On 29 Apr, 14:18, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
> On Apr 29, 11:03=A0pm, Ishtar wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 29 Apr, 04:24, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 29, 1:09=A0pm, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 29, 12:47=A0pm, Ishtar wrote:
>
> > > > > On 29 Apr, 03:24, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Apr 29, 12:11=A0pm, Ishtar wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On 29 Apr, 02:59, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Apr 29, 11:39=A0am, Ishtar wro=
te:
>
> > > > > > > > > On 29 Apr, 02:33, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > It is not un common for West Yorkshire police to threate=
n Crown Court
> > > > > > > > > > judges or blackmail them to make a desired finding in th=
ere favor. The
> > > > > > > > > > most prominent case I know of is that of Donald Cyril Ch=
apman an old
> > > > > > > > > > boy of Leeds Grammar school who took out a scholarship t=
o Oxford and
> > > > > > > > > > went on to befriend Quentin Hogg.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Chapman however being a scholarship boy didnt have the m=
oney or
> > > > > > > > > > connection to benefit his ambitions or his talent so he =
indicated
> > > > > > > > > > early the way he intended to go, promotion soon followed=
and Chapman
> > > > > > > > > > soon got enticed, seduced if you like in a life style of=
booze,
> > > > > > > > > > parties and other interesting stuff, which his wife obje=
cted to.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Chapman biffed his wife, after several spells in hospita=
l she divorced
> > > > > > > > > > him, he even run over some poor bugger and plod covered =
it up, Chapman
> > > > > > > > > > became a creature of west yorkshire plod and continued o=
n his merry
> > > > > > > > > > way. One day he .d his housekeeper Ruby Anstey, and o=
f course this
> > > > > > > > > > had to be covered up...it wouldn't do for a Crown Court =
judge to be
> > > > > > > > > > known as a rapist.
>
> > > > > > > > > > And yes WYP covered that up too......even Quentin Hogg w=
ho by now was
> > > > > > > > > > known as Lord Hailsham got in on the act and threatened =
anyone who
> > > > > > > > > > dared mention the facts....poor Chapman was sent into re=
hab, where
> > > > > > > > > > luck would have it an old mate of his was also drying ou=
t, that old
> > > > > > > > > > mate was also an old mate of mine....poor poor Chapman.
>
> > > > > > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3Dhttp://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/Ripper-detective-wins-5=
0000-damage...
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > Its done better on O'Garas web site, having said that, I thi=
nk it
> > > > > > > > right and proper O'Gara appeals on several grounds that come=
to mind:
>
> > > > > > > > 1. King suggests it is a word v word argument...O'Gara says =
this,
> > > > > > > > Gregg says that.
>
> > > > > > > > That of course is manifestly wrong, O'Gara had witnesses to =
support
> > > > > > > > his assertions of fact which King refused to hear.
>
> > > > > > > > 2. King was down right wrong in saying Gregg was never in po=
ssession
> > > > > > > > of material.
>
> > > > > > > > As the Ch Sup. Gregg signed of on the Humble case file to pr=
esent
> > > > > > > > prosecution brief.
>
> > > > > > > > I could come up with about 20 or 30 areas of impropriety in =
this
> > > > > > > > incompetent judges summary judgement but it all boils down t=
o King
> > > > > > > > protecting the ship of state and not wanting to be seen to r=
ock the
> > > > > > > > boat. In short king has certainly acted dishonestly, and one=
wonders
> > > > > > > > if the rumors are true that he is a shirt lifter with a liki=
ng for
> > > > > > > > little boys and was threatened with exposure by WYP.- Hide q=
uoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> > > > > > > I can't see them pursuing Noel O'Gara across an international
> > > > > > > boundary. The European Union is in a state of transition. Thin=
gs are
> > > > > > > much too unpredictable. The British *Old Boy Network* don't co=
ntrol
> > > > > > > everything. They don't know where this will end up if they pur=
sue it
> > > > > > > across an international boundary. It could even destabilise th=
e long
> > > > > > > term EU agendas.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > If they tried, no doubt O'Gara would make an application in the =
Irish
> > > > > > Courts to have the matter set aside on the grounds of denial of
> > > > > > natural justice, in which he can then demonstrate exactely how h=
e was
> > > > > > treated by King, no doubt O'Gara is as we speak taking affidavit=
s and
> > > > > > simply presenting newspaper cuttings in expectation of having th=
e UK
> > > > > > problems slung out of an Irish Court.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> > > > > Although it wasn't Mr O'Gara's intention, I'd say John Humble is
> > > > > having a rough ride in jail. They need to crush John into submissi=
on,
> > > > > break his spirit completely, what spirit there was there, to make =
sure
> > > > > he's so emotionally crippled when he gets out that he wont spill t=
he
> > > > > beans.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > The problem with the Humble conviction was the fact that Humble was
> > > > acknowledged to be an alcoholic, he was kept in police custody in a
> > > > single cell where no doubt his mental condition detoriated to the
> > > > point where he would agree to anything put to him....the questions
> > > > needing answers therefore are:
>
> > > > At what point did Humble receive medical attention was it before or
> > > > after his confession was got, and even if he was guilty did he recei=
ve
> > > > proper legal advise during this period which he understood and did h=
is
> > > > then solicitors have a medical clearance stating he understood what
> > > > was being put to him and was not under any duress to answer.
