Rate, & Comment on, UK Judges
Click HERE to VIEW our advanced forum
Your GENUINE COMMENTS will add towards CURBING JUDICIAL IMMUNITY of judges, WORLDWIDE. That this is possible, is a major positive impact of the Internet. We do not need a change of the law to make Judges accountable. You comments, together with comments of other "plain citizens" throughout the world, who would be the people to comprise an Independant GRAND JURY, will cause this to occur. See how this will occur on our Parent website
| Shaun O\'Connell , Dated: 18.04.08 Time: 18:52 Web: www.alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: England City: Portsmouth State: Hampshire |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: HHJ Milligan Court: Circuit Judge family and criminal |
| From December 1997 to November 2004, he dealt with my family case. His wrongdoing was blatant and included inventing a hearing that had never taken place, denying daytime wetting in my daughter dspite being given pediatric notes to prove it, refusing evidence, accepting a one and a half page letter from a psychiatrist to her solicitor as a report on fitness for residence having seen her medical records when the psychiatrist was never informed of the court order and never saw the parents or any evidence filed in Court. He finally lost his rag telling me \'come back to me in a different frame of mind and anything may be possible.\' He was removed from my case in April 2005 by the court of appeal on spurious grounds to cover up |
| Shaun O\'Connell, Dated: 01.05.08 Time: 19:39 Web: www.alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Portsmouth State: |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: Lord Justice Wall Court: Court of Appeal |
| He ignored breach of the rules by the High Court making an order of the Court\'s own motion without giving me the right to contest the order and thus allowed a half day direction\'s hearing change to a half day final hearing. he ignored the legal and factual arguments after a seven week delayed reserved Judgement and handed down the jUdgement on my duaghter\'s birhtday out of spite. On a second Appeal as the first decision was obtained by fraud he then heard an Appeal against his own decision in breach of the longstandin rule that no judge shall sit on his own case. He happily admits the family Courts destroys people yet continues his barbaric scheme |
| Shaun O\'Connell, Dated: 01.05.08 Time: 22:16 Web: alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Portsmouth State: |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: Mr justice Sumner Court: Court of Appeal |
| I was shocked to hear Mr. Justice Sumner in
open Court say ‘at the
heart of this was not the question whether an injustice had been done
to him on one or more matters, at the heart of this was not, I am
afraid, whether there was violence to him though I in no way
underestimate the considerable importance that that could have in an
appropriate case……what is quite apparent
is that, whether they were
injustices or were perceived as injustices they have become the focus
of Mr. O’s attention….the difficulty with that
is the reaction it
has had on the children.’ Yet there was no such evidence or
argument
put to Court. I was specifically asked when a four page letter from my daughter desperate for her father to contact her was received. I said, April last year, 2001. The judge then changed this date to 1999 in his judgement and he ignored my daughter’s very clear wishes and feelings. Mr. Justice Sumner also said ‘If he is unable to separate his own intense feelings about the injustice to him and the poor care that this mother gives, the children will not have a proper relationship with their mother if there is the risk that her standing with them will be undermined.’ well done to them |
| Colin Peters, Dated: 02.05.08 Time: 09:52 Web: colinpetersbd40bh.tripod.com |
| Country: England City: Bradford State: West Yorkshire |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: Arthur Hutchinson Court: Bradford |
| In
my summing up as a Litigant In Person, I made it absolutely clear to
this judge that my opponent, Bottomley, had given evidence which was
different to, and conflicted with, his pleaded case which had remained
constant in his Defence and Counterclaim document, for the previous
