There was an error in this gadget

Tuesday, 31 December 2013

Well That Was The Year That Was.



Happy New Year to everyone who has visited this " BlogSpot Of Truth " in 2013.

Your support is much appreciated by everyone involved in this righteous campaign.

Saturday, 21 December 2013

Welsh Assembly Government and Neath Port Talbot Council Guilty Of Kidnap And Trafficking



Well what I am about to say will come as absolutely no surprise to the thousands of you who have followed this case.

Thursday, 19 December 2013

Full Credit To David Rees AM.He Has Replied To Linda's Emails

 
Today a letter arrived at Linda's house in reply to her emails that were sent to David Rees the Welsh Assembly Member for Aberavon.

Friday, 6 December 2013

Update



Many of you have left comments, phoned or asked myself , Linda and her family directly as to what is happening with regards to the email sent to Linda's Welsh Assembly Member David Rees.
 
Sadly as pointed out In the article that can be read Here  we had hoped to have received a reply from Mr Rees on the points raised by the end of business on Wednesday 4 December 2013.
 
As no reply has been received Linda will be sending another email to David Rees AM today respectfully asking for a reply to be given to her by the close of business on Thursday 12 December 2013. 
 
Let's hope that all answers will be forthcoming.

Friday, 29 November 2013

Guy Taylor Interview " AXIS OF TRUTH " Paltalk Room



 
Tomorrow Saturday 30 November 2013 starting at 1900 the AXIS OF TRUTH paltalk room will be holding an interview, Question and Answer session with Guy Taylor.
 
Guy has been active for many years in fighting the corruption within our courts ,banking system , utility companies etc and is a strong advocate of The Commercial Lien process , and Common Law which is still the highest law of the land.
 
Guy was one of over 600 people who turned up at a court in Birkenhead and arrested the corrupt Judge Peake.
 
It should be an excellent , informative evening.
 
All Welcome.
 
For those of you who are unfamiliar with paltalk you can download it for free by clicking HERE and follow the instructions.
 
Hope you can make it.

Monday, 18 November 2013

Letter Received From Welsh Assembly Member David Rees And A Veiled Threat.



 
A letter arrived at Linda's house last Friday from Welsh Assembly Member David Rees in response to the email sent to him and The First Minister of Wales Carwyn Jones on the 5th of November 2013.
 
The article covering this and the contents of that email can be viewed HERE
 
As in previous articles there is no need to publish Mr Rees letter but Linda has authorised me to publish her reply to Mr Rees in which Carwyn Jones has been copied in.
 
Below is Linda's email. Click read more to continue. 
 

Tuesday, 5 November 2013

Email Sent To Welsh Assembly Government First Minister Carwyn Jones And Local Welsh Assembly Member David Rees




Below is a copy of an email sent today by Linda Lewis to Welsh Assembly First Minister Carwyn Jones and Local Welsh Assembly Member David Rees.

david.rees@wales.gov.uk, carwyn.jones@wales.gsi.gov.uk

Dear David Rees AM
 
I would like to draw your attention back to the meeting held with yourself on Monday 15th April 2013 in the presence of myself, Kevin Edwards and several supporters who remained outside the building at Morrison Road Library, Port Talbot.
 
During the meeting a lot of information was given to you regarding the kidnapping from my care of my daughter in 1998 by agents of Neath Port Talbot Social Services.
 
Over six months have passed since that meeting and despite my many requests by email and by letter I am extremely disappointed that you have failed to supply me with the basic information that I requested from you at that time.
 
I feel I am being deliberately stonewalled by you as no answers to my basic requests for information have been forthcoming. 
 
So I ask again.
 
1 – Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and the Welsh Assembly Government have often stated in the press, by letter and by email that a thorough investigation has been conducted regarding my case and that they are satisfied with their findings. Therefore there should be no problem with you obtaining a valid and legal “UK Generated Pick up Order “ on my behalf bearing in mind that if such a document does not exist then everything done to me in 1998 is illegal.
 
2 - When did this alleged thorough investigation take place? Who attended and who chaired the meeting? If such a meeting took place then obviously there will be minutes of this meeting that I would like to see and trust that you will provide me with them without delay.
 
