top of page

Comment

My site is not about disliking dismissal of my claim or Judicial error, but Bristol County Court's deliberate injustice, bias and intent to dismiss my valid claim and inflict excessive costs.

Any Legally trained person should be able to read the Judgments and understand the decisions. But here, there was no justification or sense to them. They are perverse. Legal advise from Counsel confirmed the Lower Court performed the wrong legal tests.

My claim was made out, obviously arguable, supported in Law and evidence and wrongly and unlawfully dismissed. Throughout, Bristol County Court denied me fair Hearings, ignored my submissions, ignored case Law and acted with intent to dismiss my claim and inflict excessive costs.

It is clear from O'Neill's Judgment, she took offence at some views she read in the Defendant's file, then used her flawed opinions of Criminal Law to say I had committed crimes, despite my being cleared and the views she referred to being legal. She then used this to say I wouldn't have succeeded in a malicious prosecution trial, so the Defendant didn't need to submit evidence which would not succeed. That obviously was the wrong legal test and couldn't be proved and anyway the opposite was true - the evidence proved the claim.

I make serious accusations on this site. But they are fair comment because I prove I had a valid claim with real evidence, I prove the claim was wrongly and unlawfully dismissed, I prove O'Neill acted for the Defendant so was biased. I prove Ralton ignored my Grounds for appeal and lied....etc

How could it be acceptable for a Judge who believes they were the victim of a crime, to preside over a hearing involving the person they believe committed a crime against them. She was clearly subject to outside influence so conflict of interests which disqualified her. How on earth could Ralton say I could not argue that and case Law on appeal ?  I think it would be fair to say he was covering up.

 

How could a Judge find me guilty of crimes in a summary judgment  Hearing and use this to dismiss my loss of chance negligence claim?  Her findings were based on her opinions, wrong in Law and went against the outcome of a Crown Court which cleared me with no case to answer (i.e. a collateral attack).

 

How can a Judge introduce false arguments on behalf of the Applicant to dismiss a claim, when the Applicant failed to dismiss it ?  This went against natural justice. And why did Ralton ignore this in two requests  for permission to appeal when the evidence that proved this was in front of him. I think it would be fair to say he was covering up.

It would be fair to say O'Neill was prejudiced and biased and set out with intent to dismiss my claim and inflict the severest costs possible cost order based on dislike of me, outside influence and spite. This was a fraud on me - a crime. This was like a third world kangaroo court Hearing. How dare we condemn foreign courts when we have such obvious abuse in this country.

Ralton's judgment doesn't make sense. How could such a senior Judge make so many obvious errors and refuse such strong grounds for appeal ? Because he had a policy to refuse me permission.

I believe Ralton knows O'Neill and had a choice to either accept my submissions and allow the Appeal, or cover up her errors and bias. I believe he chose the later, believing he could get away with refusing a litigant in person. Accepting her bias questioned her integrity. He did everything possible to ignore my grounds for appeal and uphold the Lower Court decision and was not going to let the Law stand in his way. This was a cover up.

Of Course it is only fair to give right of reply. Both Judges are welcome to explain and justify their decisions, show me the Hearings were properly conducted, they got the Law right and properly considered my case and appeal, in which case I will withdraw my protest and this site. Otherwise they have no complaint abut what is written here.

Reasons for this Site

  • A blog to show my appalling experiences and protest to highlight the injustice and abuse in the British Courts. Protesting assists distress I have been caused.

  • So my case can easily be referenced by Lawyers and those dealing with my Complaints (without need for paperwork);

  • So these Judges can understand why I consider their actions were wrong  and unjust and give them a chance to answer;

  • To show the appeal I was denied; 

  • To argue the case for Human Rights Abuse, Misfeasance in Public Office, Misconduct, Conduct incompatible with Judicial Oaths and protest for removal of these Judges from Office; 

  • To warn others to avoid Bristol County Court and these Judges; 

  • To show the public (by news, blog , social media and also other Countries etc) how abusive our British Legal System is;

  • To show how these Judges have brought the British legal system into disrepute and hopefully damage public confidence it it.

  • To ask the High Court why my request for a judicial review was refused by a false statement ?

A message to Ralton and O'Neill  - You ignored me, no doubt  you will ignore this site as well, but maybe others won't.  And be sure, having been subject to false accusations of crime, I am not the Criminal here.

      

 

COMPLAINT TO MINISTRY OF JUSTICE

The Human Rights Act makes it a requirement for Public Authorities to investigate and make amends where a Breach of the Act has occurred, as in this case.

 

A response from the Ministry of Justice (Ms Dipti Harini) after 3 months, failed to answer why the Judges made their decisions, ignored my complaints, claimed judicial immunity and a time-bar.

The Ministry of Justice show they are not interested in justice. They are interested in covering up They don't care if Judges lie or are biased, showing they support Human rights abuse.

This was not a case of Judicial error. There was crystal clear intent to deny Justice and defraud me. I am furious and outraged by these Judge's behaviour and entitled to answers to why those decisions were made.

  • If decisions were wrong in Law, then I have the right to justice, legal redress and compensation. Such severe financial loss and injustice would be unfair and cause anyone distress and anxiety.

  • However If these Judges acted with intent (as is obvious) and conformed by Counsel's opinion, then I am a victim of misconduct and crime and that makes it personal and serious. If I then took all necessary legal steps, and was further ignored and denied justice by the Authorities - that is provocation and would cause anyone extreme anger, distress and desire for revenge. It would also leave these Judges personally liable to me for the debt they caused.

  • I invoke Article 1 of the first Protocol to the ECHR which guarantees the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions without arbitrary state interference. That includes the right to my money, not to be taken by improper acts of the State (or compensated if it is).

  • It is great credit to me that I have avoided confrontation and not reacted to provocation, despite continuously denied justice, and  the distress, anxiety and damage this has caused me, my partner and my family.

  • I have the right to be treated properly and fairly by the Courts. I am entitled to Justice. I have the right to relieve distress and anxiety if improperly caused, I have the right to remove consequences of injustice, abuse and crime. Like anyone, I will never let myself be a victim of abuse or crime or let those that cause it get away with it. The actions of these Judges and Authorities who are made aware of injustice and improper intent, yet offer denial or immunity, is extreme provocation and an attempt to provoke me to obtain justice by duress.

  • Please email your comments or support.

The statements on this site are true or the author believes what is stated to be true or has justification for believing that what is written is true and supported by evidence, so are fair comment. The following is also written as a complaint and protest and to inform Solicitors Firms able to deal with injustice. It is written in conformance with article 10 ECHR (right to freedom of speech). The author will add the written responses and explanations from the Judges concerned to this website. Only matters completed in Court and not subject to appeal are commented on.

bottom of page