French judge agrees with me

I wish I would have had this nice French judge in my libel cases against Gray, Hilton and others because this beautiful judge ruled that a French blogger had to pay damages to a restaurant, after posting a hugely negative blog title, which had great prominence in Google searches. The judge obviously thought that just the negative title was able to bring the restaurant into disrepute and put people off from going there.

This was an important point in my case in that I argued that people just do not have the time to follow up each headline and cannot read whole articles to find somewhere at the bottom the explanation for a sensational headline.

But this judge at least agrees with me that high ranking Google search results can do huge damage just from the headline. Kiss him. Caroline Doudet was ordered to amend a post about restaurant II Giardino.  Article link.

In Britain a person is expected to read each and every article they come across just to find out the facts, if they are attracted by a particular headline. It is quite impossible already to even have the time to read the small print on contracts or other important information as there is so much of it about.

Miliband sees my point on publishing

Labour has now experienced first-hand how publishers character assassinations can ruin someone’s public profile completely. Reason, political tendencies are being created by denouncing a person’s character using political rhetoric. BBC has produced several articles about this, see one link here.

However it was Labour’s own strategy to use those denunciations whilst Brown and McBride worked together. Indeed David Osler, John Gray and others, used the tactics to smear me publicly and I lost a libel case due to the fact that high-profile publisher Iain Dale, started to collect funds and several friends of the defendants used a Conservative lawyer to produce mostly falsified evidence in court. The court was of course only too glad to accept the evidence because it helped to protect the British flagship publisher Der Spiegel.

But one of the defendant’s ally, namely Iain Dale is already falling victim to his own bad character. He recently assaulted a peaceful protester and got a caution.

Justice Eady, the truth is still waiting

I have now suffered several, in my view botched judgements that I had to endure simply because in civil law I am not entitled to legal representation. The case involves an originally British publisher, Der Spiegel and an employee of a Spiegel subsidiary, Lloyds List, which now bought into Der Spiegel. Mr Osler is extremely left-wing and supports all sorts of left-wing groups from Anarchists to Communists. He works in Lloyds list especially on the pirate issue, e.g. Somalis hijacking British ships. Of course several British women have become victims of Somali terrorist activity recently.

Justice Eady found for Der Spiegel, found for Mr Osler and found for all the other defendants involved in the UK left-wing Labour movement. They were spurred on by a member of the Conservative Party who volunteered, without being forced to in any way, to defend Mr Osler, whose defence then benefitted the other attached defendants. British law was so pleased with the performance of Mr Dougans that he became Assistant Solicitor of the Year, that is how the British reward those who work in the best interst of their country. Mr Hilton of course was supported by the big and rich Gay Support Network as he is an admitted and known Homosexual. But still all the Britishness and Gayness doesn’t allow a court to find wrongly on the evidence.

So, yes I am a German immigrant, now in possession of a British passport and I dared to attack the former Axel Springer empire over one of their publications. Of course one needs to know that Springer was implanted on Germany after World War II to dismantle the Hitler propaganda machine.

Why was I picked on by Springer? It is not known.  Tthe reason why I was arrested can be seen from these documents here, which are from the German Prosecutor from the 70s and 80s. There are 3 documents, all of which are translated. It is more than clear from the documents that I was arrested in line with an investigation against a Wilhelm Boenninger whom I do not know and who, according to my research, is never named in connection with any Baader-Meinhof activities anywhere on the net. There are a vast number of Internet pages, which list known BM or RAF associates. That name is not there, neither is mine. I never met a man called Wilhelm Boenninger and assume it is a case of mistaken identity. See letter from 12 March 1980, Ref 8 Js 500/75. I then was compensated for false arrest and the false imprisonment suffered See letter from 16 March 1978, ref 4StR Es 158/77. Also enclosed and then I received a letter from the German authorities certifying that I was never, not even remotely under suspicion of RAF association. See the underlined word on the bottom of page 1, letter dated 10 April 1980 Ref 1BJs 93/77.