For information
 
A - It is illegal to destroy at any point paperwork that deals directly with any extradition and B - how could a thorough investigation have taken place when I was denied the opportunity to put my side of the story forward?
 
This email has been bcc’d to several campaign groups and alternative media outlets in the UK and worldwide as well as The First Minister Carwyn Jones for his perusal.
 
I have authorised Kevin Edwards to place the following article onto my website and I give my full authority for you to reply to anyone who so wishes to contact you regarding my case as it is very much in the Public Interest.
 
Also please note the change in email address so that there can be no dispute that this email has been sent by me.
 
Mr Rees I have been advised by many people that as the information that I have requested over six months ago is still not forthcoming that I formally place you on notice and expect a full response to my request from you as per 1 and 2 above within 10 working days.
 
I look forward to receiving all answers and valid documentation by the end of business on Wednesday 20th  November 2013.
 
Yours Sincerely,
 
Linda Lewis

End

The content of the email is self evident as far as I am concerned but one does wonder if it will be replied to.

It is to be hoped that Carwyn Jones and others will not allow themselves to be so ill-informed as to suggest once again that a "thorough investigation" into The Linda Lewis  case has already been undertaken.
No investigation that could possibly be described as such has ever happened. 

Monday, 28 October 2013

Mr Steve Phillips,Chief Executive Of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council


 
 
Today the Chief Executive Of Neath Port Talbot Council Mr Steve Phillips ran out of time to re butt the accusations of wrongdoing made to him by Linda Lewis in her "Affidavit Of Truth." 
 
As Linda acts in truth and honesty an extension to the time limit of 30 days was offered to Mr Phillips on Friday afternoon extending to 1200 on Monday 28th October 2013.
 
Linda as per the terms of the Commercial Lien has not received a response from Mr Phillips.
 
None of her truthful accusations have been rebutted.
 
Therefore Linda now has " Summary Judgement " on Mr Phillips as he has accepted the accusations made by Linda as being truthful by his acquiescence.
 
The value of the judgement against Mr Phillips is £20,000,000 ( Twenty Million Pounds Sterling )   
 
The Public Notice has been issued which can be viewed HERE and will appear on cars and in shops within the Neath Port Talbot area soon.
 
This raises a very interesting point.
 
Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council we are reliably informed is currently operating with a deficit of £40,000,000.
 
The Chief Executive Steve Phillips and the Head Of Legal Services David Michael HERE both have Summary Judgements against them totalling £40,000,000
 
Linda has written to Mr David Michael requesting the full details of the Insurance Company , the policy number and the name of the Council contact be supplied within 10 days so that we may lawfully inform them of this additional debt so that they may consider re evaluating their policy premium should they see fit.
 
Will we receive a reply as informing the Insurance Company is a Legal requirement ?
 
Time will tell.

Saturday, 19 October 2013

South Wales Evening Post Under Scrutiny.




Many of you are fully aware that Linda Lewis having paid the South Wales Evening Post over £1000 for two perfectly lawful adverts to appear in the Public Notice section of the paper they were taken down off the internet on the instructions of the Editor Mr Jonathan Roberts.

The two Public Notices did appear in print on the 8th of October 2013. (See below)

It is increasingly clear that Mr Roberts unlawfully bowed down to political pressure from the Tortfeaser David Michael, Head Of Legal Services, Neath Port Talbot Council or his agents in his retraction statement.



Without the courtesy of an explanation ( Jonathan Roberts or his staff would not speak to either Linda or myself or return emails) as to why this action was taken and the point blank refusal to refund the money paid in good faith by Linda and which the South Wales Evening Post happily accepted ( and entered into contract ) we have decided to act. 

Action will be taken to obtain a full refund on Linda's behalf and I personally have started proceedings against the Editor Mr Jonathan Roberts that I intend to see through to it's conclusion.

Now here's the thing !

If the South Wales Evening Post were so adamant that these notices were " not what they appeared " how come that they were accepted for publication ( For Free ) on http://public-notice-online.org/ ?

Tortfeaser David Michaels Public Notice can be viewed HERE

Tortfeaser Julie Rzezniczeks Public Notice can be viewed HERE

Tortfeaser David Johnstons Public Notice can be viewed HERE

Further proof that the mainstream media cannot be trusted as far as the truth is concerned.