five years, and which had been authored by his barrister, John Walford. I had approached the court ready and able to defeat the pleaded case only to be met by a completely different story of contract and inducements to contract. Made aware of all this, judge Arthur Hutchinson ruled upon the new version of contract and inducements to contract. Not only this, but, immediately before the giving of his judgement, judge Hutchinson was informed by a replacement barrister for Bottomley, Andrew Thompson, instead of John Walford, that Bottomley conceded the counterclaim in respect of materials that he had claimed to having supplied towards the works. This was proof beyond reasonable doubt that Bottomley had lied to the court and committed the criminal offence of perjury, and yet judge Hutchinson simply waived it aside and ruled in Bottomleys favour on the contract only. He ruled in favour of a fraudster who he knew beyond any doubt at all had committed perjury in his court. |
| Colin Peters, Dated: 02.05.08 Time: 10:20 Web: colinpetersbd40jh.tripod.com |
| Country: England City: Bradford State: West Yorkshire |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: John Walford Court: Bradford |
| Now
a judge in Tyne Tees, John Walford, was the barrister who stood by and
allowed Bottomley to put a pack of lies to the court which were
different to, and conflicted with, the pack of lies which he had drawn
up as the \'pleaded case\' in the Defence and Counterclaim document 5
years earlier. I later complained about his conduct to the Bar Council and he responded to them by agreeing that there were \'inconsistencies\'(instead of deceptions) in Bottomleys evidence, but Bottomley had given him explanations for these \'inconsistencies\' which he could not remember. John Walford is a leading light in the Anglican church in Bradford, he being the chancellor to the diocese. I ask you John Walford, as a professed Christian, how do you qualify/excuse what you did to me and the family that I once had for the sake of Mammon/ |
| Colin Peters, Dated: 02.05.08 Time: 10:42 Web: colinpeterbd40jh.tripod.com |
| Country: England City: Bradford State: West Yorkshire |
| Rating: irrelevant" Judge: John Bullimore Court: Wakefield |
| I
approached judge John Bullimore in a church in Bradford. I offered him
a bundle of documents which featured the facts concerning the injustice
which I had suffered and told him that I believed the legal system was
of the devil and asked him for help. He looked deeply into my eyes as if to ascertain my mental stabilty or otherwise, and then took the documents and told me that he would have a look at them. A little while later, in a handwritten letter he told me that he would look at them over the Easter period, but to hold out no hope. Come the Easter period he sent me a long typewritten letter wherein he finished up by telling me that in the light of my own experiences he would try and be careful with his judgements. I might be wrong, but I believe that John Bullimore would be a good man but for the \'system\' that provides him is livelihood at the price of nurturing the \'system\'. Don\'t make waves!!! |
| Colin Peters, Dated: 02.05.08 Time: 10:58 Web: colinpetersbd40jh.tripod.com |
| Country: England City: Bradford State: West Yorkshire |
| Rating: Saint" Judge: Registrar Adams Court: Court of Appeal London |
| No lawyer would take on my case and, alone, I
appealled to the court of appeal in London. The barrister, Andrew Thompson was sent to oppose me and Registrar Adams made it very clear that he was not happy about the situation. He told me to be quiet and listen and make notes whilst he addressed the barrister. He tore Boittomleys case to pieces, telling the barrister that his claim of contract was, \"Madness. Madness.\" Registrar Adams left Andrew Thompson speechless, his mouth opening and closing and nothing coming out. Pure brilliance!! There are good guys within the system |
| Colin Peters, Dated: 02.05.08 Time: 11:13 Web: colinpetersbd40jh.tripod.com |
| Country: England City: Bradford State: West Yorkshire |
| Rating: Saint" Judge: Justice Dillon and Justice Evans Court: Court of Appeal, London |
| Against all the odds, Registrar Adams allowed
me through to the court of appeal in London. As a Litigant in Person I came up against Justice Dillon and Justice Evans and hit a blank wall. I spent one hour and 20 minutes going through the documentation and proving over and over again how the evidence accepted by, and ruled upon by the lower court judge was in conflict with the original pleaded case. Two different stories from the same person could not possibly be true!!! The two judges ruled that their lower court brother judge had been \"right on the evidence\" |
