The extent of investigations in the United Kingdom regarding gang rape and abuses against children

The extent of investigations in the United Kingdom regarding gang rape and abuses against children

Jayda Fransen: How to be in Northern Ireland without being in Northern Ireland?

Jayda Fransen: How to be in Northern Ireland without being in Northern Ireland?

The incompatibilities of two legal systems: England's legal system and Northern Ireland's legal system are being used for political harassment and anti-terror legislation is being used for purposes that have nothing to do with tackling terrorism.

Northern Ireland is de-facto a country outside the United Kingdom, no matter what British politicians want you to believe and this is all too real when dealing with legal issues.

When it comes to bail conditions in England and in Northern Ireland, the English legal system struggles to find solutions that are not part of present legislation and judges have to be "creative' (creative is one way of putting it) to fill up the gaps created by legal incompatibilities.

Jayda Fransen's real residence is a property in Northern Ireland but English authorities forced her to reside in England having to pay for accommodation in England that she could ill afford. She was given the choice to live in a hostel surrounded by real criminals including drug-addicts, rapists, paedophiles and the like. Although part of the bill for housing is paid by the state, people placed on bail and forced to live at a certain address that is not their home address are forced to pay part of the bill even when they have their own homes somewhere else in the United Kingdom.

Given the fact that the reasons to imprison her and to later impose draconian bail conditions were utterly political, she was treated like somebody involved in Islamic Terrorism. Due to her very high political profile, she asked SO15 to ensure that the places where she was going to be forced to reside in were safe but SO15 officers failed in their duty of care and told her that 'if she was attacked, she would be transferred to some location in Liverpool'. Translation: wait until somebody attacks you for us to protect you.

A female Probation Officer when asked a direct yes/no question about very serious issues could only come up with a reply saying 'I believe that...'. "I believe that'? An Officer of the Law is not supposed to believe. An Officer of the Law must be able to answer Yes or No. Either security measures were implemented or security measures were not implemented.

We can hardly blame a Probation Officer of not being able to answer a direct question after listening to Members of Parliament including Members of the British Government talking about liability and evidence. They could only produce words like perhaps, maybe, possibly, most probably when dealing with an extremely serious accusation against another country.

It should be mandatory for Members of Parliament to witness trials to see how Legislation is actually being implemented and to see what is going wrong. The judges were struggling to pass sentence but in the end it is not the judges' fault to be put in such idiotic situation because of defective legislation passed by incompetent Parliamentarians who very seldom have to face real everyday cases in the courts.

Are British Courts of Law and Police Services being used for political persecution? Yes, they are. Anti-Terror legislation is being used in cases that have nothing to do with Terrorism. Police Officers are being ordered to detain and arrest individuals using Anti-Terror legislation in cases that have nothing to do with Terrorism.

The so called Prevent initiative has done more damage than good. If anything, it has created widespread animosity because of blatant abuses. Abuses will not promote trust. Abuses will promote Extremism. We have seen Police Officers asking families to denounce their own relatives and friends and asking teachers to denounce their own pupils including those of a very young age. These are not just nonsensical attitudes. They are dangerous attitudes. What kind of society are they trying to create?  

   

  

Jayda Fransen was told that she wasn't allowed to live in Northern Ireland but was forced by English Court to live in Northern Ireland

Jayda Fransen was told that she wasn't allowed to live in Northern Ireland but was forced by English Court to live in Northern Ireland

The original sentence after spending nine months in jail was that she could not live in her house in Northern Ireland. She was released and the bail conditions were that she could not live in her own home and had to pay for rented accommodation something that she couldn't afford for too long and the alternative was to start sleeping rough.

At this point, she decided to return to her own home in Northern Ireland. British authorities then requested that she should return to England where she was arrested at Gatwick Airport, taken to Bromley South Police Station, spent the night in a Police Station cell and in the morning was taken to Bromley Magistrates Court that told her to sign a form indicating that she could only live in her house in Northern Ireland.

So what was all this about? She was arrested because she went to live in her House in Northern Ireland and the court in England decided that she could only live in Northern Ireland. 

Police resources were wasted, Court resources were wasted and Jayda Fransen's life was unjustifiably turned into living hell because of the madness of the legal system. As if this wasn't enough, Police Officers who went to Gatwick Airport to arrest her didn't have a clue about the whole affair and asked for her passport when Police Forces themselves had taken her passport and even threatened her with trumped charges.