At the time this " skulduggery" was taking place by chance I was doing a live interview on this subject which can be viewed HERE 

Updates as they happen.

Friday, 11 October 2013

UK Column Live Interview Thursday 10th October 2013



Interview starts 52 minutes on covering updates on the " Justice 4 Linda Lewis Campaign ".

Three Commercial Liens have been successful with one more pending.

The South Wales Evening pressurised by outside agencies to take down online " Public Notice" advert after 8 hours even though these " Public Notices " did appear in the newspaper in print.

South Wales Evening Post refuse to say why online " Public Notices " and who demanded they take them down.

South Wales Evening Post breaks it's contract and  refuses to give Linda Lewis a refund for the cost of he adverts even though the advert is a perfectly legal and lawful transaction.

All of this goes to show the depth of the on-going  cover up and collusion between Neath Port Talbot Council and the criminals who supposedly have been elected to serve us, the people in the Welsh Assembly Government.

Tuesday, 8 October 2013

Public Notice Section South Wales Evening Post 8 October 2013


Public Notices


Posted Tuesday 8th October

A Common Law Commercial Lien has been LAWFULLY established between myself, Linda Suzanne of the family Lewis, and the individual who accepts liability for the Name "Julie Rzezniczek", Head Of Improvement, Peoples Services, Herefordshire Council at address 168 Rhyddings Terrace, Brynmill, Swansea SA2 0DP, herein referred to as "the Tortfeaser". The reason for this Lien is that I have been the subject of a wrong (i.e. a tort) at the hands of the Tortfeaser, and my remedy IN LAW is to be able to place Lien on their property, until the wrong has been set aright. Thus I am LAWFULLY able to seize goods and assets that belong to the Tortfeaser, up to the amount of the Commercial Lien, which is £20,000,000 (Twenty Million Pounds Sterling). This Notice is to inform whomsoever may be concerned that the creditworthiness of this Tortfeaser is, henceforth, highly suspect, until the Lien lapses - or is, by some other means, removed.
 
See Here 

Public Notices


Posted Tuesday 8th October

A Common Law Commercial Lien has been LAWFULLY established between myself, Linda Suzanne of the family Lewis, and the individual who accepts liability for the Name "Mr. David Michael", Head of Legal Services at Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, The Civic Centre, Port Talbot. SA13 1PJ at address 51 The Meadows, Cimla, Neath SA11 3XF, herein referred to as "the Tortfeaser". The reason for this Lien is that I have been the subject of a wrong (i.e. a tort) at the hands of the Tortfeaser, and my remedy IN LAW is to be able to place Lien on their property, until the wrong has been set aright. Thus I am LAWFULLY able to seize goods and assets that belong to the Tortfeaser, up to the amount of the Commercial Lien, which is £20,000,000 (Twenty Million Pounds Sterling). This Notice is to inform whomsoever may be concerned that the creditworthiness of this Tortfeaser is, henceforth, highly suspect, until the Lien lapses - or is, by some other means, removed.
 
See Here
 

Wednesday, 2 October 2013

Orion Talk Radio Interview 1/10/2013




Last night I did a brief 22 minute interview on Orion Talk Radio "The Earth Needs Rebels Show" with Kevin Bull.

To listen to the interview click HERE .

Then go to "The Earth Needs Rebels archive list where you can either listen to or download the interview at 01 OCT 13 Tue time 01:05 PM

Tuesday, 1 October 2013

Two More Commercial Liens Successful. Two More Criminals Unable To Defend Themselves. Guilty As Accused.



Today the 30 day period Lawfully allowing a right to rebut Linda Lewis' sworn Affidavit expired.

Julie Rzezniczek ( pictured above ) Head of Improvement , Peoples Service , Herefordshire Council at address 168 Rhyddings Terrace , Swansea SA2 0DP could not rebut the truthful actions of wrongdoing (torts) that Linda Lewis accused her of through the courts.


As with David Michael we now have "Summary Judgement" against her in law.