| Colin peters, Dated: 02.05.08 Time: 11:29 Web: colinpetersbd40jh.tripod.com |
| Country: England City: Bradford State: West Yorkshire |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: John Cockcroft Court: Bradford |
| 3
years ago I appeared before judge John Cockcroft with an application to
have the judgement of Arthur Hutchinson set aside on the grounds that
it had been obtained by fraud. The court transcripts show that John Cockcroft was hostile towards me and that he misrepresented some of my claims to the Bottomleys. He dismissed my claim on a nonsense, and his summing up of the case was so bad that several of my supporters who had turned up from around the country walked out in disgust, and this occurence is reflected in the transcript. The last words spoken in court, on the transcript, are my own, and these are, \"The crooks win again.\" These words include the Bottomleys and all those corrupt lawyers who helped them to rob myself of everything that I once had. I worked very hard for 5 months and got nothing. Bottomley lied for 5 years ang got everything for nothing. Is this justice??? |
| Shaun O\'Connell, Dated: 03.05.08 Time: 00:45 Web: www.alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Liverpool State: |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: HHJ Hodge Court: High Court |
| HHJ Hodge in open court described the first defendant as pleading undue influence with a story that even the Judge acceded was unique, with features which are quite incredible and a story including the ‘school,’ MI5, the ‘other side,’ security services, military intelligence and the protection afforded to the first defendant by the first claimant. The Judge himself variously described the story as ‘crazy though aspects of it are,’ ‘in the grip of conspiracy theories involving the masons and a corrupt judiciary,’ ‘certainly is a very suspicious but also highly suggestible individual who is prone to paranoid delusions,’ and ‘sometimes slow of both understanding and expression’ and during the course of the hearing described the first defendant as crazy, paranoid, peculiar personality and suffering from paranoid delusions and in his Judgment stated that ‘to judge him by the standards of pure reason is to apply an entirely inappropriate measure to the man.’ Amazingly the first defendant won the case, the second defendant lost his claim but the Applicants had to pay both of their costs!! Justice? |
| Shaun O\'Connell, Dated: 04.05.08 Time: 19:17 Web: www.alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Cambridge State: |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: HHJ Plumstead Court: Circuit Judge |
| The Judge sitting stated in Judgement ‘And it has been pointed out to me that at the end of the 2005 year he said ‘’Are you worried about anything?’’ and he said this: ‘’being expelled for getting into fights, not seeing my mum.’’ And that is a clear indication that he was very upset and confused child and that he was upset at not seeing his mother, and this is a recurrent theme in this case and it is one of the most puzzling and most difficult things to deal with. It has clearly been the case and neither the father nor the Local Authority nor Dr. Dennehay have ever sought to persuade me otherwise than these children do express the view that they want to see their mother and indeed to see more of her and this is particularly acute with F. What one does with that is the difficult question I have to approach.’ The solution was an order for no direct contact and a two year section 91(14) order. |
| Young, Dated: 05.05.08 Time: 09:44 Web: www.stopinjusticenow.com |
| Country: England City: Birmingham State: Birmingham |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: Judge McFarlane Court: Family Judge |
| Ordered 10 police to remove 3 children from thier mothers arms, the kids were screaming to be left with her, they were holding her but the police ripped them off, just to be put in care, no chargers of abuse or neglect on the mother, just the judge did not like the mothers attitude of challenging the LA social worke |
| Shaun O\'Connell , Dated: 05.05.08 Time: 20:11 Web: www.alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Portsmouth State: |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: Lord Justice Scott Baker Court: Court of Appeal |
