On Tuesday, the House of Commons gave Third Reading to the Renters' Rights Bill. It is a good Bill.
But it is incomplete without rent controls. Without those, then rent increases would be used as section 21 evictions by another name.
Friday, 17 January 2025
Freezing Assets
Donald Trump's inauguration has been moved indoors because of the cold, so good luck to him conquering Canada and Greenland. Or is he expecting the Russians to do it for him?
Of course the Russian Presidential Election was rigged, but Vladimir Putin would have won it anyway, just not by as much. At least two of the other three candidates, including the one who came second, would have been even worse from the point of view of the people who were making a fuss, and at least one of them would have been so from the point of view of almost anyone.
The former point, and arguably the latter, would also have been true of Alexei Navalny, if anyone much in Russia had ever heard of him before, albeit under prison camp conditions, he had dropped dead of natural causes as we fortysomethings sometimes do. We cockroaches survive.
Yes, Navalny really did calls us that. In 2021, Amnesty International therefore revoked his status as a prisoner of conscience. He had no more claim to that than Stephen Yaxley-Lennon has, although he was never anywhere near as well-known in Russia as Yaxley-Lennon is in Britain. And for all the undeniable dodginess of his lawyers' trial, they were indeed engaged in "extremist activity". They probably would not and should not have gone to prison for it in Britain. But if they would have escaped the attention of Prevent, then why?
The Toll of the Bell
Ivor Caplin has left Twitter, this time presumably forever. Perhaps he is being lined up to sit on what looks increasingly like the inevitable national inquiry into grooming gangs? There would be no point holding that unless the right people were on it, but it seems to be coming. Will it address the role of social media? The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, with responsibility for online safety, is Peter Kyle, Caplin's closest friend and ally of several decades' standing.
Then again, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Pensions, which is apparently now an entry level position, is Torsten Bell, who goes beyond Kemi Badenoch's call to means test the triple lock by wanting to abolish it altogether. Thus speaks the Department for Work and Pensions, whose official consultation on the predetermined conclusion of three billion pounds in cuts to disability benefits has been found by the High Court to have been misleading and unlawful. While it was delivering that finding, Keir Starmer was signing Britain up to pay three billion pounds to Ukraine every year for the next hundred years, three hundred billion pounds in total.
The Independent Alliance may be, but no party in the House of Commons is opposed to that. When it came to saving the triple lock, though, the Independents, the Greens, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and all of the Northern Irish parties are true believers, while Reform UK has an electorate to cultivate, as do the Liberal Democrats. Even Ed Davey's call to re-join Ted Heath's Customs Union, and no doubt also Margaret Thatcher's Single Market, is welcome in that it opens up a debate that has in fact been going on the length and breadth of the country. I for one retain full confidence in our case. Let battle be joined.
Lying On File
Yesterday, as soon as I had pleaded not guilty to the third count, then the Prosecution admitted that it had never had any evidence of it. The same had been true of the first and second, but by then the guilty pleas were in. Bastards. Still, my physical and mental health could take no more. I shall never recover fully, nor at all for a very long time.
Thus was proven the legal advice that I had been given, namely that I was indefensible before a jury in the North East because it was bound to be full of people who would take one look at anyone as well-dressed, well-spoken and well-read as I was, hate me on the spot, and convict me out of spite, entirely regardless of any evidence or lack of it.
That happened to me last time, and it would happen again, so I had been advised that my only hope was to plead guilty for the reduced sentence, despite there being literally no evidence against me, and to pray that that might finally placate the person whose only remaining life's work was to drive me to suicide, a person who was obviously well enough connected to have me arrested and charged at will.
Of course I had already lost quite enough elections here to have known these things for decades, but it was still quite something to be given them as counsel in that sense, to be told that bookishness and articulacy were "sinister" and "deviant" to my peers by whom I was to have been tried. This next bit is strictly mine, but I had no expectation that a judge might have intervened in the face of the total lack of evidence, since that had never happened to me yet. After all, a judge is a salaried employee of the same State that brings the prosecution, and a judgeship in a criminal court is a salaried and pensionable reward for 30 years of success as a contracted freelance prosecutor. Anyone who has ever dealt with the Crown Court has seen how weighted towards the Crown it was. A judge would have to authorise an assisted suicide, indeed.
The Crown Prosecution Service has effectively stated that all of the above was its active policy, and the rest of us just had to suck it up. It has formally endorsed the campaign to drive me to suicide, and if it pressed for a custodial sentence, then it would be announce that, with its full support, my murder in prison had already been arranged. As an anonymous comment here has already put it:
£25,000 has been paid for your conviction.
£50,000 will be paid for your imprisonment.
£100,000 will be paid for your death in prison.
Paid to whom? I pleaded guilty, so why not, in the first case, to me? Still, at least in took 24 hours for that comment to be posted. From the same address as on Wednesday evening, the following was sent at 19:39 yesterday:
To: heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com; editorial@mankindquarterly.org; info@ulsterinstitute.org; contact@britishdems.co.uk; enquiries@homelandparty.org; info@rootsofradicalism.com; chairman@ukip.org; press@ukip.org; ResistanceGB@protonmail.com; press@tpointuk.co.uk; press@reclaimparty.co.uk; admin@workersofengland.co.uk; support@britishfreedomparty.com; northeast@patrioticalternative.org.uk; enquiries@natfront.info; info@traditionalbritain.org; editor@traditionalbritain.org; LgeStGeorge@aol.com; candourwebmaster@yahoo.co.uk; info@blackhousepublishing.com ; info@irvingbooks.com;
Strictly Off The Record: Day 88
If you are Douglas McKean, then Oliver Kamm is convinced that you and I are one and the same. I hate to have to tell you that I have never heard of you. He first contacted me about this at lunchtime on 4 July, so General Election day was obviously slow on The Times, and he has promised to involve the Police, from whom I have heard nothing. Anyone with news of any developments, do please contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com. Strictly off the record, of course.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Safeguarding Challenge: Day 553
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be imposed either to incite my suicide or, if custodial, to facilitate my already arranged murder in prison.
That purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Board of the Catholic Safeguarding Standards Agency, currently Nazir Afzal, Amanda Ellingworth, Wesley Cuell, Bishop Paul Mason, Sarah Kilmartin, Jenny Holmes, Sir David Behan, and Sr Una Coogan IBVM.
That purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Hexham and Newcastle Diocesan Safeguarding Committee, currently Gail McGregor, Paul Weatherstone, Fr Christopher Hancock MHM, Canon William Agley, Catherine Dyer, Canon Martin Stempczyk, Canon Peter Leighton VG, Maureen Dale, and Tony Lawless.