Therefore Linda is now Lawfully able to seize goods and assets that belong to Julie Rzezniczek, up to the amount of the Commercial Lien which is £20,000,000 (Twenty Million Pounds Sterling).


The same applies to David Johnston ( pictured above ) Head of Social Work Practice at Isle Of Wight Council at address 200 Ravenswood Avenue , Ipswich , Suffolk IP3 9TR.

Linda is now Lawfully able to seize goods and assets that belong to David Johnston, up to the amount of the Commercial Lien which is £20,000,000 (Twenty Million Pounds Sterling).

Public Notices have now been issued to

All agencies who may have a financial interest in the named above and to individuals and organisations that Linda will be requesting to place this information on Public Display and Record.

End

In depth articles highlighting each of the three individuals part in the kidnapping and on going cover up of Linda's daughter and what they were accused of and could not re butt will be published soon.

WELSH ASSEMBLY MEMBERS , BOW YOUR HEADS IN SHAME !   

Friday, 27 September 2013

If He Was Not Guilty He Would Have Re Butted. As He Did Not Then He Admits His Guilt.


Below is a copy of a " Public Notice " that was sent this afternoon to Mr David Michael , Head Of Legal Services at Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.

PUBLIC NOTICE



TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN

 
 
A Common Law Commercial Lien has been LAWFULLY established between myself, Linda Suzanne of the family Lewis, and the individual who accepts liability for the Name "Mr David Michael", Head of Legal Services at Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, The Civic Centre, Port Talbot. SA13 1PJ at address 51 The Meadows, Cimla, Neath SA11 3XF, herein referred to as “the Tortfeaser”.


The reason for this Lien is that I have been the subject of a wrong (i.e. a tort) at the hands of the Tortfeaser, and my remedy IN LAW is to be able to place Lien on their property, until the wrong has been set aright. Thus I am LAWFULLY able to seize goods and assets that belong to the Tortfeaser, up to the amount of the Commercial Lien, which is £20,000,000 (Twenty Million Pounds Sterling).


This Notice is to inform whomsoever may be concerned that the creditworthiness of this Tortfeaser is, henceforth, highly suspect, until the Lien lapses - or is, by some other means, removed.
 
End
 
David Michael was unable to re butt ANY of the truthful accusations of wrongdoing that Linda Lewis accused him of by her Commercial Lien ( Affidavit ) in court.
 
The thirty day period for Mr David Michael to reply has ended.
 
Therefore by his acquiescence ( silence ) he has admitted his guilt.
 
The Commercial Lien will now be processed to it's full extent.

The " Public Notice " will lawfully be sent to all agencies who may have a financial interest in the named Lienee or Tortfeaser ( being Mr David Michael ) and to individuals and organisations that Linda will be requesting to place this information on Public Display and Record.
 
Linda and I would like to thank everyone for their support and advice during this period.
 
A new Commercial Lien was signed for today by a criminal in authority who is part of this disgraceful cover up. This criminal now has 30 days to re butt Linda's truthful accusations.
 
Two other Commercial Liens are nearing their end. They have until the 30th of September 2013 to re butt Linda's affidavit. No reply's as yet. 
 
So watch this space.      

Friday, 20 September 2013

Update.



The fact that there hasn't been a posting for several days doesn't mean that things have ground to a halt.

Far from it.


More paperwork will be despatched this week on Linda's behalf by the team to other criminals involved in this sickening example of abuse of power by those in authority.

Progress is being made on a daily basis not just here in the UK but also in America where some excellent work is being done.

The next couple of weeks will be very interesting.

Kevin

Friday, 13 September 2013

Kevin Bull Discusses With Brian Gerrish The Recent Ruling By Judge Mumby Regarding The Family Courts.




The interview with Kevin Bull starts at 47 minutes.

The Linda Lewis Campaign gets a mention 1 hr 35 minutes into the broadcast.

This is a very important move regarding transparency in the " Family Courts " which leaves the criminals at Neath Port Talbot Social Services even more exposed almost to the point that any further attempts to hide by them makes it laughable.

This interview is well worth listening to as affects everyone who has had dealings with the family courts.   

Off Topic but relevant.

A "First and Final Warning " was signed for this morning at 08:04 by a criminal in authority who has and still is desperately trying to cover up the actions of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Social Services and others.

