CorruptionHighCourtJudge






                                                            INLNews.com  
                             Easy to Find...... Hard to Leave..see you there soon at your INLNews.com
                                                                                       International News Limited Domain Pricing Per Year
                                                                          .com* $9.99 | .net* $9.99 | .org* $9.99 | .info* $9.99 | .us* $9.99 | .biz* $9.99 | .ws* $9.75 | .name* $7.95
                                                                                                                 Save even more on multi-year registrations!
                                                       INLNews YahooMail HotMail GMail AOLMailUSA MAILYahooMail HotMailGMail AOLMail MyWayMail CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs
                                                 INLNsNYTimes WashNs 
AustStockEx WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
                                                                                               WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs TasNews ABCTas DarwinNs 
USA MAIL






Your Daily Motivation from Inspiration Line Add Inspiring Daily Quotes to YOUR Website

Click Here For Your Up To Date World Live Sports Scores
INLNews  YahooMail  HotMail  GMail  AOLMail USA MAILMyWayMail 
 CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs INLNsNYTimes WashNs WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs 
TasNews ABCTas DarwinNsUSA MAIL


ABC News Video  FOX News Video  FOXBusiness Video  CNN Video  AP Video  BBC News Video  Reuters Video  AFP Video  CNET Video
CNBC Video  Australia 7 News Video   Rocky Mountain News Elections Video  CBC.ca Video  NPR Audio  
Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone Video
Richard Bangs Adventures Video  Charlie Rose Video   Expanded Books Video  Assignment Earth Video 
ROOFTOPCOMEDY.com Video 
Guinness World Records Video  weather.com Video  AccuWeather Video  You Witness News User Video

NPR Audio BY CATEGORY Top Stories  Politics  World  Business  Sports 
 
Technology  Health & Science  Arts  U.S. 

VIEW LOCAL VIDEO KVUE-TV Austin  WJZ 13 Baltimore  WBZ Boston 
 
WCNC Charlotte  CBS 2 Chicago

Video by Category
 
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
 
Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports


Video by Category
 
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
 
Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports




AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL
AP WASHINGTON
AP BUSINESS
AP ENTERTAINMENT
AP ON THE HOUR
AP HEADLINES
AP BREAKING
AP REUT PHOTO WIRE
AP AUDIO 
ABCNEWS 
ABCNEWS THE NOTE
AD AGE DEADLINE
BBC
BBC AUDIO
C-SPAN 
CHICAGO TRIB
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
CNN
CNN POLITICAL TICKER
DAILY SWARM
DAILY VARIETY
ECONOMIST
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
BILLBOARD 
BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD 
BREITBART
CBS NEWS 
EMIRATES TODAY
FINANCIAL TIMES 
FORBES
FOX NEWS
FREE REPUBLIC
HOT AIR
HILL
HUMAN EVENTS
IAFRICA
INTERNATIONAL HERALD
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
JEWISH WORLD REVIEW
LA DAILY NEWS
LA TIMES 
MEDIA WEEK 
MSNBC
MSNBC FIRST READ 
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW REPUBLIC
NEW YORK
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY SUN 
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBUSTERS
NEWSBYTES 
NEWSMAX
NEWSWEEK
N. KOREAN NEWS
PHILLY INQUIRER
PHILLY DAILY NEWS 
POLITICO
R & R
RADAR 
REAL CLEAR POLITICS
REASON MAG
ROLL CALL
SAN FRAN CHRON 
SKY NEWS
SLATE
SMOKING GUN
SPLASH NEWS
SYDNEY HERALD
U.K. DAILY MAIL 
U.K.DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
UNDER THE RADAR
U.K.EVENING STANDARD
U.K.EXPRESS
U.K.GUARDIAN
U.K.INDEPENDENT 
U.K.LONDON PAPER 
U.K.NEWS OF THE WORLD
U.K.SUN
U.K.TELEGRAPH
U.K.TIMES
US NEWS
USA TODAY
VILLAGE VOICE
WASH POST
WASH TIMES
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY





London's United Kingdom
Legal selection system is corrupt, admit judges

Lord Chancellor's Department report condemns secret soundings

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/legal-selection-system-is-corrupt-admit-judges-706668.html 

   
   
  

Judges and senior lawyers admit that the system under which they are appointed is riddled with corruption and open to widespread abuse.

Judges and senior lawyers admit that the system under which they are appointed is riddled with corruption and open to widespread abuse.

In a damning report produced by the Lord Chancellor's Department, it is likened to "the old-fashioned class or caste system" by many of the judges and QCs interviewed.

The findings will deeply embarrass the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine of Lairg, who has repeatedly rejected calls to end the "secret soundings", whereby judges and senior lawyers are consulted on the suitability of judicial candidates.

Responses from 137 sitting judges or senior lawyers showed a "clear consensus" for the appointments processes to be "based on openness, objectivity, and selection on merit rather than patronage". It is the first detailed research to include judges.

Of the 137 respondents only 10 said no changes were needed to the system. A total of 52 were interviewed face-to-face.

One judge said: "I don't know what the criteria are for silk... maybe there is a document somewhere that I haven't seen but it seems to me that it depends on who you know, what committee you sit on rather than anything else. There doesn't seem to be a system of interview. It seems to be on general reputation and I think that is unreliable."

Many of those who responded expressed concern that the present system deterred applications from women and the ethnic minorities. Women account for 11 per cent and ethnic minorities for 1.7 per cent of all judges in England and Wales, according to figures from 1999.

A serious concern among those consulted was the domination of an "elite group of chambers" in both London and the regions from which most appointments were made.

One white barrister admitted: "I'm the wrong person to ask about the difficulties in applying for silk. I mean in these chambers usually everyone gets silk, usually the first time of asking and everyone becomes made a judge. It is a sort of 'golden road'."

The report's authors, Kate Malleson, of the London School of Economics, and Fareda Banda, of the School of Oriental and African Studies, said many respondents wanted proper recruitment of under-represented groups.

The report said: "The need for the active encouragement of good candidates and the adoption of processes which are, and can be seen to be, more open and objective were most commonly proposed as ways of improving the accessibility and fairness of the processes."

However, the authors noted that there was widespread support for efforts by the Lord Chancellor to increase the number of women and ethnic minority judges. One respondent described it as a vicious circle, saying: "Black and Asian barristers don't get the work because they are considered to be incompetent and because they don't get the work they are considered to be incompetent."

The respondents felt that there was a need for a judicial appointment commission with many favouring a broad range of membership including judges, lawyers and civil servants. The authors said that the growing concern about the unrepresentative background of the judiciary had become more acute because of the "ten-fold" increase in the size of the judiciary since the 1970s.

Last year Sir Leonard Peach produced a report on the process by which judicial and silk appointments are made, commissioned by the Lord Chancellor.


Judges and senior lawyers admit that the system under which they are appointed is riddled with corruption and open to widespread abuse.

Judges and senior lawyers admit that the system under which they are appointed is riddled with corruption and open to widespread abuse.

In a damning report produced by the Lord Chancellor's Department, it is likened to "the old-fashioned class or caste system" by many of the judges and QCs interviewed.

The findings will deeply embarrass the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine of Lairg, who has repeatedly rejected calls to end the "secret soundings", whereby judges and senior lawyers are consulted on the suitability of judicial candidates.

Responses from 137 sitting judges or senior lawyers showed a "clear consensus" for the appointments processes to be "based on openness, objectivity, and selection on merit rather than patronage". It is the first detailed research to include judges.

Of the 137 respondents only 10 said no changes were needed to the system. A total of 52 were interviewed face-to-face.

One judge said: "I don't know what the criteria are for silk... maybe there is a document somewhere that I haven't seen but it seems to me that it depends on who you know, what committee you sit on rather than anything else. There doesn't seem to be a system of interview. It seems to be on general reputation and I think that is unreliable."

Many of those who responded expressed concern that the present system deterred applications from women and the ethnic minorities. Women account for 11 per cent and ethnic minorities for 1.7 per cent of all judges in England and Wales, according to figures from 1999.

A serious concern among those consulted was the domination of an "elite group of chambers" in both London and the regions from which most appointments were made.

One white barrister admitted: "I'm the wrong person to ask about the difficulties in applying for silk. I mean in these chambers usually everyone gets silk, usually the first time of asking and everyone becomes made a judge. It is a sort of 'golden road'."

The report's authors, Kate Malleson, of the London School of Economics, and Fareda Banda, of the School of Oriental and African Studies, said many respondents wanted proper recruitment of under-represented groups.

The report said: "The need for the active encouragement of good candidates and the adoption of processes which are, and can be seen to be, more open and objective were most commonly proposed as ways of improving the accessibility and fairness of the processes."

However, the authors noted that there was widespread support for efforts by the Lord Chancellor to increase the number of women and ethnic minority judges. One respondent described it as a vicious circle, saying: "Black and Asian barristers don't get the work because they are considered to be incompetent and because they don't get the work they are considered to be incompetent."

The respondents felt that there was a need for a judicial appointment commission with many favouring a broad range of membership including judges, lawyers and civil servants. The authors said that the growing concern about the unrepresentative background of the judiciary had become more acute because of the "ten-fold" increase in the size of the judiciary since the 1970s.

Last year Sir Leonard Peach produced a report on the process by which judicial and silk appointments are made, commissioned by the Lord Chancellor.

The British Justice System is rotten to the core.

http://100777.com/node/125 

by Maurice Kellett

Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven

- Christ in Luke 6:37

Police will willingly protect corrupt judges. Corrupt solicitors and barristers abound. This is the true state of the present UK justice system. When people don’t stand up against corrupt judges and policemen that is the most dangerous part of it. They gain more confidence to carry on with yet more evil acts against innocent victims. On web site http://www.mason-rule.com there is part of the evidence to show what happens when a judicial and police victim stands up and defies their evil. These people have nothing to do with justice whatsoever. They are criminals covering under the umbrella of alleged justice. They are amongst the very reasons why terrorism exists. It will exist just so long as they exist. Under the New World Order, which is now underway, more of the worlds downtrodden will turn more to terrorism. World leaders will condemn terrorism but will continue to ignore the reasons that terrorists exist. Just so long as the general public are led by evil people the outcome will itself be evil. I don’t condone terrorism but I can say that I know one of the main reasons of why it exists. There are many hypocrites within British authority, those same hypocrites help to make sure that those with similar tendencies will always remain in the chain of authority.

In 1986 I was battered and then struck by a car that was deliberately driven at me after I had uncovered corruption at then British Coal Estates Department.. The court proceedings at Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne-Wear were illegal. The single magistrate who on sat on the matter was not qualified to act alone. There were in fact two magistrates sitting on the bench but he was a close friend of the man who had battered me and the struck me with the car he deliberately had driven at me. It would have been against court rules for him to have sat on the case in these circumstances. When I raised that matter , even though he sat on the bench, he claimed that he had stood down. Magistrates generally have a few days notice of cases coming before them so they can withdraw from the proceedings in cases such as this. The Clerk to the Justices of Houghton Magistrates Court, along with the Lord Chancellors Department were party to the cover up of those illegal proceedings. After years of trying to have the matter brought to true justice the reaction of authority has been to give me more trouble by continued corruption so rife amongst their ranks. I have recently made a claim for damages against Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court and demanded a full inquiry into my case and into others to see if I was the courts only victim since 1986 or whether there were others. I have also formally refused to accept the jurisdiction of that court until such Inquiry is set up. The new Clerk to the Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court has not replied to my Statement of Truth setting down the facts of 1986 and the years following it. I delivered that statement to the court several weeks before Christmas. I can only arrive at one conclusion. Northumbria Police have promised over the past few years to investigate the matter of the courts illegal proceedings. But that has been nothing short of a smokescreen set up while they have plotted yet further acts of corruption against me. Even the Crown Prosecution Service situated at Washington, Tyne-Wear attempted to blackmail me. The Northumbria Police Authority have failed to answer a letter I sent to them several months ago asking what Northumbria Police were doing in regard to my allegations of bent judges Durham Constabulary have also failed to act on the matter. of bent judges at the Durham County Court. There is also the matter of perjury that was used against me.

