NOT EVEN HAVE APPEAL FORM ITS LIKE TODAYS APPLICATION WITH NO N244 FORM. FURTHER IN ,,,,,DEFENDANTS INSP O MOH ONY LETTER APPENDIX 1 ADMIT IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED

APPENDIX 3

CO/1731/2018 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS RELATING TO TODAYS APPLICATION IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER

1/ Eaga case comes before Lord Goldring. Judgement,,,although getting judgement very badly WRONG not a reason to grant a judicial review, Srickson v Preston CC [2007] EWCA 1132, WHY CAN BRISTOL COUNTY COURT NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK, utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without a transcript , and award of 500.00 to Bristol court would be quashed,,,,,,,ISSUE EVEN IN 2018 UNABLE TO ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK WILL RETURN TO LATER

NEVER FORGIVEN FOR THIS JUDGEMENT.

2/ We have court ignoring applications. still going on in 2012. For example now have no defence in 0BS08441, as we have now a utterly different claim from the POC issued. . The defendants Royal Mail defence was by statute we need the ORIGINAL recorded delivery slip of lost item, before we can pay compensation , I had photocopy of recorded delivery slip , plus Royal Mail proof of posting that claim made,[original recorded delivery slip sent with claim] which defendants would now not accept in their defence. They then find claim, filed in wrong place, so now have different claim, just for lost mail, ask to amend the POC and seek new defence. Usual claim for lost recorded delivery. IMPORTANT AS YOU WILL SEE LATER ABUSE OF PROCESS AS ROYAL MAIL ON SAME FACTS KEEP DEFENDING, 2 CLAIMS BEFORE OBS08441 FOR LOST MAIL. Mr Blair at court office [recorded] states application ignored, not answered , APPLICATION IGNORED , he states on recording, had a note from file,,,,,DJDaniels if I visit ,,,,advised me to take up issue at hearing. You could see why ignored as in judiciary trap, would/could be struck out at hearing, court knows I may not have evidence, that I answered order, my copy date/stamped by court, only thing to save me. . . Defendants remember lost claim, now asked for order for me to supply claim number ect as application found by defendants, , done,,,,,,, my copy stamped /dated by court. WHERE CORRUPT COURT WRITES TO DEFENDANTS SAYING I HAD IGNORED COURT ORDER.[would i have evidence at hearing] Defendants barrister asks therefore at hearing to be struck out, as I ignored court order, I had proof I answered court order ,date/stamped by court, where DJWatson states ,,,something

Very very odd here, as he said …DJO Neil in order said she would strike out if you did not answer order in 14 days, must have seen your reply as she put down later for hearing, ALL PAPERWORK RELATING TO THIS ORDER SOMEONE HAD REMOVED FROM FILE. DID THIS OCCUR IN APPLICATION 6.12.2017 ???????

3/ OBS08441 was not first case for lost recorded delivery mail, where 2YJ03757 was another later claim, after OBS08441 , , comes before DJBrittan

NOTE in previous Eaga case DJBrittan asked me to leave so he could talk to defendants, defendants refused, saying I have to catch a plane, my investigations showed many hours , where I confront defendants, after hearing, in email, with reply,,,,,,true we would not be discussing case behind your back with DJBrittan for you to exploit later,,,SHOWS CORRUPTION OF THIS COURT AND DJBRITTAN

This is abuse of process in bundle I had barristers internet article on abuse of process. At hearing told will not consider,DJBrittan going to any length to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, , in bundle for hearing had copy of barristers internet article on abuse of process, skeletal argument for hearing cases cited,,in barristers article,,eg

,GoreWood v Johnson [2000] ,,,,should not be vexed a second time over same facts, when issue determined by the court,,,,court in utter disrepute if we have ,different verdicts to same facts

,,,DJBrittan states have you full transcript of GoreWood,,not just few lines,,IN BARRISTERS ARTICLE,,,no,,,then i will ignore your evidence . From later legal advice all you required to inform Brittan it was an abuse of process, IDENTICAL CLAIM ,,,,Brittan utterly corrupt IF NOT CAB SUE ME

Full detail in judicial review application, where court had documents,DJBrittan striked out as claim INCOMPREHENSIBLE, YOU WILL SEE SAME DEFENCE ON THE 27.2.2018 APPLICATION,,,, where DJBrittan makes fatal mistake where he gives in judgement way claim should be made WHICH IS IDENTICAL TO THE POC .CAN I SUGGEST HHJDENYER SAYING TO DJBRITTAN STRIKE OUT CLAIM IF HE APPEALS I WILL IGNORE AND BACK YOU . Appeal to HHJDenyer ignored, follow up emails ignored so seek legal advice, where LAWYER also could not get a reply from court,for a oral hearing [ QUOTED AS EVIDENCE IN TODAYS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION EG IGNORING APPLICATIONS FOR YEARS,,,,,as I stated even my lawyer could not get a reply , as I said to defendants today .. you state we have no evidence of malfeasance in public office ignoring applications,,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO THIS LAWYER ] my MP could not get a reply,over ignoring applications,,,,i will write to them again can not force them to reply, MP contacted Eaga where award of court they agree to not take. Lawyer suggested a judicial review under Strickson v Preston cc [2007] EWCA 1132,where judicial process is frustrated and corrupted.

NOTE REQUIRED HERE,,,,,,, THIS WAS EVIDENCE ABOVE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION HOWEVER AS RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED THE COURT OF APPEAL WILL BRING UP NOT STRICTLY TRUE, WHAT ELSE ARE YOU NOT SURE OF eg,,,,A MIISING STEP WHICH TODAY I PUT BEFORE COURT

Lawyer HAD stated , i do not deal with court of appeal, where you need your next application, as we can not get a oral hearing for you, our correspondence was also ignored. . . From email correspondence i question advice, as believed next step only via judicial review. Application made to court of appeal, where from their file, [sure court of appeal will confirm ] ,,,,,,,,,,your application presented to Master,,,,,, who asked court to inform you,,,,,,,,,,,,he had sympathy with application, however court of appeal could not hear case,you need a judicial review, I WAS CORRECT , now out of time, Master advised need to do asap application for judicial review . Application made under Srickson v Preston cc ,,,,as above to Admin court Cardiff

The Administration court makes order to ask HHJDenyer again for oral hearing, made 1.2.2013 and 13.2.2013, please see ref 1 both date/stamped by court,APPLICATIONS IGNORED THE ISSUE OF TODAYS APPLICATION . Struck out as I had not made applications,for oral hearing, comes before court of appeal, CO/1/2013 , all applications date stamped by the court, eg ref 1 . THE COURT OF APPEAL DOES NOT WANT CORRUPTION EXPOSED WHERE WE GET JUDGEMENT CASE DISMISSED YOU NEVER MADE APPLICATION FOR ORAL HEARING AND COULD NOT TAKE TO SUPREME COURT. WHAT IS REFERENCE 1 PRESENTED AGAIN TODAY. THE COURT WANTS TO CALL BLACK IS WHITE AS THEY [RL] REPEAT TODAY TO HIDE THE CORRUPTION .WE WILL ASK COURT TODAY ARE THEY STATING REF 1 IS A FORGERY,,,???????????????????

4/ We had also at this time a call,,,,,,, I do not approve of some of your applications to my court, however will not stand by when corruption is going on HHJDenyer/court out to get you, they have made a mistake they have removed applications [CONSIDER OBS08441 APPLICATION,,,CONSIDER LATER APPLICATION 6.12.2017] except one still ONE on our system, was this a district judge. . ON OUR SYSTEM ,,,Record at court yes just ONE [2YJ03757] WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE 3 DATE/STAMPED BY COURT ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,on recording Mr Blair states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,our Mr Till sent application Ref 1 [could be one 1 Feb NOT REF 1 ] to Admin court Cardiff.

5/ Tried to get evidence from Bristol court and Cardiff Admin court to do judicial review application , eg asking Cardiff we have recording with Mr Blair application made, sent to you,did you get it, where we get reply from Cardiff staff, NOTE ON FILE NOT TO DISCUSS CONTENTS WITH YOU [UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90).withholding evidence] told to contact for answer to questions Ms Weaver via email, even all follow up emails ignored, as she ignores question to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, utter breach of Article 6, ..

6/ Lawyer advised to talk direct access to barrister Mr Andrew Marsden with view to taking to the ECHR. Agreed to do, at last minute pulled out, leaving me out of time. Then heard rumours from another lawyer who saw my website, of trouble at his chambers, DID NOT REALISE HHJDENYER AND ANDREW MARSDEN AT SAME CHAMBERS AND MR MARSDEN HAD BEEN MOVED ON TO ANOTHER CHAMBERS IN DAYS OF HIS WITHDRAWAL FROM MY CLAIM . ?????????[was pressure applied]

7/ Issues above in social media/website www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com where court states remove above allegations or consequences. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED BY A CORRUPT COURT HOWEVER CONSEQUENCE WERE RESTRAINING ORDER

8/ THE RESTAINING ORDER FEB 2016,,

The citing in RL judgement was a cowardly act, as applications to remove 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 were ignored by the courts. Lets consider cases why order issued.

a/ AOIBS346/746 . This was case to obtain medical records from ,North Bristol NHS Trust [NBT] travel expenses, and to put statement in my medical records. On 13.7.2014 inform NBT if not supplied proceedings issued. Comes before DJWatson, where lawyer for NBT Ms Smith states should never be before a court the trust were UTTERLY UNAWARE OF ANY POSSIBLE PROCEEDINGS NO TIME TO RESPOND. DJWatson suggested talking outside to settle, so move to door to open door for her where told to go, must be on court tape. Ms Smith later email ANYWAY ,,, TRUE I DID NOT WANT TO TALK TO YOU. Court later strikes out in papers, as Ms Smith states we have supplied all data, have recording for example radiology where data withheld,still refuse to put statement in medical records, so await further ORAL hearing. Feb 13 2015 email Ms Smith ,,, this is stupid supply medical records as my POC, put statement in medical records, where she states no ,your case struck out so we await hearing . Then 5 months later she ask to settle, expenses paid, outstanding medical records supplied, and she puts statement in medical records. She sends settlement to court, rejected by DJBrittan , comes before again DJWatson. Ms Smith asks that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, REJECTED BY DJWATSON.

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,,,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ........[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over above issue, eg I had appealed as medical records ect still outstanding ]

Could not get into discussion ,sat on judges right hand side, with his right hand raised towards me, NOT A COMPLAINT CLEARLY MATTER CLOSED AS HE RAISED SKELTAL ARGUMENT PARTIES HAD TO PRODUCE TOWARDS MS SMITH .We emailed court ,,,,,,new court ,do they video hearing, just ignored, application for transcript ignored. IN APPLICATIONS 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 AND 6.12.2017 TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER COURT JUST IGNORES , WHAT DID I DO WRONG THE PROBLEM WAS CORRUPT AND BENT MS SMITH AS DJWATSON COMPREHENDED FROM SKELTAL ARGUMENT,,,,SHE WAS AWARE OF POSSIBLE PROCEDINGS LIED TO JUDGE,WOULD NOT TALK OUTSIDE TO SETTLE, AS JUDGES SUGGESTION AND AT END ASKED TO SETTLE AND SUPPLIED EVERYTHING AS POC. WHAT DID I DO WRONG

b/ Case B26YM042 CITED This relates to todays issue,as restraining order made under this number so need to cite in any application to the court to remove/issue new proceedings. Emails were stored via Outlook Express not a server, required backup for possible libel or contempt of court proceedings, for example courts Mr Fowler,,,,,,,,,,,we will ignore your correspondence, as I seek evidence to do judicial review, utter breach of Article 6, withholding evidence that would help my defence. . Can not just press button ,,,,,save all emails , and copy,onto USB stick, for example Compuwave required a viewer and program to make copy of emails. Would not work where Compuwave stated was when you left will not enter into further correspondence, as soon as proceedings issued, defendants stated sorry we gave wrong program, and matter settled, with later email to court to remove from hearing, MATTER SETTLED. Next thing I know as defendants ask what is going on [case struck out] as we agreed it would not go to hearing, MATTER SETTLED . I appealed as matter settled, have asked court numerous times is settlement email in file, ask again today, please see Appendix 5 [NOTE ABOVE OBS08441 SEE LATER APPLICATION 6.12.2017 IS JUDICIARY REMOVING APPLICATIONS FROM FILE] all correspondence ignored over the years. You can understand case comes before court where no one turns up,at hearing, and no complaint case struck out therefore. . RESTAINING ORDER BECAUSE I APPEALED. We may ask did HHJDenyer remove settlement , and then picked wrong extra case AOIBS346/746 AS DJWATSON STATED I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY.

