PC Blakelock: black people are waiting for justice too

The Guardian has an interesting article this morning on the continuing resentment against the Metropolitan Police in at least some parts of the black community in London: PC Blakelock: black people are waiting for justice too

Four deaths of black people at the hands of the Metropolitan Police are listed, none of which have resulted in charges against Police officers.

The article illustrates a systematic bias in the "justice" system in the UK and illustrates a systematic bias in the media coverage too.

Yes, of course, there should be justice for PC Blakelock. But there should also be justice for the black people killed at the hands of the Metropolitan Police.

The killing of Azelle Rodney - The Report

Yesterday, the Azelle Rodney Inquiry, Azelle Rodney Inquiry, published its report.

The Executive Summary of the Report is here: The Executive Summary of the Azelle Rodney Inquiry Report .

The full Report is here: The Azelle Rodney Inquiry Report .

The BBC reports its conclusions as indicating that there was no lawful basis for the killing of Azelle Rodney by a Metropolitan Police firearms officer: Azelle Rodney death: 'No justification' for police shooting 

Other media outlets are more forthright, indicating that Azelle Rodney was unlawfully killed. See, for example, Azelle Rodney death: unlawful killing verdict for Met marksman
in the Guardian and Police marksman may face trial over botched shooting of suspected gangster Azelle Rodney in the Independent.

The Crown Prosecution Service previously had decided not to prosecute the firearms officer.

It will be interesting to see if they change that position in light of the Inquiry's report.

I have recently been reading parts of the MacPherson Report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence.

There are disturbing similarities in the arguably shambolic organisation of the Metropolitan Police Service operation in both cases.

The Lockerbie Bombing: the CIA "wanted to kill the accused before trial"

In the Scotsman this week there is a report, arising from a recent book by William Chasey claiming that the CIA wanted to kill the two Lockerbie accused before trial.

See CIA ‘wanted to kill Lockerbie bomber before trial’

25th Anniversary: Iran Air Flight 655

This month is the 25th Anniversary of the shooting down by the US Navy of Iran Air Flight 655.

See, for example, Remembering Iran Air Flight 655 and Iran Air Flight 655

In the mind of Lockerbie investigators that event of July 1988 may well be causally related to the Lockerbie Disaster of December 1988.

Establishing the truth about what happened at Lockerbie is an ongoing battle against what ought to be the forces of justice in Scotland.

It seems to me that there are very serious questions that require to be answered about the role of the Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary, the Crown Office and, whisper it, the Court of Session judges who convicted Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi.

The Hillsborough Independent Panel, Hillsborough Independent Panel , has taken us much closer to the Truth about the Hillsborough Disaster.

Sadly, the resistance in official circles to establishing the Truth about the Lockerbie Disaster and the likely criminal cover-up of its true cause goes on.

Two further arrests in the Plebgate fiasco

There are reports today that two more arrests have been made in the Plebgate row. See, for example, 'Plebgate' investigators arrest police officer and woman in the Guardian and Police officer and woman arrested in 'plebgate' probe from the BBC.

A 48 year old male Police constable in the Diplomatic Protection Group was one of those arrested.

I await with interest to see how things proceed.

Was there a conspiracy to subvert a Government Minister by serving Metropolitan Police Service officers? That's one of the most interesting questions yet to be explored in detail.

Email to Detective Inspector Neil Matthews of the Metropolitan Police - Is arming the Syrian rebels a criminal offence under UK Law?

This post consists largely of an email sent today to Detective Inspector Neil Matthews, Staff Officer to Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley of the Metropolitan Police.

I believe I have a duty imposed by Section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 to report to a "constable" my suspicions about proposed terrorist offences by David Cameron MP and William Hague MP so that terrorist offences contrary to Section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006 may be prevented.

Here is the text of my email to Detective Inspector Matthews:

Detective Inspector Matthews,

In accordance with the duty imposed on me by Section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 I am reporting to you as a constable my suspicions that David Cameron MP and William Hague MP are proposing to commit offences contrary to Section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006 by unlawfully supplying arms to rebel groups in Syria.

Please bring this matter to the immediate attention of Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley.

