Tuesday, 16 May 2017

My Day In Court

Fans of the circus, get yourselves along to Durham Crown Court on Tuesday 13th June.

The like cannot be seen outside North Korea, and the café at Durham Crown Court does not serve dog meat.

For today's hearing at Peterlee Magistrates' Court, the Crown Prosecution Service had provided my solicitor with, well, more or less nothing.

No copy of "The Letter". Nothing on its alleged similarities to my published work, a suggestion that has already been comprehensively refuted.

Nothing on the fingerprints that supposedly turned up a month after my arrest and fingerprinting, but in time for the local elections.


Just as they had obviously expected me not to make it to Peterlee, but I did, so they had obviously expected me to plead guilty in the event of my showing my face, but I did not.

Despite the asserted existence of those fingerprints, it took the CPS six hours to charge me on Maundy Thursday evening, 13th April. Not such a strong case after all, one wonders?

It then took until Monday 1st May, three days before the local elections, for The Chronicle to report that I had been charged.

Following my defeat in those elections, the persistence with this matter is nothing short of malicious. They have made their point.

But, just as I have no conceivable reason to keep it going except that I am innocent, so they have no conceivable reason to keep it going except to punish me for the fact that I ever dared to suggest that Labour ought to lose control of Durham County Council.

That would have happened, if certain people had not listened to the Labour careerist saboteurs in their midst. But it did not happen, simply as a matter of fact.

Carrying on with this reflects very, very, very badly on them as spiteful, vindictive bullies. Showboating about terror threats and Jo Cox is just bad taste.

Ranked behind them, however, are people who have not deleted me on Facebook (and nor, in at least one case, have several other members of their families), and one of whom, prominent and highly ambitious, also continues to follow me on Twitter.

So much for the slightest belief in my guilt on the part of those of the supposed victims who have known me for 15, 20, 25, 30, and in one case 35 years.

The purpose of this vendetta was to frighten me out of contesting the local elections (it didn't), then to stop me from being elected at them (job done), and then to stop me from contesting the General Election, a job that has been done by Theresa May, since I could never have raised the £10,000 necessary for a proper campaign in less than a month and with no notice.

Now, however, I am a declared, organising, campaigning and fundraising candidate, probably the first in the country, both for the local elections in 2021, and for the General Election in 2022.

Therefore, the purpose of this vendetta has become to prevent me from contesting and winning those elections.

It is an undisguised attempt to use the Criminal Law in order to obstruct the democratic political process.

A democratic political process that, since my 2021 and 2022 candidacies are declared, is already underway.

Meanwhile consider that, as a matter of policy, no one in this county would ever be arrested, still less charged, with anything relating to the law against cannabis.

Consider that no one in this country would run much risk of arrest, never mind charge, never mind conviction, never mind anything more than the most derisory sentence, for what has long been the illegal activity of foxhunting, to which the Police act as escorts, arresting only anyone who might seek to obstruct this criminality or to object to it.

Consider that no one other than a Premier League footballer, and even then probably only one from the "wrong" club, would run any risk of arrest or prosecution for "digital penetration" of a 15-year-old girl who had, furthermore, been out drinking with the complete impunity of everyone from her parents to the relevant licensees.

Consider that no one other than a minister of religion, or possibly a teacher, would run any risk of arrest or prosecution for any kind of sexual activity with a 15-year-old boy.

Consider that the CPS has claimed to have insufficient evidence to prosecute people who openly admit to having filled in their 2015 General Election forms incorrectly in such numbers as to have affected the overall result.

Consider that, 10 years ago, the CPS claimed to have insufficient evidence to charge Tony Blair with selling peerages, even though he had done everything short of advertise them in Exchange and Mart.

Consider an awful lot of things about Tony Blair.

And think on.


  1. You left fingerprints David? Goodness! What will they think at All Saints?

    1. I already know the answer to that one.

      No one who has ever met me believes a word of this, including dozens of the alleged victims. That'll do me.

      In any case, it says it all that the CPS won't let my solicitor see what, so far as we know, therefore remains the purely hypothetical forensic report.

  2. If the fingerprints are not yours... you must have a twin. Are you in fact the third Milliband brother?

    1. No one knows whether there are any. My solicitor has not seen the fabled forensic report, and it took the CPS six hours to decide to charge me on this supposedly watertight basis.