AGAIN WE ASK WHAT DID I DO WRONG

9/ Application to remove order 26.2.2016 ignored, where picket at court over ignoring applications for years, consider leaflet handed out primary over historic 2YJ03757, applications ignored, where barrister asks me to report malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, over long period of time, plus perjury Eaga issue to defendants.The evidence does not need to be repeated here , it is in main text of todays application.

a/ Defendants ask for dissection of CPS document, the FEDJCAB document, THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT PLEASE SEE APPRENDIX 1 on malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, plus evidence on perjury issue, in Appendix 1 and 2 Defendants state we have no evidence of perjury/ malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness. THESE DOCUMENTS eg FEDJCAB IN INITIAL PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SO HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS eg FEDJCAB

b/ Contact IPCC in initial phase of complaint, DEFENDANTS ADMIT IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION APENDIX 2 THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS.

Asking defendants questions to do appeal to defendants where I state in 22.7.2017 email with no reply would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017, to them, where defendants send letter dated 24.7.2017 saying reply to your appeal, I have made no appeal.

IPCC STATE DEFENDANTS INFORM US YOU LODGED AN APPEAL AND VIA STATUTE MATTER CLOSED.YOU NEED A JUDICIAL REVIEW

c/ Contact IPCC in phase 2 of complaint to defendants, over defendants staff, where told only route a judicial review.

DEFENDANTS ADMIT IN LETTER DATED 5.12.2017 TAB 21 IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION I HAD NOT LODGED AN APPEAL eg as facts above ,what did they say....

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.

10/ So application to HHJCotter on the 17.11.2017 as he states against defendants, however made under B26YM042, had to be made, as number cited in restraining order, which is lodged with application. AGAIN WE RETURN,,, WHY CAN THIS COURT NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK AS JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER STATES 14.11.2018 ?????We have asked is this email 17.11.2017 ref 2 eg

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS]

P JONES

WE HAVE ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES FOR CONFIRMATION ON DATES ALL EMAILS IGNORED IF SO HHJCOTTER UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS .....FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS,,

Where HHJCotter asks for fee to consider an application .

11/ Retired district judge stated the court will always throw at you, the restraining order, , AS WE HAVE IN COWARDLY ATTACK TODAY the restraining order you need to include as part application to remove on the 6.12.2017. APPLICATIONS 26.2.2016 AND 26.10,2016 TO REMOVE ORDER HAD BEEN IGNORED.

12/ Visit court 5.12.2017 recorded, PAY FEE, ask Mr Blair for file, ask for N244, write on it not to be sent to HHJCotter , INFORM MR BLAIR NOT TO BE SENT TO HHJCOTTER , until application tomorrow dated 6.12.2017, this part of application , EMAIL 6.12.2017 in judicial review application.. Retired judge stated they before have removed documents, do application 6.12.2017, and email NEXT day , 7.12.2017 ref 3 to make sure application 6.12.2017 is one sent AND CONSIDERED BY HHJCOTTER,,,,, . THIS IS PRIMARY NOW TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER FROM N244 IN EMAIL APPLICATION 6.12.2017. WE NEED NOTE HERE THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT /EVIDENCE APPENDIX 1 AND 2 BEFORE HHJCOTTER UTTERLY CORRUPT HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM,,,,,,HE KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,, .STORY MADE UP TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. HE KNOWS I DID NOTHING WRONG IN RESTRAINING ORDER HE IS AWARE FROM APPLICATION HE HAS NO LEG TO STAND ON AS HE CORRUPTS AND FRUSTRATES THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty,which requires that when the courts have finally decided an issue then ruling should not be called into question ,,[, I HAD NOT ACTED UNREASONABLY] ,Tregubenko v Ukrain ,,,,,,,calling into question of decision in this manner whether it be by judges or the exeutive ............[did HHJDenyer call judgement into question, as he issues restraining order over issue]

13/ As soon as retired judge saw judgement stated,,,,,,,,,,,,,THE BAST,,,,,,,,,,,,,HAVE REMOVED APPLICATION SENT VIA EMAIL ON THE 6.12.2017 CONFIRMED IN LATER RECORDING AT COURT. RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE STATED YOU SHOULD NOT BE RECORDING INSIDE THE COURT, NEED STATEMENT THAT APPLICATION 6.12.2017 NOT READ eg HHJCOTTER READ WRONG PAPERS, CONFIRMED IN REF 5 AND FROM COURTS MR HUNT eg,,,,WE HAVE NO RECORD OF APPLICATION 6.12.2017 ,,,,,REMOVED FROM FILE AGAIN ?????????

14/ The actual final correspondence with defendants was only concluded in 2018, then judicial review served. .

15/ We have further applications at later date AFTER CONCLUSION of AOIBS346/746 again for medical records and to put statement in medical records, THESE EVENTS AT LATER DATE WHEN AOIBS346/746 CLOSED. . Again Ms Smith, NBT lawyer, refuses to release medical records, drags me through courts again. Application 27.2.2018 , where in days struck out by HHJCotter,,,,, abuse of process, SITTING AS A DISTRICT JUDGE. MAY I SUGGEST COLLUSION WITH STAFF eg SUGGEST NEVER ISSUE HIS CLAIMS SEND APPLICATIONS TO ME TO SEE IF I CAN STRIKE OUT . Ask for oral hearing, date given in days, where I make application, to include,,,,, for a NBT defence. Email correspondence with HHJCotters clerk, where it arises, they have been discussing case behind my back with NBT,and will later give new hearing date. . Make application to look at file before hearing

So as cited in judicial review application, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this ,application... still applications being ignored in 2018 ,,,,as application to HHJCotter WHICH WAS IGNORED was under

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,

WHAT SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BETWEEN HHJCOTTER AND NBT BEHIND MY BACK

HHJCotter then loses interest in case and no hearing for over 5 months. Case comes before HHJRalton, where we get a Watergate moment,,,,,I TALKED TO HHJCOTTER STRUCK OUT AS YOUR CLAIM UTTERLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE.,,,,,I NEVER RAISED ISSUE ,,,, Will not get involved here , not an issue today, ISSUE TODAY AGAIN IGNORING APPLICATIONS, all I can do is present evidence for media. As retired district judge advice make issue clear to court asap, what did I state in that application,,,,,,,,where HHJCotter states to HHJRalton UTTER uncomprensible

IN THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF PHILIP JONES

DEFENDANTS NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

CLAIM ,,,eg asking court

For defendants to release medical records of 24.7.2015 and for plaintiff to put a statement in plaintiffs medical records.

LEGAL BASIS ,,,,,1/ ,No evidence required in terms of obtaining medical records, in terms of putting statement in medical records, please see statutory regulations of NHS ,,,,,,the defendants must allow if requested for plaintiff to add statement to his medical records.

2/ If defendants should defend an abuse of process, eg issues determined in AOIBS346 eg medical records , and AOIBS746 to put statement in medical records, now . ABUSE OF PROCESS ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

NOT AN ISSUE TODAY ISSUE MUCH LATER FOR MEDIA WAS IT UNCOMPRENSIBLE AN EXCUSE THE CORRUPT JUDICIARY USE. MATTER SETTLED AGAIN AT HEARING NEVER OBTAINED MEDICAL RECORDS,,,,,,, LATER APPLICATION TO HHJRALTON IGNORED AS RECORDS NOT SUPPLIED

16/ Need evidence to do judicial review application,

From McGinley and Egan v UK Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

Where Mr Blair at Bristol court states your not obtaining evidence of us ignoring applications, make application which will be refused anyway to HHJCotter, where again application IGNORED MADE 16.3.2018 . UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 WHERE HAD TO DO JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION WITH EVIDENCE WITHHELD. TAKE UP ISSUE WITH MY MP . JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION MADE . WHERE WE DO GET A REPLY REF 4 DATED 10.5.2018 ,,,,AS MP INVOLVED 2 MONTHS AFTER APPLICATION, HE IS UTTERLY AWARE REQUIRED FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND AS URGENT REQUIRED REPLY IN DAYS. NOT WITHSTANDING CONFIRMS COURT STANCE UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6 WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE

A party to the proceedings must have the possibility to familiarise itself with the

evidence before the court, as well as the possibility to comment on its existence, contents and authenticity in an appropriate form and within an appropriate time (Krčmář andOthers v. the Czech Republic, § 42; Immeubles Groupe Kosser v. France, § 26),

THIS IS NO APPROPRIATE TIME ONLY REPLY AS MY MP INVOLVED.

WE ALSO GET CONCEPT OF EQUALITY OF ARMS IN ARTICLE 6 WHERE IN NBT URGENT APPLICATIONS HHJCOTTER CAN REPLY IN LESS THAN 24 HOURS ,,,,BIAS??????

NOTE FURTHER IN REF 4 HHJCOTTER ADMITTING HE CAN NOT ISSUE PROPER PAPERWORK AS AGAIN CORRECTS DATES

17/ Application to Birmingham Admin court due to Cardiff corruption in previous case above , refused, .

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

In application to HHJCotter he ignored request for evidence for my claim to succeed.So judicial review application had to be made or out of time, so need to add extra evidence for Cardiff court, further arguments sent to Birmingham via email, from above

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

Can I refer to email correspondence to Birmingham to ensure all this evidence was before HHJBigger. Can I refer to part email of 26.4.2018 ….eg .

,,,,We have question for them, can I please refer to ECHR concept ,,,equality of arms, where from todays text application , North Bristol NHS Trust make applications as urgent,to Bristol court, ask to be put to a judge today, and get reply from judge same day, where we have court order, tab 12 ,applications tab 13 14 15 as urgent where court just ignores my applications. . From Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. Today NOT application against HMCS

This was part of issue to police as picketing at the court where barrister told me to stop, and report criminal issues, eg perjury ,Eaga case , plus other issue to defendants. End of quote EMAIL 26.4.2017

So we ask did Birmingham put in bin, or did they send to Cardiff Admin court, further correspondence to Cardiff, was this binned, or was it before HHJBigger.

From ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,what evidence was before HHJBigger , or did court remove to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. With full evidence can do final application today, eg what was before HHJBigger.

Can I refer to

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Cardiff in utter breach of Article 6 refuses to answer questions, eg did defendants serve any papers on the Cardiff court, if so can we please have copy. They state defendants made no acknowledgement of service.

18/ HHJBiggers judgement utterly without merit, from appendix 1 and 2, did not go to defendants over HHJDenyers judgements, and claim against defendants not vexious THEY ADMIT MY CLAIM APPENDIX 1 AND 2.

19/ Not only struck out by court of appeal, but because I appealed restraining order issued. I APPEALED AS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER AND IT WAS NOT VEXIOUS TO MAKE CLAIM AGAINSTDEFENDANTS THEY ADMIT MY CLAIM

20/ CONSEQUENCES

a/ We ask RL that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of RL from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, REF 1 and 2 ,,,FED document above , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, perjury Eaga issue, from pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

further

b / Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAB document ect REF 1 AND 2 FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal –

c/ HHJCotter read wrong papers, did not read application of 6.12.2017 ,which HHJBigger just copies judgement, please see ref 5 he did not read application 6.12.2017 with consequences as application to re open appeal .The judgement of HHJCotter via corruption as he is denying evidence before him in pre action protocol document for judicial review. THE LITAGATION PROCESS CORRUPTED.

Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".

The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers

APPENDIX 4 WHAT ORDER ARE YOU ASKING FOR AND WHY

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed, where in Appendix 1 and 2 defendants admit procedure in IPCC complaint not followed. Not issue today, todays issue to change/vary restraining order made as I appealed HHJBiggers judgement. , where every right to appeal ON THE FACTS .

1/ Removal of restraining order [and court to undertake legal consequences of corruption that follow from removal ] made utterly without merit on the facts above ,as RL states I made order as you appealed HHJBiggers judgement,,,,, judgement utterly incompatable with evidence before the court take one of 2 main example,the FEDJCAB EVIDENCE IN APPENDIX1 ,,,,, FEDJCAB ITS IN evidence in pre action protocol for judicial review document , they know why I went to defendants, which is breach of Article 6, eg court denying evidence in front of it .FEDJCAB ITS IN COURT OF APPEAL FILE EMAIL 13.7.2018 SO RL UTTERLY AWARE WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS, EAGA PERJURY ISSUE AND FOR YEARS COURTS IGNORING APPLICATIONS [ IRONIC AS ISSUE COURT FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS WHERE COURT OF APPEAL IGNORED APPLICATION 13.7.2918 ,,,]

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

RL states sole issue he issued restraining order as I appealed HHJBiggers judgement which is utterly wrong on facts, every right to appeal, as explained in Appendix 1 and 2.

DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

b/ IT WAS NOT VEXIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANTS This complaint was line one page one , please see Appendix 2, in judicial review application WHERE DEFENDANTS ADMIT ALLEGATIONS EG IN THIS IPCC INVESTIGATION WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND WE SENT YOU REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL WHERE WE ADMIT YOU DID NOT LODGE AN APPEAL.PLEASE SEE END OF APPENDIX 2,,,, DEFENDANTS COULD NOT CONSIDER AN APPEAL AS IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED IN MY COMPLAINT.

EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL

2/ CONSEQUENCES

a/ We ask RL that application today is not heard by him please , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of RL from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAP document , plus 13.4.2017 letter,in Appendix 1 , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAP in pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

further

b / Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

c/ HHJCotter EVEN read wrong papers, did not read application of 6.12.2017 ,which HHJBigger just copies HHJCotters judgement, please see ref 5 [[SHOWS NOT ONLY CORRUPTION BUT COLLUSION AS BOTH GIVE IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENTS.]] HHJCOTTER did not read application 6.12.2017 with consequences as application to re open appeal .The judgement of HHJCotter via corruption as he is denying evidence before him in pre action protocol document for judicial review, HE HAS THE FEDJCAP IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL IN CORRESPONDENCE I STATE ,,,,CONSIDER APPLICATION WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 16.9.2017 WHERE IN THAT DOCUMENT THE DOCUMENT HAD TO BE PRODUCED VIA CPR TEMPLATE PARAGRAPHS eg ANNEX A.

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

. THE LITAGATION PROCESS CORRUPTED JUDICIARY UTTERLY CORRUPT MAKING UP STORY

Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".

The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers

THIS IS NOT APPLICATION TO REOPEN,,,ITS APPLICATION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER.

3/ FOR PARTIES TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IN 7 DAYS IN APPENDIX 5 [ WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME ] COPY TO THE COURT OF APPEAL .WITH NO REPLY COURT ORDER TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE FROM PARTIES . From McGinley and Egan v UK case above Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

CAN I GIVE ONE EXAMPLE

Application email 17.11.2017 Ref 2 HHJCotter states in judgement 9.1.2018 ,,alleges was email of , 14.11.2018 [can I refer to Lord Goldrings judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork can not be November 2018] From Ref,2 ,,,[part] of email 17.11.2017

StranGreek v Greece …………..a right to present which they regard as relevant .The right can only be seen to be effective if the observations are actually heard, that is to say considered by the court , have a duty to conduct a proper examination of arguments/evidence adducted by the parties,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Principle whereby a civil claim be capable of being submitted to a judge ranks as one of the universally recognised principles of law……………[FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS] ,,,

Have asked court numerous times, email, ,,,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37)., as over years all emails ignored.

WITH CONFIRMATION WHAT HE CONSIDERED IN JUDGEMENT WAS THIS DOCUMENT 17.11.2017. HHJCOTTER THEREFORE UTTERLY AWARE ISSUE NOT OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER AS HE CITED THIS EMAIL OF 17.11.2017

4/ SEEKING GUIDANCE FROM COURT IF THEY REQUIRE FURTHER STAY UNTIL REFUND OF FEE ISSUE SETTLED FOR APPLICATION 6.12.2017

HHJCotter asked for fee to consider an application. Went to court 5.12.2017 ,recorded, where asked for file, asked for N244 wrote on it not to be sent to HHJCotter new application would follow, next day 6.12.2017,,, emailed application I had paid for, day before,ON THE 6.12.2017 . . Retired judge stated primary issue is restraining order removal, which was in application in N244 ,,,,eg what order are you asking court to make,,,,,,,,,,,,, sent 6.12.2017 by email. . In OBS08441 documents had been removed from file, please see details in judicial review application. So retired judge said email next day to make sure application I had paid for 6.12.2017 was sent to HHJCotter. Emailed therefore 7.12.2017 to make sure application 6.12.l2017 ,obtained and sent to HHJCotter. As soon as retired judge saw HHJCotters judgement said the bas,,,,,,,,,,,have binned application. Went to court again recorded where on recording,,,,,,,,,,,we did not send to HHJCotter.HE THEREFORE READ WRONG PAPERS Retired judge stated you should not be recording in court, get a sworn statement, ref 5 , TOOK THIRD PARTY TO COURT RECORDED AGAIN to confirm not sent, SO HHJCOTTER READ WRONG PAPERS. DID NOT READ APPLICATION I HAD PAID FOR 6.12.2017

Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".

The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers

Courts Mr Hunt confirm not sent. We have asked 5 TIMES FOR REFUND ALL EMAILS IGNORED. MP pointed me towards Resolver. Mr Hunt asked for copy, of application, to reconsider REPAYMENT , its in judicial review application,,,,informed him. . We have asked is email of 7.12.2017 on file, all correspondence ignored, where we ask Mr Hunt again, reply 7 days, with no reply, request court order for NUMEROUS REPLIES TO QUESTIONS ,Resolver state all correspondence should be included in their site. The court asks me to write to Ms Andrews at the court, will not be dealing outside of Resolver ,,,,if Ms Andrews wants to comment she can do on Resolver platform, ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO DEAL OUTSIDE RESOLVER WILL BE IGNORED

APPENDIX 5 QUESTIONS TO PARTIES REPLY REQUIRED IN 7 DAYS TO COURT OF APPEAL WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME IF ANY REPLIES

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,

FOR COURT OF APPEAL

1/ Is the application email of 13.7.2018 on the courts file, timed 12.48 which contained the FEDJCAP document eg why I went to defendants .THEREFORE RL UTTERLY AWARE OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJCOTTER/BIGGER WERE WRONG AND THEREFORE HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WAS NOT A COMPELLING SUMMARY OF FACTS OF CASE,,,Further if in file know i had every right to appeal, which follows restraining order issued utterly without merit. ,Was there a reply to application.

2/ Did parties serve any documents with you, if so can we please have copy The only communication I had was from court saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,accept acknowledgement of service well out of time, however we will not get involved unless court instruct us to, this is issue between you and defendants. .If no replies parties had no objection to applications on the facts.

3/ The judgement of RL was a cowardly act considering reference to restraining order Feb 2016, as applications to remove were made 26.2.2016, 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 where judiciary just ignored applications. We know why binned/ignored as NBT asked at hearing AOIBS346/746 that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, this was rejected by DJWatson.

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive

We have asked court for transcript where again applications ignored. We have just been paid compensation by HMCS of 150..00 , we ask court of appeal to confirm, I will pay for transcript, if it shows NBT asked that judgement that reads I acted unreasonably ,and was rejected by DJWatson then court of appeal will refund fee to obtain transcript, we have asked below for NBT to confirm facts in separate question for court of appeal/

FOR BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION COURT

4/ Can you please confirm emails I sent to you by date, and confirm if sent to Cardiff Admin Court as my instructions. Eg did HHJBigger read full application.,eg from ECHR case law,,,i had , time to submit further arguments ,,,,,,,,,,,

5/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copies.

FOR CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT

6/ What documents,,,,/emails by date were forwarded to you by Birmingham court.

7/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copy.

8/ In CO/1/2013 Mr Blair in Bristol court office, [recorded conversation at court] states ,,,,our Mr Till sent your application to the Cardiff court , is this application in Feb 2013 on court file, further can we please have copy of any documents in court file in period 1.1.2013 till 1.4.2013. eg documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, ,,,,

FOR BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.

9/ Are the applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 in court file

10/ In B26YM042 defendants asked to settle, wanted settlement done by Tomlin order, this was emailed to you, 23.12.2015 with request as settled to remove from court listings, where numerous requests over years to confirm email in court file, where we ask again. For example Ref 3 today email of 7.12.2017 ,where all requests over years ignored….part of email Ref 3 of email 7.12.2017

We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please

Was this email removed from file, or is IT IN COURT FILE.This was struck out at hearing, B26YM042 either to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process someone removed email from file, or court gave judgement knowing matter settled,. AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT RESTRAINING ORDER BY HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, THIS WAS CASE SETTLED.

11/ The judgement of HHJCotter is utterly incomprehensible with respect to application, eg FEDJCAP document in pre action protocol document please see Appendix 1 today

In judgement 9.1.2018 [Lord Goldring,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork] admit alleged email of 3.1.2018 is email of 29.12.2017.

Further in that judgement you state email of 14.11.2018 can you confirm this should be email of 17.11.2017, where aware as I stated[ ISSUE TODAY IN COURT OF APPEAL NOT CORRUPT FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJDENYER,TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ] issue before court of ignoring applications for years, next step the ECHR. If you have a email of 14.11.2017 [can not be 2018 as you state ]then can we please have copy. If in file 17.11.2017 HHJCotter again utterly aware why I went to defendants, not some fairy story he made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.

12/ Pre action protocol document emailed . 16.9.2017 is it on system.

13/ Visit court 5.12.2017 ask for file , ask for N244 , from recording inform today I had written on it not to be sent to HHJCotter, new application next day. Can we please have copy of N244 form presented to HHJCotter with application, WHICH WAS SENT EMAIL 6.12.2017 OR A DIFFERENT N244 ???????????????????

14/ On the 6.12.2017 final application email forwarded to you, as retired district judge stated, before they have removed evidence from file,[we will see with answers to above if others court had removed to corrupt the judicial process] so advised next day to email you, 7.12.2017 Ref 3 is this document on file. Further Mr Hunt has confirmed application 6.12.2017 not in file, as someone again removed, can you confirm these facts, admit have recording, as retired judge stated,after seeing HHJCotters judgement ,,,,,,the bast,,,,,,have again removed from file. Came to court on recording told HHJCotter did not consider, , retired judge stated, should not be recording inside the court, take third party to court for statement for applications , please see Ref 5 . Can you confirm 6.12.2017 application not considered by HHJCotter, eg he read wrong papers not in file.

15/ Do not know what he read can you confirm again you will not allow inspection of files,, Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,

16/ We had applications in 2018, as I stated in judicial review application this criminal practice, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications still going on in 2018. We had application 27.2.2018 EOOBS236 ,was there a reply to application if so can we please have copy.

17/ Application 15.3.2018 to obtain evidence to do my judicial review, Mr Blair states your not looking at files over the years to show us ignoring your applications, make application to HHJCotter who will IGNORE your application, had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, utter breach of Article 6. Follow up emails ignored, can you confirm HHJCotters reply Ref 4 dated 10.5.2018 was his reply to application of 15.3.2018. .Again utter breach of Article 6, to get a reply to applications in reasonable time, only obtained this as my MP involved. We have further ECHR concept of equalties of arms, for example when NBT made urgent applications, THEY GET REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS SHOWING BIAS. .

FOR NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT]

17/ In hearing before DJWatson defendants Ms Smith [NBT] asked that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson is this correct.

APPENDIX 5 QUESTIONS TO PARTIES REPLY REQUIRED IN 7 DAYS TO COURT OF APPEAL WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME IF ANY REPLIES

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,

FOR COURT OF APPEAL

1/ Is the application email of 13.7.2018 on the courts file, timed 12.48 which contained the FEDJCAP document eg why I went to defendants .THEREFORE RL UTTERLY AWARE OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJCOTTER/BIGGER WERE WRONG AND THEREFORE HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WAS NOT A COMPELLING SUMMARY OF FACTS OF CASE,,,Further if in file know i had every right to appeal, which follows restraining order issued utterly without merit. ,Was there a reply to application.

2/ Did parties serve any documents with you, if so can we please have copy The only communication I had was from court saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,accept acknowledgement of service well out of time, however we will not get involved unless court instruct us to, this is issue between you and defendants. .If no replies parties had no objection to applications on the facts.

3/ The judgement of RL was a cowardly act considering reference to restraining order Feb 2016, as applications to remove were made 26.2.2016, 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 where judiciary just ignored applications. We know why binned/ignored as NBT asked at hearing AOIBS346/746 that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, this was rejected by DJWatson.

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive

We have asked court for transcript where again applications ignored. We have just been paid compensation by HMCS of 150..00 , we ask court of appeal to confirm, I will pay for transcript, if it shows NBT asked that judgement that reads I acted unreasonably ,and was rejected by DJWatson then court of appeal will refund fee to obtain transcript, we have asked below for NBT to confirm facts in separate question for court of appeal/

FOR BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION COURT

4/ Can you please confirm emails I sent to you by date, and confirm if sent to Cardiff Admin Court as my instructions. Eg did HHJBigger read full application.,eg from ECHR case law,,,i had , time to submit further arguments ,,,,,,,,,,,

5/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copies.

FOR CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT

6/ What documents,,,,/emails by date were forwarded to you by Birmingham court.

7/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copy.

8/ In CO/1/2013 Mr Blair in Bristol court office, [recorded conversation at court] states ,,,,our Mr Till sent your application to the Cardiff court , is this application in Feb 2013 on court file, further can we please have copy of any documents in court file in period 1.1.2013 till 1.4.2013. eg documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, ,,,,

FOR BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.

9/ Are the applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 in court file

10/ In B26YM042 defendants asked to settle, wanted settlement done by Tomlin order, this was emailed to you, 23.12.2015 with request as settled to remove from court listings, where numerous requests over years to confirm email in court file, where we ask again. For example Ref 3 today email of 7.12.2017 ,where all requests over years ignored….part of email Ref 3 of email 7.12.2017

We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please

Was this email removed from file, or is IT IN COURT FILE.This was struck out at hearing, B26YM042 either to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process someone removed email from file, or court gave judgement knowing matter settled,. AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT RESTRAINING ORDER BY HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, THIS WAS CASE SETTLED.