And that purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Hexham and Newcastle Diocesan Safeguarding Team, currently Meriel Anderson, Ian Colling, Andrew Grant, Kirsty McIntyre, Lisa Short, Yvonne Brown, and Petra Scarr.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The CPS Challenge: Day 553
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service as part of its organised persecution of the opponents and critics of Keir Starmer, which is its principal national priority. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from seeking the position of General Secretary of Unite the Union on a programme including disaffiliation from the Labour Party, a proposal that would be hugely popular two years into a Starmer Government. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from establishing a thinktank to strengthen families and communities by securing economic equality and international peace through the democratic political control of the means to those ends, including national and parliamentary sovereignty. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from establishing a weekly magazine of news and comment, a monthly cultural review, a quarterly academic journal, and perhaps eventually also a fortnightly satirical magazine. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from taking journalistic, political or other paid work for fear of losing my entitlement to Legal Aid. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service out of the same racism that has caused it to refuse to prosecute the Police Officers in the case of Stephen Lawrence. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point.
And I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and I have been pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to incite my politically motivated murder, a murder that the CPS has already decided would never lead to any prosecution. Any sentence beyond an absolute discharge would be further proof of that point, and if custodial, would be imposed in order to facilitate that murder in prison, a murder that in that case would demonstrably already have been arranged.
Each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the members of the CPS Board, currently Monica Burch, Stephen Parkinson, Simon Jeffreys, Dr Subo Shanmuganathan, and Kathryn Stone.
Each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the CPS senior leadership, currently Tristan Bradshaw, Dawn Brodrick, Mike Browne, Steve Buckingham, Matthew Cain, Gregor McGill, Grace Ononiwu, and Baljhit Ubey.
Each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the members of the CPS Audit and Risk Assurance Committee, currently Simon Jeffreys, Stephen Parkinson, Michael Dunn, Deborah Harris, and Dr Subo Shanmuganathan.
And each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the 279 members of staff of the CPS North East Area, by definition including, but not restricted to, Chief Crown Prosecutor Gail Gilchrist, and the Area Business Manager, Ian Brown.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Clergy Challenge: Day 1256
I invite each and every bishop, priest and deacon of the Diocese of Hexham and Newcastle to contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com if he thought that I was factually or morally guilty of any criminal charge that had ever been brought against me.
Not legally guilty; Bill Cosby is legally innocent. Factually and morally guilty. No name would be published except at the request of its bearer, but if anyone ever did get in touch, then the readers of this site would be the first to know. The current total is zero.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Representatives Challenge: Day 1256
As already stated on the day after my release: "The instant that Labour lost control of Durham County Council, then I was granted an unsolicited tag for more than 10 weeks of future good behaviour. I invite each and every Member of Parliament for the area covered by Durham County Council, each and every member of Durham County Council, and each and every member of Lanchester Parish Council, to contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com if they thought that I was factually or morally guilty of any criminal charge that had ever been brought against me. Not legally guilty; Bill Cosby is legally innocent. Factually and morally guilty. No name would be published except at the request of its bearer, but if anyone ever did get in touch, then the readers of this site would be the first to know." The current total is zero.
And I invite each and every Member of Parliament whose constituency fell wholly or partly in County Durham to contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com if they thought that I was factually or morally guilty of any criminal charge that had ever been brought against me. Not legally guilty; Bill Cosby is legally innocent. Factually and morally guilty. No name would be published except at the request of its bearer, but if anyone ever did get in touch, then the readers of this site would be the first to know. The current total is zero.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
Wednesday, 15 January 2025
Baphomet
I have only just finished the latest round of prescription codeine, and it will not be the last; I have also had tramadol in my time. The dosage of my antidepressant has been doubled, and my cognitive behavioural therapy was supposed to start this afternoon, but they cancelled it this morning. So what you are doing is working, Apollyon Abaddon, who emailed me this evening in the following terms:
There have been sacrifices to Baphomet on every continent to worsen your physical and mental illnesses, secure your conviction, imprisonment and suicide. There will be more.
It has been quite a day for it. Herewith, another item of correspondence:
From: [Redacted; although I do not recognise it, nor do I want to pass it on]
Sent: 15 January 2025 20:45
To: heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com; editorial@mankindquarterly.org; info@ulsterinstitute.org; contact@britishdems.co.uk; enquiries@homelandparty.org; info@rootsofradicalism.com; chairman@ukip.org; press@ukip.org; ResistanceGB@protonmail.com; press@tpointuk.co.uk; press@reclaimparty.co.uk; admin@workersofengland.co.uk; support@britishfreedomparty.com; northeast@patrioticalternative.org.uk; enquiries@natfront.info; info@traditionalbritain.org; editor@traditionalbritain.org; LgeStGeorge@aol.com; candourwebmaster@yahoo.co.uk; info@blackhousepublishing.com; info@irvingbooks.com
Cc: davidaslindsay@hotmail.com
Subject: David Lindsay
ALL Patriots to Durham Crown Court to demonstrate against David Lindsay at his trial on Wednesday 26 February 2025.
Let him know we're coming.
And the post immediately below this one bears this comment, which I would not ordinarily have allowed up:
£25,000 will be paid for your conviction.
£50,000 will be paid for your imprisonment.
£100,000 will be paid for your death in prison.
By whom? To whom?
All of these people clearly know what is happening tomorrow, which I myself did not know until late this afternoon. And I am a very ill man who nevertheless has a magazine and a thinktank to get up and running, the end to which I devoted the time with which the CBT people had left me. There is only so much of this that can be taken by anyone. Never mind by the likes of me.
Deal With It
Oh, the names that you called us for advocating a ceasefire in Gaza. You need not pretend now that you had ever been in favour of one before today. Until the moment that it was announced, then you were still trying to bully the Police into banning a march for it.
You are being as dishonest about this as you are about the Chagos Islands, of which you had never heard a few months ago. It is we who have always held that the Chagossians deserved the same self-determination as, say, the Falkland Islanders. Or the Greenlanders. Unless you believe in all three of those causes, among others, then you do not believe in any of them. See also the Palestinians.
Argentina is an American ally, and Javier Milei has very much the same fan base as Donald Trump, so how would you react if the fate of the Falkland Islanders were to be referred to Trump, as that of the Chagossians has been? How would you have reacted if that reference had been to Joe Biden or Kamala Harris? So much for your patriotism.