The " Commercial Lien " document will be issued and processed to this individual in the next week or so.



More criminals will also be served over the next few weeks.

Kevin

Sunday, 8 September 2013

So What Is The Commercial Lien Process ?




What is a Commercial Lien?
 
If someone has 'wronged' you, by their actions, you have a remedy, in Law.
 
The Common Law is the Law-of-the-Land, and is the highest man-made Law under which the People of the Nation are bound.
 
Under the Common Law, everyone is individually responsible for their own actions.
 
The 'office' they may hold, the 'authority' they may consider they have, and/or the uniform they may wear, does not protect them in any way, shape, form.
 
Simply because they (like everyone else) are responsible for every action they take.
 
This was set into tablets of stone following Word War II, at the Nuremberg Trials. German Officers claimed "I was only obeying orders", yet they were still found guilty, and hung accordingly. This also forms a part of the Geneva Convention to which most Countries are signatories, especially the United Kingdom.
 
Thus "I was only obeying orders" is not a defence.
 
The reasoning is simple: BEFORE taking any actions against anyone else, make sure that what you are doing is lawful and moral. If you suspect that the action you have been ordered to take is either unlawful or immoral, then you must refuse to obey. You can report the order, and your reasons for believing it to be unlawful and/or immoral to a higher authority. You can go as high as you like in the chain of authority, pointing out that anyone who conspires to support the unlawful/immoral order are making themselves accomplices, in Law.

And that, as a consequence, they (themselves) will be held fully accountable, in Law.
 
The Process itself
 
In simple terms you write down The Exact Truth of what occurred, based on your first-hand knowledge, including any necessary supporting documentation. You will be writing under penalty of perjury, so do not lie, or make any Statements you feel you cannot prove.
 
You explain the 'wrong', and you claim damages. You claim damages that you feel you deserve.
 
You write this in the form of a sworn Affidavit, and send it to whoever 'wronged' you, giving them 30 days to rebut what you have said. You tell them that you will remove any Statements they can prove to be incorrect, but the result (after all removals) will be Notarised and placed on to the Public Record.
 
You must take this step. Because it is honourable, and you must remain in honour.
 
You cannot expect a Commercial Lien to work if you cannot prove this step.

Thus your Notice should be sent by Recorded Delivery, such that you can prove it was received.
 
If you do not take this step you can expect your collar to be felt at some later date because it is essential, and the essence of the Common Law, that a Party you consider offended you has the chance put their side of the story, and you must not deny them that chance.
 
It is very important to remember how the Common Law works.
 
This is solely by Verdicts of Juries (upon hearing first-hand knowledge-based evidence) and by unrebutted Statements of Truth (also based solely upon first-hand knowledge).
 
What remains unrebutted, in substance, creates The Truth, in Law. (This is the only way the Law can work. It relies on people being truthful, with the possibility of perjuring themselves if they lie).
 
Note that 'in substance' does not mean 'simple denial' as in "No, I didn't!". 'In substance' means denial with supporting proof. (And remember "I was only obeying orders" is not 'proof', nor is it any kind of defence.
 
Neither, by the way, is "I didn't know" - because ignorance of the Law is no excuse.

They should have checked, and discovered whether or not their actions were lawful and/or moral, before doing whatever they did).
 
Being The Truth, in Law, it immediately becomes The Judgement, in Law.
 
This is why, as a Witness, you are required to swear to: "Tell The Truth, the Whole Truth, and nothing but The Truth". Simply because all judgements are based on that. (I repeat ... it is the only way the Law can work).
 
Now that you have an Affidavit that remains unrebutted, you can get it notarised by a Notary Public.
 
'Notarising' consists of identifying yourself to the Notary (Passport, Driving Licence, etc), and signing your Affidavit in his or her presence ... such that he or she can verify that it was you, yourself, making your signature. The Notary will apply his seal, and will sign accordingly. (Their fees for doing this range from £30 to £50 on average).

( You do not have to consult  a Notary to activate the Lien. The Signature of two good men and true is equally as effective and it's free. )
 
All you need to do from this point onward is to 'place the fact that your Affidavit exists on to the Public Record'. This can be done by talking out a small advertisement in a newspaper.
 