| Had a minor heart attack when the litigant asked if a bench memorandum had been prepared. He happily put his hand on it and said yes one had been prepared. The bench meorandum is an advisory opinion written by the case lawyer which gives reasons for or against permission to Appeal. Case now before the European Court of Human Rights as he refused to disclose the bench memorandum despite requesting with ECtHR case law that if requested must be disclosed |
| Shaun O\'Connell, Dated: 11.05.08 Time: 19:45 Web: alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Portsmouth State: |
| Rating: irrelevant" Judge: Lord Justice Ward Court: Court of Appeal |
| Unusually I have to criticise a decison he made as recently as 7th May 2008 refusing permission to file Appeal out of time. He argued that two months late is way too long yet ignored the mother\'s pleas that she was not legally trained, her soliciotrs took time to release the file and she had been very stressed by the experience of two weeks at Her Majesty\'s pleasure. what displeased me the most was that he stated appeals can be lodged without copy of the order (untrue Court office bluntly refuse to accept an Appeal without copy of the order) and that committal proceedings arising from breaches of civiol injunction are not criminal matters (Oh yes they are for the purposes of the European Convention on Human Rights and article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998). However, some crumbs from the hearing are that the Judgement is to be sent to the Governor of Peterborough Prison for an investigation into helping people in prison make appeals and he criticised both the judge and the mother\'s barrister for arguing permission to Appeal at the end of the hearing when as we argued in Court permission is not needed as it is an Appeal of right |
| Mr. R.R. Chauhan, Dated: 13.05.08 Time: 01:23 Web: www.ukcorruption.eu |
| Country: United Kingdom City: Bournemouth State: Hampshire |
| Rating: irrelevant" Judge: HHJ Meston QC Court: Bournemouth |
| Ignored and covered up for the multiple abuses of Law carried out under his remit of responsibility and under the false guise of the \"secret\" family courts - Salisbury and Southampton judges DJ Murphy (worst), DJ Naylor, DJ Field and LJ Wall. Matter then covered up at a farsicle full hearing at the Court Of Appeal by LJ Scott-Baker who simply like a puppet read out a pre-prepared Bench Memorandum (breach art6 HRA(1998)) without bearing the facts of the case. Full documentary evidence (including transcripts) is available for an INDEPENDENT (open to press scrutiny) analysis of wrongdoings. To all others reading this message please sign the petition to the United Nations for our children at http://www.un1503petition.com and bring the wrongdoers to account |
| Mr. R.R. Chauhan, Dated: 13.05.08 Time: 02:04 Web: www.un1503petition.com |
| Country: UNITED KINGDOM City: Southampton State: Hampshire |
| Rating: Evil" Judge: Recorder N. J. Murphy Court: Salisbury County Court |
| Manufactured
what can be best described as a child abuse scam engineered by judges
at Salisbury County Court... a hearing at less than 24hrs notice for
the predicted removal of children so that the mother (who has an
exceptionally wealthy and influential family) would not be in breach of
Court Orders so she could execute her premeditated plan of relocation
and financial gain with the blessing of the Court irrespective of the
children\'s welfare and even without the production of a welfare
report. Judicial abusers of the Law and children include:- Recorder N.J. Murphy (at best a sincerely CORRUPT abusive and aggressive judge), HHJ Meston (disgraceful behaviour, Bournemouth), HHJ Field (says the right things then screws you by making ulterior Orders without his name on the Order to cover himself), HHJ Cutler (gives his blessing a hearing at less than 24hrs notice for the removal of the children - then all paperwork for this hearing that took place disappears - I still have the fees receipt). CAFCASS abusers - sole interest and priority is that of the mother only. Children are just collateral damage to these child abusers. Key professional abusers and liars are Mr. Richard King-Li and Mrs Judith Kennard. See http://www.ukcorruption.eu for more and ongoing abuses. ALL MATERIAL IS DOCUMENTED AND TRANSCRIPTED FOR INDEPENDENT AND OPEN EXAMINATION. Abuses by Salisbury Court include racial and breach of article 6 - upheld by Court Of Appeal - See para 2, 8, 12, 14, 16, 7, 10 & 18 of Re C, Neutral Citation Number: [2004] EWCA Civ 512. PLEASE, PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION TO UNITED NATIONS AND HELP BRING A STOP TO THESE ABUSES INCLUDING BRINGING THE GUILTY PARTIES TO BOOK.... EVERY UNIQUE SIGNATURE brings us closer... |