Member of Parliament Mr Fraser Kemp has known about my allegations for several years. Previously he had passed me on to former MEP Alan Donnely. Alan Donnely then informed me that what was being done to me was nothing to do with him and he would not act. Only now after a further approach to him, has MP Fraser Kemp referred my case to the RT Hon. Baroness Scotland QC Parliamentary Secretary to the Lord Chancellors Department. He has also referred my case to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. That was several weeks ago but to date nothing further has been heard from Mr Kemp.

Durham Constabulary have falsely alleged that when a judge lies it is a judicial decision and is therefore protected. That is in fact a lie. A judge who decides to lie and use fraud to arrive at his or her judgement is not protected other than by bent policemen. Such a judge is a criminal by reason of such acts.

To date the mob I mention above, for that is what they are, have cost me my thirty year marriage and the death of my father. They have also caused me other severe damage. With the assistance of bent judges operating within the North East Court Circuit they engineered my bankruptcy. It was two days later that my father collapsed and died after my alleged bankruptcy was published on the front page of the Sunderland Echo newspaper. He had been extremely upset at what was being done to me and begged me to give up my fight against our corrupt justice system because he said that ultimately it would kill me.. My conscience would never allow me to do that. It was the damages awarded by a criminal judge named onhttp://www.mason-rule.com who is still being protected by both Durham and Northumbria Police which allowed my alleged bankruptcy. The proceedings before that judge were also illegal and he used considerable fraud as a means to arrive at his judgement. He also allowed my civil law opponent the use of very material perjury. Some of the evidence of that fraud etc. is published on http://www.mason-rule.com It is known that several police forces are monitoring this website. These scum operating within the UK justice system have made my life so bad that I am no longer afraid of death so I am no longer afraid of them.

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell-fire."

- Christ in Matthew 10:28

By means of their corrupt practices, they have provided me with evidence of what they are capable of doing to people such as myself. I am using that evidence. And providing it to others. I will never give up until these people are brought to trial. Prime Minister Tony Blairpromised us a fairer Britain. Britain is less fair now than I can remember in the fifty eight years of my life. We remain the laughing stock of other countries who have what can be called a credible justice system. I think it is now time for judges to be elected as in the North American system. The old boys network, often with Masonic membership or leanings, who are responsible for the employment of judges. That must be brought to a halt as soon as possible. People holding public office must be made to declare any membership of any secret society as a first step to trying to achieve something resembling a true justice system.

I can no longer rely on the police for protection. A visit to http://www.mason-rule.com will give the reason for this. I cannot rely on the courts either for justice but that has been the situation for a long time now. Bent judges don’t like being exposed. Straight judges don’t like bent judges being exposed either. My life has been threatened and a threat was also made to burn my home down unless I stopped publicising judicial and police corruption much of which has its roots in Freemasonry. Northumbria Police simply did not want to know about that. Neither did they want to know about a man who threatened that my wife, daughters and I were to be stabbed. He even repeated that threat to a Northumbria Police officer who took no action on it. When we heard evidence that the threat to burn down our home was probably real, my wife begged me to sell our home and run. I could not do that so she went and there effectively ended my thirty year marriage.

In the name of God Almighty all I ask is that the general public wake up to what is going on. My health is now such that my efforts to publicise the situation, even if I eventually get justice, will not help me much. I have concluded that what I am doing may well cost me my life but what is a life when it has been made pure pain and suffering at the hands of the corrupt justice establishment? It is a sad reflection when Tony Blair has recently been preaching at home and abroad on the matter of justice when Britain remains second only to Turkey for the abuse of human rights.

Maurice Kellett
16A The Lyons, 
Hetton-le-Hole, 
Tyne-Wear DH5 0HT.

e-mail: maurice.kellett@ntlworld.com

6:12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth Seal (using his "Key"), and, lo, there was a great "earthquake"; and the "sun" became black as sackcloth of hair, and the "moon" became as blood; (Please see "The Four Horsemen of The Apocalypse & the Two Witnesses" Booklet for the Bible Prophecy "Code")
6:13 And "the stars of heaven" fell unto the "earth", even as the "fig tree" casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind (Ezekiel 13:13).
9:13 And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God,

It can´t be much more before the "earthquake", that is, a great upheaval of people...

In this context the scriptural code "sun" means The Throne of David - (Psalm 89 v 36) - which is the British Throne. The "Stone of Scone" is Jacob's Pillar and Israel's Throne of David.

and the "moon" Reflects the light of the SUN. The SUN is the British Throne and the "Commonwealth" reflects her light and power (like the moon does to the sun).

please see http://jahtruth.net/horse.htm for the complete document.


Fw: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A BLACK JAMAICA MAN IN THE U,K

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Stacie Banton <mssbstbess@yahoo.com>
To: yourstory@equalityhumanrights.comyourstory@equalityhumanrights.com
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 9:30:57 AM
Subject: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A BLACK JAMAICA MAN IN THE U,K

To whom it may concern,my name is Stacie Banton i am writing this story to you asking you to please help us ,my brother Paul Banton lives in the UK, he was setup by his EX-Girlfriend and her daughter.these two girls plotted all sorts of allegations against him,had him arrested and sentence to 8 years in prison just for revenge,all the legal representative in Great Britain believed these girls.they did not gave Paul Banton the opportunity to defend himself,he was represented by the legal aid department,the legal aid lawyers did not defined paul banton the way they should have,they did no investigation in to these girls allegations,they had no evidence or proof against paul banton to collaborate these girls allegation.they found paul banton guilty from the very moment they arrested him know that he was a black jamaica, he was found guilty before they tried him,now paul banton is doing 8 years hard labor for something he did not do,all because of his origination and race .this girl also had custody of our nephew by lying,manipulating coning and schemeing the entire justice department, the immigration officers and most of the legal Representatives of great Britain,she was abusing our nephew until the social service found out and took him away from her,the social services report this to the cat-ford police station from November 2008 until today March 2009 nothing has been done by the police or the social workers regarding the abuse.our family is poor and we don't have much this trial has taken a great tole on us,and has cost our family a lot trying to get justice for paul banton and our nephew.please help us we need your help,now more then ever before.please do not turn your backs on us.paul banton and our nephews rights has been violated in every way possible by these girls and the legal Representatives of Great Britain,i thank you sinclery stacie banton .contact details email mssbstbess@yahoo.complease respond A,S,A,P. thank you God bless.

I am mother to 4 kids after

I am mother to 4 kids after moving districts 2yrs ago our lives have been a living hell,All I did was ask local authorities for help as I ran into problems with the house we moved into and also a reluctant negligent landlord,that was it! After being held at gun point 17 yrs ago i suffer from a nervous debility, most days have a fear of leaving the house.The landlord that thought it was acceptable to leave us for 11 months with no drainage and raw sewerage coming in to the house via up the waste pipes just so happens to be married to one of the registrers for births,deaths and marrages! health visiter ,CPN,housing support worker,msp,environmental I can now identify the stench in the air when I first drove into the town 2yrs ago and its the rotten smell of corruption.And I have saw how low they are willing to go,my youngest was 5 month old when it began the disease from 5yr old sewerage from a main drain in my kitchen easily could have killed her.Not 1 single legal requirement did this man meet he even went 1 yr renting house and wasnt registered after I requested an environmental officer to come out and even though to the naked eye this house was sellotaped together and in serious disrepair,but because she said it was tolerable we were left for another year 5 of us between 2 rooms .Then in june they did what I would call an illegal eviction with the aid of my housing support wrkr and her boss waving the threats of "for the welfare of". I started studying the housing law 4 month ago when i realised what was happening.They made it into this I only wanted me and my children a safe home.Now they are making it hard for us to move into our new home they are even refusing to refer me to any charity as we have lost almost everything we ever had.If Anyone that reads this is one of many corrupt people stop and think How can anyone say this is right there are child molesters and rapists people that are a waste of space why not concentrate on scum if you'se have to terrorise anyone.Im sure if there was a public outroar something would have to be done.There really is no one willing to help it is my childrens rights I am fighting for. I hope we all get judged at the gates who would get the last laugh the

I am mother to 4 kids after moving districts 2yrs ago our lives have been a living hell,All I did was ask local authorities for help as I ran into problems with the house we moved into and also a reluctant negligent landlord,that was it! After being held at gun point 17 yrs ago i suffer from a nervous debility, most days have a fear of leaving the house.The landlord that thought it was acceptable to leave us for 11 months with no drainage and raw sewerage coming in to the house via up the waste pipes just so happens to be married to one of the registrers for births,deaths and marrages! health visiter ,CPN,housing support worker,msp,environmental I can now identify the stench in the air when I first drove into the town 2yrs ago and its the rotten smell of corruption.And I have saw how low they are willing to go,my youngest was 5 month old when it began the disease from 5yr old sewerage from a main drain in my kitchen easily could have killed her.Not 1 single legal requirement did this man meet he even went 1 yr renting house and wasnt registered after I requested an environmental officer to come out and even though to the naked eye this house was sellotaped together and in serious disrepair,but because she said it was tolerable we were left for another year 5 of us between 2 rooms .Then in june they did what I would call an illegal eviction with the aid of my housing support wrkr and her boss waving the threats of "for the welfare of". I started studying the housing law 4 month ago when i realised what was happening.They made it into this I only wanted me and my children a safe home.Now they are making it hard for us to move into our new home they are even refusing to refer me to any charity as we have lost almost everything we ever had.If Anyone that reads this is one of many corrupt people stop and think How can anyone say this is right there are child molesters and rapists people that are a waste of space why not concentrate on scum if you'se have to terrorise anyone.Im sure if there was a public outroar something would have to be done.There really is no one willing to help it is my childrens rights I am fighting for. I hope we all get judged at the gates who would get the last laugh then! 

THE MOST CORRUPT BRITISH JUDGES TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR By Dr A Adok 
http://www.ukfathers.co.uk/THE%20MOST%20CORRUPT%20BRITISH%20JUDGES%20TO%20THE%20LORD%20CHANCELLOR%20By%20Dr%20A%20Adoko%20Barrister.htm
Welcome to UK Fathers 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MensIssuesOnline/message/14590 

THE MOST CORRUPT BRITISH JUDGES.

TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR

By

Dr. A Adoko
Barrister: 
(Voluntarily disbarred)
Papal Knight 
of St. Gregory the Great.

PRINTED & PUBLISHED
BY
LONDON TRUTH PUBLISHERS
DR. A ADOKO
10 SOANE HOUSE
ROLAND WAY
LONDON SE17 2JT
TEL: 0171 640 0583 

ISBN: 1 871694 05 1
CONTENT
Cover Page: 01

JUDICIAL CORRUPTION: THE START.
1. Millennium Present: 03-08

THE MOST CORRUPT LAWYERS:
2. (Chronology of Events of Racial Discrimination): 09-14
3. The Gang of Four: Rendall, Saunders, Hone & Coles: 15-22
4. Individuals Members of the Gang: 23-31
5. The Cross Examination of Mrs. Coles. 32-35
6. Lord Anthony Lester of Herne Q.C. 36-44
7. Solicitor Robin Lewis: 45-51

THE MOST CORRUPT JUDGES:
8. Chairman: Ms. E R Donnelly 53-62
9. (Chronology of Events of- Publishing Proof of Offences): 63-69
10. Chairman David Booth 70-84
11. Mr. Justice Morrison 85-91
12. Anonymous Judges 92-94
13. Mr. Justice Michael Wright: 95-98
14. His Honour Judge Mitchel : 99-105
15. Mr. Justice Potts: 106-111
16. The Legal Aid Board 112-118
17. & Mr. Justice Maurice Kay: 
18. Office for the Supervision of Solicitors. 119-134
19. Lord Chief Justice, Lord Bingham of Cornhill: 135-140

THE MOST JUST PRACTISING LAWYER:
20. Counsel Richard Clayton 141-145

THE MOST JUST JUDGES:
21. Mr. Justice Brooke: 146-147
22. His Honour Judge Altman: 148-151
23. His Honour Judge Prosser: 152-165
24. Lord Denning: 166-173
25. People, People everywhere 174-182
26. Conclusion: 183
27. Inspired Verses: 184-195 

CHAPTER 1.

MILLENNIUM PRESENT
TO THE VICTIMS 
OF JUDICIAL CORRUPTION

The content of the book sounds very much like a wild burlesque. And, I wish it were. Unfortunately, it is a sinister reality. Nor is it a unique sinister reality. It is about common place corruption, within our courts of law. And, still much more within our legal system i.e. the Law Society and the Bar of England and Wales. 