Jayda Fransen: going through hell for the sake of the truth

Jayda Fransen: going through hell for the sake of the truth

This is Jayda Fransen using one of the most powerful weapons known to man: a microphone. Why? To tell things as they are, not as the Political Establishment wants the public to believe that they are.

Marxist Wikipedia calls her a Fascist. Well, if denouncing gang rape of British children ignored for a very long time by politicians and Police forces for fear of being called Racists is Fascism we should all be Fascists.

In Rotherham and in many other cities across the United Kingdom gangs mostly made up of Pakistani Muslims terrorised thousands of children that were drugged, plied with alcohol and pass around to satisfy the sexual needs of individuals some of whom are now being arrested, put on trial and convicted as it is vox populi because their names and image has been publicised by mass media and the press.

Denoncing crime and expressing rejection of crime is not a crime but it seems to have become a crime when individuals like Jayda Fransen are persecuted, harassed, arrested and jailed for daring to speak the truth. No sooner Jayda Fransen was released draconian bail conditions were imposed including Jayda Fransen being forced to live in a hostel sharing space with drug addicts, pedophiles and other common criminals -just a continuation of what she had to endure when she was in jail surrounded by Muslim criminals.

The fact the Probation Service involved didn't allow her to live in her own home speaks volumes about the way processes are being used for political persecution against those the Political Establishment doesn't like because they remind the Political Establishment of the failures of the Political Establishment.

Jayda Fransen is forced to live in fear because any excuse - even the most ridiculous and irrational reason - can be used by the Probation Service to demand her arrest for her to be sent to jail.

When you stand for the truth, when you stand for justice, you automatically become a marked person as I myself experienced on my way to Moscow, Russian Federation, on a family trip and a few days later, once again, in my own home when I was subjected to political interrogation. Unfortunately for the MI5 agents sent to talk to me, I have no political involvement. I am a researcher in the areas of politics, data gathering and military strategy and tactics.

I referred the matter to a Member of Parliament that did the proper enquiries but the government was less than candid about MI5 political involvement in the United Kingdom. I am not talking about counter-terrorism. I am talking about using British Security Services for political persecution - when laws and procedures can be bent for political purposes and Police Forces become Political Police.

  

Political Witch-hunt that will lead to violence

Political Witch-hunt that will lead to violence

There is a a new industry: the industry of political witch-hunt. Britain is becoming a Totalitarian State in which there are special interest groups that are out to create havoc that threatens to destroy public freedoms. 

The irony is that of the havoc created the very same groups that promote havoc will suffer the lethal consequences of what they are doing because where is action there is reaction and this is not just a law of physics. It is a law of life. The one doing the persecution will become prey.

It is most visible when it comes to the political system. We see the Labour Party accused of Anti-Semitism and Racism. We see the Conservative Party accused of Islamophobia. We see individuals that raise the alarm about the abuses committed by Muslims gangs and about the very real risk created by Islamic Extremists being taken to court and jailed simply because they are doing a public service.

The Crown Prosecution Service is being abused and used thanks to political pressure applied by pseudo charitable organisations like the CAA and cases are being created out of thin air to please a minority that has the power to force the Crown Prosecution Service to re-instate cases that had been previously rejected for lack of merit. Rumour and innuendo have become evidence. Something said in anger or a careless comment or even a joke has now become evidence to prosecute individuals who are not engaged in criminal activities and who most likely would not engage in criminal activities and the general public is paying for such nonsense while real crime is spreading across the United Kingdom and left unpunished.

The mass media are also guilty party because they benefit from the climate of fear and uncertainty generated. We are not in Colombia but we might well become Colombia when public anger is directed against irresponsible mass media.

The British mass media are no longer seeking the truth. They are just propaganda machines and this includes the British Broadcasting Corporation that persecutes old ladies for not paying the TV License by pays unjustifiably generous contracts to pseudo stars in a system in which one day A interviews B and C, the next day B interviews A and C and the following day C interviews A and B and it is all part of a club of exceedingly well paid celebrities. This Nomenklatura of the mass media is being paid for by British taxpayers that are forced to swallow propaganda and lies of people who have got an anti-British agenda.

The messages of the mass media are there to justify the political witch-hunt by saying that is fine to go against fundamental rights of some people as long as the rights of those they support are protected. The promote the idea that certain people that they don't like are guilty simply because they are who they are and there will be consequences. The backlash is not far away when mass media and politicians that promote such way of thinking will be targeted and eliminated in a tit for tat operation. 