| Shaun O\'Connell, Dated: 01.06.08 Time: 20:18 Web: www.alliance4justice.eu |
| Country: UK City: Portsmouth State: |
| Rating: irrelevant" Judge: Lord Justice Sedley Court: Court of Appeal |
| The grounds give for refusal of permission to
Appeal were; 1 I agree with practically everything in your grounds. So did the Judge. But the disclosure order, and the CSA\'s defiance of it, was relevant to the substance of your appeal only to the extent that disclosure was capable of casting any light on the computation. 2 As it transpired, the computation was a matter of simple arithmetic not requiring any background documents from the CSA Hence the outcome of your appeal and the failure of your application for judicial review of it. 3. I nevertheless share your and the judge\'s concern at the conduct of the CSA I am also concerned at the unnecessary use of a disclosure order in the first place. But once it was made, it had to be either varied or set aside if it was not to be obeyed. Since the judge\'s declaration can by itself have no concrete effect, I am directing that her judgment be sent to Her Majesty\'s Attorney General so that she may consider what needs to be done to secure observance by a statutory agency of the fundamental obligation to respect the law. So Lord Justice Sedley agreed with the grounds generally, saw the matter as so important to refer it to the Attorney General and yet refused permission to Appeal on paper. How absurd! |
| Ms. Ann Payne , Dated: 11.06.08 Time: 09:58 Web: www.freewebs.com/mums-house |
| Country: Ireland City: Dublin State: Meath |
| Rating: Saint" Judge: John Brophy Retired Court: District 10 Trim |
| I found now Retired Judge Brophy since 9th May 2008 a very Fair and Descent Person with in Family Law cases and Open Court , he seemed to want Transparency out of the Family District Court of Law , as he seen Health Board Solicitor Ms. Helen McGovern crucify innocent Parents to meet govern Targets in favour of her Clients and Friend`s , however she was no exception to this Members of Police were also Involved because of Relative Foster Carrier . I know this First Hand as I have been the recipitant of their Abuse , I will be Granting Judge Brophy his wish very shortly and holding those accountable for the abuse of my Children and I. |
| Jimmy Craven , Dated: 11.06.08 Time: 10:26 Web: www.4lmec.com |
| Country: Ireland City: Dublin State: Meath |
| Rating: irrelevant" Judge: Tom Fithspatrick Court: District 10 Trim |
| I
don`t know much about Judge Tom Fitzpatrick so what I would say about
him would be irrelevant however I would agree with the comments
regarding Judge Brophy, I did find him a very Fair Person with in
Family Courts and out side of it , I found Health Services Solicitors
pulling \" Trials by Ambush\" on Parents allowing individuals to
Perjure them selves , to get the result they wanted for their Clients ,
resulting in the depletion of Family life through concurrent Faults ,
because of Personal Data been leaked out of the Family Courts in which
are in Camera . Solicitors acting on Behalf of Parents and Cohersing
with the HSE Solicitor , the end result been Professional Losers . File
given by Parents to their Solicitor , with their Personal Data and that
of their Children never been returned to them , last Minuted
information been handed to a Solcicitor who is representing Parents ,
by a HSE Solic: in which the Solicitor involved cant build up a Defince
with out a Consultation with their Clients . Any Judge is as only as good , as the Evidence that is produced in Front of them , yes I would agreee of Blowing away the Cobwebs out of the Family Courts and letting the Sun Shaine Shine in and give Transparency into the Open Courts , I also agree that if a Decision of a Judge is on Fair , that should be held accountable for that decision , however bearing in mind of the Evidence that is produced in Front of them , Dealing with Social Services in Ireland always make a Data Protection to them , and to the Police , known in Ireland as GARDA , you should also make a Data Protection Request to the Garda Vetting Unit , Garda Criminal Records Office , Racecourse Road , Thurles , Co. Tippeary , I trust that this Information may be of Help to someone . Please look up my Website |