Within the advertisement you can invite Debt Collection Agencies to contact you - in order to actually exercise the Commercial Lien debt.
 
What can the Lienee do about this?
 
Judges know that they cannot affect a Commercial Lien because it is based on first-hand knowledge, which they can never have. Only you can have that knowledge. Only you can make the Statements you made. Thus there is nothing for them to 'judge', and they know that.
 
The Lienee, therefore has three options:
 
1. To pay up the full amount you have demanded
2. To engage a Common Law Court, with a Jury of 12, to have their side of the story considered. In this Court you will also be able to explain your side of the story to the Jury. The Jury has the power to wipe away your Lien (if, for example, they don't believe what you stated), or to modify the amount you have demanded (if they think it was unreasonable). This is because the whole process derives from the Common Law (Note: Not Statute Law, which is subsidiary to Common Law!)
3. To wait 99 years with the Lien hanging over their head. However, within this period, you can progress your Lien via Debt Collection Agencies and Credit Reference Agencies.
 
Who can you take out a Lien against?
 
Anyone you feel who has wronged you - or conspired to wrong you.

For example, the Directors of a Company who have made demands upon you, without a Contract of Obligation from you. For example, all Debt Collection Agencies who simply write, demanding money, when you have never heard of them before, and know that you have no obligation to 'do business' with them. They may write on the basis of a Parking Fine, or whatever. The point is they do this without having first obtained a lawful obligation from you. They may very well claim a Warrant from the Northampton Bulk Clearing Centre, but you never consented to be 'judged' at Northampton Bulk Clearing Centre (and were never given any opportunity to put your side of the story). Furthermore the Warrant is not based on the Verdict of a Jury, or sworn Affidavit from first-hand knowledge (computers do not have first-hand knowledge!). So any such Warrant is void in Law. Consequently, if they continually harass you, they are (seriously and criminally!) 'wronging' you.
 
Therefore you go to the Companies House Website, and pay £1 for a Current Appointments Report on the Debt Collection Agency. This will list the names of the Directors. You apply a Lien to each of the Directors, because it it their responsibility to make sure that their Agency acts in honour, and within the Law, not outside of it..
 
Important Notes
 
If you read the description above carefully, you will see that - in order to apply a Commercial Lien - you do not need to get a Court's permission.
 
The Lienee would need to take you to Court (with a Jury of 12) in order to get it removed, or the amount reduced, without making a payment.
 
Obviously you need to be prepared to remove it yourself, if they do pay up.

End

Footnote.

With thousands of people now involved in and aware of the " Justice4LindaLewis"  campaign locally there has been interest from many people who are considering raising "Commercial Liens" against those in authority who they believe have wronged them. Obviously agents of Neath Port Talbot Social Services figure highly in this.

Therefore for more on Commercial Liens visit the website  http://lien.fmotl.com/ 

Tuesday, 27 August 2013

Enough Is Enough.


 
This morning three " Commercial Lien " documents were signed for by registered post and are now in the hands of three despicable criminals who still hold Public Office.
 
These criminals have collectively broken every law in the land in order to either cover up for their own criminal activities or those of others involved in the kidnapping of Linda's daughter in 1998 from her sickbed in America at gunpoint using a false passport so that Medical Negligence actions already started by the Lewis family would never come to light in the United Kingdom.
 
The value of each " Commercial Lien " is £20,000,000 ( Twenty Million Pounds Sterling ).
 
Notices of " First and Final Warnings " were sent to these criminals on the 17th August 2013 and were signed for and received.
 
They chose not reply.
 
Therefore we have followed due process and lawfully activated the "Commercial Liens" in which these criminals now have 30 days to rebut the truthful accusations made by Linda Lewis against them by individual affidavit and then take Linda to a common law court for judgement.
 
They cannot do this. 
 
Therefore after the 30 day period has elapsed we receive "Summary Judgement " and " Public Notices " will be activated with adverts in newspapers and especially The London Gazette and all credit agencies.
 
The Commercial Liens will be pursued to the end and we will be looking for full recompense to the value of each lien from every criminal named.
 