The mass media, special interest groups and politicians will bring back the 1930s.

  

The extent of Jewish Power in the United Kingdom

Gideon Falter

THE EXTENT OF JEWISH POWER IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism might appear to be an innocent title for an organisation that would merely be about preventing attacks against members of Jewish Communities but then you start digging up and finding things that you wish were not there. The ramifications go as far as affecting the administration of justice, the mass media, political parties and Parliament as a whole and even the Church of England that is supposed to be representing Christianity in the United Kingdom.

But it doesn't stop there. When you try and understand the motivations of the British Prime Minister in - for example - launching a missile attack against Syria based on lack of evidence and that constitutes a violation of International Law by bypassing the Security Council of the Organisations of the United Nations and engaging in military actions against countries that are not at war with the United Kingdom, sooner than later you come across Jewish lobbies. The well publicised visit of Priti Patel to Israel going to occupied territories and maintaining secret conversations without the knowledge of the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson shows things as they are.

Gideon Falter, head of CAA, made explicitly clear that his organisation works in close cooperation with 10 Downing Street (the office of the British Prime Minister, the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service) but it goes much farther than that. When you look at the list of 'sponsors and/or members of the Management you find a former Archbishop of Canterbury and people who are very active within the Crown Prosecution Service and prominent figures of the Political Establishment.

The RT HON. The Baron

Lord Ahmad is the Minister for the Commonwealth and the United Nations at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He was formerly the Parliamentary Under Secretary for countering extremism at the Home Office. During his political career he has taken a particular interest in communities and integration, and has ensured that Home Office Policy reflects the nexus between Anti-Semitism and Extremism.

Note: Home Office nexus between Anti-Semitism and Extremism. Terror Laws limiting Freedom of Speech and applied to cases not related to terrorism?

BOB BLACKMAN MP

Bob Blackman is the Member of Parliament for Harrow East. He has repeatedly spoken out against antisemitism in Parliament and tabled motions relating to antisemitism and the Holocaust. He is often sought out by the media to comment on antisemitism.

THE RT REV. AND RT HON. DR THE LORD CAREY OF CLIFTON PC RVC GBE FRSA

Both during his tenure as Archbishop of Canterbury and since, Lord Carey has spoken out firmly against antisemitism and worked tirelessly to strengthen bonds between Christians and Jews. Lord Carey led efforts to deepen the Church of England’s involvement in Holocaust commemoration, and has devoted many addresses to discussion of the lessons of the Holocaust. He is Honorary President of the International Council of Christians and Jews and in 2016 he delivered the Simon Wiesenthal Centre’s important Dorothy Gardner Adler State of Antisemitism Lecture.

THE BARONESS DEECH OF CUMNOR DBE

Baroness Deech’s career has been one of distinguished public service. She has served as chair of the Bar Standards Board, Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education, Principal of St Anne’s College, Oxford, and chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. She has also been a Governor of the BBC, and the Gresham Professor of Law. Hers is a staunch voice against antisemitism in the House of Lords and she has taken a prominent stance in calling out antisemitism at universities.

Note: Mass Media - BBC

MIKE FREER MP

Mike Freer is the Member of Parliament for Finchley and Golders Green. He has repeatedly spoken out against antisemitism in Parliament and the media. He first worked with Campaign Against Antisemitism to prevent neo-Nazis from demonstrating against Jews in Golders Green.

Note: Determines who demonstrates and where?

JONATHAN GOLDBERG QC

Jonathan Goldberg is a formidable Queen’s Counsel whose career has included many landmark criminal trials, most recently securing the release of Marine Sergeant Alexander Blackman. He is a fierce opponent of antisemitism and has personally seen to it that an antisemitic barrister was disbarred. He is a staunch supporter of Campaign Against Antisemitism and led our first private prosecution, pro bono.

Note: Active both internally and externally with regards to the Crown Prosecution Service.

FABIAN HAMILTON MP

Fabian Hamilton is the Member of Parliament for Leeds North East. He is proudly Jewish and takes an uncompromising stance against antisemitism. He is currently the Shadow Minister for Peace and Disarmament working in the Defence and Foreign Office Teams.

Note: Proudly Jewish and presumably proud member of the Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet. This appears to somewhat contradict a statement made by Lord Mitchell. Mr Hamilton is Jewish and presumably supports Jeremy Corbyn.