Yet Mr Justice Eady felt fit to belief the palaver of Mr Osler, who argued that all arrests in the 70s in Germany must have to do with the Baader-Meinhof Group. The British publication machinery, including the BBC spread rumours that in Germany up to 35% of the population were in active support of the Baader-Meinhof group, which is a statistic that is very hard to belief. It is false and mere rubbish. You must imagine that if 35% of the population were in support of something then every 3rd or 4th person you would meet in the street would be involved into a criminal gang and actively supporting them. That is practically unthinkable and cannot be supported in any rational argument.  Apparently there is no broadly conducted survey that could support such a statistic, a survey that would have been conducted in Germany itself, asking ordinary German citizens and not just the demonstrating student minority that is so readily portrait on UK websites.

It simply pleases the British mentality to think that the Germans were broadly in support of Baader-Meinhof but that is the reason for Justice Eady’s judgment against me. The fact is that not anywhere in any official paperwork available from 1975 – 1980, not anywhere is there any mention of any political orientation. There is no way that anybody could come along and reasonably argue that any arrest that took place in Germany in the 70s, must have taken place because of Baader-Meinhof activities. Especially also not as at that time Germany did not know a Terrorism clause within Criminal law. A terrorism clause was added in late 1976. It was Der Spiegel that couched my arrest in an article about Baader-Meinhof and Eady J cleared Der Spiegel of publication  in the UK  during my case against Der Spiegel when later he accepted doctored evidence from Osler that it had been published. This is an obvious miscarriage of justice.

Osler seems to be the babe of the court. He works for Lloyds List the subsidiary of Der Spiegel and in particular mostly on the Somali Pirate issues. Several women were kidnapped by Somali pirates recently. Judith Tebbutt, a disabled women, was snatched, her wheelchair left behind, her husband murdered.

The Paragraph 129 as it was in use then was so wide, that anybody would be arrested within it, including Travellers, religious sects like the The Church of Scientology and all would be accused of potentially wanting to throw over the German state and be potential terrorists, there was no actual proof needed for such an accusation. That was the climate under which arrests took place in Germany in 1975. It would be unthinkable today that this could happen with the Human Rights Act in place. It was plain and simply state persecution that allowed the imprisonment of indiscriminate amounts of people so that the state could weed out undesirables and collect information from people. Thousands fell victim to this.

There is no way, that I was ever assumed to be in touch with the RAF or Baader-Meinhof, there is no proof that the state even sought it was possible. The letters proof it, one even says, that I was never, not even remotely under such suspicion.

Not only did Eady J support the dismissal of my case because he thought it was an abuse of process because the difference between a compensated criminal arrest and compensated Baader-Meinhof arrest is too small, he actively supported in his judgement the notion that my arrest must have been for left-wing activities, for which there is no proof available at all. Not in any letter from the German authorities is this actually supported. I protested about this rigorously during the draft-judgement state but Justice Eady knows that without that left-wing element, his judgement cannot stand, and so he put it in just to make it work.

Justice Eady decided to please Der Spiegel, to please the left-wing Lloyds List employee. Why? Probably its a racist and sexist motivated judgement, that might also have religious grounds. What the British have established to be an anti Hitler propaganda tool, has turned into a pro-British propaganda tool and bends facts to please the British instead. Mr Osler later posted on Mr Gray’s blog, that I was defeated just like the Germans in World War II and the police promptly allocated a crime number for that posting but refrains to prosecute because the fine they could achieve would not exceed £50.

Of course I think sexism plays a big role. I am a single women, not associated with the typically important English male or even female (that if I was a Lesbian, which I am not). Many nasty posts have been produced during the course of the court case, mainly from men with revolting comments, that even one female high court judge remarked upon and then Mr Osler dropped his claim for costs. Unfortunately distasteful sexual comments were all over the Internet on this case.

Unfortunately for me, the whole justice system in Europe is now so impenetrable, that the single judges in the European Court of Human Rights also just tick off applications by unrepresented applicants as not being admissible, like they do in 95% of the cases. They cherry pick cases to hear and mine was not there.