What is written here, is the tip of the iceberg. I was embarrassed, not by the paucity, but, by the abundance of the incidences of judicial abuses of power, from which I had to select, what to publish, and what to leave unpublished. It reminded me of the claim made in the Bible, that if everything that Jesus said and did were written down, the world would not be able to hold the publication! 

COMPARATIVE STUDY:
The enormity of the offences of corruption, dealt with may be brought home by comparing what our corrupt judges and lawyers have done, with what Jonathan Atkin and Oscar Wilde did. Both Jonathan Atkin and Oscar Wilde ended up in prison. The charge against them was perjury, that is, telling lies in court. Yet, many of our judges, who have committed worse offences, are still trying cases! 

THE NEED TO SPEAL OUT:
It is necessary to the commonwealth of justice, for all persons, especially those of us who are lawyers, to uphold justice without fear or favour. And we should do so, even if, by so doing, the firmament may fall upon us. In an effort to ensure that a few frogs do not pollute the source of the well of justice, this book is written. It is my millennium present to the victims, in England and Wales, of judicial abuses of power. 

It has been said that:
“No individual however ... resourceful, can bring a court into disrepute ... The conduct of the judiciary itself and not the individual or group criticising it. determines whether or not it is respected”.

Indeed, honest judges do welcome criticisms. As Lord Denning puts it:
We will never use this jurisdiction to uphold our own dignity ... Nor will we use it to suppress those who speak against us. We do not fear criticisms. Nor do we resent it. For there is something more important at stake. It is no less than the freedom of speech itself”.

There is no law, which make judges immune from the legal consequences of their false oaths. Indeed, the provision of s.4(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1968 makes it mandatory that their criminal offences should be reported to authorities. It is now the practice in England, as is seen in the case of Jonathan Atkin, and Hamilton and of other ministers, that a case alleging sleaze, in a public office, is first reported in a media of public opinion. This book, is that media of public opinion. 

In accordance with the requirement of the law, a copy of this book will be sent to the Lord Chancellor, by way of a formal complaint. It will stress the fact that the judges, whose conduct is criticised in this book, are not fit and proper persons to be judges. It will demand that a public investigation of the serious accusations of gross misconduct made against those judges. Further, it will insist that those judges be tried for the criminal offences that they have committed i.e. the course of justice, or defeating the end of justice.

THE OFFENCE OF DEFEATING JUSTICE
BY SWEARING FALSE OATH:
It does not make sense that these judges should escape scot-free from the offence, for instance, of perjury that they have committed. The more so when persons like Jonathan Atkin and Oscar Wilde are made to suffer grievously, for the offence of perjury. Indeed, the offence of perjury committed by Jonathan Atkin and Oscar Wilde, compared to the offence of perjury committed by the corrupt judges such as Lord Bingham, Mr. Justice Morrison and Judge David Booth, to name but a few, look like a grain of sand, compared to a huge balloon! 

The charges against Oscar Wilde and Jonathan Atkin were merely that they had committed breaches of a witness' oath, to tell the truth. But, these judges have committed breaches of their Oath of Loyalty to the Sovereign, as well as their Judicial Oath, plus the offence of swearing falsely, in the name of God! 

The 3 oaths, which those judges have broken, are as follows. 

First, in their Oath of Allegiance to the Sovereign, all these judges had sworn that they would:
Well and truly serve our sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second, in their various judicial offices. 

Second, in their Judicial Oath, all the judges had sworn to:
Do right to all manner of people after the laws and usage of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. 

Third, all the judges ended the swearing of their Judicial Oath, by calling upon Providence. Each said: 
So help me God.

Yet, all of them, in the course of their duty as judges, have maliciously committed atrocious breaches of the oaths to the Sovereign, the Court and to God.

THE OFFENCE OF DEFEATING JUSTICE 
BY IGNORING ISSUES: 
The legal requirement about what a judge should and should not deal with, may be said to have had it origin in our prayer book. The prayer book commands us not to leave undone that which we ought to do, and not to do that which we ought not to do. The law requires judges to deal with the issues raised in the case before them, by giving their reasons for determining those issues, in one way, or the other. in the cases that I have brought against the Law Society, the judges invariably ignored to deal with the issues that I had raised! The reason is quite clear. If they dealt with those issues, they would have had no alternative, but to make a ruling in my favour. However, since, they had already conspired to defeat justice, they had no alternative but to avoid dealing with the issues raised by me! Their conduct, could not merely be explained in terms of judicial bias. It was the very definition of the offence of a conspiracy to defeat the end of justice!

Just as a judge would have to be insane to deny that the object of the eye, is to see and, of the ear, is to hear, so would he be insane, to deny that the object of judgement, is to determine the issues in the dispute between the parties. There can therefore, be no defence, in law or in fact, to a judgement, which ignores to deal with the issues that constitute the cause of action or the grounds of appeal. Just as no judge dares say that he believes in the self-contradiction, or in the existence of the impossible, so, no judge dares say that he believes that the purpose of pleading causes of action, or grounds of appeal, is for him to ignore them! 

Consequently, judgements which ignore causes of action, or grounds of appeal, such as the judgements of Mr. Justice Potts, Mr. Justice Morris Kay, Judge Mitchel, and Judge David Booth etc are, law and in fact, a confession by the judges concerned, that they have maliciously defeated the end of justice. And that confession constitutes grounds for prosecuting them for the criminal offence of a conspiracy to defeat the end of justice. 

According to the law, as stated by the Court of Appeal, a fully judicial body, is required by natural justice to give 

"Sufficient reasons for its decision to enable the parties to know the issue to which it addressed its mind and acted lawfully". See R v. Civil Service Appeal Board, ex parte, Cunningham [1991] 4 All E.R. 310 at 318 as per Lord Donaldson M.R.

The most corrupt judge in the country, Mr. David Booth, does not merely ignore issues in a case. He goes all the way out to conceal material evidence from assessors! His conduct is like that of the watchdog who steals the property in its trust. Or that of a father, who sexually assaults his minor daughter. He cannot be trusted. 

THE OFFENCE OF DEFEATING JUSTICE 
BY SECRET BRIEFINGS:
The offence of giving judgement on the basis, not according to evidence as required by law, but according to secret briefings sent to judges has now become prevalent! Suson Forscey-Moore, of Campaign for a Fair Hearing, discovered a written secret briefing, warning the Court of Appeal, in case number FC2 96/6193/E (LTA 96/5619) against the plaintiff, Geoffrey Harold Scriven! Mrs. Moore carried out necessary investigations, and learnt that such Secret Briefings to judges, was not an exception to the rule, but the order of the day! 

Accordingly, she wrote a strong complaint, denouncing the judicial Secret Briefings, as judicial corruption. The prejudicial Secret Briefing to the judges of the Court of Appeal, stated: 

"It will be noted that after reading the Attached Affidavit, Lord Justice Russell directed that the papers should be submitted to Her Majesty's Attorney General to consider what further action, if any, he should take in the public interest. The Court should be warned, that the present Plaintiff has made it clear in discussions with the writer on the telephone that he has completely misinterpreted the basis of the referral. The writer has not commented in response to his expression of delight that Lord Justice Russell has referred the topic of alleged perjury committed by Lords and Lady Justices of Appeal to the Attorney General for further investigations. The Plaintiff has no idea he is the subject of the referral"!

Judges being human, and human nature being what it is, Secret Briefings of the kind, warning the judges that a litigant was a dangerous person, who accused judges of perjury and corruption etc, could not fail in their object. Indeed, it did not fail in its object! Geoffrey Harold Scriven narrowly escaped criminal penalty. 

Nor indeed, did it fail in its object in the cases I brought against the Law Society! Look, for instance, at my appeal against the judgement of Chairman Donnelly! The appeal was based on very serious judicial misconduct: 
The misconduct of Judge Donnelly accepting a bribe! 
The misconduct of Judge Donnelly receiving blackmailing letter from solicitor Robin Lewis and complying with the term of the blackmail!
Yet my appeal did not succeed! Why did it fail?

The answer is, because of secret briefing! In his judgement, Mr. Justice Mummery, who determined the appeal himself, confessed, without shame, that the appeal failed on the basis of a secret briefing that he had received from the bribed and blackmailed Judge Donnelly! Up to now, I do not know the content of the secret briefing, which is the basis upon which my appeal was determined! I hope and pray that the Lord Chancellor will cause an investigation to take place and then, I will know the content of the secret briefing and give an answer to it!

In its campaign to judges, the Law Society seems to have made my accusation of their officials to appear as a violation of the Law Society franchises! Consequently, my publication of the crimes committed by the Law Society officials was treated, by the court, as the kind of conduct that the court must severely punish! I was to be compelled, by a denial of my right to practise law, to kneel before the Law Society and to apologise for publishing the offences of the Law Society officials! I was to be denied an opportunity to earn a penny of income, as a practising solicitor! 

Some of the judges who conspired to defeat the end of justice still show some conscience. For instance, Mr. Justice Morrison and Mr. Justice Potts were, at least, so ashamed of their fictitious judgements, that they did not have the courage to deliver the figments of their minds, which they called judgements, in an open court, attended by their judicial victim! In order to prevent me from attending the deliverance of his judgements, Mr. Justice Potts dared not deliver it in London! He insisted on delivering it in Leeds, in the absence of the parties! Had the courage to deliver his judgement in London, in my presence, I would have had the discourtesy to call him by the name that describes him best: 
A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing.

And had Mr. Justice Morrison had the courage to deliver his judgement in open court, in my presence, I would have called him, in his face:
"Sir, Macbeth might have murdered sleep. But you have murdered Justice".

I did, however, had the courage to tell Chairman Booth that he was who he is: 
The Most Corrupt Judge in England. And A Racist!

BIBLICAL DESCRIPTION OF INJUSTICE:
The Bible describes well, the conduct of these corrupt judges. Their conduct is not different from the conduct of bad parents. When litigants ask for bread, these corrupt judges, like bad parents, give stones. When litigants asked for fish, they give snakes! When we ask Morrison for Justice, he gives us Injustice. And when we ask Booth for Judicial Determination, he gives us Malicious Determination!

By their own conduct, they have opted out of being judges. They should be butchering cows, and weighing meat.

LEGAL MAFIA:
During the trial of the several cases that I brought against the Law Society, it became clear, why the Law Society hired Lord Lester Q.C. and Solicitor Robin Lewis to represent it! The legal practice of Lord Lester and Solicitor Robin Lewis is essentially Mafia in nature! Lester and Lewis were hired to represent the Law Society solely because of their ability to corrupt the judiciary! 

There is absolutely no question that there are some officials of the Law Society, to whom justice is fearful for its own sake. They are like former President Iddi Amin of Uganda, who, having no academic qualification, held that persons with academic qualifications, were fools fit only to be hewers of wood and drawers of water! 

These owl-like creatures of darkness, known as the Gang of Four, are:

The Law Society Director John Rendall 
Head of Department Nicholas Saunders.
Legal Adviser Anne Coles.
And Manager Mark Hone. 


A DEMIGOD:
There is nothing more natural than that those of us brought up under the English system of law should find ourselves addicted to crying ourselves up, as belonging to the best legal system in the world. I never heard a single person cry us down as being a part of a legal system, which was not the best in the world. I had taken for granted that when those addicted to such puffing, stoop to conspire against justice, they would, because of such puffing, at least commit a breach of justice, while still appearing to be doing justice. 

I was thus shocked that a number of judges in England go all the way out to publish at least where black people are concerned, that they are neither doing justice, nor pretending to do justice!

Again, there is nothing more natural that a person brought up under the English system of law, as I am, should have entertained the greatest respect and even affection towards our judges. In terms of his independence, and above all, in terms of his unshakeable impartiality as a judge, a person like Lord Denning has always been, to me, as some sort of demigod. 

THE SINS OF INJUSTICE & THE VIRTUE OF JUSTICE:
Hence, upon the heads of those corrupt judges, the sins of injustice must be heaped. And, it must be seen to be heaped. 

And upon the heads of the just judges, such as Lord Denning, Mr. Justice Brooke, His Honour Judge Altman and his Honour Judge Prosser the virtue of justice must be heaped. And it must be seen to be heaped.