>
> > > > If his solicitors were negligent in allowing him to be questioned an=
d
> > > > did not get medical advise as to his state of mind, then of course
> > > > Humble would have grounds for appeal, his confession was got under
> > > > duress and he was not fully aware of his rights. It is of course ver=
y
> > > > clear that no medical certificate of competance was ever gotton by
> > > > wainwrights or WYP and that Humble was placed under considerbale
> > > > duress to confess.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Ergo sum Quad:
>
> > > Gregg who signed off on the Humble prosecution is guilty of
> > > corruption, worst however, King who it must be said fully understands
> > > police procedures, has stated that Gregg did not handle this material,=
> > > King knew or might reasonably be expected to have known that Gregg
> > > acting simply in his normal admin capacity would be required to sign
> > > off on the prosecution of Humble and therefore Gregg on any reading
> > > would know the elements of the case against Humble.
>
> > > The confession being central
>
> > > King therefore can be shown to be manifestly biased.....not only in
> > > making a punative award based on a word v word contest but in fact, by=
> > > chosing to belive the word only of a corrupt police officer and given
> > > that the essence of the case was that Gregg was corrupt at the very
> > > least King should have allowed evidence on oath to be given to test
> > > those assertions.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> > When I first saw that letter supposedly written by John Humble to Noel
> > O'Gara, I was immediately suspicious that it was dictated to him by
> > someone else, possibly even written by someone else. Although it
> > contained a few spelling and grammatical errors [by the standards of
> > the 1960s], it still seemed too good to be true. So possibly the
> > argument about the handwriting in that letter is irrelevant.
> > What we really need now is a credible, independently obtained sample
> > of John Humble's handwriting, to be examined by handwriting experts as
> > well as by the rest of us, plus voiceprint technology [maybe an
> > inexact science, but everything adds up], plus acknowledgement that
> > the DNA LCN was unreliable, even if planted, hence the need for a
> > retrial.....
>
> > But this is not what it's really about. The law is not about truth and
> > justice. It's about glory and career prospects, and it is a stick with
> > which to beat your enemies if you have the power to do so, whereas
> > Justice is administered in the fullness of time by God and karma.- Hide =
quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Wrong! Humble may well be guilty, but, he deserved a proper treatment
> after his arrest, what matters here is how Humble confessed, he was an
> admitted alcoholic, he was denied drink for several days and he
> suffered alcoholic withdrawal, the cops and his own team needed to be
> sure that he knew what he was doing when he confessed, that he was
> confessing without duress, without the promise of medical help if he
> confessed.
>
> Without a medical certificate that Humble was co herant his confession
> is highly suspect. The correct procedure by his legal team was a voir
> dere to get the confession thrown out, that didnt happen and the
> confession was allowed to stand, and only his legal says he was
> properly advised. He may well have been properly advised but was he
> capable of understanding that advise =A0,was he scared was he under
> duress and in need of medical advise.
>
> Only a medical certificate given at the time will clear that up,
> without one, that confession is highly dubious...and one wonders if it
> was dictated to him or was given under his own words.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
One of the numerous documentaries exploiting the Peter Sutcliffe myth
is being repeated tonight at 8pm on Channel Five
uk.
Those who are beginning to see the terrible truth about the Yorkshire
Ripper cover up may like to have a look at it, knowing that Sutcliffe
committed only THREE of the murders he was charged with - Yvonne
Pearson, Jacqueline Hill, Margo Walls - and that the REAL Yorkshire
Ripper was left free to go on killing for the past 27 years to make
life easier for the West Yorkshire Police.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article622475.ece
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|