11/ The judgement of HHJCotter is utterly incomprehensible with respect to application, eg FEDJCAP document in pre action protocol document please see Appendix 1 today

In judgement 9.1.2018 [Lord Goldring,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork] admit alleged email of 3.1.2018 is email of 29.12.2017.

Further in that judgement you state email of 14.11.2018 can you confirm this should be email of 17.11.2017, where aware as I stated[ ISSUE TODAY IN COURT OF APPEAL NOT CORRUPT FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJDENYER,TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ] issue before court of ignoring applications for years, next step the ECHR. If you have a email of 14.11.2017 [can not be 2018 as you state ]then can we please have copy. If in file 17.11.2017 HHJCotter again utterly aware why I went to defendants, not some fairy story he made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.

12/ Pre action protocol document emailed . 16.9.2017 is it on system.

13/ Visit court 5.12.2017 ask for file , ask for N244 , from recording inform today I had written on it not to be sent to HHJCotter, new application next day. Can we please have copy of N244 form presented to HHJCotter with application, WHICH WAS SENT EMAIL 6.12.2017 OR A DIFFERENT N244 ???????????????????

14/ On the 6.12.2017 final application email forwarded to you, as retired district judge stated, before they have removed evidence from file,[we will see with answers to above if others court had removed to corrupt the judicial process] so advised next day to email you, 7.12.2017 Ref 3 is this document on file. Further Mr Hunt has confirmed application 6.12.2017 not in file, as someone again removed, can you confirm these facts, admit have recording, as retired judge stated,after seeing HHJCotters judgement ,,,,,,the bast,,,,,,have again removed from file. Came to court on recording told HHJCotter did not consider, , retired judge stated, should not be recording inside the court, take third party to court for statement for applications , please see Ref 5 . Can you confirm 6.12.2017 application not considered by HHJCotter, eg he read wrong papers not in file.

15/ Do not know what he read can you confirm again you will not allow inspection of files,, Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,

16/ We had applications in 2018, as I stated in judicial review application this criminal practice, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications still going on in 2018. We had application 27.2.2018 EOOBS236 ,was there a reply to application if so can we please have copy.

17/ Application 15.3.2018 to obtain evidence to do my judicial review, Mr Blair states your not looking at files over the years to show us ignoring your applications, make application to HHJCotter who will IGNORE your application, had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, utter breach of Article 6. Follow up emails ignored, can you confirm HHJCotters reply Ref 4 dated 10.5.2018 was his reply to application of 15.3.2018. .Again utter breach of Article 6, to get a reply to applications in reasonable time, only obtained this as my MP involved. We have further ECHR concept of equalties of arms, for example when NBT made urgent applications, THEY GET REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS SHOWING BIAS. .

FOR NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT]

17/ In hearing before DJWatson defendants Ms Smith [NBT] asked that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson is this correct.

CASE CO/1731/2018 APPLICATION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER OF RHLJLEGATT [RL]

1/ Restraining order as I appealed HHJBiggers judgement. Parties and court informed via email of application to remove, 24.1.2019 , with full application to court of appeal 1,2,2019 , proof of posting obtained. We had side issue with background to this corrupt issued restraining order, where recently HMCS have paid 150.00 compensation, so can today return to application. . What did restraining order state,, RL,,,,,the background to case is compelling in HHJCotters judgement.. However HHJCotter comes under banner corrupt and bent [ CAB] He is utterly aware application to him was one made 6.12.2017 that he removed from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.He quotes in letter correction of dates his judgement where cites email 29.12.2017 ,in that email 29.12.2017 aware of application of 6.12.2017. [see below statement of Ms Bowyer]

SIMPLE QUESTION TO COURT OF APPEAL BELOW UNDER REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FOR ECHR

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

AS BARRISTER STATED YOUR APPLICATIONS TO BRISTOL AND CARDIFF COURTS WERE BOUND TO FAIL AS COTTER/BIGGER WOULD BE TURKEYS VOTING FOR XMAS,,,INVITING POLICE TO LOOK AT THEIR COURTS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR.

QUESTION ,,,THERE WAS AN APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL SEE TIMED 12.48 DATED 13.7.2018 IS IT ON FILE OR HAS COURT REMOVED .IF ON FILE WAS THERE A REPLY. IF A REPLY TO APPLICATION CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COPY OF RL RESPONCE. [eg state to magistrate court removing email from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, or RL utterly aware from FEDJCAB that I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, RL just denying evidence in front of him to protect his fellow judges]

SIMPLE DEDUCTIONS FOR ECHR COURTS FOR YEARS REMOVING APPLICATIONAS FROM FILES OR FROM APPLICATION RL AWARE OF FEDJCAB DOCUMENT THEREFORE . KNOWS HHJCOTTER IS CAB,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. AND THEREFORE HIS JUDGEMENT THAT HHJCOTTER COMPPELING EVIDENCE IN JUDGEMENT IS UTTER NONSENSE ,,FROM McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM.

Further aware HHJCotter read wrong papers, did not read application of 6.12.2017 where RL judgement is based on.

Further shows corruption of courts Mr Hunt from above, utter breach of Article 6, withholding evidence to help my claim. further point out to magistrate we have asked numerous times for repayment of court fee as application 6.12.2017 binned, Mr Hunt states Ms Pawsey dealing with issue, now a Resolver complaint however she is CAB as ignore all correspondence on Resolver.

MS PAWSEY WAS APPLICATION 6.12.2017 SENT TO HHJCOTTER YES/NO in emails 7.12.2017 29.12.2017 emailed to make sure application 6.12.2017 was one presented to judge.

Details in my website. .WE HAVE NOT ONLY CORRUPTION HHJCOTTER READ WRONG PAPERS [not my application of 6.12,2017 ] what did he read Mr Hunt CAB refuses to allow me to look at file, withholding evidence utter breach of Article 6....BUT VIA COLLUSION HHJBIGGER COMES TO WRONG IDENTICAL JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER BOTH CAB [SEE 3/ THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL OF 16.9.2017 DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.

RL KNOWS HHJBIGGER/COTTER [CAB] IN APPLICATION WHICH HE IGNORED 13..72018 WAS THE FEDJCAB,,,,,,,,,,,,HOW DEEP DOES THIS CORRUPTION GO ,,HE KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER, HOW CAN HE SAY IN JUDGEMENT THAT JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER IS COMPELLING EVIDENCE ABOUT CASE

2/ THIS IS EMAIL PRIMARY TO COURT OF APPEAL UNDER The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed ,,,,[LATER ECHR ect] (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37)., and evidence in later magistrates hearing, over shoplifting. ,, WE ASK PARTIES TO CONSIDER LATEST UPDATE IN WWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM. THIS today IS EMAIL CONNECTING PARTS TOGETHER WHERE WE HAVE IN EVIDENCE FOR LATER MAGISTRATES COURT HEARINGS …HAVE SEVERE HEART CONDITION HOPE TO DIE THIS YEAR IN DEFENDANTS CUSTODY VIA SHOPLIFTING CAN SHOW my PROTEST IN COURT OF BENT DEFENDANTS AND COURTS,,,,,eg PARTIES NOW WERE AWARE OF ALLEGATIONS IN MY WEBSITES INCLUDING , IN DEFENDANTS AND NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT ]CORRESPONDING SITES WHY DID NO ONE ISSUE PROCEEDINGS FOR LIBEL OR CONTEMPT OF COURT.I DIRECT PARTIES TODAY TO MY WEBSITE ABOVE IF NOT CAB SUE ME

3/ A female barrister and judge who saw my website stated there are cornerstones to cases, take an example 3 people saw X leave premises after bank robbery, However sitting as a judge, Counsel bring evidence, not my client, as at time in closed prison, where I have to dismiss proceedings. In your case,

HHJBigger in judgement states you went to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, should have reported to JCIO ,[IF CLAIM HAD MERIT NO] . Picket at court over for years court ignoring applications, told by barrister to report issue malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, and Eaga perjury issue, to defendants , seen by defendants Sgt Price who asks for dissection of CPS document on malfeasance in public office, which we define FEDJCAB, [FATAL EVIDENCE DOCUMENT JUDICIARY CORRUPT AND BENT]. The document in my website, a sample of my dissection ,,,

SAY TO COURT OF APPEAL WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS NOT COTTER/BIGGER FAIRY STORY

a/ THE FEDJCAB

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document ,into Word document which allowed me to edit, my comments were inserted in red eg,,,,, letter to DEFENDANTS Sgt Price WHICH I STATE TO COURT OF APPEAL ,,REASON I WENT TO DEFENDANTS

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications ;;;;[WHERE I GO THROUGH CPS PAPER ]

b/ The FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT, SENT TO PARTIES and COURT 16.9.2017 , THIS PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT HAD TO BE DONE VIA CPR REGULATION TEMPLATE PARAGRAPHS ANNEX A ,eg

SAY TO COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMATION SECOND TIME WITH FEDJCAB WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

Court told to consider application with pre action protocol document of 16.9.2017.

So this case fails did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, went over criminal offences, perjury and malfeasance in public office . HHJBigger states should have reported to JCIO, but perjury and malfeasance in public office are criminal offences, via statute therefore JCIO can not consider criminal offences. Vexious to make allegations against defendants, line 0ne page 1 in judicial review application however please see MY application in judicial review .There are 2 allegations in judicial review application ,in page 1 .line one.

i/ This was a IPCC investigation, where defendants did not follow IPCC regulations, in my website defendants Insp O Mahony letter confirms they did not follow IPCC regulations .To consider an appeal defendants state must be on our appeal form …. appeal form have to tick boxes that IPCC regulations followed,,,,,so could never do an appeal

ii/ I am allowed to appeal defendants judgement, that we had no evidence of perjury, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, defendants judgement comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness ,evidence provided,,,WE HAD EMAIL FROM COURT SAYING WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS,,,MY LAWYERS APPLICATIONS IGNORED,,,MY DOCUMENTS DATE STAMPED BY COURT.IGNORED.....so email defendants 22.7.2017 asking 11 questions these in judicial review application ,[eg have you talked to lawyer,,,,] stating with no reply by the 28.7.2017 would do appeal on/after 28.7.2017 . Defendants sends letter dated 24,7,2017 saying our reply to your appeal, I have made no appeal, can I quote defendants letter of 24.7.2017 where they admit my claim.

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....]

Well lets pull this all together did I have grounds to appeal HHJBiggers judgement, ,,,did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, see FEDJCAB document. Went from FEDJCAB and letter in my website of 13.4.2017 over perjury issue, and malfeasance in public office courts for years ignoring applications, as CRIMINAL offences JCIO could not investigate. Further my allegations were not vexatious defendants admit we had IPCC complaint and we did not follow IPCC regulations, and as my complaint I had not appealed on the 22.7.2017 the defendants stance that we had no evidence of perjury and malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications .IPCC ask i contact PCC Ms Mountstevens permission to issue an appeal, where defendants state you have appealed.

WELL LETS PUT THIS AFTER ARREST TO MAGISTRATES COURT AS MY PROTEST. DEFENDANTS IN A IPCC INVESTIGATION COURT OF APPEAL STATE THERE IS NO NEED TO ADHERE TO IPCC REGULATIONS AND DEFENDANTS CAN SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL WHERE ONE NOT LODGED.

4/ Can i cite local judge and barristers paper on malfeasance in public office

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Well simple question in magistrayes court after arrest,,reason before court making my protest,,,,have i been wronged by defendants, who are taking me to court, who in IPCC investigation ,ignored IPCC regulations, and where i can appeal utter nonsence we had no evidence of perjury,,,,, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years sent reply to an appeal where one not lodged.

Need to conclude HHJCotter read wrong papers did not read application 6.12.2017,,,,further made judgement where HHJCotter read wrong papers, and clearly made up his mind about case,,,,,the background in HHJCotters judgement, but he did not read application, we have corruption and collusion as BIGGER /COTTER COME TO IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENTS .. This is utter breach of Article 6 ,,,denying evidence in front of him.

Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".