Adlai Stevenson once described a free society, as a society, where it is safe to be unpopular. We should not allow our corrupt judges to succeed to describe our free society as:
A society, where it is safe for corrupt judges, to defeat the end of justice!

CHAPTER 2 CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS IN RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CASES:

CHAPTER 3 THE GANG OF FOUR: RENDALL, SAUNDERS, HONE AND COLES

CHAPTER 4 INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE GANG OF FOUR:

CHAPTER 5 THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF MRS. COLES

CHAPTER 6 LORD ANTHONY AS LORD CAMOUFLAGE!

CHAPTER 7 SOLICITOR ROBIN LEWIS: MASTER OF BLACKMAIL

CHAPTER 8 CHAIRMAN E R DONNELLY: JUDGEMENT BY FEAR.

CHAPTER 9 SECOND CHRONOLOGY - PUBLISHING THE CRIMINAL OFFENCES OF LESTER ETC:

CHAPTER 10 CHAIRMAN DAVID BOOTH: THE MOST CORRUPT JUDGE.

CHAPTER 11 MR. JUSTICE MORRISON: THE MURDER OF JUSTICE.

CHAPTER 12 ANONYMOUS JUDGES:

CHAPTER 13 MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL WRIGHT:

CHAPTER 14 HIS HONOUR JUDGE MITCHEL

CHAPTER 15 MR. JUSTICE POTTS.

CHAPTER 16 LEGAL AID BOARD & MR. JUSTICE MAURICE KAY:

CHAPTER 17 OFFICE FOR THE SUPERVISION OF SOLICITORS

CHAPTER 18 LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, LORD BINGHAM

CHAPTER 19 COUNSEL RICHARD CLAYTON:

CHAPTER 20 MR JUSTICE BROOKE:

CHAPTER 21 HIS HONOUR JUDGE ALTMAN:

CHAPTER 22 HIS HONOUR JUDGE pROSSER:

CHAPTER 23 LORD DENNING

CHAPTER 24 PEOPLE, PEOPLE EVERYWHERE:

CHAPTER 25 CONCLUSION


http://www.ctjnet.co.uk/dossier%20of%20corruption.htm 

Dossier of Judicial Corruption in the UK

 

Ahmed Balogun and Others

Highbury Corner Magistrates' for Ultra Vires Abuse of Judicial Powers

 

Mr. Grant outside the RCJ
Unlawfully Denied Access to the courts by a corrupt Judiciary 
read more > 

Shetreet v SHARP and Lovells / Hogan & Hartson NHS and UK Attorney General v Shetreet


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/draconian-judge-says-riot-sentences-were-fair-7855270.html 

'Draconian' judge says riot sentences were fair

Justice who gave teenager eight-month jail term for stealing Lucozade bottle breaks silence

   
   

The judge who sent a teenage girl to jail for eight months for stealing a bottle of Lucozade and a bag of sweets during last summer's riots has vigorously defended the tough judicial response in which two-thirds of defendants were denied bail and harsh custodial sentences were handed down to first-time offenders.

In a public interview – highly unusual for a serving judge – District Judge Tan Ikram, who sits at Camberwell Green magistrates' court, warned those who incite others using social media such as Facebook that they can expect similarly harsh sentences in future.

Mr Ikram revealed that it was the threat of "widespread public disorder" which justified the large numbers of youngsters remanded in custody for petty crimes which would have ordinarily attracted little more than a caution. "There were a large number of people being brought to court and evidence of a large number of people involved in civil disorder. The question each judge had to ask was: 'What is the risk of future offending?' In light of what was going on that was a very different question to one that might be asked in the calm of today."

Mr Ikram says there was no political pressure on judges to come down hard on the thousands of rioters and opportunistic thieves: "I can assure you, no politicians told me or any of my colleagues what to do. We applied the law."

The Home Secretary, Theresa May, was among senior ministers forced to cut short their summer holidays to return to deal with the riots, and who had promised tough action against those involved.

Dozens of first-time offenders, who were not directly involved in the rioting but were later caught stealing booty such as cigarettes and shoes, ended up in prisons already struggling with intense overcrowding.

Mr Ikram says judges got sentencing "just about right" and insisted each case had been treated fairly on its own merit despite the all-night court sessions and political outrage. The district court judges were speaking to more senior judges "on a regular" basis right from the start, he said.

In one of last summer's most controversial cases, Jordan Blackshaw, 20, was sentenced to four years in prison for inciting people to riot on Facebook even though no rioting occurred.

Mr Ikram this week told his audience in Ealing, west London, where violence and looting also spread: "It is my personal view that [in the Blackshaw case] it was the potential to reach many people through Facebook, far and wide, when there was already widespread disorder going on, and this is why the Lord Chief Justice came to the view that the sentence wasn't excessive."

He added: "The world is changing and the judiciary and society have to deal with new situations. While we can't second-guess where technology is going to, we can have general principles: encouraging widespread disorder is a serious offence and that is not new."

Mr Ikram praised the "good will" and "resilience" of judges, court staff and prosecutors. He said that they had enabled the courts to deal with dozens of rioters every day last summer.







Law or Justice?

http://www.perceptions.couk.com/laworjustice.html

 Are corrupt / pervert males being appointed as judges, 
 magistrates and police-chiefs? 


 The evidence says so 

 "Is the UK still governed by the rule of law?  Things are bad;  I fear they will become worse" 
 
Anthony Julius 

 

|    Drugs lies     |     women & kids     |     anti-Fairness?     |     pedophile     |     frame-Ups     |     hypocrites    | 
|   
 
media conspire     |     Viking > US jury     |     elite's racists     |     conspiracy     |     fake 'acquittal'     |     misuse    | 
|   
 
police, judges     |     anti-JURY     |     rigged Trials     |     Coroners     |     Result?     |     Cover-Ups     |     Fake Fines     |     `Rich' law    |

Now -


In Britain, non-rich folk are often jailed - for the offense of poverty: non-payment of unfair ref-00 bureaucratic fines.

These are non-crimes: actions without harmful consequences or victims.  No
 decent person would imprison fellow humans for such 'offenses' - but UK magistrates and judges do.

While VIPs are rarely jailed - even after committing ref-01multiple crimes: lying in court, frauds, sexual abuse, pedophile, and worse. ref-02

[We hear that many VIPs' trials - for tax-theft, fraud and sex abuse offences - are now being held in virtual secrecy (see
 below), to prevent public awareness.]

So police-chiefs, magistrates and judges ref-03 are corruptref-04 and perverse - in routinely imprisoning poor people for no compelling reason.  And complicit, in giving authoritarian licence to elite fraud and criminal perverts.



UPDATE - Nov 2010 - Review of UK's Waste & Injustice of Tax-Swindles and `Charges'

UPDATE - Sep 2011 - `UK Taxes are Unfair, Regressive, Totally Corrupt' - Delayed I.F.S Report

UPDATE - Nov 2011 - Reason for Political & Bureaucratic Corruption

 






DRUGS

Context
Drugs and 'Class'
 

The "Law" ? - A working-classs lad was prosecuted and convicted of `drug-taking' solely on his own confession and long afterwards.

It was "Boy George" - who was then definitely `working-class'.  But Susan Blackmore, who has also admitted to taking drugs, has never been convicted or even questioned about her admitted `offences'.  Because she was definitely `upper-middle class'.

BY LAW - THE VIP's BELOW SHOULD STILL BE PROSECUTED ANDSHOULD STILL BE CONVICTED AND JAILED  -  UNDER PRESENT UK LAW.

IF UK LAWS WERE APPLIED HONESTLY & EQUALLY.

THAT IS, - IF UK POLICE-CHIEFS, JUDGES, BUREAUCRATS AND POLITICIANS WEREN'T PERVERSE & CORRUPT.

 




DRUGS - Race and Class Prejudice

Corrupt Police Chiefs - Corrupt Judges


Mon. 17 May 1999:- [re Royal Family - Thomas Parker Bowles's "cocaine habit" - Prince Charles' godson]

Quote -
 "Today, Mr Parker Bowles's employer, Dennis Davidson, of PR company Dennis Davidson Associates, stood by him, claiming drug taking was "part of our life in general".

No jail (or even prosecution).

Prince Charles and Mr Parker Bowles are
 not working-class 

see beeb2.html#Inward

Corrupt Police Chiefs - Corrupt Judges


Monday September 6, 1999

"Princess Michael of Kent yesterday publicly supported her 20-year-old son, Lord Frederick Windsor, after he admitted taking cocaine.  The Queen's cousin confessed he snorted the drug from a glossy magazine at a party in Fulham, west London, three months ago."

"He told them: "I admit it is true.  It is very difficult to avoid getting into this sort of thing when you move in these circles, but I don't blame anyone else for the incident."


Home Office research says
 "those who tended to use drugs most are the very rich"

No jail (or even prosecution).

Lord Frederick Windsor is
 not working-class.

see beeb2.html#Inward

Corrupt Police Chiefs - Corrupt Judges


Monday September 27, 1999 The Guardian

"From newspaper reports after the first day of the case against the Earl of Hardwicke it looked as though the aristocrat was bound to go to jail.  He and his friend, Stefan Thwaites, had arranged for cocaine to be delivered to a hotel.  Hardwicke was heard to say: "Come on, bring on the charlie.  I want a big fat line.  He was then videoed snorting the drug."

"The Earl of Hardwicke snorted cocaine, was videoed and still walked free."
 

judge = Timothy Pontius 

No jail. 

The Earl of Hardwicke is
 not working-class. 

Legal note :- "Entrapment is no defence in English criminal law" (Regina v Shannon)

see beeb2.html#Inward

Corrupt Police Chiefs - Corrupt Judges


Wed. September 15, 2004 Ananova

"Princess Diana's former lover James Hewitt has been let off with a caution for possession of a Class A drug."

"Hewitt, 46, was arrested on suspicion of being in possession of cocaine in July outside a west London wine bar.  He was detained along with girlfriend, freelance broadcaster Alison Bell"

"Following consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service, he received a caution for the offence of possession of a Class A drug ... and will be subject to no further action by police."


No prosecution.  No jail.

James Hewitt is
 not working-class.

Corrupt Police Chiefs - Corrupt Judges


Tues. 23 Feb. 1999

55 year old grandfather, Eric Mann, of Pembroke Dock, South Wales used cannabis twice, to relieve pain from chronic arthritis.

He was today sentenced to 1 year's imprisonment.


judge = Wyn Rees

Mr Mann is working class.

Corrupt Police Chiefs - Corrupt Judges






REPORTS FROM UK MEDIA 

LATER NOTE
 
"The Guardian" May 5, 2000 "The number of people convicted for cannabis possession has more than doubled in the past six years to over 40,000 a year, according to new Home Office figures which deal a bodyblow to the idea that the police are taking a more lenient approach to soft drugs." 

Cover-up ...
 Less Risk of Cannabis 

UPDATE - March '07 - Media Dis-information on Cannabis

 


Since then, evidence says:-

corrupt rich & privileged haven't stopped drug-taking;

corrupt police and judges haven't stopped covering-up

but

corrupt Press have stopped reporting!

 






USA / ENGLISH LAW IS USED BY BLINKERED ELITE TO IMPOSE CLASS BIAS & RACISM. 

USA History & Use:-  MARIJUANA PROHIBITION WAS BEGUN IN CALIFORNIA TO EXCLUDE LATINOS - SOUTHERN US STATES USE MINOR POSSESSION LAWS TO DEPRIVE BLACKS OF THEIR VOTE BUTDO NOT APPLY THOSE "LAWS" TO ELITE WHITE COCAINE-USERS 
paraphrased from:- "The Pursuit of Oblivion - A History of Narcotics 1500-2000"- Weidenfeld, by Richard Davenport-Hines 

English media: liars 

English media routinely fulminate against "drug users"
 

"The SUN" / "The MIRROR" / "The MAIL" / "The EXPRESS" / "The TELEGRAPH" / "The INDEPENDENT" / "The GUARDIAN" / "The TIMES" 

Secretly the Press & BBC lied, for class, race & political reasons -
 above

Now we can see (from list
 above) that the Press, BBC & 'establishment elite' use more hard drugs than anyone else! 