The truth on my cases is still outstanding and I feel I am a victim of a miscarriage of justice.  It is my opinion and I have Freedom of Expression.

One recent reader comments that the court must have been listening to the case for so long to cash in on the payments from the state, which covered the costs for my applications because they need the money. That does not please the British Tax Payer.

I still belief and think I am correct in doing so, that there is a considerable difference in a general arrest and an arrest with specific suspicions of supporting and sympathising with a mayor terrorist group, who solely work from an illegal underground network. That is what the posts implied. Even in Germany the authorities did put such specific accusations in their arrest warrants, but not in mine, which was jointly with one other person, who also never was associated with known terrorists. I am glad to have been cleared of BM involvement, even with the British judgements, yet I was still made to loose the cases.

I shall add links to this shortly and further docs to download as proof

Hi, it is back on

You may have noticed that I took my blog off for a little while because I gotten threatening letters again from the lawyer because of my lost libel cases. Suddenly they remembered that I still owe them money. But having read an article last night to which I was alerted from a Facebook Friend, I think the legal action against me now has to be seen in a historic light. Please read the new page about the Rothchilds and I put that indirectly in the legal context of my cases. In such a way, that I wondered why the court found it so important to defend the Freedom of Speech of people who report wrongly and who work for a mainstream publisher. I wondered why one of the most prominent judges found it important to issue judgements that still falsify the context of my case. Because I was never arrested for left-wing activities, there is not a shred of proof for that assumption in Mr Justice Eady’s judgement.

I have provided many original German documents and none of them put me in any left-wing context.

I wondered why a Conservative Lawyer works for free to defend a left-wing radical and there is the connection, it is the bigger picture that is being defended here. Read on my new page who owns all the mayor publishing houses that tell us what to think day after day and make conclusions about the importance of Left-wing and Right-wing politics and politics in general. If you read the new page you will see that politics is merely a smoke screen that hides the more important factors away from us and is merely intended to keep us busy so that we do not think about the real facts that are important. Of course it is now also quite obvious that the ECHR only takes on cases that suit their political power-play and refuse all others including mine.

What is important now is to prevent any political or other upheavals that could disturb our quality of life. Prevent any future political movements that could bring harm to our population or criminal activities that disturb our peace. Because we little people are sick of suffering for the benefit of some powerful players.

I am a Londoner Mr Gray

Having read the latest post of Mr Gray about me, my mind immediately began to spin. I think it happens to all of us, that if we read something our minds start associations both emotional, intellectual and irrational. With that post of Mr Gray my mind started to get unfortunately and worrying irrational thoughts, which I am hoping others do not get too. It is most regrettable that Mr Gray should have chosen to portray the most unfortunate rock band in the history of Britain to express his delight of his win before the High Court. We all know that the particular member of the Sex pistols ended up stabbing his own girl friend and then killed himself or died a drugs-related death. How unconstructive that dialogue is that Mr Gray opened there. He describes the video as video recording of the defendant Osler at the Royal Courts of Justice.

I am disturbed about this element of death and wonder what is going on in Mr Gray’s mind.

Of course it is never easy to deal with the loss of not one but several civil court proceedings as I have to do but glee is not the best way to deal with it, even not as the winner of the proceedings, at least that is my view.

Probably the court did think it necessary to discuss that matter through thoroughly and I went all the way along with it and in the end, even though I lost, the court was not very harsh and encouraged the defendants to enforce the costs strictly against me but built me a few bridges in recommending that the defendants don’t do anything to get their money because there is no point in doing so.

However since Mr Gray introduced the self-destructive element into the discussion by using Sid Vicious as his spokes-man, and that’s why I am getting slightly worried and start to think about John F Kennedy who came to Berlin saying, Ich bin a Berliner and he ended up getting murdered by some mad-man. Just as I came to London and I am feeling as  Londoner but hope that I do not suffer the same fate as Mr Kennedy.