But the deal over Gaza does vindicate the Arabs and Muslims of Michigan who swung that swing state for Trump, just as it vindicates all voters for Cornel West, Jill Stein, and the others whose supporters' votes the Democratic Party thought that it owned.
And of course it vindicates Jeremy Corbyn, who is still fighting the good fight for the Chagossians, too. Corbyn never "invited" Gerry Adams to the Palace of Westminster. As an abstentionist MP at the time, Adams did as Sinn Féin's seven MPs, two more than the ubiquitous Reform UK, do now, coming and going regularly (these days, daily), only without entering the chamber.
When Ireland is to have a government supported by the Healy-Raes, and quite possibly with Michael Healy-Rae as a Minister, but without Sinn Féin, then that party needs to wake up and hear the Hum. As do those who still go round the bend at the mention of its once grand old men. Every party in Northern Ireland opposed the Legacy Act, but members of the DUP and, be in no doubt, UUP electorates will be on course for payouts to rank with Adams's. Even when it was done to bad people, internment without charge was still wrong.
Adams is the least of anyone's worries now. If it is not the Awami League, then it is the supporters of Trump's putative annexation of Canada, Greenland, the Panama Canal Zone, and wherever else, some of whom want him to take over Britain. Both of those opposed a Gaza ceasefire vehemently until this evening, including by placing RAF Akrotiri at Israel's disposal, free of charge. And they do indeed take their seats in the House of Commons. Among other places.
Noli Potestatem Neglegere Stultorum Cunctorum
“Latin? You should be teaching computing instead.”
“Latin? You should be teaching modern foreign languages instead.”
Unexpected Dip?
Ivor Caplin is back on Twitter, so the terms of his bail obviously do not preclude such things. And he is already sailing close to the wind. Doubtless for the edification of Rachel Reeves and of the other Labour grandees among his followers.
After all, how else is Reeves filling up her days? Today's "unexpected dip in inflation" does not mean that prices are falling. It does not even mean that they are staying the same. It just means that they are rising by very slightly less than had been expected. They are still going up. But especially with Reeves's increase in employers' National Insurance contributions, whose pay will be going up? Will yours?
Case Management: Day 38
The second rescheduling of my Case Management Hearing was to have seen it held at Durham Crown Court on Monday 16 December, five weeks after the original date. But it has now been delayed until further notice. They are on the run.
Whenever my Hearing came, if the Prosecution still did anything other than drop the whole business, then it would do nothing other than prove the legal advice that I had been given, namely that I was indefensible before a jury in the North East because it was bound to be full of people who would take one look at anyone as well-dressed, well-spoken and well-read as I was, hate me on the spot, and convict me out of spite, entirely regardless of any evidence or lack of it.
That happened to me last time, and it would happen again, so I have been advised that my only hope was to plead guilty for the reduced sentence, despite there being literally no evidence against me, and to pray that that might finally placate the person whose only remaining life's work was to drive me to suicide, a person who was obviously well enough connected to have me arrested and charged at will.
Of course I had already lost quite enough elections here to have known these things for decades, but it was still quite something to be given them as counsel in that sense, to be told that bookishness and articulacy were "sinister" and "deviant" to my peers by whom I was to be judged. This next bit is strictly mine, but I have no expectation that a judge might intervene in the face of the total lack of evidence, since that has never happened to me yet. After all, a judge is a salaried employee of the same State that brings the prosecution, and a judgeship in a criminal court is a salaried and pensionable reward for 30 years of success as a contracted freelance prosecutor. Anyone who has ever dealt with the Crown Court has seen how weighted towards the Crown it was. A judge would have to authorise an assisted suicide, indeed.
Over, then, to the Crown Prosecution Service. Is it going to state that all of the above was its active policy, and the rest of us just had to suck it up? Will it formally endorse the campaign to drive me to suicide? If it did anything other than drop all charges against me at or before my Case Management Hearing, then the answer to both of those questions would be yes. Until then, this post will appear daily.
Strictly Off The Record: Day 86
If you are Douglas McKean, then Oliver Kamm is convinced that you and I are one and the same. I hate to have to tell you that I have never heard of you. He first contacted me about this at lunchtime on 4 July, so General Election day was obviously slow on The Times, and he has promised to involve the Police, from whom I have heard nothing. Anyone with news of any developments, do please contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com. Strictly off the record, of course.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
Justice Delayed: Day 192
Even assuming, and it was far from clear, that the Crown had presented any evidence whatever on the morning of Wednesday 19 June, then no later than the afternoon of Thursday 20 June, I would have been found not guilty unanimously in the time that it took to walk to the jury room and send a note to the judge. On Monday 6 November, the only Prosecution witness did not turn up, having been suspended from the Police. Since then, he has been "asked to resign" because of his conduct of my case. On Friday 14 June, my barrister formally complained.
Lo and behold, on the morning of Sunday 16 June, enough Police Officers turned up at my door to take down an al-Qaeda cell, and behaved roughly as if that were what they were doing. Everyone is laughing, and not at me. Late that night, a nonsense additional charge, quite different from the stated grounds of the arrest, was added, with no expectation that it could possibly stick, but in order to postpone what would have been that week's open-and-shut acquittal. Be at Durham Crown Court on Wednesday 26 February 2025, almost exactly two years, although we dispute the timeline, after the original complaint was allegedly made. When I shall be found not guilty. But the process is the punishment.
Rather than embarrass itself any further, the Crown did not even ask for me to be remanded. Nor did it dispute that the Police had found nothing on my laptop or on my phone, even though the latest allegation therefore cannot be true. And nor did it dispute that its only witness had been sacked from the Police because of my case, or that this latest action against me was a revenge attack for my barrister's complaint, both of which are now on Monday 17 June's record of Newton Aycliffe Magistrates' Court, as is the cleanliness of my devices, of which the Police are nevertheless keeping possession, requiring me to replace them at considerable expense.
I wish that my solicitor had used such terms as "Mafia hit" and "punishment beating". I am using them now. This is a punishment beating for the sacked policeman. And it is a Mafia hit by some Fredo Corleone, because the latest complaint was supposedly made before I had withdrawn from the General Election, a withdrawal that has rendered it pointless in its own terms. Other than the unpaid position to which I was elected unopposed well over a year ago, and which has therefore been kept vacant ever since, I have no intention of contesting another election to public office.
Welcome to the Starmer State, which institutional Britain has treated as the status quo since Keir Starmer became Labour Leader. I am not the only dissident that it persecutes, and things are already getting an awful lot worse now that Starmer is Prime Minister.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Safeguarding Challenge: Day 551
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and the allegation at the base of any outstanding charge has been made in order to incite my suicide.
That purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Board of the Catholic Safeguarding Standards Agency, currently Nazir Afzal, Amanda Ellingworth, Wesley Cuell, Bishop Paul Mason, Sarah Kilmartin, Jenny Holmes, Sir David Behan, and Sr Una Coogan IBVM.
That purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Hexham and Newcastle Diocesan Safeguarding Committee, currently Gail McGregor, Paul Weatherstone, Fr Christopher Hancock MHM, Canon William Agley, Catherine Dyer, Canon Martin Stempczyk, Canon Peter Leighton VG, Maureen Dale, and Tony Lawless.
And that purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Hexham and Newcastle Diocesan Safeguarding Team, currently Meriel Anderson, Ian Colling, Andrew Grant, Kirsty McIntyre, Lisa Short, Yvonne Brown, and Petra Scarr.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and the allegation at the base of any outstanding charge has been made in order to incite my suicide. I should emphasise that there is absolutely no risk that I might ever give anyone the satisfaction of my suicide.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The CPS Challenge: Day 551
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service as part of its organised persecution of the opponents and critics of Keir Starmer, which is its principal national priority.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from seeking the position of General Secretary of Unite the Union on a programme including disaffiliation from the Labour Party, a proposal that would be hugely popular two years into a Starmer Government.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from establishing a thinktank to strengthen families and communities by securing economic equality and international peace through the democratic political control of the means to those ends, including national and parliamentary sovereignty.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from establishing a weekly magazine of news and comment, a monthly cultural review, a quarterly academic journal, and perhaps eventually also a fortnightly satirical magazine.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to prevent me from taking journalistic, political or other paid work for fear of losing my entitlement to Legal Aid.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service out of the same racism that has caused it to refuse to prosecute the Police Officers in the case of Stephen Lawrence.
And I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and any outstanding charge is being pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to incite my politically motivated murder, a murder that the CPS has already decided would never lead to any prosecution.
Each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the members of the CPS Board, currently Monica Burch, Stephen Parkinson, Simon Jeffreys, Dr Subo Shanmuganathan, and Kathryn Stone.
Each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the CPS senior leadership, currently Tristan Bradshaw, Dawn Brodrick, Mike Browne, Steve Buckingham, Matthew Cain, Gregor McGill, Grace Ononiwu, and Baljhit Ubey.
Each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the members of the CPS Audit and Risk Assurance Committee, currently Simon Jeffreys, Stephen Parkinson, Michael Dunn, Deborah Harris, and Dr Subo Shanmuganathan.
And each of those eight statements stands as a matter of record unless and until it had been expressly denied to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com by each and all of the 279 members of staff of the CPS North East Area, by definition including, but not restricted to, Chief Crown Prosecutor Gail Gilchrist, and the Area Business Manager, Ian Brown.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Clergy Challenge: Day 1254
I invite each and every bishop, priest and deacon of the Diocese of Hexham and Newcastle to contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com if he thought that I was factually or morally guilty of any criminal charge that had ever been brought against me.
Not legally guilty; Bill Cosby is legally innocent. Factually and morally guilty. No name would be published except at the request of its bearer, but if anyone ever did get in touch, then the readers of this site would be the first to know. The current total is zero.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Representatives Challenge: Day 1254
As already stated on the day after my release: "The instant that Labour lost control of Durham County Council, then I was granted an unsolicited tag for more than 10 weeks of future good behaviour. I invite each and every Member of Parliament for the area covered by Durham County Council, each and every member of Durham County Council, and each and every member of Lanchester Parish Council, to contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com if they thought that I was factually or morally guilty of any criminal charge that had ever been brought against me. Not legally guilty; Bill Cosby is legally innocent. Factually and morally guilty. No name would be published except at the request of its bearer, but if anyone ever did get in touch, then the readers of this site would be the first to know." The current total is zero.
And I invite each and every Member of Parliament whose constituency fell wholly or partly in County Durham to contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com if they thought that I was factually or morally guilty of any criminal charge that had ever been brought against me. Not legally guilty; Bill Cosby is legally innocent. Factually and morally guilty. No name would be published except at the request of its bearer, but if anyone ever did get in touch, then the readers of this site would be the first to know. The current total is zero.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
Lagan Behind No More?
Sorcha Eastwood is suing Andrew Tate, so we now know which constituency he should contest. Lagan Valley. What is he frightened of?
Ministerial Code
"The door remains open to you going forward," Keir Starmer assures Tulip Siddiq. There was none of that for Louise Haigh, who had merely had something with a mobile phone years ago, and whose resignation statement the House of Commons still awaits. But whatever else Siddiq may be, she is not, as Kemi Badenoch might put it, a peasant.
I do not agree with unexplained wealth orders without a conviction. But they are the law. Let there be one against Siddiq. And let there be the long, long, long overdue one against Michelle Mone. Why not?
Tuesday, 14 January 2025
Simply Confronting The Challenges
Still no word either from Alastair Campbell or from Oliver Kamm in response to Tony Blair's remarks about depression. Nor from Luciana Berger, who also has to account for her ties to Ivor Caplin.
More and more people are saying that Gillick competence, which ought to be called Thatcher competence after the woman who fought for it rather than after the woman who fought against it, has created a culture of sex with children. Some of us have been saying that forever.
See also the recognition that collapsing birth rates were a problem, and the exponential rise of Natural Family Planning, in which only a monogamous couple can engage, instead of the poisoning of women to make them permanently available for the sexual gratification of men. No, those two points are not contradictory. Read up.
The dose of my antidepressant has had to be doubled, and I start cognitive behavioural therapy tomorrow, but there is plenty going on to assist them both. Even in a country and a world with Blair in them.
Courting Couple
As the American-backed President Joseph Aoun of Lebanon appoints Nawaf Salam as Prime Minister, Salam is succeeded as President of the International Court of Justice by Julia Sebutinde, its only permanent judge to vote against all provisional measures against Israel.
And as Fr Timothy Gardner pleads guilty at Newcastle Crown Court, he does so for the same reason as he did 11 years ago, namely because he just could not take it anymore. This time, he was supposed to have been tried last July. If he had pleaded not guilty today, then when would he ever have faced a jury? Add to that the fact that since Tony Blair's infamous Criminal Justice Act 2003, which also admitted hearsay evidence, removed the protection against double jeopardy, and provided for Crown Court trials by a judge without a jury (the first ever such resulted in a life sentence), effectively made it possible to be convicted of having previously been convicted.