See `Perceptions' knowledge of media (BBC) using 'banned substances' while broadcasting hypocritical diatribes against relatively harmless herbs 

See Press & BBC lies - at
 bbccoke 

Late in 19th Cent. upper-class London used a 'nasal decongestant' - recently revealed as 99.9% pure cocaine 

 






Police-chiefs know 'elites are highest per capita users of hard drugs' - - at bbccoke 

Yet UK police spend their time giving hassle to working people, black people and young people, often for minor usage of 'soft' or non-addictive substances, non payment of fines, or even more often for refusing to kowtow to arrogant, corrupt bullying and pervert policemen, magistrates or judges.  See last generations & real unholy & inevidence 

From the examples shown above and below it can be seen that :- 

UK
 police-chiefs, judges and legislators use law corruptly

More
 criminals inside UK police forces than in the general population

 






Reason for corrupt Attitudes? 

Increasing indications of some police involved in hard-drug trade and vice (inc. pedophile).  Possible cause of police / gangsters dislike of cannabis - it does not lead to physical dependency, therefore cannot be used to compel hard-drug buying and cannot be used as compulsion to enter vice trade (inc pedophile).  This dislike / enmity to cannabis maybe percolates upwards to elite (police, politicians etc) who, as seen above, are often secretly hard-drug users. 

Unless - and here we allow strong speculation - elite's attitude comes from financial / physical motivation.  Ie. that political / social / police elite more deeply
 implicated in vice, inc.pedophile, and hard-drug trade. 




Cover-up ...
 Lesser Risk 

Analyses:
 "Abusers common among police, judges etc" 

 






Goverment Double-Talk? 

"The government continually uses the the very real dangers of crack cocaine in its propaganda, to keep us alarmed and enthusiastic about its drug wars, but it actually spends 85% of its anti-drug budget fighting the relatively harmless and often medicinal marijuana". 

`Everything is Under Control'
 R.A. Wilson & M. J. Hill, 1998 NY. ISBN 0-330-38994-7 





FROM "1984" to "2004" 

`War on drugs' - Hypocrisy 




ENGLISH ELITE? check this CIA REPORT on our LONDON RULERS

(try "illicit drugs" para)
 









WOMEN 

Context 

ENGLISH POLICE CHIEFS & JUDGES ARE NOTORIOUS FOR CRUEL TREATMENT OF WOMEN,
ESPECIALLY OF YOUNG MOTHERS
 

There are
 some disturbing resemblances to cover-ups/cases, even inrecent years 

NEWS 09/09/01 bentcops13 

NEWS January 2003 avoiders 

NEWS September 2003 bad cops 

Only 13% of women jailed have actually committed a violent offense - English magistrates & judges jail 8 (eight) times more than necessary 

from polrape & polsexism (and also Seema1 check HTML go "view" "page source") 

WORKING-CLASS MOTHERS FALLING UNDER THE POWER OF CRUEL (& SOMETIMES CRIMINALLY PERVERT) ENGLISH JUDGES WILL BE SUBJECT TO BRUTAL AND UNNATURAL PUNISHMENTS 

 






News 

Mar. 2003 - Female prisoners sexually abused 
"Women at Broadmoor used as guinea pigs for male sex offenders"
 





News 

June 2005 - Gov't OK's gang rape of woman 
"Rape victim demands her 'freedom"

[if down go http://www.perceptions.couk.com/badmales.txt] 





News 
Jan. 2000 -
 "The Times" Internet January 8 edition "This week it was decided - [for no compelling reason] - to deprive a young mother of her newborn child, her first.  [She was only jailed for a minor shoplifting offense] The new-born baby will be taken away by the State" 

"Until that decision is taken - probably within the next few days - the mother will be held at the North London jail and the baby taken into care." 


[It has been admitted - Jan 2000 - that children taken from their parents are often physically / sexually abused in English State institutions.  It is also admitted that physical and sexual abuse of children in English State institutions continues today - BBC R4.warning 1 & warning 2]





Jan 2004 - UK - Record number of women commit suicide in prison









Both main English political parties, when in power, have a policy of separating working-class mothers from their children.

The present 'Labour' government seems to be implementing this policy, with its so-called 'welfare laws', even harder than its predecessors.


[LATER INTERRUPT - 07 Feb '01 We're told "New Labour" has mitigated its efforts in this direction - come back for UPDATES]

There may be a "culturally hidden" reason for this behavior on the part of the English political elite - devices & confirm5 &psychotix

 






Pervert abuse of women in Court

"Young rape victim commits suicide - after being repeatedly forced to hold up her knickers before the rapist - and the Court" - Report 01 August 2002


Lindsay Armstrong - innocent victim who suffered more abuse in court

You might say only fools, brutes or perverts would inflict such harm on rape victims.

Male `barrister' (the rapist's) and male `judge' obviously thought it was `necessary' or "desirable".

The Judge
 (at the Glasgow High Court) - "Lord McEwan"

Barrister's name now seems to be secret.  Can you believe he's shy / sensitive? - although obviously known to the rapist's lawyer: John Carruthers - a Scottish solicitor.

But our strange `legal system' gave young victim no protection from pervert cruelty, humiliation and abuse - in Court.


See - 01 August
 Victim's suicide = Was it "murder" by brutal or pervert Courts, Laws & Lawyers?




UPDATE
 - Dec. '06
Abuse continues -
 "devastating court ordeal"
"The Observer" 19 Dec. 2006




Why do women get such a lousy deal in English Courts?

Why are majority of rapes never prosecuted and even those prosecuted are nearly all `let-off' by a corrupt system?

Simple answer - police-chiefs, magistrates and judges are corrupt and pervert.

Later - another `Lindsey'
 writes in to tell her experience. 







Jury 
the only successful committee - why? 

Context 
Some humans evolve into justice earlier than others note.  The Norselanders developed a formal jury system centuries, perhaps millennia before other countries.  Their jury all had to know the accused and be his/her social equals.  Ie. 'a jury of one's peers'. 
In civil disputes six jurists knew one of the disputants, six knew the other.
 





Extract from `The Icelandic Sagas' 

Then Flosi said  "Now I will name my daysmen*:  First I name Hall, my father-in-law;  Auzur from Broadwater;  Surt Asbjorn's son of Kirkby;  Modolf Kettle's son" - he dwelt then at Asar;  "Hafr the Wise;  and Runolf of the Dale  . . . " 

. . . and then Njal stood up, and said 
 "First of these I name, Asgrim Ellidagrim's son;  and Hjallti Skeggi's son;  Gizur the White;  Einar of Thvera;  Snorri the Priest;  and Gudmund the Powerful" 

. . . After that Njal and Flosi . . . shook hands . . . that they would hold to what those twelve men doomed.
 

from "The Story of Burnt Njal" translated by Sir George Webbe Dasent 

*daysman = a juror
 
"neither is there any daysman betwixt us"
 Job. 9:33 




Maybe save/print - A Jury's Right to Nullify Corrupt or Unfair Use of Law - Wiki

Maybe save/print - A Jury's Right to Nullify Corrupt or Unfair Use of Law - in USA / Canada





From the Viking 'Danelaw' (virtually all England N of the Thames valley) the Norsemen's jury passed into earliest English Law as one of our "Rights Immemorial". 

Despite later becoming corrupted to favour Britain's ruling Norman-German elites, in 1785 a practitioner of Scottish & English law could still write:- (the italics are his)
 - 
"The juries of England are judges of
 law as well as of fact in many civil and in all criminal trials. . . I should be the last man in the world to encourage juries to contradict rashly, wantonly, or perversely, the opinion of the judges.  On the contrary I would have them listen respectfully to the advice they receive from the bench, by which they may often be well directed in forming their own opinion; which, 'and not another's,' is the opinion they are to return upon their oaths.  But where, after due attention to all that the judge has said, they are decidedly of a different opinion from him, they not only have a power and aright, but they are bound in conscience to bring in a verdict accordingly." 

IN OTHER WORDS, IF A LAW IS UNJUST OR IS OPERATED UNJUSTLY, THE JURY CAN AND SHOULD FIND THE DEFENDANT 'NOT GUILTY' - AND SO CHANGE THE UNJUST LAW. 

[
Example: the hanging of children by pervert English judges.]

 




Maybe save/print - A Jury's Right to Nullify Corrupt or Unfair Use of Law - Wiki

Maybe save/print - A Jury's Right to Nullify Corrupt or Unfair Use of Law - in USA / Canada




"Every jury in the land is
 tampered with note 1 & note 2 and falsely instructed by the judge when it is told that it must accept as the law that which has been given to them, or that they can decide only the facts in the case." 

Lord Denham - O'Connell v. Rex (1884)
 

and in the U.S.A by :- 

"The jury has the power to bring in a verdict in the teeth of both the law and the facts."
 

Justice Holmes - Homing v. District of Columbia 138 (1920)
 

and 

"If the jury feels the law is unjust we recognize the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence."
 

4
 TH Circuit Court of Appeals, U.S. v. Moylan (1969) 

and 

"In 1672, a jury refused to convict William Penn of preaching a religion not that of the Anglican Church, a serious `crime' in those days"
 

"In 1734, a New York jury refused to convict Peter Zenger of an equally odious `crime', of which he was guilty - printing criticism of the government"
 

UPDATE 25 Feb. 2011 - "Corrupt `Feds' arrest man for telling truth about Juries' Right To Nullify Laws" 



Maybe save/print - A Jury's Right to Nullify Corrupt or Unfair Use of Law - Wiki

Maybe save/print - A Jury's Right to Nullify Corrupt or Unfair Use of Law - in USA / Canada

 






News 

"The Guardian" Alan
 Travis, Friday January 14, 2000 

"clash with Jack Straw about plans to scrap the right to jury trial for some defendants" 

Explanation:- Recently, for a generation or so, English
 lawyers - pocketing tax-payers money - have been corruptly advising criminal clients to:- 

1) initially plead "Not Guilty" - to obtain delay;
 

2) "go for jury trial" - to extend delay:
 

3) then plead "Guilty" hoping for a reduced sentence.
 

This does not actually help most criminal clients but it
 does give lots of taxpayer's money to the lawyers (who later become judges, - fromcorrupt2 & corruptlaw). 

Jack Straw, the 'Home
 Secretary' (and a lawyer, like most English politicians - including the Prime Minister), has decided not to take action against the corrupt lawyers. 

Instead he illegally attacks our "Rights Immemorial" - our right to fair jury trial.
 

In a country where
 all "official judgement" is heavily polluted bygreedy, corrupt perverts in authority. 




English law is now corrupt in practice, ensuring that 'justice', or indeed protection from justice, is only given to the rich; and to judges themselves of course - see bentjudge.  Institutionally corrupt English judges routinely and falsely try to convict working-class folk, but juries don't.

Now UK juries are not allowed to know the accused; 

now juries are often chosen from the 'upper' or 'middle class' to disadvantage minority, black or working-class defendants.
 

Now our "Rights Immemorial" are subverted by judges illegally acting for a ruling elite.

Now judges tamper with juries, falsely instruct juries (see
 above), and even illegally overrule a jury's decision. 

[ See recent cases of English judge named Farquhar / Farquharson ?]




News - 18 Sept '00 The
 BBC , always ready to do dirtypropaganda work for a corrupt elite, broadcast "anti-jury" selection of snips taken from interviews with a handful of ex-jurors [Radio 4 "You and yours" 1245] 

Why should we suspect this was rigged ?
 

Not mentioned by the BBC script:- a national survey covering 8,000 cases, with responses from at least 10 jurors per case, resulting in an overwhelmingly positive "pro-jury" outcome
 

STOP PRESS 27 Sept '00 




WHY THE
 PUSH TO GET RID OF JURIES? 

We suspect there's a long-term secret agenda, Europe-wide, to cover-up fraud among politicians, bankers, lawyers and other members of the elite (and, even more secretly, to hide pedophile crime in the elite).
 

CHECK - Judges aim to excuse / cover-up pedophiles,
 in UK and all over Europe 

CHECK - Judges aim to excuse / cover-up fraud,
 in UK and Europe 

[ Largest part of fraud in Europe originates in UK - we suspect that is due to UK's incompetent (&
 corrupt?) senior civil service, police and judiciary.  Ditto for pedophile crime? ] 



Check - Jury Law in a Real Democracy

 


 



mathematical outcomes 

If 'n' individuals each decides right 40% of the time, the group will decide wrong 100% of the time! 

committees and cabinets - members of self-selecting 
ELITES - are historically incompetent & opt for 
injustice 


If 'n' individuals each decides right 80% of the time, the group will decide right 100% of the time! 