The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,,IT KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

P JONES

CASE CO/1731/2018 ,WE HAVE ,ORDER OF RHLJLEGATT [RL] WHICH HAS NO MERIT ON THE FACTS FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY JUDICIARY unambigious FROM FEDJCAB AND LETTER 13.4.2017 BELOW ,,,did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer went over Eaga perjury issue and malfeasance in public office court for years ignoring applications which they admit, these are criminal offences as JCIO state therefore we can not investigate, as barrister who saw my website stated all judgements in this case follow from wrong fairy story made up by HHJCotter that you went over,,,, you were unhappy with judgement of HHJDenyer .why i went in FEDJCAB DOCUMENT BELOW,,,IRONIC APPLICATION 13.7.2018 TO RL IGNORED CONTAINED FEDJCAB SO HE KNOWS FACTS OF CASE WRONG IN HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT ?????? HE IS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE6,,,,its further legally flawed eg RL ,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement however HHJCotter is corrupt and bent he did not consider application of 6.12.2017 as he removed it from file to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. What did he read the corruption of courts Mr Hunt , which is also utter breach of Article 6 refuses to let me see file,,The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).WHAT DID HE READ,APPLICATION MADE FOR REMOVAL OF RESTRAINING ORDER [ BRINGING READERS UP TO DATE ]

1/ Reader in website had judgement of HHJBigger , UTTER NONSENSE IN RESPECT TO EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM PLEASE SEE BELOW FEDJCAB DOCUMENT IT WAS ALSO IN PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT SENT TO COURT AND PARTIES 16.9.2017, where appeal made to court of appeal, where we have restraining order issued 24.1.2019 because I made appeal against HHJBiggers judgement. . Parties and court via email on the 24.1.2019 informed of application to remove restraining order, parties had 7 days to dispute facts, no replies, so parties accept facts, Application which also contained the email 24.1.2019 via hard copy sent to court, 1.2.2019 , proof of posting obtained. In application 1.2.2019 asked for stay as direct related issue over related judiciary corruption in this restraining order, where HMCS have just paid compensation of 150.00 so now in position to add to application 1.2.2019, which had been served on court of appeal. ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court ,,,,,ECHR case law

THIS IS ISSUE WHERE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT. WE ASK WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA. HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT UTTER NONSENCE ,,,, DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENT OF HHJDENYER, WAS OVER CRIMINAL OFFENCES, PERJURY ,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE COURT FOR YEARS IGNORING APPLICATIONS. PLEASE SEE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT BELOW . AS CRIMINAL OFFENCES AS JCIO STATE WE COULD NOT INVESTIGATE VIA STATUTE. HHJBIGGER STATES VEXATIOUS TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS LINE ONE PAGE ONE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION WHICH WE HAVE THE TWO. IN THE IPCC INVESTIGATION THEY DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS WHERE DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY BELOW CONFIRMS WE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS. FINAL ISSUE ALLOWED TO APPEAL DEFENDANTS JUDGEMENT THAT WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND ,MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS .WHERE I SEND EMAIL 22.7.2017 ASKING QUESTIONS TO DO APPEAL, SAYING WITH NO REPLY WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017 AS NEAR OUT OF TIME.WHERE DEFENDANTS SEND LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 SAYING REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL ,,,I HAVE MADE NO APPEAL,,,DEFENDANTS IN LETTER 24.7.2017

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE THESE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....

THEY STOPPED ME APPEALING AS IPCC STATED DEFENDANTS INFORM US YOU LODGED AN APPEAL 22.7.2017 YOUR ONLY ROUTE JUDICIAL REVIEW. THE DEFENDANTS ARE CAB HOW CAN THEY STATE TO IPCC,,,,HE LODGED AN APPEAL

2/ Judiciary want to call black is white so be it , have severe heart condition, hope to die this year in defendants custody ,to expose corruption of judiciary and defendants and North Bristol NHS Trust [ NBT ], leaving me in constant pain, in shoulder, repair in inguinal hernia broke down in days, due to mesh issue, 4 chances to diagnose gallbladder problem ,where another trust diagnosed in minutes, stated should have been diagnosed months before. .Have had near miss while in defendants custody in NBT case. Retired district judge who saw my website suggested picket at court of appeal, inform media before. Not doing that, will deal with this,, shoplifting, my protest against defendants/judiciary then in magistrates court,,,, can take this document with me so when lawyer visits in cells , he knows why i am there. Have discussed with graffti artist our theme when they paint www.corruptioninbristolcountycourt.com with CAB [corrupt and bent] our theme.This document in my website www.corruptioninbristlcountycourt.com if facts below untrue sue me for libel, contempt of court , do it now as now have no one to leave property to, looking for suitable person to give home to.

3/a/ HHJBiggers judgement , lets quote exactly what he said,,,,stems from dissatisfaction by applicant against a decision of HHJDenyer,,,, Well all i can say lets do this legally as my lawyer will present in magistrates court,,why i am there, in protest ,,,,what HHJBigger is doing is denying evidence in front of him, utter breach of Article 6 to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process, what i would say your CAB CORRUPT AND BENT denying evidence

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....

What was before him, picket at court for years ignoring applications, barrister told me to stop ,report matter to defendants malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications, plus Eaga perjury issue. Seen by defendants Sgt Price ,she asks for dissection of CPS document on malfeasance in public office , which we define FEDJCAB [fatal evidence document judiciary corrupt and bent],as best description of issue today . plus details of perjury issue.

Simple question as in only last month a female barrister who saw my website stated, this whole case depends on why you went to defendants,,,,simple question was this evidence before court for years.

THE FEDJCAB [sent to Sgt Price also in pre action protocol emailed 16.9,2017 to all parties.also before RL application ignored by him of 13.7.2018]

CPS in black DIRECT PASTE from their document ,into Word document which allowed me to edit, my comments were inserted in red eg,,,,,

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,he is judge HHJDenyer that deals with appeals, there is no doubt he failed to act when appeals/appications are sent to him to pervert the course of justice. DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications PUBLIC OFFICER ,,,,judges defined as officer,,,,,ACTING AS SUCH ,,,,,,,must be direct link between the misconduct and an abuse ,misuse or breach of the specific powers and duties of office of position ,,,,HHJDenyer deals with appeals, direct link he is ignoring applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

applications WILFULL NEGLECT MISCONDUCT ,,,,,the wilful act or misconduct can be a result of a positive act, or a failure FAILURE IGNORING MY APPLICATIONS.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Could not find transcript of Eaga case, misfiled, so sent a few days later, eg

31 Bibury Ave

Bristol BS346DF

13.4.2017

Good morning Sgt Price,

Can I issue apology for delay, in terms of Eaga perjury issue please find evidence, misfiled the transcript , have scanned just relevant pages, as you can see,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,my client does not know Ms Suggett or where these emails in his bundle come from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did district judge conclude,,,,a lawyer would not come all the way from Newcatle and lie to me, THESE EMAILS MUST BE FORGIES ,,,,,,when accused of perjury you can see letter where taunted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application, too late for you to do anything about it now. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

You have been supplied with CPS document on malfeasance in public office , where you asked to explain how it relates to my complaint. If you need more information please contact me, When picketing at court, as you know barrister told me to report to you malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications over many YEARS , ,plus above perjury issue. You were unaware of term malfeasance in public office, as you stated would not be given to anyone to investigate if not a criminal offence, lawyer informs me a legal name its ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,misconduct in public office , where he informs me your officers jailed recently over this criminal offence.

We have court ignoring correspondence,,,,,,openly saying we will ignore emails, as utterly bent and corrupt stopping me obtaining evidence, will be of interest in Cardiff Admin. court issue if one of your officers in Cardiff can obtain file ,do not expect you to travel to Cardiff, further as we discussed, is this a case against HHJDenyer /judges ignoring ,,,,,,,,,binning applications, or court staff malfeasance in public office ignoring not sending to a judge, or both working together .However we know in OBS08441 from my website, we have recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court where he confirms DJDaniels had ignored application, STATES THERE WILL BE NO REPLY TO APPLICATION ,as all he sent was just a note,,,,,Mr Jones should take up issue with judge at hearing,just igmored my application. We have no evidence not sent, you may have issue where staff say was sent and judges saying we did not see, the court utterly corrupt will not let me consult files, breach of Article 6.

P JONES

The FEDJCAB document later in PREACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW SENT TO COURT AND PARTIES 16.9.2017

Further pre action protocol document had to be done via CPR template paragraphs Annex A , what did i state in Annex A in pre action protocol document,,,COURT LATER TOLD TO READ APPLICATION WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 16.9.2017...................................5/ ,,,,,,,

6/ INTERESTED PARTIES

IPCC PO BOX 473 SALE M33 OBW 2017/086838 [IPCC]

NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST BRISTOL BS105NB [NBT]

BRISTOLCIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE 2 REDCLIFE ST BRISTOL BS16GR [BCC]

7/ THE ISSUE

BCC [Bristol county court ] for years ignoring applications, criminal offence malfeasance in public office, .resulting in one incident of miscarriage of justice. Complaint to defendants who refuse to investigate.

What did i state in judicial review application,,,,

The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,, McGinley v UK,,,,,,breach withholding documents which would have assisted with case...Ruiz-Mateus v Spain ,,,,,to have knowledge of and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed... resulting in miscarriage of justice, perverting course of justice, In 2YJ03757 we know application made for oral hearing , from recording with Mr Blair at Bristol court office Mr Till sent to the Administration court Cardiff, he has court order to send to HHJDenyer did he ignore order, malfeasance in public office, or did he send to HHJDenyer who ignored, did Administration court obtain, we suggested to police could they get local police to obtain file, ,,,,we know lawyer could not get a oral hearing, we asked police,,,,,have you talked to lawyer, ,,,,have you talked to Pro Bono Unit, ,,,,,,please see details in text. .Are these chronic events, Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored.

END OF QUOTE FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION NOTE MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE RELATED TO APPLICATIONS IGNORED

WHERE HHJBIGGER STATES AS CAB ,,CONSIDER ABOVE INCLUDING FEDJCAB ,YOU WENT TO DEFENDANTS IN FEB 2017 OVER MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS YOU WERE UNHAPPY WITH HHJDENYERS JUDGEMENT,,???????,YOUR UTTERLY CORRUPT FROM DOCUMENTS ABOVE BEFORE YOU,,,,I STATED YOU SHOULD CONSIDER APPLICATION WITH PRE ACTION PROTOCOL DOCUMENT OF 16.9.2017,,,,. CLEARLY YOU KNOW UNTRUE DID NOT GO MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE AS UNHAPPY OVER JUDGEMENTS,,, . SHOWS NOT ONLY CORRUPT AND BENT BUT COLLUSION WITH HHJCOTTER,,,eg IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT NOT WITHSTANDING THIS APPLICATION TO HHJCOTTER OF 6.12.2017 TO CORRUPT AND FRUSRTATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS WAS REMOVED FROM FILE,,,,HE DID NOT READ MY APPLICATION 6.12.2017,,,BELOW YOU HAVE STATEMENT FROM MS BOWYER WHERE WE TRY TO SEE WHAT WAS READ WHERE COURT AS UTTERLY CAB REFUSES ME TO SEE EVIDENCE,,,,,UTTER BREACH OF ARTICLE 6,,,,WAS IT APPLICATION HHJCOTTER MADE TO HIMSELF. ,THEREFORE AS I PAID FOR APPLICATION WHICH WAS BINNED ASKED FOR REFUND OF FEE WHERE UNDER BANNER CAB COURTS MR HUNT REFUSES TO PAY,,,BEING DEALT WITH BY RESOLVER. AS SOON AS RETIRED JUDGE SAW JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER STATED,,,,THE BASTARDS AGAIN HAS REMOVED APPLICATION, IN JUDGEMENT OF HHJCOTTER CITES EMAIL 29.7.2017 , below, so aware of application 6.12.2017 as cited in email of the 29.2.2017. [the document citing of 29.12.2017 damaged by Royal Mail, courts refuse to issue complete copy] WHERE I CITED APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017. THEREFORE AWARE OF APPLICATION HOWEVER AS CAB REMOVES FROM FILE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE JUDICIAL PROCESS ,,,,, present application solely to remove restaining order however,,,,,,,,,,,DO WE HAVE CORRUPTION AND CLEARLY DID NOT READ MY APPLICATION,,,THE APPLICATION 6.12.2017 CONTAINED SECTION TO REMOVE RESTRAINING ORDER OF Feb 2016 ,,,,,

Applications to re-open appeals pursuant to CPR 52.30 may not be reopened unless – "(a) it is necessary to do so in order to avoid real injustice; (b) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to reopen the appeal; and (c) there is no alternative effective remedy".

The "paradigm case" identified in Lawal v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514 was said to be where "the litigation process has been corrupted, such as by fraud or bias or where the judge read the wrong papers

b/ HHJBigger states should have complained to JCIO, UTTERLY AWARE FROM ABOVE PERJURY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS ARE CRIMINAL OFFENCE AND THEREFORE COULD NOT COMPLAIN TO JCIO.

c/ The corruption continues, HHJBigger ,,,,defendants were right to advise to go to JCIO, NO they were not ,could not investigate, criminal offences,,, [as they stated, if they could anyway out of time as events in this corrupt court over years still going on today] FROM b/ was it vexatious to make claim against defendants , or is court of appeal saying JCIO can investigate criminal offences ??????????????. As retired judge stated make issue clear to judiciary as soon as possible, therefore what were allegation in judicial review that were vexatious, AGAIN WE HAVE IDENTICAL WRONG JUDGEMENT AS WITH HHJCOTTER,,,HHJBIGGER CORRUPTION AND COLLIUSION WITH HHJCOTTER,,identical wrong judgements

,

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [end of quote judicial review]

Regulations of IPCC [ their summary]

Regulations IPCC in a police investigation.