Like my own guilty plea, the biggest regret of my life, Fr Gardner's sets the seal on every lurid allegation made by his accusers, which are then dutifully regurgitated and even embellished by the media. In my case, and possibly in his, those were introduced in court after my plea but before my sentence, an astonishing catalogue of total falsehood that I was powerless to contest. Not that I would wish the slightest contact with those whom they formally protected, but three 10-year restraining orders were imposed on me because of this factional fiction, of which I had had no prior intimation. Where was the justice there?
Exhausted into submission, Fr Gardner has not even so much as been convicted by a jury, and I am the first to say that juries are overrated, so the latest accusations against me still have absolutely no credibility, and nor does the propensity evidence that alone secured my conviction in 2020, to breach of the suspended sentence for which I wrongly pleaded guilty in 2021, leading to my imprisonment. Fr Gardner's non-conviction was not the only thing that could have vindicated me. But it would have done so. And I have other arrows in my quiver.
Fools' Gold
Apparently joined by Traditional Unionist Voice, Reform UK wants to ban Quantitative Easing, and wants to return to the Gold Standard. Yes, you did read that second part correctly. But Reform is relying on two groups to turn out for it and dislodge Labour from scores of seats. One is outright racial nationalists, who have never quite trusted Nigel Farage, and who are already thoroughly annoyed with him. By the time of the General Election, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon will have been free for four years, there will be candidates endorsed by him in perhaps hundreds of constituencies, and there will certainly be hundreds of Far Right candidates, mostly for seats held or targeted by Reform.
Reform's other hope is in switchers from the Conservative Party. But that has the most tribal electorate in the democratic world. Its supporters identify it with the nation. Hence the routine suggestion that to disagree with it is to "hate Britain". They may complain about it, but polling suggests that it might become the third party in a hung Parliament. It has never, ever come third at a General Election. Moreover, there is no Tory like a Tory in a Labour area, or in an area that was always Labour until 2019 and which is so again. Perhaps especially after five years of a Labour Government, Reform will be asking too much for them. They won't do it. They just won't.
Darktrace, Indeed
Skwawkbox writes:
Keir Starmer has appointed newly-ennobled ‘entrepreneur’ Poppy Gustafsson to the Labour front bench as ‘Minister for Investment’. But Gustafsson’s history has been highlighted and questioned by Private Eye – with the tongue-in-cheek comment that “others may wonder if she is less an entrepreneur who knows about growing business and more a practitioner of the less economically productive dark arts of creative accounting”.
Announcing the new role, Starmer called Gustafson ‘an accomplished entrepreneur who brings invaluable experience to the role’ of bringing investment into the UK – but neglected to mention that she is also closely linked to a notorious corporate scandal that left one colleague in prison in the US and another ruled by the UK High Court to have acted fraudulently.
Gustafsson’s CEO role at cybersecurity firm Darktrace was mentioned by Starmer, but not that Mike Lynch, the owner of the firm, knew her before that role because she was ‘European Financial Controller’ at another of his firms, ‘Autonomy’, which he then sold to Hewlett Packard.
But Lynch was found by the High Court to have acted fraudulently to inflate the perceived value of the business before the sale, while his finance director Sushovan Hussain ended up in jail in the US for the fraud. The High Court judgment reveals that Gustafsson was involved in transactions linked to the fraud. The fraud included an ongoing ‘ruse’ that involved creating fake sales value by selling stuff and software services to customers who would get the premium prices discounted later, building misleading sales figures and making the firm look more profitable than it was.
High Court judge Mr Justice Hildyard said of this dishonest practice that its
purpose was to cover shortfalls in software revenues and perpetuate the appearance of meeting revenue forecasts, [so] their true nature was being concealed and their effect on Autonomy’s trading performance was being disguised.
He found that Gustafsson was ‘aware of the hardware reselling strategy’ and that her attempt to excuse her role in the selling of software packages – she had admitted she had ‘literally no idea’ what she was selling – that were of little or no use to clients was ‘not convincing’.
It certainly didn’t change the metrics I was putting in… I have no idea of what any of [the listed products] is… what’s a kick-start metadata? I have literally no idea.
Poppy Gustafsson at the High Court.
the only rational explanation for Ms Gustafsson being tasked with putting together the software offering was that it was primarily driven by accounting considerations…her attempt to explain her role was not convincing.
High Court judge Mr Justice Hildyard.
Hildyard found the firm guilty of ‘improper accounting and misstatement of recognised revenue’ and a ‘breach of duty and improper use of power’.
Keir Starmer’s team is no stranger to the use of a little creative accounting, including Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s description of large donations for designer clothes, in her official declaration of interests, as ‘office support’. Deputy PM Angela Rayner accepted similar donations and declared them as a ‘donation in kind for undertaking parliamentary duties’ and as ‘support’ for her ‘capacity as deputy leader of the Labour Party’.
Ms Reeves has also been accused of making up her employment history, claiming she was an economist for Lloyds Bank while a former boss said she was in reality a ‘complaints support manager’.
Prioritising Assisted Suicide Over Social Care
Professor Kevin Yuill writes:
The British government has announced a new commission that it hopes will build a ‘national consensus’ on social-care reform. Yet despite Labour’s talk of the ‘critical issues’ that face the social-care sector, the commission won’t deliver its first report until 2028, which is around the time of the next election. In other words, despite decades of debates, commissions and reports about social care, Keir Starmer and Co are kicking the can even further down the road. Plus, given the government’s already deep unpopularity, it may well be leaving the urgent problem of social care to whoever is next in power.
This offers an illuminating insight into Labour’s attitude towards the ill, elderly and disabled – particularly when contrasted with the government’s haste in legislating for assisted suicide. PM Starmer boasts an enormous parliamentary majority, and as a result has little trouble navigating the passage of bills. So why is Labour prioritising assisted suicide over social care?
After all, social care poses far fewer ethical concerns than assisted suicide. While MP Kim Leadbeater’s private members’ bill has already proven deeply controversial, a national consensus has long existed on the issue of social care. We all agree that care for elderly, ill and disabled people needs to be provided as widely as possible. The only real points of contention concern the amount of resources and public funds that should be allocated to this end, and how those funds should be raised.
The Leadbeater bill is far less straightforward. If it becomes law, it will fundamentally alter the UK’s moral terrain. By legalising ‘assisted dying’, it will transform the relationship between doctor and patient forever.
And this is far from the only problem with Leadbeater’s bill, which passed its second reading in the House of Commons back in November. Unlike assisted-suicide legislation in most other countries, the bill contains no conscientious-objection clause for doctors. In jurisdictions that have already legalised assisted suicide, only Canada, where euthanasia is now the fifth-leading cause of death, requires doctors to participate regardless of their views.
