CAUL GRANT + others JAILED – UPDATE 15 MAY 14

received:

“Caul Grant got 28 days for contempt of court. Caul Grant and Michael Cohen were also fined £700, other protester Fiona was fined £500, Jackie Fergus was acquitted as no evidence. 
The four were in court yesterday for alleged charges related to breaching a police order whilst peacefully protesting on the Zebra crossings outside Royal Courts of injustice last year September 2013. Caul Grant of ‘Campaign for Truth and Justice’ began peacefully protesting after the tragic avoidable death and cover up of his 15 month baby son Prince Grant in a NHS hospital..

His quest for justice led him to become the subject of two decades of persecution and torture involving false imprisonment on previous occasions instigated by the highly corrupt law firm Bindman and Partners who had been sued by Mr. Grant ( Bindmans and Partners are also the part of the very same criminal cartel involved in my case). I don’t have any details as to what happened in court yesterday as i sadly was not there. But am told that Caul has since been taken to Wandsworth Prison..

 Once again we see yet another example of the victims/ survivors (peaceful protesters against injustice) being arrested and penalised by either imprisonment or fine, while the actual real guilty parties( serious criminals) are wrongly protected by the state. 

Shall update once I know more”

x writes 16 May 14 - all is alleged:

“Apparently, both Caul and Michael lodged applications prior to the hearing which resulted in them being denied their human rights to give their defence. obviously this would upset anyone.. But it very much appears from what I’ve been told that both men’s rights were violated by the judge..

Michael was also prevented from being present at the last prior hearing before this one.. I was there on that occasion, and it appears that the judge did the same thing to him again, only this time he also sent Caul down to the cells during the hearing.. This was suppose to be their defence hearing where they had a right of reply to the allegations, but this never happened and the judge decided to fine them all accept Jacqui on the spot.. Jacqui and Fiona both had legal reps, Caul and Michael were representing themselves. But obviously couldn’t do so being barred from the court room.. But I know for sure only Caul was jailed..

Either way sounds like they have been deliberately rail roaded to get the convictions they wanted, but only Caul Grant has been jailed.. He was also fined 700 pounds.. Two others were only fined, namely Michael Cohen fined 700 pounds and Fiona ?? Fined 500 pounds And Jacqui Fergus (sister of Joseph Fergus whose land properties were stolen) was acquitted.

They also did not allow Caul Grant and Michael Cohen into the court to give their defence and the case was heard in the two men’s absence.. Michael was asked to leave the court room, and Caul was taken down to the cells apparently for contempt.. From want I have now been informed, the two men made applications to the court prior to the hearing, and as a consequence the seated Judge held them in contempt.. I have been told that due to being denied his right to provide his defence, Caul wrote an obtuse note to the judge.. Apparently the Judge read this out before sentencing him to 28 days in prison, which I understand is at now Wandsworth Prison.. “

“In November 1994, Mr. Grant retained the services of Bindman & Partners Solicitors to pursue a complaint against King’s College NHS Hospital Trust for negligently giving false information about the circumstances leading up to the death of his 14 month old son.

Bindman & Partners advised him in writing, that there was no law in the United Kingdom which gave protection against false advice. Mr. Grant found this very difficult to accept and sought the advice of several other law firms, who all told him Bindman’s were wrong.

Mr. Grant tried to have his Legal Aid Certificate transferred to a firm who were prepared to properly represent his interest, but Bindman’s refused to release it.

In August 1997 Mr. Grant then issued a writ against Bindman & Partners for several breaches of the Solicitors Code of Conduct. They included a breach of contract, willfully giving false advice and failure to act in the best interest of the client.

Bindman & Partners were represented by another firm of Solicitors, Reynolds Porter Chamberlain (RPC). They offered no defence to the claim and sought only to rely on the influence of their friends or families within the Judiciary.

The Senior Partner at RPC, Alan Toulson, is the brother of a High Court Judge, Mr. Justice Toulson. Alan Toulson, or his firm, went to his brother and arranged to have Mr. Grant’s claim willfully struck out of Court. RPC also arranged, with Justice Toulson, an unlawful injunction against him contacting Bindman’s directly.

The actions of Justice Toulson and his brother, or brother’s law firm, is a direct contravention of Article 6, Section 1 of The European Convention. During the abuse of process and infringement of his rights, Mr. Grant made several complains to Downing Street, Members of Parliament, the media and to Her Majesty the Queen, but no help was forthcoming.

In an effort to attract public attention to all what was taking place, he spray painted the windows of the offices of Bindman & Partners. Mr. Grant was subsequently arrested and prosecuted for criminal damage. He pleaded not guilty as a result of circumstances. The following Morning, 13th August 1997, he was brought before a District Judge, Mr. Baker and despite the documented fact that there were no conditions attached to his bail, the Judge remanded him to 4 days in prison.

On the 17th August 1997 he was taken back to the same Court before a different Judge, Mr. Johnstone, who stated in Court, he would not become involved in what was taking place and he confirmed that there were no conditions attached to his bail and released him from custody.

In June 1998 Mr. Grant was eventually convicted for the allegation of criminal damage. He appealed against the conviction and in July 1998 the conviction was overturned. The Appellate Court presided over by His Honor Judge Inman, accepted his defence of duress of circumstances.

By now Mr. Grant had also received a reply to his complaint from Buckingham Palace, written on behalf of the Queen. It is clear from that letter that the Queen could not intervene directly. However, she instructed that Mr. Grant’s letter of complaint be sent direct to the former Head of the Judiciary, Lord Irvine. The letter from Buckingham Palace also confirmed Lord Irvine’s awareness of his case. Lord Irvine’s failure to act on the issues raised in his complaint allowed the corruption to spread out of control and because he was the Head of the Judiciary Mr. Grant was denied the right to be heard by an impartial, independent Tribunal, the basic principles of fairness.

In September 1998 Mr Grant reissued his writ, this time there were four Defendants, Bindman & Partners for reasons already given, the Solicitors Indemnity Fund, the Hospital responsible for subjecting him to mental torture and the Hospital responsible for deliberately over prescribing him antidepressants.

Alan Toulson, or his firm, went back to his brother to have Mr. Grant’s writ struck out, again unlawfully. In an effort to break him once and for all, RPC also alleged that Mr. Grant had breached their unlawful injunction. In February 1999 Mr. Justice Toulson conducted a hearing, in Mr. Grant’s absence, without legal representation and without his knowledge, prosecuted by his brother or his brother’s law firm. At the conclusion of that unlawful hearing, Justice Toulson ordered that Mr Grant should go to Prison and serve 6 months for Contempt of Court.

source:   http://www.ctj.org.uk/#/genesis-of-the-problem/4559046061: 
——————————————————————————–