|
|
Guilty of malfeasance
in public office
So far they have
covered up death threats made against witnesses by Sussex Police to cover up cases
corruption
KATY BOURNE
COVERING UP CORRUPTION EXPOSED
https://sussex-police-corruption.uk/
BUT THIS
TIME KATY BOURNE PICKED ON THE WRONG PERSON AND DID NOT LIKE THIS REPLY WHICH
SHOWS HER PART INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT AND ABUSE OF WITNESSES.
HER REFUSAL
TO TAKE STATEMENTS FROM VICTIMS OF
Working
with Weightmans LLP she trys to have websites removed.
THE BIG
QUESTION IS WHY WILL SHE NOT LET MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REPORT CRIMES AND
CORRUPTION.
BUT HAS JOHN HOATH ARRESTED BY
John M. E. Hoath
Flat , Duke House,
Laughton
Weightmans LLP
Surrey Police,
Attn: Gilly Jones.
Legal Services Department,
Guildford,
Dear Miss Jones,
Re: your threats against my person of harassment against your client the
I take seriously your threats against my person, pursuant to your letter of the
1st May 2018, a “deliberate premeditated defamation of my character and
the intimidation of my person to pervert justice on behalf of your client, to
conceal her provable conduct of aiding and abetting crime and assisting
criminals whilst acting in a “Public Office”, regarding the
harassment of your client, “Which is Denied Emphatically” when I
have “legitimately made complaints regarding corruption within Sussex
Police to your client” when it is your client, who has “knowingly
and deliberately” failed in her “Statutory Duty” to protect
my person and family from crime by criminals when “Sussex
Police”, proved by documents and admissions before a High Court
Judge, that Sussex Police and Sussex Police Chief Constables have persistently
acted in “complicity” with that “premeditated crime”,
therefore have “assisted criminals” to “evade arrest and
prosecution” by “perverting justice”, by the commission of granting
security to criminals from prosecution for their crime, inter alia, “robbery, assault, battery, theft of firearms
and ammunition, theft of property, cannabis cultivation, bribery of Sussex police officers,
intimidation of my person and family by making threats to kill and false
imprisonment”.
As I am sure you are able to appreciate, such criminal conduct is unacceptable
to my person, or in the alternative, would be unacceptable to the reasonable
person at trial of the matter, therefore your threats would conclusively fail.
I take the following points.
(1) Abuse of Court Process.
It is an abuse of court process to use Her Majesty’s Court for unlawful purpose. Your
client, on your advice, has used, and it appears, intends to further use,
whilst acting in Public Office, Her Majesty’s Court to conceal
corruption, therefore pervert justice, by the intimidation of persons lawfully
making legitimate complaints as to your clients, “provable criminal
conduct to knowingly aid and abet criminals”, as the Police Reform Act
2002, on which your client relies, “under no circumstances”, grants
to your client, “dispensation to knowingly” allow criminals on the
streets of the UK with firearms and ammunition, due to corruption within Sussex
Police, therefore “endanger the lives of the British Citizen from
potential gun violence in their homes or on the streets
of the UK”.
Such a claim to a defence by your client is flawed
and would categorically fail at trial. Your client, upon your advice, uses Her Majesty’s Court for the criminal purpose to
conceal corruption, therefore the “criminal intention” to
“pervert justice”.
(2) Misappropriation of Public Funds.
Your client receives from “Public Funds”, salary and expenses, on
the “pretext” that she will act in the best interest of Her
Majesty’s Subjects and uphold the laws of Her Majesty’s Kingdom.
Your client, whilst acting
in her capacity of Sussex Police & Crime Commissioner, has “knowingly
and deliberately acted” to “cover up corruption” in Sussex
Police, as listed at the introductory paragraph of this letter, therefore
“knowingly and deliberately”, “fraudulently accepts salary
and expenses” from the “Public Purse”, so as to act in
“her capacity to cover up crime and corruption in Sussex Police”,
therefore her claims to salaries and expenses are by “fraudulent
intent”, to profit from crime, therefore the “proceeds from her
crime” of “aiding and abetting crime”, in contravention of:-
“Johnson-v-Youden [1950] 1KB, 544 DC Lord
Goddard CJ”, and furthermore, “assisting criminals” to
“evade arrest and prosecution”, therefore acting in contravention
of “R-v-Sinha, [1995] Crim
L.R. 68, CA”. and the
“Criminal law Act 1967, s4”.. Such conduct by the
(3) Proceeds of Crime Act.
It is an offence for any person to “knowingly accept the proceeds of
crime”. Weightmans, and in particular, Gilly Jones, who are deemed to be
fully aware and conversant with the law, and especially the Court of Appeal
Authority in R-v-Sinha, [1995] Crim
L.R. 68, CA. and the Criminal law Act 1967, s4,
therefore are fully aware of the conduct of their client by acting in the
fraudulent capacity that she does, in contravention of Criminal Law, therefore
their client “fraudulently accepts” from the “Public
Purse”, “salaries and expenses on false pretences” as being
prepared to place innocent citizens of the UK “at risk to gun crime on
the streets of UK”, therefore Weightmans “knowingly accept from
their client” the “proceeds from her crime”, to pervert justice
on her behalf”.