I do not regret having brought those court cases still and still think they were necessary to clear my name because the court judgements that were handed down had a sober effect on people in that they explained the many questions that were opened by Mr Gray’s original postings and smoothed people’s fears that were aroused through the meanings that could be read between the lines of Mr Gray’s post.

I, have always taken great pride in my status as a Londoner and worked very hard to make my surrounding environment as nice as possible and spent many voluntary hours of doing so. That is well documented in the many letters I have written to the local authority and others to try and stem anti-social behaviour and crime in my area to the extend that I am now chair of the Tower Hamlets Neighbourhood Watch Association and I worked closely with the police and members of the local authority to establish this voluntary body within Tower Hamlets after the council has abolished support for Neighbourhood Watches ca 10 years ago.

I have turned my back on politics because I do not like the bitterness of it, how fierce party members trash each other in trying to get to the top of the pile and get votes and glory. I have never gotten any glory for my voluntary work, the opposite is the case. I have always been severely criticised by people like Mr Gray who have nothing better to do than spread trivialities around themselves and hand out disturbing comments in some respects, like on this occasion using the most unfortunately public figure in British life, like Sid Vicious for his purposes.

Persons like Sid Vicious are the reason why I spend so many hours, days, month, years to combat drug dealing and anti-social behaviour because drug use leads to death and self-destruction. The police knows it, the council knows it and the drug dealers in mya rea know it because I am one of the most prolific anti-drug campaigners in my area. I have gotten a lot of support over the years and think I managed to do some good and all I am trying to achieve is get rid of mental and physical destruction that is the poison of communal happiness.

Of course I have never gotten the glory of being nominated by any party for election, that is because I am not one of those political sheep but have my own way of building relationship and bring communities forward. It is most regrettable that costs have occurred to the tax payer during my libel actions but that has happened in my instances of totally regular government activity that money has been wasted on schemes or money has been spent that probably had some good effect but has not materialised immediately.

I think some judges have openly shown some sympathy because of the grossly tasteless nature of some posts about me and in the end, when an application was made to actually investigate my finances and I was forced to disclose the last 10 years of my personal accounts to the court, on application of Mr Dougans, the court could not find anything wrong with my accounts, which of course is something I am proud of. In fact the vice-president of the Queen’s Bench recommended no action being taken against me to get the costs. The court found that I have been quite responsible with my finances and had not ridden roughshod with my money as so many others do. They dismissed the application to interfere in my financial affairs. Well of course it is always nicer to be rich and successful financially but we all have found out lately, unfortunately that this is not an easy feat.

Well, it is one of those cases, we all seen in the past where officially the law is on one side but emotionally people can understand and sympathise with what is actually going on.

It seems quite odd to me that Mr Gray’s posting coincides with the publication of an article in East End Life, where they announce the meeting of the Tower Hamlets Neighbourhood Watch Association’s public meeting next week, so that Mr Gray now has to time his posting to properly ridicule me again, to make it even more difficult for me to bring the Neighbourhood Watch Association forward. It has been the jest of public policy in Tower Hamlets to get rid of Neighbourhood Watch by supporting it as little as possible. Tower Hamlets is one of the few boroughs in the whole of the UK where the council does not support Neighbourhood Watch. It  is one of my biggest goals in life to re-establish neighbourhood watch. Getting rid of crime has always been my biggest dream in life because I do not like personal destruction, I like to live in a harmonious community and I am sure most of us do like to live in a nice area with nice people.

I am not bitter at all, it is just unfortunate that I did not get more positive official feedback but that is probably just my lot that I am one of those people who tirelessly work for the public good but who never get any tap on the shoulder or public praise, I just end up spending many hours and days and the little bit of money I got, doing voluntary work with often little sleep and all I ever get in public is criticism and ridicule. That just happens to some people but that doesn’t put me of from working for the community because I like to live in peace and I do not like crime and anti-social behaviour and so I do everything possible to achieve a better life for us all.