These details, and many others, bear thinking about – not least by our elected law-makers. But the assisted-dying bill was rushed through after just five hours of debate. Leadbeater herself betrayed a limited understanding of her own bill, and its implications, when she was arguing for it in parliament. MPs were given only 16 days to digest one of the longest private members’ bills in parliamentary history. What’s more, a committee stacked with assisted-suicide supporters and inexperienced MPs is now responsible for combing through the bill at break-neck speed.
The skewed priorities are grotesque. A third reading of Leadbeater’s shoddy legislation is already scheduled for April. Assisted suicide could be law by 2027, bringing in what Tory MP Danny Kruger has branded a ‘national suicide service’. Yet, at the same time, more than 10 and a half years after it was first proposed, a national care service looks no closer to becoming a reality.
It seems that this is a government keener on helping people to die than on ensuring they are cared for while they are still here.
Resigned To Its Role As A Satellite
Professor Thomas Fazi writes:
Since becoming Italian Prime Minister in 2022, Giorgia Meloni has developed a notable rapport with Elon Musk. The tech billionaire attended the 2023 edition of Meloni’s political festival, Atreju, and she has defended his recent political comments. Their relationship has attracted significant attention over the past few months with regard to a potential €1.5 billion deal to employ Musk’s Starlink satellite internet service for the provision of secure military communications to the Italian government.
Starlink, operated by SpaceX, uses a constellation of low Earth orbit satellites to provide internet connectivity, particularly to underserved or remote areas. The service has been operational in Italy since 2021, serving approximately 50,000 customers, but discussions with ministers suggest a possible expansion into secure government communications. The talks reportedly include provisions for military communications to Italy’s estimated 7,000 troops deployed overseas and emergency services such as disaster response or counter-terrorism operations — for which Meloni says there is “no public alternative”. However, the Prime Minister’s office has denied signing any contracts, emphasising that talks with SpaceX were still “in the preliminary stage”.
The potential deal has stirred a heated debate in Italy. Opposition parties, primarily the Democratic Party (PD), have voiced significant apprehension about the deal, arguing that entrusting Italy’s sensitive government and military communications to a foreign private entity like SpaceX raises serious concerns about national security and sovereignty. One PD senator has described this move as an “unacceptable sell-out of national sovereignty”, highlighting the danger of relying on a company owned by Musk, who is known for his controversial political stances and close ties to Right-wing figures internationally. The fear is that sensitive data could potentially be at risk if not strictly managed under Italian or European control. Critics of the deal argue that Italy should foster its own technological capabilities or support the European Union’s satellite programs like Iris, set to launch in 2029, rather than outsourcing to a US-based company.
There’s also concern over the economic implications of the deal. Critics within the PD suggest that this partnership might sideline local and European companies, thereby affecting job opportunities within Italy’s telecom sector. The opposition has pointed out that Starlink’s services directly compete with local telecom operators, potentially leading to market monopolisation by SpaceX. This could have long-term negative effects on Italy’s telecommunications industry, reducing the incentive for local innovation and investment.
Many of the opposition’s criticisms are valid, but the rhetoric about national sovereignty rings hollow coming from the Democratic Party. Since its inception in the mid-2000s — and even in its previous post-communist incarnations — the party has consistently championed and facilitated the extensive transfer of Italy’s economic sovereignty to the European Union. Indeed, it has often dismissed the very notion of national sovereignty altogether, preferring the idea of “European sovereignty”. What’s more, the party has remained largely silent about the many Italian companies which have come under foreign ownership in recent years — often under its watch — or about the increasing influence of US investment funds, particularly BlackRock, in some of the country’s largest corporations.
It seems pretty clear, then, that the party’s true concern isn’t Italy’s national sovereignty or the country’s security and economic dependence on the US (which already exists), but rather Musk himself. The opposite could be said about Meloni, of course. There is good reason to believe that, from her standpoint, the deal is more about political allegiance than strategic necessity — that is, about cementing her relationship with Donald Trump and his incoming administration. Ultimately, the entire Italian political class seems resigned to its role as a satellite of foreign powers, with the only real dispute between the government and the opposition being whether to submit to Brussels or Washington.
That Narrative Is Substantially Undermined
Kit Klarenberg writes:
An official inquiry into a notorious 2018 Novichok poisoning case has found the victim briefly emerged from a coma, revealing information which wholly undermined the British government’s narrative. While the medical professional she told was muzzled, mainstream media has ignored the new finding.
On March 8, 2018, just four days after being hospitalized for having allegedly been contaminated with Novichok, which is said to be the world’s deadliest military grade nerve agent, Yulia Skripal was roused from her coma. Upon waking up, she communicated to an intensive care consultant that she and her father, the turncoat former Russian spy, Sergei, had been “sprayed” with an uncertain substance while dining at a restaurant, before their collapse — and not at their home, as claimed by the UK.
The revelation, which runs completely contrary to widespread reports that Yulia spent almost a month in critical condition before regaining consciousness, stems from recently-disclosed transcripts of an official British inquiry into the death of Dawn Sturgess, who supposedly died after having inhaled Novichok from a sealed perfume bottle.
For several years, British authorities have stonewalled, prevaricated, and connived to prevent an inquest into the Sturgess case, and perhaps now it is clear why.
According to the British government, Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned by two GRU assassins who snuck into Britain using false identities with Russian-produced Novichok, which was supposedly smeared on the doorknob of Sergei’s MI6-furnished home in Salisbury. The Skripals ultimately survived, but in the intervening years, this story has been repeatedly retold by legacy media outlets to hype up the threat Russia poses to the British public.
That narrative is substantially undermined by the recent revelation that Yulia briefly awoke from her coma and countered the official story through a form of visual communication.
The Sturgess inquiry also revealed that after Yulia awoke from her coma and interacted with a doctor, high-ranking officials at Salisbury hospital forbade the healthcare professional from divulging details of his interchange with Yulia with anyone or having any further contact with the Skripals, and warned him not to discuss the poisoning case with anyone.
The Russian government’s supposed involvement in the Salisbury poisoning has proven pivotal in igniting a new Cold War. Moscow was universally depicted as a dastardly pariah in the media, precipitating a British-instigated expulsion of Russian diplomats, dramatically escalating a conflict that eventually erupted in the Ukraine proxy war.
Even if Yulia’s hospital bed claims were inaccurate, they still undermine the British government’s official narrative, while raising serious questions about which substance was used to poison the Skripals, and who was actually responsible. The public is also left to ponder whether the silencing of the healthcare professional who received Yulia’s testimony resulted from state pressure on Salisbury hospital.