I ask you to ensure that you record this report as a suspected crime and supply me with a Unique Reference Number relating to this matter.

My reasoning regarding the suspected offences by Mr. Cameron and Mr. Hague is laid out in my email of today's date to David Anderson QC the UK Government's independent reviewer of terrorist legislation.

The text of my email to Mr. Anderson (copied to my constituency MP Sir Robert Smith) is here:

http://criminal-state.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/email-to-david-anderson-qc-is-arming.html

That email contains a link to a more extended consideration of the matter on my fuqq.eu blog here:

http://www.fuqq.eu/2013/06/is-arming-syrian-rebels-criminal.html

You are aware that I believe that senior Metropolitan Police officers may have perverted and may be continuing to pervert the course of justice with respect to the failure to investigate suspected terrorist offences.

In that context I am sure that you and Assistant Commissioner Rowley will wish carefully to consider how you proceed.

Thank you

(Dr) Andrew Watt

I copied the email to Assistant Commissioner Rowley and his other Staff Officer, Detective Chief Inspector Jacqueline Sebire.

It will, indeed, be interesting to see how the Metropolitan Police proceeds on this matter.

Email to David Anderson QC - Is arming the Syrian rebels an offence under UK Law?

Today I've written to the UK's independent adviser on terrorist legislation, David Anderson QC, asking him to consider the matter for possible inclusion in a future report to the UK Parliament.

I have also asked Mr. Anderson to consider whether, under the provisions of Section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000, he would be committing an offence by failing to report these matters to the Police.

First, here is the text of my email to Mr. Anderson:

Mr Anderson,

I am writing to you in your role as the reviewer of terrorist legislation to ask you to review the proposed arming of Syrian rebels in the light of the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Terrorism Act 2006.

I am copying this email to my constituency MP, Sir Robert Smith for information.

It seems to me that the actions of the Syrian rebels may fairly be considered to be "terrorism" in the meaning of Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

Section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006 makes it a criminal offence punishable, on conviction, by imprisonment for life to assist another to commit acts of terrorism.

It seems to me that the proposed arming of Syrian rebels may fairly be seen as assisting them to commit acts of terrorism.

I have expanded on my reasoning here: http://www.fuqq.eu/2013/06/is-arming-syrian-rebels-criminal.html

I ask you to consider this matter for inclusion in your next Report to Parliament and whether, in light of Section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 you have, or may have in the near future, a duty to act in the manner specified in that Section of the Act.

It occurs to me that Sir Robert may also have a duty to act in accordance with Section 38B. I provide a link to the relevant text here:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/38B

I am due to meet Sir Robert today and I imagine he might find your views on whether or not the actions of the Syrian rebels can fairly be viewed as "terrorism" in UK Law of some assistance as he decides how to proceed.

I hope you will feel able to reply.

Thank you

(Dr) Andrew Watt

 I'll post the current text of Section 38B here for convenience (the link to the text is in my email to Mr. Anderson above):

38B Information about acts of terrorism(1)This section applies where a person has information which he knows or believes might be of material assistance—
(a)in preventing the commission by another person of an act of terrorism, or
(b)in securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of another person, in the United Kingdom, for an offence involving the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism.
(2)The person commits an offence if he does not disclose the information as soon as reasonably practicable in accordance with subsection (3).
(3)Disclosure is in accordance with this subsection if it is made—
(a)in England and Wales, to a constable,
(b)in Scotland, to a constable, or
(c)in Northern Ireland, to a constable or a member of Her Majesty’s forces.
(4)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (2) to prove that he had a reasonable excuse for not making the disclosure.
(5)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or to a fine or to both, or
(b)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both.
(6)Proceedings for an offence under this section may be taken, and the offence may for the purposes of those proceedings be treated as having been committed, in any place where the person to be charged is or has at any time been since he first knew or believed that the information might be of material assistance as mentioned in subsection (1).

It seems to me, assuming that my reasoning is correct regarding acts of "terrorism" by Syrian rebels that Mr. Anderson (he is based in London) has a duty to report the matter to a constable with a view to preventing acts of terrorism.