I think it is also very unfortunate that political squabbling led to this very unfortunate court case and that is another reason why I turned my back on politics because if we are all honest, wanting to live in a nice neighbourhood, where we can enjoy ourselves is something we all want regardless of political aims. At least that is what we all should want. It is often political glee and anxiety that leads to character trashing of the other side’s representatives often with very tasteless public exultations.

Now I am starting to think have it your way Mr Gray and with this latest expression of your feelings, I think you made it quite clear to people that you think Britishness is being free to kill your girlfriend and yourself with too much drug use. You are of course free to do that here in the UK. And come to think  of it the public are entitled to know what you really think about life.

One of Mr Gray’s harshest criticism against me was that I left the Labour Party and he idealizes the CCCP young pioneers in his post. I did not know what CCCP meant but when I searched it on the Internet the first search result talked about Hitler youth. But what Mr Gray put on show was his herd mentality, which is something he always held against me, the fact that I do not have it and that little discussion has now surprisingly brought me some support from someone at the BBC who wrote an article about it.

It is deeply worrying how many radical elements Mr Gray has in some of his posts.

I have raised 5 children and now have also 5 grandchildren and I dearly love to give them a good future. Though my lost court cases mean that unfortunately I cannot leave them any money but at least I can try to make sure that they can grow up in a country with as much going for them as they can achieve through honesty and hard work. That is all that is left to me to do as a German immigrant in Britain today.  Apparently non of my kids ever even looked at drugs, they do not like them, they do not take them and they work and live quite ordinary but respectable lives. It is well known to my local police and the local council how much I was always on the side of the law and how much I care for my environment. I also put considerable amounts of my own money into my voluntary efforts.

I have been getting training as Community Crime Fighter under Gordon Brown who came to the Rich Mix Centre one day to support the scheme but not Neighbourhood Watches who are the central communal crime-fighting force throughout the UK and I will not let it happen that this is being dismantled by the likes of Mr Gray, even though I belief that this is what he really wants to achieve with his actions. He tries to discredit a member of the Neighbourhood Watch movement to ridicule it and make it untenable for people to support it.  Why else would he time his posting to coincide with the first meeting of the Tower Hamlets Neighbourhood Watch Association THNWA, of which I am chair at the moment and I am the most eager driving force behind it and he knows it.

We are all human and there are many who have not 100% status by being rich, famous and successful but there are many ordinary people like myself that are committed to lawfulness. It has been quite seriously established in the last 5 years, that there is nothing I have ever done wrong or against the law and that is really what counts that whatever we do, we have to do it within the law and that was always one of my most important principles, which I intend to keep.  That is what disturbs me about politics these days, is that voters are asked to look for that perfect human being, that has no blemishes in their lives to represent them when we then see them before the courts to find they fiddled their expenses.

Lets all sober up and continue to strive for the best possible life we can get and as long as we all do the best we can I think that is the most we can expect. My voluntary activities include all and I hope that people from all political directions agree with me that wanting to improve our quality of life means that we must repel anti-social behavior and crime and that is something we can all work together on. But of course if people do not want me to work on that goal, then I just have to make do with what I can do, and that is just look after my own family and read books. I shall see.  It is obvious that nobody wants to employ me.

Of course I cannot regret having come to London and become a British citizen because I had my children here and started to built my family. Of cousre had I never come to London I would not have had to suffer the many years of ridicule because of my German origin. But life goes on and I am happy with having gotten my kids and I am concerned about their future. I think most people with children can follow my sentiments.  Does Mr Gray have any children? Does Mr Hilton have any children? No, not to my knowledge. So it seems to put this all into perspective, the radical postings of 2 Labour Party activists who have no personal future to protect beyond their own existence.

The court did find it necessary to thorouughly examine the issues that these cases have brought and if they would have thought it not worth to look at the cases they could have stopped them very quickly if they had wanted but they chose not to do so.

I might add to this posting later on but now have a school-run.