Meanwhile, the Dawn Sturgess investigation has closely emulated past British government coverup inquiries, such as the questionable 2016 probe into FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko’s strange death a decade before. In an effort to validate the preordained conclusion that Sturgess was poisoned with the same Novichok that purportedly nearly killed the Skripals almost ten miles away, the inquiry’s chair and counsels have routinely relied on stultifying illogic, highly gymnastic legalistic arguments, speculative claims, and anonymous security and intelligence personnel testimony, while ignoring or outright dismissing inconvenient evidence.
Skripals ‘sprayed’ with poison at restaurant?
Over six weeks from late October 2024, a formal inquiry probed the July 2018 death of Dawn Sturgess resulting from alleged Novichok nerve agent poisoning. The investigation had been rigged to prevent the truth about that tragic incident from reaching the public, and to to suppress inconvenient details about the poisoning of GRU defector Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia three months earlier. However, the inquiry nonetheless yielded a number of important findings.
That there has been any official investigation into the death of Dawn Sturgess — even a flagrant whitewash — is miraculous. Under English law, a coroner’s inquest is typically completed within six to nine months of an individual’s passing. But as independent journalist John Helmer has exhaustively documented, British authorities have stonewalled, prevaricated and connived to prevent an inquest. This was after an inquest was opened, then immediately adjourned pending further police investigations, on the very same day in July 2018.
After heavy legal tussling between British authorities and Sturgess’ grieving family, British authorities finally authorized a public inquiry in November 2021, with no date for commencement given. This was a highly suspect manoeuvre. Inquests are legally-mandated to establish how, when and why someone died, and the wider circumstances surrounding it. They have sweeping powers to subpoena documents and witnesses, evidence is given under oath, and absolutely any member of the public, the British government, and its national security apparatus can be called to testify.
Previous high-profile inquests have shed important light on potential MI6 assassinations, and exposed major scandals involving British police.
By contrast, as one law firm explained, inquiries are little more than “highly emotive” public relations exercises, intended to “attract large scale media coverage”. Their terms — who can be interviewed and what evidence will be considered — are sharply limited by direct government decree, and they have no power to compel anyone or anything to turn over evidence.
That authorities exerted so much energy to avoid holding an inquest before opting for a toothless PR stunt should be an obvious source of concern. While some testimony was publicly broadcast and transcribed, the BBC reports that many inquiry sessions were held in secret, with some witnesses’ “names, faces and even voices hidden.” Meanwhile, “only three accredited journalists” were allowed to report directly on proceedings, prohibited from using any electronic devices throughout, and reduced to making notes on whatever was said using “old fashioned pen and paper.”
Still, despite the veil of obfuscation, important public testimony emerged during the inquiry’s six-week-long span. It was Dr Stephen Cockroft, an intensive care consultant who treated the Skripals upon their admission to hospital, who revealed Yulia had awoken after just four days. Cockroft told the inquiry he “never thought [Yulia] would be capable of having a conversation” again, having “suffered a catastrophic brain damage.”
However, he noted that she seemed mentally competent, nodding and crying in response to questions he asked, while looking “absolutely terrified.”
He quizzed her about what happened prior to her collapse, to which she responded with a series of blinks — .
Among Dr Cockroft’s queries was whether she and her father were “sprayed” with a substance at a restaurant called Zizzi. This was where Yulia dined with Sergei on the afternoon of March 4 2018. She responded in the affirmative to the doctor’s question.
When asked if she knew who was responsible for spraying her, Yulia burst into hysterical tears. At that point, Cockroft stopped pushing his subject for answers.
Despite Yulia’s stunning responses, a senior British counter-terror police forensics expert who participated in the probe of the Skripals’ poisoning, Keith Asman, apparently decided not to interview her at all, and attached no credibility to her post-coma declarations.
During his inquiry testimony, Asman acknowledged he was informed that Yulia had indicated Zizzi was the site of her poisoning. But the revelation ultimately had zero bearing on his team’s probe. This, they said, was due to forensic investigators finding relatively “low-level” traces of Novichok at the restaurant compared to other sites, and suspicions Yulia may have “wittingly or unwittingly been involved” in the incident that landed her and her father in hospital.
Asman claimed his misgivings about Yulia were due to her crying “when asked who did it” by Dr Cockroft. “I did wonder… if she was crying because she felt maybe she had been identified,” he claimed. This doubt, combined with the Skripals having allegedly “eaten and drank different things” at Zizzi, led British police forensic masterminds to conclude it was “unlikely one particular item of food or drink was the source of the contamination,” and they therefore formally ruled out the restaurant as the site of their poisoning.
Shockingly, when inspectors from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) arrived in Salisbury on March 21 2018 to investigate the incident, the Skripals were physically prevented from speaking to them. The inquiry has revealed that on the very same day the OPCW inspectors arrived, Skripals’ doctors unilaterally decided to simultaneously tracheotomize both him and his daughter. Yulia’s tracheostomy tube was removed March 27, two days after OPCW representatives left. Sergei had to wait until April 5 for his tube to be dislodged.
Hospital whistleblower silenced
Another deeply strange detail divulged by Dr. Cockroft was that his interaction with Yulia apparently caused significant consternation at the highest levels of Salisbury hospital. Following this incident, Dr. Christine Blanchard, the institution’s then-medical director, not only removed him from the intensive care rota, but “warned” him he “should not discuss any aspect of the poisoning with colleagues… or other individuals.” Cockroft was outright “forbidden to discuss any aspect of the presentation, recognition or initial treatment of Yulia or Sergei Skripal,” even at regular ICU hospital meetings.
Asked by inquiry counsel if Blanchard believed it hadn’t “been wise” for him to speak to Yulia “about these matters,” Cockroft concurred, though he said that based on his 24-year-long career in healthcare, he didn’t believe he’d done anything wrong. “I always talk to my patients… even when I think they can’t hear me,” he explained, opining, “the worst intensive care doctors… ignore the patients.” Describing the attitude of Dr Blanchard, who had no experience of working in intensive care, as “a little difficult,” he stated:
“I genuinely was concerned that if [Yulia] had some knowledge that somebody had assaulted them… that might be something she would be concerned about. I do feel this was a lost opportunity to discuss with my colleagues what I observed in those first few hours and how I recognized that the Skripals had been poisoned.”
“If [my colleagues] were having a conversation [about the Skripals] they would stop talking about it in front of me,” Cockroft revealed, adding: “it was odd. It was very odd.”