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

IN LETTER BELOW LETTER FROM DEFENDANTS INSP O MAHONY [can I clarify, fall at home where could not move fire service had to break in ,DEFENDANTS ASK CONTRACTOR TO BOARD UP WHOLE WINDOW,,,however just small piece of wood to cover hole, where as in hospital 4 days, water entered home, complain to contractor who stated this is what police asked us to do, so complaint to defendants. You have Insp O Mahony comprehensive reply,WHICH I THANKED HER FOR, where she states AS IPCC REGULATIONS IN THIS NEW COMPLAINT I HAVE TO TALK TO YOU,,,,WHERE I RAISE ISSUE OF TODAYS ISSUE WHERE SHE GAVE FIRST CLASS SERVICE AND TALKED TO MR GALLOWAY,,,,eg my complaint today where he admits I did not follow IPCC regulations, THIS WAS ALLEGATIONS WHICH HHJBIGGER STATES WAS VEXATIOUS BECAUSE I APPEALED WAS NOT VEXATIOUS THEY ADMIT CLAIM ,,,,RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED,,,,,,,,so my appeal to court of appeal, because I appealed restraining order issued, WHERE ARE WE RUSSIA/CHINA] LETTER OF INSP O MAHONY

With regard to the letter which you left in Patchway front office for the attention of Sgt Price, I can confirm I have spoken directly with Sergeant Price. She said that she does recall speaking to you in the front office and tasking one of her officers to investigate a crime Malfeasance in a Public Office. However she cannot recall whether she ever received your letter. [THIS WAS ANOTHER COMPLAINT MUCH LATER OVER BOARDING UP OF WINDOW NOT RELATED TO TODAYS ISSUE,,,DUE TO FALL COULD NOT MOVE WHERE FIRESERVICE HAD TO BREAK IN AS I STATE NOT ISSUE TODAY,,,DO HAVE DEFENDANTS RECEIPT THAT THIS LATER LETTER WAS LEFT] She accepts that this will have been frustrating for you and as the Investigating Officer for your complaint, I offer my full and sincere apologies on behalf of the organisation that your letter was left unanswered.

Secondly, as requested I sent an e-mail to Hamish Galloway asking whether he had ever had cause to speak to you. Mr Galloway provided a response stating that;

1) He had no recollection of ever personally speaking to you

2) As a member of the Professional Standards office he had assessed a complaint from you (HC/CO/369/17) which was that an officer failed to investigate an allegation of malfeasance in public office by a Judge and officers from Bristol County Court.

3) Mr Galloway states that he recorded the complaint and then sent you a 'disapplication' letter on the basis that it was an abuse of the complaints process in that complaints/allegations against Judges and Court Officers are dealt with by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.

I understand that you then made a complaint against Mr Galloway (HC/CO/812/17) alleging corruption and malfeasance in public office. This complaint was also subject to disapplication on the grounds of being an abuse of the complaints process.

I hope this clears up your query with regard to Mr Hamish Galloway.

With regard to the boarding up of your window, I can confirm that I have listened to the audio for the call from Fire to Police in relation to the boarding up request and also the call from Police to Boing Rapid Secure in relation to the same.

I have ascertained that the Fire Service make the call to Police on behalf of the Ambulance Service. This is in line with the Joint Protocol agreement for persons collapsed behind closed doors. A request for boarding up is made for a wooden framed window 1200 by 400mm. Police then in turn call Boing Rapid Secure and request the same. I have listened to both calls and at no time is any mention made of when you may be returning from hospital. The duration of your stay in hospital is not mentioned at all. I can confirm that no police officers were dispatched to your property and that the only role of police in this matter was to request boarding up as requested by the Fire Service.

I hope that this investigation helps to resolve your queries and I hope you accept our apology with regard to your letter.,,,,,END OF LETTER

ADMIT IPCC REGULATIONS NOT FOLLOWED.MR GALLOWAY NEVER TALKED TO ME ACCORDING TO HHJBIGGER VEXIOUS TO MAKE COMPLAINT . DEFENDANTS DO NOT CHALLENGE FACTS. WHERE UTTER RIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT OF HHJBIGGER, AND EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE APPLICATION AS RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED AS I APPEALED HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT.

Further from judicial review application,,,,all I need to quote is defendants letter of 5.12.2017 where they admit second part of claim, eg I had said in email 22.7.2017 with no replies to questions, over perjury, and malfeasance in public office ignoring applications, would do appeal on/after the 28.7.2017,,,,DEFENDANTS LETTER CONFIRMING 5.12.2017

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE THESE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....

So VEXIOUS LETS MAKE THIS CLEAR FOR LATER USE,,,,DEFENDANTS IN IPCC INVESTIGATION CAN IGNORE IPCC REGULATIONS AND SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL [eg we have no evidence of,,,perjury issue, malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years,] where defendants admit no appeal lodged. What i state in judicial review application are allegations true or vexatious

c/ The corruption concludes the Public Law issue never cited,,,what is this,,

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER

The Queen on the application of PHILIP JONES

Versus ,,,,CHIEF CONSTABLE AVON AND SOMERSET POLICE

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL,[grounds 2 in judicial application page 4/5] ,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA

JUDICIARY DEFINITION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW. It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.Simple question were right procedures followed, where defendants admit above procedure in a IPCC complaint ,,,IPCC regulations not followed. I am allowed to appeal judgements of defendants eg we have no evidence of perjury, malfeasance in public office,ignoring applications however defendants admit sending reply to an appeal where one not lodged, every right to appeal ON THE FACTS HHJBIGGER JUST CORRUPT.

Consider local barrister and judge paper on malfeasance in public office,

The elements [for offence] which can be extracted from the limited case law are: A public officer ,,,,,, Wilfully neglecting to perform her duty or wilfully misconducting herself ,,,,,,, To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder ,,,,,, Without reasonable justification or excuse. Despite the criticism, there remains an appetite, at the Law Commission at least, to preserve an offence of misconduct in public office, or create a codified replacement. This appetite comes at least in part from recognition that the offence, at times, is the best description of the criminality involved: the public outrage comes not from the particular details of the misconduct, but from the sense of being wronged by an individual whose duty is to serve the public interest. . Kate Brunner QC

Well simple question in magistrayes court after arrest,,reason before court as my protest,,,,have i been wronged by defendants, who in IPCC investigation ,ignored IPCC regulations, and sent reply to an appeal where one not lodged.

d/ Can i quote RL judgement eg ,,background COMPELLING EVIDENCE in judgement of HHJCotter, BUT HHJCOTTER IS CORRUPT RL KNOWS CORRUPT,,,RL WAS SENT FEDJCAB ON THE 13.7.2018 ,,,, IRONIC WHY I WENT TO DEFENDANTS AS APPLICATIONS IGNORED,,,WHERE APPLICATION TO RL OF 13,7,2018 WAS IGNORED AND CONTAINED THE FEDJCAB DOCUMENT. RL UTTERLY AWARE I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER.

Can I refer to actual application skeletal argument to RL ,

SKELETAL ARGUMENT [as at 1.7.2018] ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Lets look at this judgement paragraphs

PAR 1 /A ,,,,SO ISSUE AS JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION,,,page 2 ,,,, The issue with police ,,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff /judges ignoring applications, and correspondence ignored,,,,,APPLICATIONS IGNORED ,,,,IN APPLICATION ALSO SAY STILL GOING ON IN 2018 GIVE EVIDENCE STILL NO REPLY TO APPLICATION 26.2.2018. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENT OFHHJDENYER,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ITS ABOUT WE COULD NOT GET A JUDGEMENTS . FAILURE TO PERFORM THEIR DUTY MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION PAGE 22 TO 26 HHJBIDDER HAS QUESTIONS I ASK DEFENDANTS AFTER THEY SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE .,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO MY LAWYER WHO ALSO COULD NOT GET A REPLY, HAVE YOU TALKED TO PRO BONO UNIT,,,,HAVE YOU TALKED TO COURT MANAGER,,EG 5 MONTHS LATER,,,;;WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE AS WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WANTED COURT TO DO,,,,MAY I SUGGEST DAY ONE ,,,,,EMAIL DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR APPLICATION,,,

PAR1 B ,,,,Perjury /malfeasance in public office is a criminal offence so could not report to JCIO ,

from judicial conduct publication] We cannot investigate

Allegations of criminal activity for example, perverting the course of justice , [Eaga case perjury/malfeasance in public office ] (criminal allegations should be directed to the POLICE ) Further these cases over a long period of time, so out of time to make complaint, defendants aware……………………………………….end of quote

IMPORTANT HERE RL UTTERLY AWARE I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER,,,,,HE WAS SENT VIA EMAIL THE FEDJCAB IN APPLICATION 13.7.2018 ,,,,IRONICALLY IGNORED APPLICATION SO UTTERLY AWARE I HAD EVERY RIGHT TO APPEAL,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

Can I refer to Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 where clearly RL had judged case before looking at facts, ,,,,mind already made up,,,,,as RL stated,,,,,facts of case in HHJCotters judgement,,,but this is story HHJCotter made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process , ITS WRONG ON FACTS eg why I went to defendants, as CPS FEDJCAP document ect,,, FEDJCAB its in pre action protocol for judicial review document,,,,DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER. From Sharing,, The ‘fair minded and independent bystander’ test used here should clearly be in the mind of any representatives who feel that they have been effectively rejected without serious hearing on appeal – IN EMAIL 13.7.2018 THE COURT OF APPEAL RL HAS THE FEDJCAP DOCUMENT,,, KNOWS I DID NOT GO TO DEFENDANTS OVER JUDGEMENTS OF HHJDENYER

We asked RL that application to remove restraining order is not heard by him , as clearly ,,,,,,A Court of Appeal in which the trial judges are called upon to ascertain whether or not they themselves committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision can raise doubts as to impartiality , San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, however clear stance of RL from judgement,,,,,,,,,,,,,the facts of case in HHJCotters judgement.,,,,,,,,,,but I did not go to defendants over judgements of HHJDenyer, defendants asked in first meeting to send CPS document on malfeasance in public office and show how it relates to my complaint, eg FEDJCAP document , plus 13.4.2017 letter,above , went over malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years,and perjury Eaga issue, FEDJCAP in pre action protocol document confirming facts , these criminal offences as JCIO state as such we can not investigate, further as numerous events over long period of time these out of time, accepted in letter of defendants, so could not go to JCIO, which leaves ,,,,,fact of case in HHJCotters judgement IN UTTER TATTERS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

RL states further ,,,does not supply any evidence for bringing proceedings,,,,,,,,,,,so we have court saying you make application to defendants, perjury and malfeasance in public office, ignoring applications for years, defendants state you have no evidence, comes under Wednesbury unreasonableness,,,,what is this SECOND APPLICATION NOTE

further we have my lawyers where applications sent ignored, we even have court in email saying,,,,,,,,,,,,WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS. This is a IPCC investigation where defendants as CAB admit not following IPCC regulations, and sends reply to appeal, where admit one not lodged. As paper above of Ms Brunner QC HAVE I BEEN WRONGED BY DEFENDANTS. We know what happened as questioning that IPCC regulations not followed, asking 11 questions in judicial review,,,,have you talked to my lawyer whose application was ignored, have you talked to court staff in their email admit WE IGNORED APPLICATIONS. No they never followed IPCC regulations ,clear breach, so as Mr Crouch CAB sends reply to an appeal when one not lodged,,,malfeasance in public office.Well from above CPS document on malfeasance in public office

SCOPE OF OFFENCE ,,,Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law ,,,,,,,office confined to those that are public office holders and is commited when the office holder acts or fails to act in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office. ,,,,,,,

HE DID NOT FOLLOW IPCC REGULATIONS AND HAVE DUTY TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL eg WE HAD NO EVIDENCE OF PERJURY AND MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE IGNORING APPLICATIONS ,,,WHERE HE ADMITS I HAD MADE NO APPEAL FROM MS BRUNNERS PAPER HAVE I BEEN WRONGED BY MR CROUCH HE STATED

You then emailed in reply 22.7.2017 and accused,,,,,,,,,,,,,of sweeping under the carpet.You also said will assume with no email reply [to 11 questions OVER IGNORING APPLICATIONS/PERJURY ISSUE ] by 9.00 am 28.7.2017 there would be no reply and can do appeal to you.....HE THEN SENDS LETTER DATED 24.7.2017 STATING OUR REPLY TO YOUR APPEAL.