A " Lawful Chain " has been established to protect Linda Lewis from any potential harassment or harm and will ensure that this process cannot be stopped under any circumstances.    
 
 
As well as the three " Commercial Liens " mentioned , several other Liens have been  " Lawfully Notarised " and are held at different locations and will be posted to other criminals involved in the kidnapping of Linda's daughter very soon.
 
 
Several American Radio Stations are keen to follow this story and are watching with interest.
 
I have already been booked in for a two hour show in a few weeks time. 
 
My and the families thanks to the many who made all this possible.
 
Remember that you cannot kill the truth but you can always kill a lie.

Wednesday, 21 August 2013

" Angel On Our Shoulder. " More Documents Received This Time From "The Highest Authority "



Just a brief note to say thank you to everyone still hanging in there.

A lack of postings does not mean a lack of action far from it.

A hell of a lot is going on with the help of a hell of  a lot of people.

I have said it before that my UK Column interview  here  proves that " Justice 4 Linda Lewis " has been achieved.

Linda is vindicated from all the lies  perpetrated by Neath Port Talbot Council against her. Lies damn lies.

A" Mad Dog With Rabies " can see what Neath Port Talbot Social Services have exactly been up to.


I am led to believe that Linda's Welsh Assembly Member  David Rees has now confirmed that he has at last watched the UK Column video and yet he remains neutral.

He has also seen the pertinent evidence regarding The Head Of Legal Services David Michael having submitted " False and Fraudulent Evidence " to the courts to gain an injunction or shall we call it a " Gagging Order " to stop the truth coming out and from what I believe wants to see the full documents as snippets will not suffice.

No problem.

We will send David Rees the full documentation in the next few days we have nothing to hide.

But one very pertinent point that I will make to Mr Rees publicly right now is this.

You will get full disclosure for one reason and one reason only.

That if a very brave and honest person had NOT had the integrity to send us these documents see this link Mr Rees here then Linda would never have known what the criminal David Michael and his cronies were up to.


We now have received a large document from " The Highest Authority " working on our behalf.

This lengthy document has been hidden from Linda for many years.

It was also hidden from her Barrister.

It was never meant to be seen.

It was deliberately manipulated by Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and it's agents.

It is the statement from a supposedly independent " Guardian Ad Litem " Carol Thomas.

It is another of many documents proving this evil and wicked conspiracy against an innocent Mother , Child and Family.

This is the most powerful of all.

WOW !

" What is done in the dark will be shown up in the light. "

Saturday, 10 August 2013

The story I'm not allowed to tell you. By Bob Woofinden



Bob Woffinden tiptoes around the law to report the extraordinary case of a broken family.

I'd like to tell you a horrendous story. It's about a mother and her child, who live somewhere in Britain . . . sorry, this is going to get me into trouble. I've already given too much away.

Let me try again. I'm investigating this story . . . no, that won't do. I'm not supposed to be investigating it.

The problem is that what I may or may not be looking into is covered by an injunction. This is what the injunction prevents me, or anyone else, from doing:

Soliciting any information relating to the minor or her parents from the parents of the minor, members of the minor's family, any staff at any medical establishment where the minor has been or is [now] . . . or any educational establishment at which she has been or is being educated or any person who may have care of the minor.

Publishing any information relating to the minor or her parents or members of the minor's family obtained directly or indirectly from any other person.
 

That's what you could describe as a blanket ban. Nor is anyone talking "D" notices or invoking national security. This is just a family affair.

It is along roughly similar lines to what is known as a Mary Bell order, so called because an injunction was originally taken out to protect a child who had been convicted of murdering two other children. The idea was that, if the child's treatment and whereabouts became the subject of press debate, the chances of her successful rehabilitation would be greatly reduced.

The logic is the same as that which normally prevents minors being named in court cases. Another injunction prevents publication of certain details about Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, who were convicted of James Bulger's murder.

However, yet another child famously protected by a Mary Bell order was Sara Keays's daughter, Flora. But in that case no criminal activity of any kind was involved. And the consensus of opinion was that the order was brought in not to safeguard the interests of the child, but to safeguard the interests of her father, Lord Parkinson, who found the continuing press interest in his daughter politically and personally embarrassing.Certainly, that was how Keays herself saw it.