COLONEL RICHARD KEMP CBE Colonel Kemp served in the British Army from 1977 to 2006. He was commander of British forces in Afghanistan and completed fourteen operational tours of duty around the world, including in Iraq, the Balkans and Northern Ireland. His last years of service were spent in the Cabinet Office where he headed the international terrorism intelligence team and was chairman of the COBRA Intelligence Group. Having retired from the army, Colonel Kemp is now a writer whose expertise is frequently sought by national and international news media. He also consults companies on leadership, security, intelligence, counter-terrorism and defence and is a public speaker in each of these areas. Having taken a professional interest in extremism, Colonel Kemp recognised the links between extremism and antisemitism, and the threat that antisemitism therefore poses to society. He has been giving his time to campaigns to raise awareness about antisemitism since his retirement and is well known as a staunch friend of the Jewish people.

Note: British Armed Forces, British Intelligence, you can interpret 'well known as a staunch friend of the Jewish people' and its connotations when it comes to Defence and National Security.

BRIAN KENNELLY QC Brian Kennelly is an award-winning Queen’s Counsel who has argued cases at the Supreme Court and various international courts. Prior to taking silk he was on the Attorney General’s ‘A’ Panel of Counsel to the Crown. He is sought after for his expertise in public administrative law and regulatory law, including sanctions against extremist organisations. He is a staunch supporter of Campaign Against Antisemitism and led our first judicial review, pro bono, resulting in the quashing of a decision by the Crown Prosecution Service not to prosecute a neo-Nazi.


Note: Pressuring Home Office to prosecute individuals after cases were rejected by the Crown Prosecution Service?

THE BARON MITCHELL OF HAMPSTEAD

Lord Mitchell has led a distinguished career in business and politics, during which he has always fought against antisemitism. For five years he chaired the Coexistence Trust, whose mission is to encourage dialogue between Muslim and Jewish students at British universities. As a prominent member of the Labour Party, he was highly critical of a report into antisemitism by Shami Chakrabarti which whitewashed severe and ongoing problems in the Party, and condemned her elevation to the peerage following the publication of the report (she remains the only peer ever nominated by Jeremy Corbyn). Upon Mr Corbyn’s re-election as leader of the Party, Lord Mitchell resigned from the Party on principle, telling a television audience that Mr Corbyn had failed to tackle antisemitism in the Party and had surrounded himself with people who are hostile to Jews.

DR MATTHEW OFFORD MP

Dr Offord is the Member of Parliament for Hendon. Since becoming an MP in 2010, he has campaigned against antisemitism, including by highlighting the permissive attitude of the authorities towards supporters of genocidal antisemitic terrorist organisation Hizballah.




NOTE: Notably an angle on issues not related to British internal affairs but more of an issue that affects merely Israel. Hizballah is not an anti-Semitic terrorist organisation but a Semitic organisation since those it represents are also Semites.

THE RT HON. SIR ERIC PICKLES

Sir Eric has devoted himself to fighting antisemitism throughout his political career. He has been instrumental in securing the widespread adoption of the International Definition of Antisemitism. He is the United Kingdom’s Special Envoy for post-Holocaust issues and has formerly served as the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. He was the Member of Parliament for Brentwood and Ongar for 25 years and used his last speech in the House prior to retiring to highlight the selection of disgraced former MP David Ward by the Liberal Democrats, resulting in Ward being sacked as a candidate within hours.

NOTE: Interesting angle in terms of intrusion of the Conservative Party into the internal affairs of another political party.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. When you witness certain cases brought to Crown Courts you see the implications and repercussions of certain associations. As Home Secretary during a Labour Administration, Jacqui Smith introduces a piece of legislation to combat Terrorism. From that point forwards, the temptation to use anti-Terror legislation in cases of Freedom of Speech has been irresistible. 

On March 7th 2017, The Guardian reports that "The Crown Prosecution Service is reconsidering whether to prosecute a far-right activist for alleged antisemitism on the eve of a highly unusual legal challenge to its decision to let the case drop. Government lawyers were due at the high court in London on Wednesday for judicial review proceedings brought by the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism."

What the previous paragraph shows is that Jewish Power active at 10 Downing Street twisted the arms of the Crown Prosecution Service to force the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute. 

The Guardian states: "The CPS originally examined the allegations against Bedford-Turner for five months, but decided in December 2015 a jury was unlikely to convict him of incitement to religious or racial hatred". 