Juries - cross-section of 
WORKING POPULATION - are historically competent & regularly opt for 
justice 









CONSPIRACY? 

Context 

A UK "Parliament" once expressed the will of the people, when approving the Criminal Justice Act 1991.
 

Two offenders who committed an offense should receive different financial penalties if they had different disposable weekly incomes.  This was to make the severity of the fine equally burdensome for rich and poor. ["Fair Fines Act" - 1991]
 

But the elite - in covert control of English judges and many magistrates - would not accept equal justice.
 

There was a conspiracy to force its cancellation, with judges and magistrates refusing to comply with the Act, claiming it was "too difficult"
 

[though the Tax Departments (Inland Revenue / I.R.S) do it every day, easily]
 

Meanwhile the UK press - owned by the elite
 see review and the BBC - controlled by the elite see below & unholy synchronized a media campaign against Fair Fines. 

It is possible that this judicial conspiracy was criminal - that the English elite lawyers and judges illegally connived against the UK Constitution.  If so - then all judicial decisions since that date have been unconstitutional. 

A weak and corrupt
 see perv3 Parliament capitulated.  The Fair Fines Act was repealed [cancelled] in the Criminal Justice Act 1993 s.65. 

 






News 

Unfair
 results soon followed.  See the case of Regina v UK Steel PLC [1995] ICR 586 

["
 UK Steel ":- a multibillion dollar company - believe it's now called "Corus" ] 

where the defendant [
 UK Steel ] was convicted of violating section 3 of the 'Health and Safety at Work Act 1974' after one of its platforms had collapsed and killed a workman. 

The trial judge fined the company £100. [That's about a hundred and sixty dollars for taking a (working-class) man's life.]
 

UPDATE ON `CORUS' ACCIDENTS 

 






WE BET: IF HIS WIFE OR CHILD WERE RUN DOWN BY A TRUCK, THE M.D. OF UK STEEL (or "CORUS") WOULD ENSURE THAT THE (working-class) DRIVER WOULD BE SENT TO JAIL FOR A VERY LONG TIME. 

And we can also bet :-
 

the trial judge would eagerly (and vindictively) comply.
 

PROOF - From "The Independent" - an English broadsheet "Jail for driver who killed man" By Cahal Milmo 15 February 2001 A lorry driver was jailed for five years yesterday for killing a man ... Paul Browning, 36 ...admitted causing death by dangerous driving. 

 






from "
"Cruel & Unjust Taxes"" quote 

You don't believe CPS & judges are corrupt, biased and pervert? 

Overpaid, corrupt civil-servants
 linkTA01 & company directorslinkTA02 kill - by greed & incompetence - hundreds of people["RailTrack" linkTA03 & certain English Ferry Co's] - 

or thousands of people ["UK Gas"
 - their explosive North-Sea gas conversions have murdered more than the population of an entire UK town since the 60's] 

-
 

they get millionaire's incomes and even bonuses,
 linkTA04 taken from their victims' taxes by the murderers' accomplices, our venal linkTA05 lying linkTA06 politicians. 


Overworked, overtired truck-driver
 accidentally kills somebody - he gets 6 years in jail! 

04 June 2001 

LATEST "only the poor go to prison" 

pooronly - privileged exemptions - murdering rich 

 






News Aug 2002 

UK's government introduces "on the spot fines" of £40, £80, £100+? for offenses like drunkenness or rowdy behaviour. The offense and the fine to be decided solely by a policeman. 

DO WE BELIEVE SOME POLICE WILL NOT MISUSE THIS POWER TO TARGET YOUNG BLACK MALES & THE UNDER-PRIVILEGED GENERALLY - AS THEY HAVE DONE SO MANY TIMES IN RECENT PAST 

[ Just after plan was first mooted (few years ago) the PM's own son committed several such offenses - drunk and incapable, giving false name and address to police, etc
 

Needless to say he wasn't punished as a working-class, or black youngster would have been
 

And even if he
 had been fined "on the spot" the fine would have been perhaps a few seconds-worth of his parents income, perhaps 1/1000th of their `wallet cash ] 

IF a working class boy is fined any fixed amount it could represent more than all his (or parents') available cash, demanding 'scrimping' or even going hungry 

Ironically, our government of barristers seems unable to see the injustice of punishing the working poor a thousand times more cruelly than a favoured elite 

This fosters resentment and justified anger among the poor 

Worse, it encourages arrogance in the elite, breeding rich hooligans & criminal perverts among them.
 seepromise.html 

News - "Disgusting vandalism by rich going unpunished" - Radio5Live 8 Aug 2000 

"You can't stop me - my father's a barrister" 

An interviewer asked Paul Tyler, the MP for North Cornwall - "are you saying the rich kids are noticeably worse than other teenagers?" 

"Yes"
 he replied, going on to report that gangs of rich youths, when remonstrated with for urinating and vomiting in people's gardens, would respond with - "you can't touch me - my father's a barrister" 

[With such upbringing it is little wonder that
 perverts are dominant among barristers, judges, and other prestige branches of the establishment!] 

The English parliament is mainly made up of lawyers and other parasitic, untruthful trades; there are few representatives from productive, honest or creative professions. 

Government
 does need to address problems of the systemic corruption of Britain's police and of legal and "upper" classes, as shown by rich perpetrators going unpunished, while corrupt police chiefs and judges persecute ordinary folk. 

It does
 not need to oppress ordinary young people with unjust, regressive fines applied by vindictive or self-seeking policemen. 









RACISTS 

Context 

The elite of all nations (and their bully-boys - some policemen and secret-policemen) are more racist
 linkR-00 & linkR01 and sexist than the normal population, because class bias is merely another form of racism linkR02 

From the notes above we have seen how UK police-chiefs and judges pervertedly and corruptly oppress most females and the working class.  Their actions against ethnic minority groups are even more contemptible
 

"The Times" (Net edition) 2 March 2000
 "Blacks 'suffer as Jews did'" 

BY ROBIN YOUNG "The father of Stephen Lawrence, the teenager murdered in a racist attack in 1993, yesterday compared the position of black people in Britain to that of Jews under the Nazis" 

 






News 

Sunday January 30, 2000 "The Observer"
 QUOTE - "A farcical trial and 13 years of racist abuse in jail - the story of Satpal Ram" 

Story - A biased police arrest and prosecution - for murder - when he acted in self-defence; a racist / corrupt / or incompetent defense lawyer; a racist / corrupt / or incompetent judge.
 

All these meant that his skin color placed Satpal Ram at the mercy of the corrupt and perverted UK "justice" system
 linkR03 

"At the trial, a whole series of Asian witnesses, who could have supported Satpal's version of events, were never called.  The evidence of the one who did take the stand was dismissed because his broken English could not readily be understood.  No translator was employed.  At one point the judge told the jury he would translate, even though he did not speak Bengali" 

Satpal Ram - wrongly convicted - has been abused in all the jails in which he has been held -
 

a) because his skin was was a different color
 

b) because he maintains his innocence.  In these cases pervert English prison governors (from
 pervperps) routinely allow similarly perverted prison wardens to indulge in physical / sexual tortures to 'break' the prisoner's dignity and morale. 

The Parole Board will ensure that the prisoner will never be allowed to complain -
 

if he complains - he doesn't get parole!
 linkR04   Simple, isn't it ? 

But the parole board
 linkR05 and the governors have always lied - covered-up! 

QUOTE - "There's people in this prison, where I've been seven times, who have been responsible for torturing me and now they're all smiles as if nothing ever happened.  If there's any kickback from speaking out in this article, I'll deal with it when it happens" - Satpal Ram 

From -
 www.newsunlimited.co.uk/ ~ 

UPDATE 19June '02 Satpal Ram released under EU ruling 
"Politicians should not have powers to extend sentences - to prevent political, class-biased or racial use / abuse of "Justice System"
 

See
 violence 

and
 offliars 

and
 prison2 - disturbing (but too prevalent) abuse / tortures permitted to jailers. 

Late News.
 CPS & DPP. Perverse decisions (taken by perverts?) to allow torture and murder in prisons. 

see
 perverseCPS 

[
NOTE When the newspaper coyly says 'he refused to squat for a strip-search' it means he refused to allow himself to be placed naked and kneeling on the floor to be assaulted by several prison officers. For that natural and normal refusal he was killed. 

NOTE 2 Anthropologists know of these old, primitive (sexual?) forms of torture / abasement / indignity inflicted on captive or beaten men.] 

From
 pervperps and bentcps 

LATE "bentgovs" 

LATE NEWS
 03 Sep. 2003 - Police still bent 

LATE NEWS
 08 Sep. 2003 - "Another lone black man murdered - by 8 policemen?"

 






News 

"The Observer" Sunday April 2, 2000
 "Asian teenager . . . killed in cell" by Tony Thompson, Crime Correspondent 

"Zahid Mabarek, 19, from Walthamstow, was less than 12 hours from being released from the Feltham Young Offenders Institution in Middlesex when he was `found in his cell' suffering from severe head injuries in the early hours of 23 March."
 

No impartial observer attended the death-scene, so it will never be known what assaults he suffered before being silenced - by being murdered "in Her Majesty's custody".
 

Zahid was arrested and jailed [ by a pervert
 linkR05 system#] for a 'non-offense' (see above). He had not committed any harmful action against any person.  Zahid was sentenced to 90 days for the crime of 'going equipped'. 

 






21 August 2000 "The Independent" :- "Prison service admits it is 'institutionally racist'" - also, same date - "Police given warning over deaths in custody" 

24 Dec.'00 see prisons' corruption 

24 Jan '01 see 
prisons' racism 

06 Feb '01 see 
prisons' criminal brutality "a betrayal of the most base kind of our duty..." 

25 July '01 see 
UK's racist corruption Amnesty International - "reports of ill treatment by police, to deaths in custody" 

17 Sep '01 see 
uncontrolled prisons' crime, smug governors cover-up authorities' crimes 

23 July '02 see 
CPS pretence shield racists - in uniform - see CPS in Index (and Edit-Find in this page) 

 





Corrupt judges jailed web girl


Judge ... Michael T Conahan

 

STAFF REPORTER

Published: 19 Feb 2009

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2255203/Corrupt-judges-jailed-web-girl.html

A MODEL student was sent to a detention centre by corrupt judges – for building a spoof MySpace page.

Hillary Transue thought she might get a stern lecture when she appeared before a judge in 2007 for building the webpage mocking her headteacher.

Incredibly the judge sentenced her to three months at a juvenile detention centre on a charge of harassment.

But today the judge, Mark A Ciavarella Jr and his colleague, Michael T Conahan, pleaded guilty to taking more than $2.6million in kickbacks to send teenagers to two privately run youth detention centres.

Prosecutors said that Judge Conahan, 56, secured contracts for the two centres to house juvenile offenders.

Then Judge Ciavarella, 58, carried out the sentencing to keep the centres filled.

Hillary, 17, said: “I felt like I had been thrown into some surreal sort of nightmare.

“All I wanted to know was how this could be fair and why the judge would do such a thing.”

 


Corrupt judges, credit rationing and the political economy of bankruptcy laws

 

Bruno Biais, Universit´e de Toulouse and CEPR, and Gilles Recasens, Universit´e de Reims1

September 2002

1Many thanks to Catherine Casamatta, Roman Inderst, Steven Kaplan, Jean Jacques Laffont, Thomas Mariotti, David Martimort,

Marco Pagano, Howard Rosenthal, Klaus Schmidt, Andrei Shleifer, Jean Tirole, and seminar participants at Toulouse

University and the CEPR Conference on The Firm and its Stakeholders, for very insightful discussions and comments.

ABSTRACT

The liquidation of distressed companies entails social costs, which lenders and managers do not fully internalize.

To mitigate this problem, bankruptcy laws in France and the US (in contrast with the UK or Germany)

favor reorganization. The corresponding expropriation risk faced by creditors worsens credit rationing, especially if bankruptcy judges are corrupt. Consequently tough bankruptcy laws, involving strict enforcement of debt contracts, can be socially optimal. Soft laws are likely to emerge, however, when the majority of citizens are so poor they would be credit rationed even under a tough bankruptcy law. In contrast, tough laws can be chosen when pivotal voters are middle class citizens who benefit from enhancing entrepreneurial opportunities.