Similarly, it seems to me that Sir Robert also has a duty to report the matter to a constable whether in Scotland (where his constituency is) or in England (when he attends Parliament).

Iraq War debate in House of Commons today

Today at 12.30 there will be a debate in the UK House of Commons on the Iraq War.

Readers can follow this on the BBC Democracy Live site here:
Democracy Live

That link will take you to the relevant debate only today (13th June 2013). I'll add another more permanent link later, if anything of substance is said in the debate.

Events of concern to Criminal-State.com - Hillsborough, the death of Dr. David Kelly, the illegaility of the Iraq War

There are many events and issues which are relevant to this blog.

Here I'll briefly mention three of them:

• The Hillsborough Disaster of 15th April 1989
• The death of Dr. David Kelly in July 2003
• The illegality of the Iraq War

In future posts I'll expand on how the failings of the Police, the judiciary, the Attorney General's Office and the Crown Prosecution Service impede justice.

With respect to the Hillsborough Disaster the Police involvement is obvious, in the perception of many.

But the failings of other organisations and individuals also impede justice.

For example, if in 1992 the Attorney General's Office had acted as it finally did in 2013 the Hillsborough families would have been spared 20 years of wholly avoidable pain.

Those responsible for that pain should not escape without the effects of their failings being noted.

One problem with the Attorney General's Office is the implicit assumption of rectitude in the original decision which is being questioned. In other words, the Attorney General's Office seems to assume that the questionable original decision is correct, when what they are being asked to do is to test whether or not that original decision is correct.

With such distorted, circular "logic" being applied to at least some Section 13 applications it is not surprising that the Attorney General's Office gets things wrong.

The purpose of the Criminal-State.com blog

People in the United Kingdom have, or seem to have, a naive, belief that there is a "justice" system in existence.

I hold a different view.

There are what I'll call "legal processes" in existence which are different in Scotland from those in England and Wales.

But, in my view at least, there is no system that can accurately be called a "justice" system, in the sense that it reliably acquits the innocent and convicts the guilty.

There are, in my view, serious failings that preclude the current Legal Processes System ever fairly being called a "justice" system. In other words, the systems are not fit for purpose.

More seriously, there is a growing body of evidence indicating that components of the Legal Processes System act so as to conceal crime, when it suits those individuals or suits the purposes of the State.

The public concerns about a possible Police conspiracy among officers of South Yorkshire Police to conceal or mitigate their culpability with regard to the Hillsborough Disaster has resulted in an investigation managed by the so-called Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Will it discover all the truth? I very much doubt it. Time will tell.

The IPCC-managed investigation cannot achieve "justice". It will not, for example, ever be able to punish any culpability by the late Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Peter Wright. Mr, Wright, so I understand, died in 2011 unpunished.

The causes for major concern are not limited to historical situations like the Hillsborough Disaster.

Senior Police officers continue today to conceal serious crime.

In this blog I will progressively put into the public domain evidence that leads me to conclude that senior officers in Thames Valley Police and the Metropolitan Police Service have perverted the course of justice with the effect of preventing the proper investigation of serious crimes including suspected murder

When senior Police officers fail or refuse to investigate serious reported crime there is very serious cause for concern.

The failings or dishonesty of senior Police Officers in Thames Valley Police and the Metropolitan Police Service will be one line of evidence that I will follow in this blog.

A Criminal State indeed. In the United Kingdom.

The causes for major concern are not limited to the actions or failings of Police officers.

Complacency, incompetence, failure of perspective or dishonesty also, in my view at least, come into play. Areas of concern include the Crown Prosecution Service, forensic pathologists, the judiciary and the Attorney General's Office.

If, for example, the Attorney General's Office had acted in a different way the Hillsborough families would have been closer to the truth years ago.

The failings in the Attorney General's Office could have taken the Hillsborough families closer to justice years ago. It failed to do that. The Attorney General's Office caused years of avoidable pain and distress to the Hillsborough familes.

The issues I'll consider on this blog aren't trivial, nor are they simple.

In future posts I'll explore how the defects in the system and defects in the competence or honesty of individuals in the Police and other components of the Legal Processes System lead to denial of truth and denial of justice.