The inquiry made very little of Cockroft’s testimony on this point. Still, his declarations suggest a code of omertà was imposed by the British state around the facts of the Salisbury incident. Whether pressure of some kind was brought to bear on Salisbury hospital to prevent Cockroft’s interactions with Yulia emerging publicly may never be known.
However, it is clear the British government has been committed to preventing inconvenient facts about Salisbury from ever entering the public domain. The narrative of Russian culpability for the Skripals’ poisoning had to be sustained, even before a clear motive was established, perpetrators were identified, or other elementary facts were ascertained.
In the days immediately after the poisoning, a substantial slice of the British public expressed serious doubts about Moscow’s responsibility for the purported poisoning among Britons, and even entertained the possibility that the MI6 had carried out the operation. Battering down that scepticism has apparently necessitated some extreme measures at every level.
Case Management: Day 37
The second rescheduling of my Case Management Hearing was to have seen it held at Durham Crown Court on Monday 16 December, five weeks after the original date. But it has now been delayed until further notice. They are on the run.
Whenever my Hearing came, if the Prosecution still did anything other than drop the whole business, then it would do nothing other than prove the legal advice that I had been given, namely that I was indefensible before a jury in the North East because it was bound to be full of people who would take one look at anyone as well-dressed, well-spoken and well-read as I was, hate me on the spot, and convict me out of spite, entirely regardless of any evidence or lack of it.
That happened to me last time, and it would happen again, so I have been advised that my only hope was to plead guilty for the reduced sentence, despite there being literally no evidence against me, and to pray that that might finally placate the person whose only remaining life's work was to drive me to suicide, a person who was obviously well enough connected to have me arrested and charged at will.
Of course I had already lost quite enough elections here to have known these things for decades, but it was still quite something to be given them as counsel in that sense, to be told that bookishness and articulacy were "sinister" and "deviant" to my peers by whom I was to be judged. This next bit is strictly mine, but I have no expectation that a judge might intervene in the face of the total lack of evidence, since that has never happened to me yet. After all, a judge is a salaried employee of the same State that brings the prosecution, and a judgeship in a criminal court is a salaried and pensionable reward for 30 years of success as a contracted freelance prosecutor. Anyone who has ever dealt with the Crown Court has seen how weighted towards the Crown it was. A judge would have to authorise an assisted suicide, indeed.
Over, then, to the Crown Prosecution Service. Is it going to state that all of the above was its active policy, and the rest of us just had to suck it up? Will it formally endorse the campaign to drive me to suicide? If it did anything other than drop all charges against me at or before my Case Management Hearing, then the answer to both of those questions would be yes. Until then, this post will appear daily.
Strictly Off The Record: Day 85
If you are Douglas McKean, then Oliver Kamm is convinced that you and I are one and the same. I hate to have to tell you that I have never heard of you. He first contacted me about this at lunchtime on 4 July, so General Election day was obviously slow on The Times, and he has promised to involve the Police, from whom I have heard nothing. Anyone with news of any developments, do please contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com. Strictly off the record, of course.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
Justice Delayed: Day 191
Even assuming, and it was far from clear, that the Crown had presented any evidence whatever on the morning of Wednesday 19 June, then no later than the afternoon of Thursday 20 June, I would have been found not guilty unanimously in the time that it took to walk to the jury room and send a note to the judge. On Monday 6 November, the only Prosecution witness did not turn up, having been suspended from the Police. Since then, he has been "asked to resign" because of his conduct of my case. On Friday 14 June, my barrister formally complained.
Lo and behold, on the morning of Sunday 16 June, enough Police Officers turned up at my door to take down an al-Qaeda cell, and behaved roughly as if that were what they were doing. Everyone is laughing, and not at me. Late that night, a nonsense additional charge, quite different from the stated grounds of the arrest, was added, with no expectation that it could possibly stick, but in order to postpone what would have been that week's open-and-shut acquittal. Be at Durham Crown Court on Wednesday 26 February 2025, almost exactly two years, although we dispute the timeline, after the original complaint was allegedly made. When I shall be found not guilty. But the process is the punishment.
Rather than embarrass itself any further, the Crown did not even ask for me to be remanded. Nor did it dispute that the Police had found nothing on my laptop or on my phone, even though the latest allegation therefore cannot be true. And nor did it dispute that its only witness had been sacked from the Police because of my case, or that this latest action against me was a revenge attack for my barrister's complaint, both of which are now on Monday 17 June's record of Newton Aycliffe Magistrates' Court, as is the cleanliness of my devices, of which the Police are nevertheless keeping possession, requiring me to replace them at considerable expense.
I wish that my solicitor had used such terms as "Mafia hit" and "punishment beating". I am using them now. This is a punishment beating for the sacked policeman. And it is a Mafia hit by some Fredo Corleone, because the latest complaint was supposedly made before I had withdrawn from the General Election, a withdrawal that has rendered it pointless in its own terms. Other than the unpaid position to which I was elected unopposed well over a year ago, and which has therefore been kept vacant ever since, I have no intention of contesting another election to public office.
Welcome to the Starmer State, which institutional Britain has treated as the status quo since Keir Starmer became Labour Leader. I am not the only dissident that it persecutes, and things are already getting an awful lot worse now that Starmer is Prime Minister.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
The Safeguarding Challenge: Day 550
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and the allegation at the base of any outstanding charge has been made in order to incite my suicide.
That purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Board of the Catholic Safeguarding Standards Agency, currently Nazir Afzal, Amanda Ellingworth, Wesley Cuell, Bishop Paul Mason, Sarah Kilmartin, Jenny Holmes, Sir David Behan, and Sr Una Coogan IBVM.
That purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Hexham and Newcastle Diocesan Safeguarding Committee, currently Gail McGregor, Paul Weatherstone, Fr Christopher Hancock MHM, Canon William Agley, Catherine Dyer, Canon Martin Stempczyk, Canon Peter Leighton VG, Maureen Dale, and Tony Lawless.
And that purely factual statement is acknowledged as such, unless and until it had been expressly repudiated to davidaslindsay@hotmail.com, by each and all of the members of the Hexham and Newcastle Diocesan Safeguarding Team, currently Meriel Anderson, Ian Colling, Andrew Grant, Kirsty McIntyre, Lisa Short, Yvonne Brown, and Petra Scarr.
I am morally and factually innocent of every criminal offence with which I have ever been charged, and the allegation at the base of any outstanding charge has been made in order to incite my suicide. I should emphasise that there is absolutely no risk that I might ever give anyone the satisfaction of my suicide.
This post will appear daily until further notice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