The Crown Prosecution Service spent five months studying a case and decides not to prosecute. In March 2017, Jewish Power puts Crown Prosecution Service against the wall. Gideon Falter made a derogatory statement against the Crown Prosecution Service and the Police and said: "To get through the threshold of the police and then through the incompetent and arrogant attitude of the Crown Prosecution Service, it's practically impossible to get something prosecuted". 

When the Crown Prosecution Service and the Police acting within the limits of their attributions make a decision that does not satisfy Jewish Powers, Jewish Powers say that they don't please Jewish Powers because "they are incompetent and arrogant". This is an interesting interpretation of the role of those administering justice in the United Kingdom.

During a speech made in July 2015 in Whitehall, Jez Turner denounced the existence of the Shomrin that he refer to as an example of what he defined as disproportionate influence of Jewish organisations in the United Kingdom. Mr Turner said later on when the Crown Prosecution pressured by those Mr. Turner criticised had to prosecute. At a speech Mr. Turner made in 2017 he anticipated what would be the outcome of the prosecution. It is my view, taking into account the aforementioned, that Mr. Jeremy Bereford-Turner was crucified by those he criticised in a case that was not so much about Freedom of Speech, Racism or Anti-Semitism but about the dangers of challenging Jewish Power in the United Kingdom.

Mr Turner was sentenced to 12 months. Six of those months will be served in prison and the remaining six months will be served on licence (a form of conditional release with strings attached). Unwittingly, Jewish Powers in the United Kingdom have shown that Mr. Turner's assertions about 'disproportionate influence of Jewish organisations in the United Kingdom' are the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth.

But there is a lot to be said about the fact that the case was only taken into consideration because of the pressure exerted by the Executive on the Judiciary. In a Democracy, there must be separation of powers (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) and it is my view that the fundamental principle of separation of powers was violated and this creates a very dangerous precedent when the Executive acting on behalf of a private organisation with a very specific agenda of its own forces the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute.

And there is more. The Prosecution had the intention of using Anti-Terror Legislation against Mr. Turner and until the last minute made every effort to create yet another dangerous precedent by mixing legislation regarding Free Speech, Anti-Semitism and Terrorism.

If the separation of powers is violated, if legislation about Free Speech, Anti-Semitism and Terrorism is turned into one and the same thing, we are on a slippery slope towards a Totalitarian State.

Alice in Wonderland: A former British soldier facing court for having fought against Islamic State

British Soldier taken to court in UK because he fought against Islamic State

I have believed for a very long time that Lewis Carroll didn't write Alice in Wonderland as a fictional story but as a true description of Britain where cuckoos reign supreme. A former British soldier is facing court charges of terrorism because he fought against a terrorist organisation called Islamic State, Daesh and so many other things.

Imagine the scenario in which during World War Two a British soldier had been arrested and taken to court accused of fighting against National Socialist Germany. It seems that apart from being related to  the acquisition of pornographic material registered as parliamentary expenses, the then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith produced a monstruous piece of legislation that is being used for political purposes and to generate irrational court cases. Ah, by the way, Police resources and other resources including expenditure involving the Crown Prosecution Service are being lamentably wasted, once again, in cuckoo cases.

We live in a world in which Turkey (a NATO member) is fighting against a Kurdish group that is fighting against Islamic State, a Kurdish group that is supported by two other NATO members namely United Kingdom and the USA. To put it mildly, NATO is fighting against NATO.

But there is a lot more. You might have seen Prime Minister Theresa May during her visit to China, talking about building trade opportunities with China. Just a few days later a warship of the British Navy was sent to the Sea of China to 'put pressure on China'. You couldn't possibly make it up. Britain is sending ship to the Sea of China to try and put pressure on China the very same country the British Prime Minister recently visited to promote trade agreements.

For all that matters, the sending of a single ship to the Sea of China is a meaningless gesture that would have the same effect as the sending of the same ship to the Bermuda Triangle. The Royal Navy that could soon see their numbers cut - once again - with the dismantling of the Royal Marines is wasting money in meaningless gestures. Britain doesn't have enough ships to patrol its own costal waters and is having to borrow American planes to chase submarines because it doesn't have enough planes of her own.

Jez Turner: Who pulls the strings of some members of the British government

Who pull the strings of some members of the British government and uses British Courts to promote its own agenda?