 

Corrupt judges, credit rationing and the political economy of bankruptcy laws

 

1 Introduction

Why do we need laws? Laws can provide a useful framework for the enforcement of contracts. In presence of externalities, however, laws can also be useful to limit ex–ante the set of feasible contracts, or interfere ex–post

in their application. With benevolent legislators and honest judges such interference enhances social welfare.

In contrast, when there is corruption it can lead to severe distorsions. The present paper analyzes these issues in the context of bankruptcy laws.

Bankruptcy laws vary quite significantly around the world.In the UK and Germany, their main objective is nto enforce debt contracts. In contrast, in the US, France, and Russia, bankruptcy courts can violate contractual clauses, and impose firm reorganization and debt write–offs. Franks and Sussman (1999) and Berglof and Rosenthal (2000) offer very interesting analyses of the historical developments that led to the English and US

bankruptcy laws. They note that the latter was greatly influenced by the public reaction to large railroad bankruptcies in the late nineteenth century. At that time it was widely felt that liquidation of the railroads would go against the public interest.

 

While debtor oriented bankruptcy laws can be ex–post socially optimal, they can have adverse effects ex– ante. When anticipating that their rights as creditors risk to be violated, bankers are reluctant to grant loans.

This can result in credit rationing. Indeed La Porta et al (1997, 1998) find that in countries where creditor rights are well protected, such as the UK or Germany, firms rely extensively on debt financing, which is reflected in large debt to GNP ratios, while in countries where creditor rights are weak, debt financing is more limited. In the face of these results, La Porta et al (1997 and 1998) ask why it is that the law can define such weak

See for example, Franks, Nyborg and Torous (1994), White (1994) and Atiyas (1995).

1 creditor rights. From a standard public economics perspective one answer could be that optimal bankruptcy laws trade–off credit rationing with social costs of liquidation. If coping with credit rationing is more important for social welfare than limiting the social costs of liquidation, then the optimal bankruptcy law should be tough,

i.e., it should insist on liquidation whenever debt is not serviced. Alternatively, if the social costs of liquidation are relatively large, the law should besoft, i.e., it should allow for reorganization, to keep the firm in business, even if it implies some violations of creditors’ rights. When one looks at the darker side of human nature, however, the picture becomes a little more blurred.

First, bankruptcy judges may not be honest and benevolent social welfare maximizers. Unfortunately there are numerous cases of bankruptcy judges’ corruption. With corrupt judges soft laws generate credit rationing as well as deviations from socially optimal liquidation decisions ! Second, the laws actually voted may deviate bfrom those which are socially optimal, as median or pivotal voters do not internalize the welfare of all citizens.

The goal of this paper is to analyze the political process through which bankruptcy laws are chosen and its consequences for economic efficiency and social welfare.

We build from a simple corporate finance model `a la Holmstrom and Tirole (1997). Entrepreneurs with investment projects need outside financing to fund these. As they must exert costly but unobservable efforts to make the project profitable there is a moral hazard problem. The latter can generate credit rationing for entrepreneurs with initial wealth below a certain threshold.

We extend this model by assuming that liquidation can create social costs that are not internalized by managers and lenders, and by considering two possible bankruptcy laws. Under the tough law, firms are liquidated whenever they cannot service their debt. Under the soft law, judges decide if firms are liquidated when they cannot serve their debt. Some judges are honest and make liquidation decisions to maximize social welfare, other judges are corrupt and bribes will influence their rulings.

We embed this analysis into a slightly more general model where a continuum of citizens have identical investment projects, but different initial wealth.Citizens with initial wealth below a certain threshold are

3This is similar to Biais and Casamatta (1999).

2 credit rationed. In an extension of our analysis we enrich this setting by considering a simple general equilibrium model where equilibrium is jointly determined on the labor market and the credit market. Thus we are able to analyze the consequences of bankruptcy laws on investment and on wages, reflecting the increased labor demand generated by the creation of new firms.

Within this framework, we analyze the emergence of bankruptcy laws resulting from the votes of this population of agents.

Our analysis generates the following insights:

² The adverse effect of soft laws on access to financing is worsened by judges’ corruption. Tough laws do not grant judges any discretion regarding liquidations. Hence there is no scope for bribery. With a soft law, in contrast, the judge has discretion over the liquidation decision. In this context corrupt judges extract bribes. These play the role of a tax on creditors, reducing the return they can expect from their loans, and thus their willingness to fund projects. When the judicial system is corrupt, it can be preferable to

opt for tough laws, even if it means inefficient liquidations.

² Yet, soft laws are likely to emerge in democracies when the majority of the citizens are so poor that they are credit constrained, whatever the bankruptcy code. While poor citizens suffer from the social costs of liquidation generated by tough laws, the extent to which they benefit from enhanced financing opportunities is limited. Correspondingly they are not very sensitive to the adverse effect of soft laws or judges’ corruption on credit rationing.

² In contrast, tough laws are more likely to emerge in democracies where the pivotal voters are middle class citizens benefitting from enhanced entrepreneurial opportunities. In this case, access to financing is facilitated, which spurs investment and growth.

² Furthermore the determinants of the softness of bankruptcy laws are correlated with the business cycles.

In slumps, the social costs of bankruptcy are likely to be particularly large and soft laws are more likely to be passed than in booms.

3 Our paper builds on the substantial literature analyzing the design of bankruptcy laws (see e.g. Harris and Raviv, 1993, White, 1989, Bebchuck, 1988, Aghion, Hart and Moore, 1992, Berkovitch, Isarel and Zender, 1997, and Berkovitch and Israel, 1999.) Relative to this literature, our contributions are i) to analyze the differences between (bankruptcy) laws and (financial) contracts arising in presence of externalities, ii) to endogenize the bankruptcy law as resulting from an electoral process, iii) to study the consequences of bankruptcy judges’

corruption, and iv) to delineate the impact of the law on social welfare (in particular through credit rationing and social costs) and on financing choices.

Our political economy approach is in the line of the insightful paper by Bolton and Rosenthal (1999).

Some of the major differences between our paper and theirs include the following: In their analysis voting on moratoria occurs ex–post. In ours citizens vote for the bankruptcy law ex–ante, and then financial contracts are written and economic decisions taken, reflecting the legal context. Also, we emphasize the role of (possibly corrupt) judges, while Bolton and Rosenthal (1999) emphasize more the legislative process. Finally, their focus on how bankruptcy laws complete contracts by making their application contingent on macro–shocks, differs from our focus on how laws take into account externalities imposed on third parties by the parties of financial contracts.

Our analysis of the consequences of bankruptcy laws on access to financing is also in the line of the law and finance body of research, initiated by La Porta et al (1997, 1998). Our paper proposes to push this research nagenda one step further, by studying the political economy of the emergence of legal systems, and offering a rationale for their imperfections.

The next section presents institutional features of bankruptcy procedures which motivate our analysis.

Section 3 analyzes corporate financing choices with a tough law. Section 4 analyzes the case of a soft law.

Section 5 analyzes the socially optimal law and studies which law results from voting. Section 6 presents

extensions of our basic model. Section 7 offers a brief conclusion. Proofs not given in the text are in the

Appendix.

4

2 Institutional background on bankruptcy laws in different countries

 

Bankruptcy laws vary considerably across countries.4

As shown by the very interesting historical analysis of Franks and Sussman (1999), “the English procedure was developed by lenders and borrowers, exercising their right to contract freely.” It was left to the parties of debt contracts to determine their mutual obligations. “The role of the state in this process was relatively limited, largely confined to enforcing the contract”. In line with this historical evolution, the current UK bankruptcy code emphasizes the protection of creditor’s rights.5

Similarly to the UK law, the German law emphasizes the protection of creditors’ rights (see Kiefer, 2000).

In most cases, when companies default on their debt repayment obligations, they end up liquidated, and the proceeds are distributed to the debtholders.

In contrast, as explained by Franks and Sussman (1999), the US constitution gave Congress large powers to create bankruptcy laws resulting in interferences with the application of contracts. The US law took a decisive turn towards the end of the nineteenth century, when very important railroads companies failed. As explained by Franks and Sussman (1999): “It was largely felt that the lenders’ liquidation rights stood in conflict with the public interest”. Similarly, Berglof and Rosenthal (2000) note that: “It was argued that the liquidation of the

railroads would lead to significant costs for the US economy, e.g., cutting off the West from important supply lines.” In this context, as noted by Franks and Sussman (1999), “the Federal Courts innovated new procedures to preserve the railroads sometimes in blunt violation of pre–contracted agreements.” The current US law, in particular the Chapter 11 procedure, can be used to maintain firms in operations, even when creditors do not agree. For example, in the US, if creditors disagree with the reorganization plan, the judge can decide to use the “cram down” procedure to implement the plan in spite of their opposition.6

See for example, Franks, Nyborg and Torous (1994) for a comparison of the US, UK and German insolvency codes. White

(1994) and Atiyas (1995) also offer interesting international comparisons.

5Franks and Sussman (2000) offer an empirical analysis of the workings of the bankruptcy process in the UK.

6Franks and Torous (1989 and 1994) offer an empirical analysis of the workings of the bankruptcy process in the US, and Fisher

and Martel (1995, 1999, 2000) compare it to its Canadian counterpart.

5

The French bankruptcy law goes even further than the US law as regards the violations of creditors’ rights (see Biais and Mal´ecot, 1996). Its first stated objective is to save failing firms and avoid laying off workers. To reach this goal, judges enjoy large discretionary powers. If, based on their analysis of the firm and its social context, they feel that keeping the firm in operation is essential, they can unilaterally write–off the creditors’ rights. The French law, which was voted in 1985 by the socialist majority in parliament, reflects the popular feeling that other stakeholders than the creditors are concerned by bankruptcy procedures, and that judges should aggregate the different preferences of the different parties, to implement socially optimal decisions.

When that law was voted, very severe industrial restructurings were taking place in France (for example in the steel and coal industries in the North and the East of the country) and the social costs of liquidation were quite visible to French citizens.

This very brief comparison of bankruptcy procedures in four major industrial economies suggests that two different philosophies can underly these laws. On the one hand, bankruptcy laws can be designed to enforce the contract between two parties: the creditors and the debtors ; this is the approach taken in Britain and Germany. We refer to such laws as tough. On the other hand, bankruptcy laws can be designed with a view at taking into account the welfare of other parties, on which the application of the debt contract could have

external effects. In this second approach, taken by the US and France, the judge is given discretionary powers, and is allowed by the law to violate the contractual rights of the creditors. We refer to such laws as soft.

Note however that such discretionary powers can enhance social welfare only if judges are benevolent.

Unfortunately, there has been ample recent evidence in France that some judges use their powers in order to obtain bribes, rather than to maximize social welfare. A recent investigation, undertaken by the French Parliament, uncovered major dysfunctionings in bankruptcy courts.

Lambert–Mogilianksy, Sonin and Zhuravskaya (2000) offer an interesting analysis of the Russian bankruptcy law. Similarly to the American Chapter 11 procedure and the French bankruptcy law, Russian courts have significant discretion in bankruptcy procedures. As noted by Lambert–Mogiliansky, Sonin and Zhuravskaya (2000): “The judge does not need to follow the creditor’s request. This clause in the law was motivated by the fact that creditors may opt for inefficient liquidation.” The analysis of Lambert–Mogiliansky, Sonin and

6

Zhuravskaya (2000) suggests that corruption of Russian bankruptcy courts is rather frequent.