(4) Solicitors Act.
It is an offence for a solicitor or person to “knowingly mislead the
court”,.[R-v-Sinha,
[1995] Crim L.R. 68, CA.]
Furthermore, to do so brings the Solicitors Profession into disrepute,
therefore actionable by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
Gilly Jones, on behalf of Weightmans, has full knowledge of my correspondence
for the past ten years, therefore must advise her client according to the
criminal laws of England & Wales, and as such, must refrain from acting for
her client if such evidence is not to be made available to the court, on the
grounds not to do so, is “perverting justice”.
Gilly Jones, has at all times, a “Duty to the Court”, therefore
has, and furthermore, has the “criminal intention” to
“further mislead the court to pervert justice”, therefore a
complaint to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, in this case, is the
“appropriate cause of action” in the first instance, due to her
conduct of affairs at this time.
Whilst a solicitor must always do his best for his client, a solicitor “must
never mislead the court”.
Clearly Gilly Johnson has at all times, “being aware of all the true
facts”, has “withheld those facts from the court”, therefore
“knowingly perverted justice on behalf of her client”, and
furthermore, received the “proceeds of crime for so doing from her
client”.
(5) Submission.
I take the point that on the basis of the evidence, previously and now
submitted, “no honest solicitor can represent the Sussex Police &
Crime Commissioner, before the court”, without first providing the
evidence to the court, that the defence claimed by
the Sussex Police & Crime Commissioner, “has merit”, that the
Police and Reform Act 2002, grants “dispensation” to
“knowingly aiding and abetting firearms crime on the streets of
UK”, therefore places every UK citizen at risk to gun crime, therefore
the Sussex Police & Crime Commissioner has “no obligation to report
or prosecute such crime”, which is effectively, a “claimed defence” that “does not exist in law”, in
either “Common or Statute Law”.
(6) Human Right
Act 1998, Article 10. Freedom of
Expression.
I take the point that it cannot be deemed to be harassment by a British Subject,
by adopting his “Right
of Freedom of Expression” to act in the “Public Interest” to
“expose corruption” by posting on the Internet all correspondence
to and from the Sussex Police & Crime Commissioner, with Other Documents,
that prove beyond reasonable doubt that your client “knowingly and
deliberately places citizens at risk to gun crime on the streets of the
UK”, due to “her deliberate intention not to report or prosecute
corruption” within Sussex Police Force, that places all citizens at risk
to gun violence.
Such posting includes the
letter from Weightmans to my person, and this my reply to that letter, as it is
again the criminal intention of the Sussex Police & Crime Commissioner,
supported by Weightmans, Gilly Jones, to “intimidate my person”,
therefore “cause mental injury to my person”, a 74 year old, OAP,
Elder Abuse to “further conceal the identified corruption from public
view”, an offence pursuant to the “Offences Against the Person Act
1861”.
(7) Human Rights Act 1998, Article
3. Torture and inhuman and degrading treatment.
As per the recent Supreme Court Judgement in
“Worboys”, your client “knowingly and deliberately”
causes “distress, trauma, pain and suffering to my person”, in
contravention of the “Offences Against the Persons Act 1861”, and
furthermore, can be proved by the evidence, to be the “inhuman and
degrading treatment of my person”, in contravention of HRA 1998, Article 3.
(8) Contempt of Court
The conduct of Weightmans and Gilly Jones, on the face of the evidence and
conduct to hand, is in fact and law, an “intentional contempt of court to
pervert justice”.
It seems that the Sussex
Police & Crime Commissioner, with her solicitor, Gilly Jones, have
forgotten this basic fact, or perhaps, in the alternative, wish to take
“criminal advantage” of “innocent persons”, therefore
have acted in a “conspiracy to conceal crime and corruption before the
court”, therefore the “criminal intention to pervert justice”
in contravention of:- [R-v-Sinha,
[1995] Crim L.R. 68, CA.]
Check out these sites all Katy Bourne cover ups this includes the murder
of Katrina Taylor and the attempted murder of key witness
Katy Bourne pcc
Covers up the fact that firearms and
major drug deals took place at Top Flat 318 South Coast Road Peacehaven before
the murder of Katrina Taylor
BULLSHIT SHE IS LYING
“Katy Bourne I
want to personally reassure victims that, if they report crimes of stalking or harassment
to Sussex Police or to other organizations, they will be believed and the force
will work as hard as they can to hold perpetrators to account.
http://www.acer66.00server.com/
THIS SITE
HAS BEEN IS REGISTERED IN
GILLIAN JONES FROM SHUTTING IT DOWN
This site is protected
by
The First and Second
Amendment in the