Jez Turner is being targeted for a case that was dismissed by the Crown Prosecution Service and reinstated by the very same Crown Prosecution Service because of pressure exerted by a lobby on very visible figures of the British government.

CPS forced to consider a case about which the CPS initially said that no offense had been committed

As reported, Jez Turner – organiser of the London Forum – has been charged with “inciting racial hatred” in connection with his speech at the “Anti-Shomrim” rally in Whitehall on 4th July 2015.

The Zionist lobby group “Campaign Against Anti-Semitism” had brought a legal action to force the Crown Prosecution Service to bring charges against Mr Turner, even though the CPS had originally decided he committed no offence.

An initial hearing will be held at 1.30 pm on Monday 30th October at Westminster Magistrates Court, Marylebone, Central London.

What did he actually say? We are left none the wiser about what was actually said but what is fairly visible is that the Crown Prosecution Service that "originally decided that he committed no offense" is now forced by a Jewish extremist organisation to consider the case once more. If Justice means surrendering to an organisation that might well be acting against genuine Jewish interests, then Justice becomes persecution.

I would say that the said "Campaign Against Anti-Semitism" is actually Anti-Semitic because is generating ill will against innocent Jewish people who have no links whatsoever with the said organisation. Let us remember that Jewish Communities in the United Kingdom amount to about 269,568 people in a country that has more than 60 million people. How many members does Campaign Against Anti-Semitism have? 

Even the Labour Party that has campaigned against Anti-Semitism stands accused of being Anti-Semitic. Something is going very wrong. The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism lobby is as dangerous as Daesh or Islamic State or whatever you want to call it.

On Saturday (28 October 2017), I saw a demonstration carried out by the Black Lives Matter group. There were about 60 people gathered near Downing Street in Central London. This shows how relevant the said group is. The vast majority of the population of London, of whatever race and of whatever religion couldn't care less about a group like Black Lives Matter.  Why? Because people in Britain don't like extremists whether they are Zionist extremists or Black extremists, White extremists or Religious extremists.  

Crown Prosecution Service: What does 'wearing a political uniform' actually mean?

After reading the news and learning that Prosecutor Kirsty Allman had accused the Deputy Leader of a political party of "wearing a political uniform", I contacted the Crown Prosecution Service directly to know that Kirsty Allman actually meant when she made the accusation.

Unfortunately, nobody at the Crown Prosecution Service was actually able of explaining what the crime of 'wearing a political uniform' means.

Later, this evening, I read an article of The Independent that says that the said Deputy Leader was convicted of the crime of 'wearing a political uniform'. When I asked The Independent to explain what 'wearing a political uniform' means, nobody was at hand to explain and all they said was that they didn't have a clue themselves and that they just published what Police authorities said.

When you hears the words 'wearing a political uniform' one is reminded of the SS and of the SA thinking about political uniforms. What in the legal system is 'wearing a political uniform'? The Crown Prosecution Service doesn't seem to be able to explain. The Independent that published the article doesn't have a clue and I am sure that most if not all the readers of British newspapers know what the crime of 'wearing a political uniform' actually is.

I gave my name, my email address and my telephone number to the Crown Prosecution Service and hopefully somebody will come back to me to explain what 'wearing a political uniform' means.

Thank you for contacting Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Enquiries

The CPS is responsible for prosecuting most criminal cases in England and Wales, following a police investigation.

If you are contacting CPS Enquiries in relation to a case which is presently before the courts, or in relation to a case which the CPS is advising the police on charges, you should contact the relevant CPS area directly.  Contact details for the 13 CPS regional offices can be found at the following link:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/your_cps/our_organisation/the_cps_areas.html

Your query may be forwarded to the relevant CPS regional office in the best position to respond to any issues that you have raised.  If your email is forwarded, a response will be provided to you by the relevant CPS regional office within 20 working days.

Please note that if you have previously been advised that the CPS cannot provide assistance to you and your query does not raise any new issues we will not be able to provide any further response.  If your enquiry does not relate to the CPS we will be unable to provide a response, but may be able to provide contact details for the relevant agency or organisation.

If we are talking about a crime, I assume that officers of the Law should be able to define it straightaway, instead of telling me that I have to wait to find out. Are they making laws as they move along? Are people being convicted on the basis of laws that do not actually exist?

What about the role of the mass media? Are the mass media supposed to print whatever they are told without even asking about what they are actually printing? The Independent does not have a clue and I reckon most if not all the other mass media haven't got a clue about what they crime actually was.