In this present case - which, you understand, I don't really know about - the claims of the family are remarkably similar.

According to them, this injunction also has nothing to do with the well-being of the child and everything to do with the fears of powerful people for their professional reputations and financial well-being.

The case involves a child separated from her family apparently against her and her mother's will.

The child has written heart breaking letters, pleading to be reunited with her mother.

If the public knew what was going on there would be an outcry, but the injunction, brought in under the Children Act 1989, prevents any publicity at all.

One journalist who has specialised in similar cases, usually involving children, families and social workers, told me he could wallpaper his room with injunctions.

Whenever the authorities get to hear of press interest in a case (as they inevitably will, if the case is being conscientiously researched), then they quickly apply for an injunction. Judges always grant them; they never rescind them. No doubt they genuinely believe they are acting in the interests of the child.

Had the mother in this instance ever been charged with a criminal offence (which she never has been), she would have received legal representation, access to evidence and a public hearing.

In her situation, she has been denied all of those basic rights.

She has also been deprived of her freedom of speech, since, as the House of Lords has ruled, freedom of speech is a meaningful right only if it incorporates the right of access to the media.

Yet the injunction in effect stifles journalistic inquiry, never mind publication (see text above).

Nor can the mother get appropriate legal representation. Every time the solicitor who has tried to act for her has applied for essential material, he has been fobbed off with a copy of the injunction.

In theory, the injunction should not apply to legal representation; in practice, it does.

So the imposition of the injunction means that the authorities are not accountable for their actions. In fact, even the injunction itself illustrates their absolute arrogance.

It is littered with mistakes.

Whoever drew it up can't use apostrophes or even spell "solicitors" correctly.

One court order binds the family to hand over material coming into their possession "after 25 November 1998".

Freed from the possibility of public scrutiny of their actions, the authorities can behave with impunity.

Hardly surprisingly, with the injunction in place, the case history becomes increasingly distorted.

A mistake or misapprehension is transferred from one document to the next, on the Chinese whispers principle, becoming both embellished and more established "fact" in the process.

This case is about - I can resist the temptation no longer - allegations of serious medical negligence and an ensuing cover-up, during which the child has been taken into care.

Such matters are currently of particular general interest, the public mood having been perfectly caught by a cartoon in Private Eye: "You can trust me - I'm not a doctor."

In this case, the family claim that, the diagnosis of an illness having eluded a succession of doctors, they simply diagnosed it themselves via the Internet. A tall story? Hardly. A few weeks ago, the press reported a case in which just that had happened.

Nevertheless, I can't tell you about any of this. I've already said far too much. After all, this is 21st-century Britain with a government committed to freedom of information.

Mum's the word.

Original article can be read here

OK.

I am sure that you are all aware that the above article that was written by the well respected journalist Bob Woofingden in January 2010 is all about the treatment of Linda Lewis, her daughter and her family by Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.

Why publish it now ?

Several reasons but the main one being that it has now been proven to both the Chief Executive of Neath Port Talbot Council Steve Phillips and Aberavon Welsh Assembly Member David Rees ( all evidence was sent to them ) that the application filed to the courts by David Michael in an attempt to obtain a lifelong injunction to help cover up their crimes committed perjury in the documentation submitted.

This is an extremely serious offence.

In a previous article Here I called for David Michael to be removed from his position within the council.

Sadly many people who have contacted the council this week have confirmed that David Michael is still employed by the local authority.

No action has been taken by the Chief Executive and no reply has been received from David Rees AM.

Obviously having a criminal in charge of the Legal Department of a criminal local authority suits their agenda. 

With regards to the press and I take no credit for this.

Many journalists have been contacted by supporters of Linda and evidence has been provided to them regarding David Michael's perjury.

Nothing solid has come out of it yet but we live in hope.

One thing of encouragement is that the vast majority of journalists contacted  are aware of our campaign and are supportive. Do we detect itchy fingers on their typewriters ?

We will see.

We have said all along that " No Injunction Can Be Taken Out To Cover Up For Criminal Acts."

Neither can an injunction be applied for in a criminal manner by providing false and fraudulent information to the courts.

Can it David Michael ?  

This article has been press released.