The precious gift

I am just starting to realise how precious the permission to renew an application for permission to appeal at an oral hearing really is. Though I am short of wanting to kiss Lord Justice Law’s feet on the matter, my experience on the oral hearing for permission to a Judicial Review did not harvest the wonder fruits I was expecting at that time.

When a learned judge dismisses an appeal because it does not have any merit, then that is the end of the road and no more hope can be relied on, in bringing a case forward, but if permission is given to renew with an oral hearing the barometer of hope rises high and crashes through the ceiling. Just a bit like the elevator at the end of Willy Wonka and the chocolate factory when Charlie went up through the roof and gotten his prize.

This hope will keep me going throughout the summer break, and of course whilst the learned judges have their summer holiday, and most of the lawyers as well, I shall spend this summer in my room elaborating over things to say and papers to show to the learned Lady that will hear my oral submissions. Phew, it’s going to be  a holiday without a break.

My learned friends!

My confidence is rising, even though I am not on a Mission from God, I have seen the light. I am now looking forward to the appeal procedure because I feel I have some very good arguments in support of my case. May any judge find what they feel fit to find, it is their decision in the end, that is the decision that sticks with them forever. It is a free world, isn’t it just.

Just a secret, my Reverend tells me each and every week to do God’s work in the coming week. Ah. So I shall.

Climb every mountain

that is the implication of Mr Justice ‘s  judgment, that I can still continue the path of righteousness but it is a very steep mountain to climb.

Yet are the hills still alive in English Justice? I certainly hope so because if they aren’t then there is a lot of dead wood on the mountain in England.

It is very worrying though that the court has already used one of my judgments to throw out another case and that of a woman at that. Knowing that this case is up for permission to appeal the court is very hasty to apply its new-found resolution strategy.

I am always positive and as such, since I have gotten rid of my frustrations taken a deep breath and noticed that I do not have a bad case but I simply have a badly pleaded case.

There is a remedy and that is to apply to amend the pleadings and particulars of claim. I wonder whether the Appeal Court judge can resists the temptation to refuse a drop-dead-gorgeous pleading.  It really is a matter whether the hills of English Justice are still alive or does it suffer from Rigor Mortis, to not let anybody up that mountain once made a mistake.

I was a bit worried when Justice Stadlen proclaimed that I would be unable to go through a jury trial because I am too slow and a litigant in person could not cope with that. Well that is an attitude that could have come from my husband who had a similar view to women in general and was very dismissive of inventive thinking.  We can divorce a husband but we can’t divorce a judge. There are many more where he came from in any case. So its a matter of arguing and convincing with a steady pace. To say it with the words of Joan Amatrading, I am not in love but I’m open to persuasion of the legal ideas of course, I hope that this is what the judge will think.

Joan Amatrading, singer of I am not in love but I'm open to persuasion

Yet looking at the situation from Mr Gray’s point of view, if the case went to trial and it wasn’t a jury trial then he would have grounds to go to Strasbourg if he lost. There, we now see the shortcomings of the Access to Justice Act, that yes, we want to allow litigants in person to bring Defamation Claims, but no, they can’t really have a jury trial. I don’t think that is going to work. I am going to apply for a Declaration of Compatibility. My second attempt to query the judicial system, since my application for Judicial Review on the matter failed, currently also before the Strasbourg court administrator.

I think it would be best all around if we could resolve the matter on the claims before the court because otherwise we open the gates for filing future claims on old matters just with different pleadings. I think that Hilton, Osler and Gray should have allowed me to amend the pleadings, now that I have finally caught up to the legal side of law as it was in Germany in 1975 and able to compare that to today’s Human Rights Act.  Because, frankly speaking, if the Court of Appeal now allows me to amend my pleadings and I win the case, then the Defendants will have to pay a much higher bill but also if the court does not allow me to amend then we will see more action both in Europe and in England.

So the English should not complain about the high EU contributions they have to pay as that is what much of the money to Europe goes on, to maintain the European Court of Human Rights amongst other things.

Frankly matter of being able to pay costs has been decided against me whilst the Defendant’s cashflow is zero too, they could not pay costs if they had to but the court has never even put them into the awkward position, isn’t that nice of the court.