 

3 Corporate financing with a tough bankruptcy law

3.1 Model

Consider a continuum of risk-neutral entrepreneurs (also referred to hereafter as “managers”). Each entrepreneurhas access to an investment project, requiring initial investment I. While all the investment projects are identical, the entrepreneurs differ in terms of their initial wealth, Ai. The total mass of the population of entrepreneurs is normalized to one. For simplicity, assume there are only three types of entrepreneurs:

the rich (with initial wealth: Ar), the middle class (with initial wealth: Am), and the poor (with initial wealth:

Ap), where A> A> Ap. The masses of the three categories are ¹r; ¹and ¹respectively. The average initial wealth of the population is: E(A) = ¹rAr¹mA¹pAp. To undertake the investment project, the manager with initial wealth Aneeds to raise outside funds: ¡Ai. Competitive risk neutral outside financiers are willing to lend as long as they break even in expectation. For simplicity their required rate of return is normalized to 0, and, as they are competitive, their participation constraint is saturated. If the investment is undertaken, the project can yield payoff or 0. If the manager exerts effort, and incurs disutility e, then the

probability that the payoff is is phwhile if she does not exert effort, the probability of success is lowered to pl. We assume effort is unobservable, which raises a moral hazard problem between the entrepreneur and the outside financier. We also assume there is limited liability. So far, our framework is directly inspired by Holmstrom and Tirole (1997). In the remainder of the paper we build on this basis, adding ingredients to model bankruptcy laws and their social and political environment.

After the cash flow (or 0) is obtained, the firm can continue to operate or be liquidated. In the latter case, liquidation proceeds are obtained. For simplicity we do not model explicitly the case where the firm is maintained in activity. We simply assume that in this case, the manager obtains non–transferable private benefits

B. These can be thought of as reflecting the psychological satisfaction of the entrepreneur. Alternatively, one can think of as the non–pledgeable rents the manager could earn from continued operations. We assume

7

that B > L, to focus on the case where liquidation is inefficient. Indeed, soft bankruptcy laws, which we want to analyze, are often justified as a way to avoid inefficient liquidation.

We also assume that the project has positive net present value if and only if i) the manager exerts effort, and ii) the firm is not liquidated except possibly in the bad state:

ph¡ ¡ I > ph(B) + (1 ¡ ph)¡ ¡ I > 0

> ph(L) + (1 ¡ ph)¡ ¡ I > ph¡ ¡ I:

3.2 The first best

In this context, the first best is to undertake the project, and never liquidate it. Denote:

Sph¡ ¡ e;

the surplus created by the project in that case.

Is that outcome incentive compatible? The corresponding contract would involve a monetary transfer to

the outside financier in the good state and nothing in the bad state. In this case the incentive compatibility

condition of the entrepreneur is:

ph(¡ T) + (1 ¡ ph)¡ e > pl(¡ T) + (1 ¡ pl)B:

The participation constraint of the outside financier is:

¡ A

ph

· T:

Combining the two conditions, the first best can be implemented if and only if:

A¸ ¡ phph

e

p¡ pl

:

Denote Athe right hand side of this inequality. It states the standard result that, with moral hazard and limited liability, agents with wealth below a threshold are credit rationed. Note that, the minimum initial wealth constraint is tightened as the cost of effort (e) increases.

8

3.3 The second best

If A< Athe first best cannot be implemented. Is it possible to reach the second best outcome, whereby the firm is liquidated in the bad state? Denote:

Sphph+ (1 ¡ ph)¡ ¡ e;

the surplus created by the project in the second best.

In that case the incentive compatibility condition of the entrepreneur is:

ph(¡ T¡ e > pl(¡ T):

The participation constraint of the outside financier is:

¡ A¡ (1 ¡ ph)L

ph

· T:

Combining the two conditions, the second best can be implemented if:

A¸ ¡ phph

e

p¡ pl

¡ (ph+ (1 ¡ ph)L):

Denote Athe right hand side of this inequality.

Note that AA¡(phB+(1¡ph)L). Liquidation in the bad state relaxes the condition under which the project can be financed, because it relaxes the participation constraint (by promising liquidation proceeds to the financier) as well as the incentive constraint (by threatening the manager to deprive him from his private when cash flows are low).Hence the minimum level of wealth needed to obtain outside financing is lower

when the firm is liquidated in the bad state than when it is never liquidated.

Although liquidation is ex–post inefficient, this contract cannot be renegotiated. The manager has no cash in the bad state, and thus cannot pay the financier to avoid liquidation.

 

7This is not unlike in Hart and Moore (1994, 1998), Bolton and Scharfstein (1990), and Bolton and Rosenthal (1999).

9

3.4 Debt, equity and credit–rationing

The two contracts, implementing the first and second best outcomes respectively, can be interpreted in terms of financial contracts widely observed in practice:

² In the first best contract, which is feasible when A¸ AE, the firm is never liquidated, and cash flows are split between the owner manager and the outside financiers. This corresponds to the case where the firm obtains outside financing by issuing outside equity (without relinquishing control, either because the entrepreneur keeps the majority of the shares, or because of dual class shares).

² In the second best contract, which is feasible when A¸ A, the outside financiers receives a monetary transfer when cash flows are high, and liquidation proceeds when cash flows are low. This corresponds to the case outside financing is obtained by issuing risky debt, secured by the firm’s assets.8

As the outside financiers are competitive, the entrepreneur captures the entire net value of the project. If his initial wealth is greater than Ahe opts for the contract implementing the first best, and thus issues equity.

If his initial wealth is lower than Abut greater than A, he opts for the contract implementing the second best and issues debt. Finally, if the initial wealth of the would–be entrepreneur is below A, then he faces credit–rationing, and the project cannot be undertaken, although it has positive net social value.

 

4 Soft bankruptcy laws, social costs and judges

4.1 Social costs and bankruptcy judges

So far, we have focused on outside investors and managers. It is plausible, however, that firm liquidations can have external effects on third parties. In particular, they can entail social costs corresponding to the destruction of firm specific capital acquired by the employees of the firm, or firm specific investments made by suppliers or ncustomers. Additional costs are borne by citizens, whose everyday life was linked to the existence of the firm.

 

8Our simple model of debt contracts to discipline managers is in the line Hart and Moore (1994, 1998) and Bolton and Scharfstein

(1990), and consistent with empirical analyses such as Kaplan (1989).

10

For example, in France, in the eighties and nineties, there was a severe crisis in the textile industry. Many small businesses, located in small towns or villages were liquidated. This generated large social costs, as the whole life of these small towns was disrupted: as workers were laid off and had to move, and the population of these small towns decreased and became poorer, local shops and schools had to be closed, and valuable social

networks were distroyed. Tirole (2001,, page 3) points at the importance of such costs:

“Managerial decisions ... exert externalities on a number of “natural stakeholders” who have an innate relation with the firm... There is no denying that such externalities may be substantial; for example, the closure of a plant by a major employer in a depressed area has dramatic consequences for its workers and the local economy.”

In the present paper we do not explicitly model all these costs and externalities. Rather, we take a short–cut and assume that these costs (denoted c) are diffuse and borne by all the citizens.

As shown in the previous section, entrepreneurs with wealth above Acan obtain outside equity financing and undertake the investment project, without creating any liquidation risk. With a tough bankruptcy code, somewhat less wealthy entrepreneurs, with A[A;AE], can issue risky debt. But if these firms default, this creates social costs. The purpose of soft bankruptcy laws is to interfere with the application of debt contracts to reduce these social costs of bankruptcy. We hereafter study the consequences of such laws on welfare, taking

into account credit–rationing as well as social costs.

We assume social costs are not known exactly ex–ante. We model these costs as a random variable, with expectation E(c), and, for positive real number k, we denote G(k) the probability that social costs are greater than k. Furthermore, we assume that social costs can be observed, ex–post, by the judge when the liquidation decision has to be made. We model the soft law as follows: The bankruptcy law defines a threshold value of the cost,c¤, and states that defaulting firms should be liquidated if the cost is lower than this threshold,

and reorganized otherwise. When the firm is reorganized, the creditors cannot receive liquidation proceeds, while the manager still enjoys the non–transferable private benefit from continuation, and the social costs of liquidation are not incurred. If the firm is liquidated, creditors receive L, the manager receives nothing, and social costs are incurred.

Judges are not always honest, and do not always act as stated by the law. We assume that with probability ¹ the judge is incorruptible, while with probability 1 ¡ ¹ she is corrupt. Tough laws do not grant judges any discretion regarding liquidations. Hence there is no scope for bribery. With a soft law, in contrast, the judge has discretion over the liquidation decision. Consequently, interested parties might attempt to bribe him to influence the court’s ruling. Managers can’t bribe judges when the return of the firm is 0, since they have no cash to do so. Furthermore, as in Bennedsen (2000) or Shleifer and Vishny (1994), we assume that the public is disorganized, so the entire population of citizens cannot get together to convince or bribe the judge to be efficient. The bank, in contrast, can use its financial resources to bribe the corrupt judge, so that he rules in favor of liquidation. For simplicity, we do not explicitly model the corruption game ; we just assume the

amount of bribe is equal to a fraction of the liquidation proceeds: ±; which reflects the bargaining power of the bankruptcy judge. Thus, the corrupt judge obtains: ±L while the bank obtains (1 ¡ ±)L. As analyzed below, the bribe left to the judge reduces the cash flow which can be pledged to the creditors, and consequently the bank’s willingness to grant a loan.9

Denote ¼ the ex–ante probability of reorganization in case of default when the judge is honest. It is given by:

Pr(c > c¤) = G(c) = ¼:

 

4.2 Equilibrium under the soft law

Under the soft law the incentive compatibility condition of the manager is the following:

ph(¡ B) + (1 ¡ ph)¹¼B ¡ e

> pl(¡ B) + (1 ¡ pl)¹¼B:

This is equivalent to:

9In a previous version of this paper, we also studied the case where the managers could bribe the judge. The main qualitative results were unaffected. Indeed, irrespective of the identity of the party who can collude with the judge, bribes reduce pledgeable income and thus enhance credit rationing problems.

12

¡

e

p¡ pl

¡ ¹¼B > T:

Comparing this incentive compatibility condition to its counterpart obtained for the tough law, we see that there is an additional term on the right–hand–side: ¹¼B, which reflects the adverse effect of the softness of the bankruptcy law on the incentives of the manager : when they can hope for reorganization, managers are less incentivized to exert effort than when they are threatened by systematic liquidation. Correspondingly, we denote:

AEI ¹¼B;

where AEI stands for Adverse Effect on Incentives. Note that AEI is equal to the additional expected private benefit obtained by the manager in the bad state, relative to what he would have obtained under the tough law.

Under the soft law the participation constraint of the bank is:

¸

¡ ¡ (1 ¡ ph)[¹(1 ¡ ¼) + (1 ¡ ¹)(1 ¡ ±)]L

ph

;

or:

¸

¡ ¡ (1 ¡ ph)+ (1 ¡ ph)[1 ¡ ¹(1 ¡ ¼¡ (1 ¡ ¹)(1 ¡ ±)]L

ph

:

Comparing this condition to its tough law counterpart, we see that there is an additional term on the right–

hand–side: (1 ¡ ph)[1 ¡ ¹(1 ¡ ¼¡ (1 ¡ ¹)(1 ¡ ±)]L, which reflects the adverse effect of the softness of the

bankruptcy law on the participation constraint of the bank. Correspondingly, we denote:

AEP = [1 ¡ ¹(1 ¡ ¼¡ (1 ¡ ¹)(1 ¡ ±)]L;

where AEP stands for Adverse Effects on Participation. It is equal to the loss in expected liquidation proceeds obtained by the bank in the bad state, relative to what would be obtained under the tough law.

Combining the participation constraint of the bank and the incentive compatibility condition of the manager, the project can be financed by debt with a soft law if and only if:

A > Aph¹¼B + (1 ¡ ph)[1 ¡ ¹(1 ¡ ¼¡ (1 ¡ ¹)(1 ¡ ±)]L

AphAEI + (1 ¡ ph)AEP:

Denote Athe right hand side of this inequality. The minimum level of initial wealth needed to avoid credit rationing in the case of debt financing with a soft law (AS) is greater than its counterpart in the case of debt financing with a tough bankruptcy law (A). Since the flexibility of the bankruptcy law weakens the incentives of the manager to exert effort, and tightens the participation constraint of the bank, it worsens the credit rationing problem.

The minimum level of initial wealth under which there is credit rationing under the soft law (AS) is increasing in the probability of continuation ¼. The greater this probability, the more difficult it is to induce the manager to exert effort and the outside financiers to provide funding. The soft bankruptcy law generating the smallest possible amount of credit rationing corresponds to the case where ¼ is set to 0 and Ais equal to:

AS(¼ = 0) = A+ (1 ¡ ph)(1 ¡ ¹)±L:

Building on the analysis above the following proposition obtains:

Proposition 1

If A