Lets state this as it is, the reference to restraining of Feb 2016, in judgement of RL is a cowardly act, and i will address this. Its a case of in a green house do not throw stones. I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED COURT STATED REMOVE YOUR WEBSITE OR CONSEQUENCES WHICH WAS RESTRAINING ORDER. We had applications to remove this order 26.2.2016 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 ignored by this corrupt court. In website you have detail you can see why HHJCotter removed application of 6.12.2017 as in AOIBS346/746 [WAS CITED as IN ALL APPLICATIONS ]

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or exective

This was case where CAB lawyer Ms Smith at hearing asked that judgement reads i acted unreasonably, rejected by DJWatson, read website account , Ms Smith lawyer for NBT is CAB and DJWatson comprehended this,,,,, at initial first hearing stated should never before the court, we were utterly unaware of possible proceedings, in email from NBT Ms Needs ,,,,we were aware of possible proceedings, ,,,,DJWatson said settle outside ,opened door for her where told to go, admitted in email, said ridiculous in email supply medical records, put statement in medical records, where she said no in email, then 5 months later ask to settle, puts statement in medical records, supplies medical records then AS UTTERLY CAB GOES TO COURT AND ASKS THAT JUDGEMENT READS I ACTED UNREASONABLY..REJECTED BY DJWATSON

WHAT DID I DO WRONG ,,, I ASK HHJCotter SAME QUESTION 6.12.2017 IHOWEVER HE KNOWS NO LEG TO STAND ON AND REWMOVES APPLICATION OF 6.12.2017 TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE JUDICIAL PROCESS

The second aspect was i wanted backup of emails, eg email of Ms Needs, i can say Ms Smith LAWYER is CAB as i can prove from email, she lied to DJWatson, otherwise could be in court for libel, further as seeking evidence to do judicial review have email from courts Mr Fowler that he would ignore my emails, as seek evidence for judicial review, utter breach of Article 6. Coming home found programme given by Compuwave would not work,to back up emails, where Compuwave state was working when you collected, we have no further comment to make, proceedings issued, straight away email, we sent wrong program, where matter settled, email to remove from listings matter settled, where Compuwave contact saying what is going on it went for hearing and struck out,as no one turned up, where i appeal, as matter settled , where restraining order as i appealed,,,Same issue today you appeal I will issue restraining order I will not be blackmailed CASE WAS SETTLED.

WE HAVE FURTHER DEDUCTIONS FROM RL JUDGEMENT,,,,BRINGING CLAIMS WITH NO MERIT ,,,,,,,THESE WERE CLAIMS WHERE CLAIMS HAD UTTER MERIT WHERE DEFENDANTS ASKED TO SETTLE BOTH

We asked 4.6.2019given parties 7 days to answer questions, no replies, where in application to court of appeal ask for court order to obtain. We have situation does court of appeal want to see what went on or do they want to sweep judiciary corruption under the carpet. What were questions,

APPENDIX 5 QUESTIONS TO PARTIES REPLY REQUIRED IN 7 DAYS TO COURT OF APPEAL WITH EMAIL COPY TO ME IF ANY REPLIES

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents (McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 .....WHEN I HAVE FULL EVIDENCE CAN ONLY THEN DO THIS APPLICATION

The parties should have the opportunity to make known any evidence needed for their claims to succeed (Clinique des Acacias and Others v. France , § 37).

Proper participation of the appellant party in the proceedings requires the court, of its own motion, to communicate the documents at its disposal. It is not material, therefore, that the applicant did not complain about the non-communication of the relevant documents or took the initiative to access the case file (Kerojärvi v. Finland, § 42). The mere possibility for the appellant to consult the case file and obtain a copy of it is not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard (Göç v. Turkey [GC], § 57). Furthermore, the appellant must be allowed the necessary time to submit further arguments and evidence to the domestic court

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,

FOR COURT OF APPEAL

1/ Is the application email of 13.7.2018 on the courts file, timed 12.48 which contained the FEDJCAP document eg why I went to defendants .THEREFORE RL UTTERLY AWARE OF JUDGEMENTS OF HHJCOTTER/BIGGER WERE WRONG AND THEREFORE HHJCOTTERS JUDGEMENT WAS NOT A COMPELLING SUMMARY OF FACTS OF CASE,,,Further if in file know i had every right to appeal, which follows restraining order issued utterly without merit. ,Was there a reply to application.

2/ Did parties serve any documents with you, if so can we please have copy The only communication I had was from court saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,accept acknowledgement of service well out of time, however we will not get involved unless court instruct us to, this is issue between you and defendants. .If no replies parties had no objection to applications on the facts.

3/ The judgement of RL was a cowardly act considering reference to restraining order Feb 2016, as applications to remove were made 26.2.2016, 26.10.2016 and 6.12.2017 where judiciary just ignored applications. We know why binned/ignored as NBT asked at hearing AOIBS346/746 that judgement reads I acted unreasonably, this was rejected by DJWatson.

Brumarescu v Rumania ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,fundamental aspect of rule of law is the principle of legal certainty which requires that when the courts have finally determined an issue then ruling should not be called into question…………Tregubello v Ukrain ,,,,,,,,,,calling into question in this manner whether it be by a judge or executive

We have asked court for transcript where again applications ignored. We have just been paid compensation by HMCS of 150..00 , we ask court of appeal to confirm, I will pay for transcript, if it shows NBT asked that judgement that reads I acted unreasonably ,and was rejected by DJWatson then court of appeal will refund fee to obtain transcript, we have asked below for NBT to confirm facts in separate question for court of appeal/

FOR BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION COURT

4/ Can you please confirm emails I sent to you by date, and confirm if sent to Cardiff Admin Court as my instructions. Eg did HHJBigger read full application.,eg from ECHR case law,,,i had , time to submit further arguments ,,,,,,,,,,,

5/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copies.

FOR CARDIFF ADMINISTRATION COURT

6/ What documents,,,,/emails by date were forwarded to you by Birmingham court.

7/ Did parties serve any documents to you, if so can we please have copy.

8/ In CO/1/2013 Mr Blair in Bristol court office, [recorded conversation at court] states ,,,,our Mr Till sent your application to the Cardiff court , is this application in Feb 2013 on court file, further can we please have copy of any documents in court file in period 1.1.2013 till 1.4.2013. eg documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, ,,,,

FOR BRISTOL COUNTY COURT.

9/ Are the applications to remove restraining order 26.2.2016 and 26.10.2016 in court file

10/ In B26YM042 defendants asked to settle, wanted settlement done by Tomlin order, this was emailed to you, 23.12.2015 with request as settled to remove from court listings, where numerous requests over years to confirm this email in court file, where we ask again. Further example Ref 3 today email of 7.12.2017 ,where all requests over years ignored….part of email Ref 3 of email 7.12.2017

We have from file see asked several times with no reply, can I please ask again, case b26ym042 this was settled BEFORE hearing via Tomlin order defendants wanted to use, is this Tomlin order in file please

Was this email removed from file, or is IT IN COURT FILE.This was struck out at hearing, B26YM042 either to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process someone removed email from file, or court gave judgement knowing matter settled,. AS I APPEALED JUDGEMENT RESTRAINING ORDER BY HHJDENYER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, THIS WAS CASE SETTLED.

11/ The judgement of HHJCotter is utterly incomprehensible with respect to application, eg FEDJCAP document in pre action protocol document please see Appendix 1 today

In judgement 9.1.2018 [Lord Goldring,,,,,,why can this court not issue proper paperwork] admit alleged email of 3.1.2018 is email of 29.12.2017.

Further in that judgement you state email of 14.11.2018 can you confirm this should be email of 17.11.2017, where aware as I stated[ ISSUE TODAY IN COURT OF APPEAL NOT CORRUPT FAIRY STORY MADE UP BY HHJDENYER,TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ] issue before court of ignoring applications for years, next step the ECHR. If you have a email of 14.11.2017 [can not be 2018 as you state ]then can we please have copy. If in file 17.11.2017 HHJCotter again utterly aware why I went to defendants, not some fairy story he made up to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process.

12/ Pre action protocol document emailed . 16.9.2017 is it on system.

13/ Visit court 5.12.2017 ask for file , ask for N244 , from recording inform today I had written on it not to be sent to HHJCotter, new application next day. Can we please have copy of N244 form presented to HHJCotter with application, WHICH WAS SENT EMAIL 6.12.2017 OR A DIFFERENT N244 NOT ONE EMAILED 6.12.2017???????????????????

14/ On the 6.12.2017 final application email forwarded to you, as retired district judge stated, before they have removed evidence from file,[we will see with answers to above if others court had removed to corrupt the judicial process] so advised next day to email you, 7.12.2017 Ref 3 is this document on file. Further Mr Hunt has confirmed application 6.12.2017 not in file, as someone again removed, can you confirm these facts, admit have recording, as retired judge stated,after seeing HHJCotters judgement ,,,,,,the bast,,,,,,have again removed from file. Came to court on recording told HHJCotter did not consider, , retired judge stated, should not be recording inside the court, take third party to court for statement for applications , please see Ref 5 . Can you confirm 6.12.2017 application not considered by HHJCotter, eg he read wrong papers not in file.

15/ Do not know what he read can you confirm again you will not allow inspection of files,, Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities,

16/ We had applications in 2018, as I stated in judicial review application this criminal practice, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications still going on in 2018. We had application 27.2.2018 EOOBS236 ,was there a reply to application if so can we please have copy.

17/ Application 15.3.2018 to obtain evidence to do my judicial review, Mr Blair states your not looking at files over the years to show us ignoring your applications, make application to HHJCotter who will IGNORE your application, had to do judicial review application with evidence withheld, utter breach of Article 6. Follow up emails ignored, can you confirm HHJCotters reply Ref 4 dated 10.5.2018 was his reply to application of 15.3.2018. .Again utter breach of Article 6, to get a reply to applications in reasonable time, only obtained this as my MP involved. We have further ECHR concept of equalties of arms, for example when NBT made urgent applications, THEY GET REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS SHOWING BIAS. .

FOR NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST [NBT]

17/ In hearing before DJWatson defendants Ms Smith [NBT] asked that judgement reads I acted unreasonably , rejected by DJWatson is this correct.

When barrister told me to report perjury issue, malfeasance in public office ignoring applications for years, warned as being brushed off,,,,the COPWATCH PAPER EXPLAINS EVERYTHING

COPWATCH which proved correct in every detail,

For most people the police complaints process is a depressing waste of time. Not only do the police get to investigate themselves and help fellow officers escape misconduct charges, they get to handle appeals to…[further quotes from paper below ,,,,]

When it was recently reported that the police only investigate 4 out of 10 crimes, the Home Office responded by stating: “We expect the police to investigate ALL crime.”

And if the police start reciting huge chunks of legislation in a bid to get rid of you, don’t be afraid to remind them that it is not their job to interpret the law. It is their job to enforce it. The Home Office, the government and the courts are there to explain the fineries of legislation, not some lazy cop who has probably memorized it by rote just to help him pass a Sergeant’s exam……

. Seen by defendants Sgt Price who asked for dissection of CPS paper on malfeasance in public office, the FEDJCAB document plus details of Eaga case, stated as recorded visit if not criminal matter will not give to someone to investigate, she gave to PCBird

ADDITION TO RESOLVER FILE WHICH LEADS TO OTHER ISSUES EG CASE BEFORE COURT OF APPEAL CO/1731/2018 AS WE ASK FURTHER QUESTIONS IN TODAYS DOCUMENT

1/ We have had email from Resolver asking me to escalate . Background complain to MP , advised to contact Avon legal help, who passed me on to PSU Bristol, where advised to contact Resolver. The issue as Salford court refused to issue proceedings,ENCLOSED V J LEWIS clear breach of human rights case law. In usual way document today in my website as we await reply to be added to internet. . .

The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 76). 72. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 73. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim to a tribunal meeting the requirements of Article 6 § 1. Where there is a serious and genuine dispute as to the lawfulness of such an interference, going either to the very existence or to the scope of the asserted civil right, Article 6 § 1 entitles the individual concerned “to have this question of domestic law determined by a tribunal” (Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 92; Markovic and Others v. Italy [GC], § 98). The refusal of a court to examine allegations by individuals concerning the compatibility of a particular procedure with the fundamental procedural safeguards of a fair trial restricts their access to a court (Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v. Switzerland

This is difficult as Salford court ignored emails in Resolver file, , and only recently replied, assume as application to Cardiff county court to issue proceedings. What did we ask the court to do, can I please refer to application to the Cardiff court, which was approved as fee except.

WHAT I AM ASKING COURT TO DO AND WHY

1/ MAKE AN ORDER FOR CARDIFF COUNTY COURT TO SUPPLY COPY OF RESTRAINING ORDER ALLEGED MADE 22.6.2018. IF NO ORDER EVER MADE THEN APPLICATION FOR COST IN MAKING APPLICATION TO SALFORD COUNTY COURT WHICH WAS REFUSED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT WITH NO EVIDENCE OR REASON .

2/ IF RESTAINING ORDER NOT MADE THEN COURT TO MAKE ORDER THAT APPLICATION JONESV JOHN LEWIS ENCLOSED IS PROCEESED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT AND ALREADY IN THEIR FILE AND IT IS ISSUED IN 7 DAYS AS APPLICATION CORRECT AT TIME OF INITIAL POSTING

From court reply enclosed, they will issue claim against J Lewis, and will pay compensation , so no need to ask for court order, every thing asked for given, today see papers from court case issued, can i please thank the Salford court.

However the Salford court reply enclosed raises more questions than answers, and we need further reply to conclude. .

2/ The court states in enclosure when application obtained you were still on CRO list. But this does not make sense, as we give Salford court opportunity to explain, before Resolver looks at case. In May 2018 another application made to this court, which was ACCEPTED , so restraining order not on list May 2018. Are the Salford court saying correct, however someone put back on May –October 2018 . Further in letter 3.1.2019 from Salford ,,,,allegations order made by Cardiff county court 22.6.2017. where did this data come from, no contact ever with Cardiff CC. . We ask where did they get data Cardiff CC and issued on specific date which this court states. How do you explain application over 6 months ago your staff approved as fee except, eg v RapidSecure.

3/ The application which Salford approved v RapidSecure as fee except, in May 2018. A case closed as defendants asked to settle the claim. The claim directly related to case in the court of appeal, CO/1731/2018. Fall at home where could not move, where ambulance staff had to break in. Police ask RapidSecure to board up the whole window. Coming home after 4 days from hospital, only small amount of wood secured by silicon on broken glass, where water entered home. Complaint to police, where they state not our fault they did not follow our instructions, your complaint with RapidSecure they did not follow our instructions., eg ,board up whole window. Police state in IPCC regulations as you made complaint, we have now to follow IPCC regulations, for example I have to talk to you.

IPCC REGULATIONS AFTER ANY COMPLAINT

Contact to make sure have all details

Ask what you want to happen

Inform you what is likely to happen

Talk to you about way they will deal with your complaint

Let you know the outcome when they have finished , do in person or on phone ,BUT should also write to you

Should receive enough information at end of investigation to understand what has happened,,,,,,,,,,

At point where I state I refuse to talk to you, unless when you call in case before court of appeal you answer my question did investigation officer Mr Galloway ever talk to me. In court of appeal file it has reference 131/2 police the defendants admit that he never contacted me and reference 97/8 we accept we were wrong and your email 22.7.2017 can not be considered as an appeal. This is issue before the court of appeal can I please refer to page 1 line 1 of judicial review application.

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUE [in judicial review] WHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS [POLICE] IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL[grounds 2 in judicial review application page 4 and 5] ,,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter [tab 21] they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017

DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [document before HHJB]

4/ We have issue again related to court of appeal case co/1731/2018, ,,,,,,,court ignoringapplications malfeasance in public office STILL GOING ON IN LATE 2017 AND 2018 . From court of appeal bundle the full application eg email 6.12.2018 not sent to HHJCotter, NOW REMOVED FROM FILE TO CORRUPT AND FRUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS,,,,we asked for compensation, as fee paid for this application, however in standard way Bristol CC ignored email and follow up emails. Issue before court of appeal, which we can follow up later, perhaps an issue for Resolver at a later date.

P JONES

COMPENSATION ,,,accepted, although on benefits do not know if treat as income, REPORTED TO DWP .Data Salford court asked for to pay compensation.

PD JONES

Barclays

30884960 02

20 1334

We have enclosed application, reference HMCS directions, that applications can be made, if no fees payable, this practice accepted by Bristol county court in 2018 which I thank them.

We have issue as allegations restraining order 22.7.2018 in place reason why Salford county court will not issue enclosed claim.

Unaware of any order , not in GOVUK site. Salford /Cardiff COUNTY court refuses to supply copy of order.

We have concern legally advised to contact court of appeal, as I issued co/1731/2018 , it would appear from enclosed application a fee should have been paid. As in medicine can not be involved in fraud, I was utterly unaware of any order. We ask the court of appeal separately to conduct their investigations, as I inform them of evidence, and ask to put in file of co/1731/2018 . . From enclosed court judgement of HHJBigger it would appear an order was in place, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did he make order ??????????????????????, if so why not as legal advice in enclosed judgement in ADMINISTRATION COURT, 3 days later, why issue as allegations in the COUNTY COURT 3 DAYS BEFORE. In terms of court of appeal if no restraining order in place, we ask ,,,DID YOU EVER LOOK AT FILE.

We await reply from Cardiff and court of appeal, .

P JONES

APPLICATION TO CARDIFF COUNTY COURT FOR COURT ORDER [REFERENCE CITED FROM COURT OF APPEAL APPLICATION DOCUMENT THIS APPLICATION TODAY COPIED INWWW.CORRUPTIONINBRISTOLCOUNTYCOURT.COM]

With reference to correspondence with HMCS applications can be done via email if no fees are involved, accepted by Bristol county court in 2018.

WHAT I AM ASKING COURT TO DO AND WHY

1/ MAKE AN ORDER FOR CARDIFF COUNTY COURT TO SUPPLY COPY OF RESTRAINING ORDER ALLEGED MADE 22.7.2018. IF NO ORDER EVER MADE THEN APPLICATION FOR COST IN MAKING APPLICATION TO SALFORD COUNTY COURT WHICH WAS REFUSED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT WITH NO EVIDENCE OR REASON .

2/ IF NOT MADE THEN COURT TO MAKE ORDER THAT APPLICATION JONESV JOHN LEWIS ENCLOSED IS PROCEESED BY SALFORD COUNTY COURT AND ALREADY IN THEIR FILE AND IT IS ISSUED IN 7 DAYS AS APPLICATION CORRECT AT TIME OF INITIAL POSTING

SKELETAL ARGUMENT. [Salford court denying access to the court]

The application made under

The right of access to a court for the purposes of Article 6 was defined in Golder v. the United Kingdom (§§ 28-36). Referring to the principles of the rule of law and the avoidance of arbitrary power which underlie the Convention, the Court held that the right of access to a court was an inherent aspect of the safeguards enshrined in Article 6 (Zubac v. Croatia [GC], § 76). 72. The right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1, requires that litigants should have an effective judicial remedy enabling them to assert their civil rights (Běleš and Others v. the Czech Republic, § 49; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 112). 73. Everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his “civil rights and obligations” brought before a court or tribunal. In this way Article 6 § 1 embodies the “right to a court”, of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect (Golder v. the United Kingdom, § 36; Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], § 113). Article 6 § 1 may therefore be relied on by anyone who considers that an interference with the exercise of one of his or her civil rights is unlawful and complains that he or she has not had the possibility of submitting that claim to a tribunal meeting the requirements of Article 6 § 1. Where there is a serious and genuine dispute as to the lawfulness of such an interference, going either to the very existence or to the scope of the asserted civil right, Article 6 § 1 entitles the individual concerned “to have this question of domestic law determined by a tribunal” (Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], § 92; Markovic and Others v. Italy [GC], § 98). The refusal of a court to examine allegations by individuals concerning the compatibility of a particular procedure with the fundamental procedural safeguards of a fair trial restricts their access to a court (Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v. Switzerland

In Salford county court letter dated 3.1.2018 they state we will not issue enclosed claim as restraining order in place, dated 22.7.2018 , from GOVUK site retired district judge who saw my website states not listed, we have no evidence. . The Cardiff county court states we can nor put hand on order. Again utter breach of the ECHR case law never seen alleged order, Salford court will not supply.ALLEGED ORDER ..

Ruiz –Materis v Spain,,,,,,,,,,,,,,plaintiff to have knowledge and comment on all evidence adducted or observations filed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

APEH et al v Hungary ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is inadmissible for one party to make submissions to a court without knowledge of the other and on which the later has no opportunity to comment,,,,

We know alleged restraining order not on system, however see alleged made in letter by Salford court on 22.7.2018 by Cardiff county court ,3 days before HHJBiggers judgement, please see enclosed judgement CO/1633/2018. We may ask did he in corrupt way write to Salford court, in 2018, in cowardly way , did not have the moral fibre to inform me of his underhand actions, have i evidence of this judge being corrupt, and corrupting and frustrating the judicial process.

Moral v France ,,,,,legitimate reason to fear that a particular judge lacks impartiality this standpoint important but not decisive,,,,

Pabla v Finland ,,,what is decisive is whether their fear can be held to be objectively justified,,,,,

Further issue before court of appeal denying evidence in front of him, did he ever look at application ????????????????????????????

Obligation incumbent on the administrative authorities: the appellant must have access to the relevant documents in the possession of the administrative authorities, if necessary via a procedure for the disclosure of documents McGinley and Egan v. the United Kingdom, §§ 86 and 90). Were the respondent State, without good cause, to prevent appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession which would have assisted them in defending their case, or to falsely deny their existence, this would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing, in violation of Article 6 § 1 ,

Consider judgement enclosed,

It was wrong , utterly without merit, to say Public Law basis was not shown The public law basis was clear from application. From first line of application before HHJBigger eg ,,pasted page 1/line 1 ]]

SYNOPSIS ,,,SOLE ISSUEWHAT WE ARE ASKING CAN DEFENDANTS [POLICE] IGNORE STATUTORY IPCC REGULATIONS ON INVESTIGATION [grounds 1 in judicial review application page 4] AND WHEN AGAIN IN STATUTORY REGULATIONS I CAN APPPEAL[grounds 2 in judicial review application page 4 and 5] ,,,,,SEND REPLY TO AN APPEAL I HAVE NOT LODGED. AS ONE LAWYER STATED WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA. [IPCC state police inform us you lodged an appeal, only route a judicial review you will see in police letter [tab 21] they state you emailed us on the 22.7.2017 asking questions to do appeal, you stated WITH NO REPLY BY 28.7.2017 YOU WOULD ASSUME QUESTIONS WOULD NOT BE ANSWERED AND WOULD DO APPEAL ON/AFTER 28.7.2017. IN REPLY TO THAT EMAIL ,,,,24.7.2017 DEFENDANTS ALLEDGE THAT EMAIL 22.7.2017 WAS THE APPEAL] WHERE ARE WE CHINA/RUSSIA [document before HHJB]

HHJBIGGER judgement ,,,,,,,,,,,,You made application to police over HHJDenyers JUDGEMENTS UTTER NONSENSE. Again as retired judge stated let HHJBigger know as soon as possible issues, he has Public Law issue page one, on page 2 of judicial review application . HHJBIGGER,however states ,,,,,Further should have complained to JCIO. But malfeasance in public office a criminal offence, ignoring applications, as JCIO stated as criminal offence we can not investigate. The police [defendants] state we were told for you to complain to JCIO, BUT JCIO TOLD ME WE CAN NOT INVESTIGATE REASON COMPLAINT TO POLICE over advice ,,,,,we have asked who told them,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BRISTOL COUNTY COURT,,,,,,,,,,,,,however all correspondence to police ignored, if told by the Bristol court then utterly aware that via regulations Bristol knew as criminal offence I could not complain to JCIO. PAGE 2 OF APPLICATION NEXT PARAGRAPH TO HHJBIGGER HIS JUDGEMENT A DISGRACE NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS DENYING EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,PAGE 2 OF JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION BELOW

,,,,,day 1 letter to defendants,contained dissection of CPS document,,, dissected in letter to them.eg,,,,,,,,,,,,DEFINITION OF OFFENCE wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconduct himself ,,,,,,,,,he failed to perform his duty by ignoring my applications , from page 2 of JR application The issue with police ,[DEFENDANTS] ,,,,,perjury issue [Eaga case] and court staff/judges ignoring applications, and correspondence, ignored,,,,Mirojuhys v Latvia …………………fairness of proceedings always assessed by examining them in entirety [malfeasance in public office] that an isolated incident may not be sufficient to conclude proceedings as a whole unfair…. ,,,,,,consider even 2018 issues, where even today applications ignored. [End of quote fromJR document.]As JCIO state these numerous cases cited out of time, and malfeasance in public office anyway a criminal offence and therefore we can NOT investigate,so could not go to JCIO, further retired district judge who saw my website, states no restraining order against you, he believes as seek advice from PBU a case for ECHR.

HHJBIGGER,,,,,,In pocket of police state they did nothing wrong, so they can ignore IPCC regulations, in their investigations, which police admit, REF 131/2 and send reply to an appeal, where police admit REF 97/8 I have not lodged one, WHERE ARE WE AS I ASK IN MY WEBSITE RUSSIA/CHINA AND NOW COURT OF APPEAL

Note as we ask question, from judgement HHJBigger states restraining order in place. If this proves untrue, MAJOR ISSUE IN COURT OF APPEAL APPLICATION,,,,DID HE LOOK AT APPLICATION ,,,,,FROM APPLICATION IF WE SAY IF ,,,,DID HE OPEN FILE,,,,,IF HE DID WOULD SEE FEE EXCEPT NO RESTRAINING ORDER .

IF YOU LOOK AT HHJBIGGERS JUDGEMENT HE STATES RESTRAINING ORDER IN PLACE DID HE ISSUE 3 DAYS BEFORE JUDGEMENT ENCLOSED OR WAS IT ISSUED BY SOMENE IN CARDIFF COUNTY COURT AS SALFORD ALLEDGE AND ON WHAT GROUNDS.