Is there a general rule in English Justice that says, whoever gets the first costs against them is going to lose the case? I think the court should not give preference to Gray, Hilton and Osler just because they are young and middle-aged men who have better things to do than come to court and leave me with all the frustration and paperwork, to file with Strasbourg and then having to wait for years before I can get my costs back. The approach should be to resolve this matter now because the solution to the problem as it is now is unsatisfactory in so far as a publication is declared as untrue but the publisher has not been banned from re-publication. I do have a case but it is badly pleaded. I could get damages but because of the bad pleadings the damages are low. What does that mean to the rest of the world?

German autumn

As it has been published on Jack of Kent’s blog on 11 July 2010, I was invited to put a case before Mr Justice Stadlen to explain the difference between a generic accusation under §§ 129 in Germany in 1975 and an open accusation of Baader-Meinhof activities.

I have used material that is either distributed or approved of by known Human Rights organisations. I have used material that is established English law and I have even used material that is distributed by left-wing organisations themselves to make my case.

For example this dissertation by a well known Human Rights campaigner Dr. Rolf Gössner gives an excellent oversight of what happened in Germany under the legislation. I have provided as evidence a transcript of an arrest warrant of a Dr Croissant who was a lawyer to the Baader-Meinhof gang, that was issued against him in 1975, this clearly shows that the state accused him of working with the Baader-Meinhof gang, whilst in comparison my own arrrest warrant never did.

Furthermore I have shown how that same paragraph 129 was even used against the Church of Scientology.

I have provided the court with the whole history of the German anti=criminal legislation and how it has changed since 1871. For those that cannot read German, you can have this translated online by Google within 5 minutes.

All in all I have shown that Osler’s view that I had been accused of links to the ultra-leftist Baader-Meinhof gang is plain stupid and simplistic and can only be brought by a simpleton like David Osler, John Gray and Alex Hilton.

It is plainly a falsification of history. What is worrying though that Robert Dougans tries to put Justice Stadlen under pressure to find the same as Justice Eady, suggesting that Justice Stadlen has not got the autonomy to make a differing decision. There is no case law for something like that. If Justice Stadlen was forced to find the same as Justice Eady that would take away his right to even consider evidence that was before him.

Robert Dougans pointed out that Osler is now free to re-publish his lies and distortions. Strange that an English court supports that. Considering that Der Spiegel even offered me Euro 5.000 to allow them to keep on printing the further lies about me, we can conclude that what we read online and or in the press can be a bunch of lies and the courts do nothing to protect the readers from lies or only in cases where it involves prominent persons.

I refused the Euro 5,000 from Der Spiegel, I shall appeal in the English courts as long as I can in the hope that truth will prevail. If you look in the Definition of Liberty on the Human Rights Article 10, Freedom of expression, you know that you just cannot write anything but that this right is conditional. Even the Press Complaints Commission has set standards for reporting and those standards have been accepted by the European Court of Human Rights.

All my arguments are within the realms of recognised Human Rights organisations and not right-wing.

There is a considerable difference whether one was arrested under a German legislation of 1975 that included all types of groups, e.g. Animal Rights campaigners, and/or was mainly used to investigate groups of people of no distinction but just because they congregated is a considerable difference to being outright accused of Baader-Meinhof membership. Please I urge you again to read this article by Dr. Rolf Gössner here to get the idea of what was going on in Germany during the 70s.

steep up-hill struggle

The cases I  have ongoing becoming a more and more steep up-hill struggle especially now also that Robert Dougans has won the assistant lawyer of the Year award from the

If you look at the categories and nominations you see it’s a business led awards system. There are no social rights lawyers promoted, at least not at first sight.

I won’t comment on Osler’s wife’s website from which I got that information as this is well below my standards. I mean the cat suit and the picture of a Mrs whiplash for the Facebook profile.  Can’t re-produce any photos for copyright purposes but got the print.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 55,049 hits
%d bloggers like this: