Leanne Minick plunged from her towerblock bedroom window in Tower Hamlets

I want to extend my most sincere condolences to this family who lost an 8-year old daughter after she fell from her 8th floor bedroom window in a property owned by Old Ford Housing Association.

There are a number of housing management related concerns that I immediately find important to discuss.

As a long-standing social tenant in Tower Hamlets I spent years on trying to improve housing related issues through individual conplaints that were then taken up by the local housing officer and the results of which could have an improving impact on housing management through the whole of Tower Hamlets because social housing then was handled throughout the borough by Tower Hamlets council who owned and managed all the social housing properties throughout this borough.

Since social housing was split up onto housing associations and social housing landlords the situation has drastically changed. I am now restricted to acting within Tower Hamlets Homes because whatever I achieve within Tower Hamlets Homes, in one of their panels stays within Tower Hamlets Homes.

You can see in the about-me section of this site how I, and a group of local residents complaint about the change in housing organisation to no avail.

I distinctly remember having asked at one of the very recent meetings, this year in fact, how well calls to the housing centre are logged because I am not happy about this and that is one of the most disturbing features of the story about that poor 8-year old child, that the neighbour told the East London Advertiser that the mother of the girl nailed the window shut because it was faulty and that the mother was then ordered by Old Ford Housing to remove the nails, as they posed a danger and that Leanne’s mother, Claire Sieberras tells the paper how often she complaint to Old Ford Housing without any result and that Old Ford Housing outright deny that such negotiations took place.

The police have now gotten involved and it must be evident if that window had ever been nailed shut or not and also through phone records whether calls had been made to Old Ford Housing. All we read is that Old Ford Housing made a statement saying that there are ‘no safety flaws’.  One cannot disregard the comments of  Leanne’s mother, her family or the neighbour because Old Ford Housing’s official story is that they have no evidence of any concerns logged with them.

To continue with the housing maintenance threat at the beginning of this post, when we had the old, Tower Hamlets wide housing management system, the local housing office had a duty to log all callers with a hard copy, visitors book, into which housing officers duly registered each and every visitor, that came to the office and they wrote into this very evident visitors book, when and why callers came to the office, so that it was not possible to deny that complaints had been made.

It was with this in mind that I raised a query with Tower Hamlets Homes to ask how calls are logged now because it is one of the most outstanding features of complaints that people ring up, and get hung up on and nobody knows why they called. Electronic call handling in itself and the logging of those calls is not fool proof if whole strains of calls can be removed from a database because there is no system of numbering those calls consecutively.

However so far not too much importance has been placed into my concerns. The fact is that most people when they are speaking to housing officers they do not care whether they have obtained proof of their conversations, they just trust the officer to do their job.

I know for certain that Mr John Gray, my opponent in a libel matter works for Old Ford Housing. He used to be a senior housing officer for Tower Hamlets Council and then moved to Old Ford Housing shortly after I had complained to Tower Hamlets Council that a senior housing officer is writing material about a tenant under his care.  Old Ford Housing has attracted a few complaints that were featured in the local paper over the last 2 years. Mr Gray of course is known for his view on portraying machine gun wielding heroes on his webblog, he is a councillor in Newham now and a known union activist.

It is not exactly the best calling card for a local housing officer, or indeed the housing association he works for, who is in charge of residents that such mentality is prevalent in him. It is certainly not often happening that such incidents as this death of an 8-year old is happening under such controversial circumstances. That a mother should tell of countless contacts with a landlord over a faulty window and the landlord completely denies that such contacts took place, that windows were nailed shut and nails ordered to be removed, but the landlord completely denies that such incidences took place as well.

I have never heard Mr Gray or any other unionist take up my fears over call logging on housing issues, about the accountability on logging repairs requests. It is very, very sad and of great concern that such issues are an apparent feature in the death of an 8-year old child.  This child should not have died and be alive and happy among us and I miss promises by social housing landlords to improve the call logging of both personal contacts with housing officers and phone calls that are made with a fool proof system.

The Tower Hamlets website for example has a complaints procedure whereby each complaint is allocated a consecutive number when it is made on the site but only 15% of Tower Hamlets residents have computers and many still prefer personal contact or are encouraged to make phone contact with the landlord. I have no knowledge of how Old Ford Housing’s procedures are but think that if a family had reported a problem and such reports being affirmed by the local community, then the landlord Old Housing cannot simply deny those calls for help. Old Ford Housing says they have a clear record sheet, they deny such reports took place. There should be an investigation by Old Ford Housing into why it is possible that staff had not made any records of those complaints and the result of that investigation should be made available to the public.

Old Ford Housing should have promised such an investigation publicly. Yet this lack of desire to be publicly accountable and having to justify their procedures, is quite common among service providers in Tower Hamlets.

Advertisements

avoiding left-wing radicalisation

I think I did a splendid job in the way that I handled the left-wing extremism propaganda about me that was spurted about by Lead Councillor Francis in 2007, who wanted to brand me an extremist. In fact I think that I had joined the Respect Party for a short while helped to lead to their demise because my public denunciation of that party afterwards helped people to turn away from it. I openly encouraged that people join the Conservative Party at that time.

What in fact happened is that certain members of the Labour Party tried to create a left-wing icon, the left-over from the German Baader-Meinhof terrorist days that joined the Respect Party were their headlines and that of course fired up the radical elements in the community who probably already rubbed their hands at the prospect of more left-wing extremism in the community.

It was irresponsible from Osler and John Gray how they reported about me, in blogs they promised to re-publish should I lose my appeal. I am writing this now to counter-act any eventual re-publication. What Osler and Gray should have told people that the law in Germany in 1975 was not as the law is today in England under the current Human Rights legislation. Arrests that took place in Germany in 1975 would be against the law today and illegal internment.

Especially as I have been working with the local police since years and actually once appeared as a prosecution witness for them, then founded a Neighbourhood Watch and got support from the police for it, must make it clear to anyone that the police are hardly likely to work with individuals that pose a threat to law and order and/or have a dodgy past. I think that is what John Gray and David Osler tried to imply and I am still on the case so to speak.

I think it was correct to take the local problem as it was and avert more damage as had already been done by the publications of Osler, Gray, Hilton and in effect also Councillor Francis with his letters to the East London Advertiser.

I find it always really concerning that the Labour party manage to warn of others who are left-wing yet they themselves encouraged Respect members to join their ranks. In fact Mr Biggs himself stood up in defence of Mr Galloway during the Mayoral elections for London when I was busy drumming up support for Boris Johnson. Boris Johnson won, despite all the Labour lies.

I think any responsible resident cannot ignore the threat that left-wing extremism poses to the community and just ignoring it is just not enough. During the last general elections I had scores of Respect members knocking on my door, begging for a vote, when again I turned away and supported the Conservative Party.

I have never been left-wing or extremist in my life, yet there are some who wish to purport that impression, yet I always tell others not to fall for the lies. I think we have come to a good consensus in Tower Hamlets that we need a peaceful coexistence of all residents and have seen off the threat from the EDL and Islamist extremists. The Respect party got wiped from the map and we saw an increase of Muslims in the mainstream parties, especially the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour.

I think we can all say well done to ourselves and our neighbours and hope that we can keep up the good work for the betterment of our communities.

I continue to work as Neighbourhood Watch coordinator, and the local Safer Neighbourhood Police  and sit on the Police and Community Safety Board in Tower Hamlets and we had a splendid meeting only last week with the wonderful input of the Young Mayor of Tower Hamlets.

I have always supported good relations with the local police and in fact once supported a case they brought against a local prowler as prosecution witness. When do these warmongers like Osler, Gray and others finally realise that there is no point telling people of 35-year-old closed matters, when the very people who are in the forefront in the fight of terrorism and crime have a closed working relationship with me on a voluntary basis and they should know of any important issues. It would have been much more useful had Mr Gray and Osler and Hilton encouraged support for my local Safer Neighbourhood Work instead of trying to focus in on some old and forgotten stuff that has long been shredded by the German authorities and buried.

The flirtation with left-wing radicalism that some left-wingers propagate under the mantle of public interest does more harm than good and we have to try and avert the damage done by irresponsible publications such as they come from Mr Osler and Mr Gray.

the plot thickens

Britain has lost momentum, that is my personal view and why has it lost momentum, I think it is because Britain has lost honesty. I came to that conclusion during my court cases where I can observe that written evidences are not taken into account and that always the same judge finds a reason to dismiss my cases, and incidentally it is that same judge that doesn’t take the official written evidence into account.

It is the same judge that dismissed my case against Der Spiegel saying there was no publication and it is the same judge that ruled on the Der Spiegel publication during the Osler case, despite having ruled only 1 year earlier that the UK court has no jurisdiction in the matter. It is the same judge that ruled in favour of a supporter of Anarchism, Socialism and Communism and it is the same judge that dismissed my case against Osler. Osler works for Lloyds List. Lloyds List have a business interest in Der Spiegel and actually tried to take over part of the company.

Now one reason why I am poor is because I have always been honest and honesty itself doesn’t make anybody rich these days. Yet honesty should be the driving force in Justice and especially in British justice as Britain always wants to be seen as the saviour of the world the Defender of Freedom and Truth. This is now why I am getting stuck into this to disclose to the world that so far the justice that was delivered in my case was not based on the truth but on fancy thinking delivered by that judge again.

Mr Simon Singh has even written an article in The Guardian proclaiming that my case against Osler was thrown out of court very quickly when in fact it was in court since May 2008 and has been recommended for trial by Master Rose and by Justice Eady twice and Justice Eady suddenly changed his mind when Mr Robert Dougans came onto the scene. What I find so absolutely of magnifying importance is, that Justice Eady just believes Mr Osler’s assertions, delivered by Robert Dougans, in disregard and absence of any written proof. There is no investigation into my claims that confidential evidence, that had only been disclosed to lawyers became available on the Internet and was linked to by Osler, the court refuses to investigate this so far.

Now I hate dishonesty, in fact it is proven that I once started to write a book on the Truth. It is still visible on the Wayback machine. I am not even particularly concerned about political orientation of the matter, I am just concerned because the simple truth is being ignored by the court and the case is being steered into one particular direction, namely being dismissed because I think there is something the English want to cover up, why else would such a doctored judgment as the one in Kaschke v Osler be delivered by one of the highest judges in the land. Of course now Mr Dougans has said he will be making an application to have me declared a vexatious litigant, that will bar me from making any further applications to the court.

Why is it that the English have something to hide in the matter?  My evidence is plain to see, there are letters written by the German Attorney General that explain the situation as it is, that an investigation was carried out into one individual, this person (1) I do not know and it is also clear that I was arrested in the centre of Cologne, whilst entering the flat of person (2).  I do not know whether person (1) knows person (2). The arrest warrant is concerned with the property of the person(1)  the investigation was all about. That property is I believe about 100 miles away from Cologne. None of these very important facts were actually mentioned in Justice Eady’s judgment.

There was no mention of Baader-Meinhof, there was no mention of Rote Hilfe in that arrest warrant of 1975, there was merely a generic use of the then Criminal Justice Act, with a potential possibility of terrorist implications. This is compatible to the use of today’s terrorist legislation whereby people are investigated under the Terrorism Act and  it is misused plenty of times. Osler then writes an article assuming a Baader-Meinhof connection, so did his mates Gray and Hilton.

But if we compare that to today’s events, when for example Damian Green’s offices were searched using Anti-Terror legislation, nobody thought of making a connection to Al Qaeda but in my case Osler sees fit to make a connection to Baader-Meinhof. The court accepted Dougan’s submission that in Germany an automatic association to Baader-Meinhof had to be made. Well, if that’s the case an automatic association between Green and Al Qaeda has to be made, according to that logic that Justice Eady has accepted. I believe that no automatic association to any terrorist group should be made by the press unless the charges of the police say so and I think Damian Green will strongly agree with me on that. I am fighting to get it through the court that no connection to a particular terrorist group can be made by the press just because antiterrorism legislation is used against people.

In my case I have no idea who the individual (1)  is, I do not know his political beliefs, I have never met my former boyfriend (2) again, who was arrested with me. I do not know what the outcome of the proceedings against those other 2 individuals (1+2) was but I am certain that neither of them was ever mentioned on any website that is available on the Internet today in connection with Baader-Meinhof. I personally never communicated in any way whatsoever with anybody of the Baader-Meinhof group or any known associates of that group.

For me it is now completely unexplained why the court, here Justice Eady falls over themselves to protect Osler. What is it about Osler that makes the court ignore all available evidence that proves me right? Why is the Dougans now so keen to get me barred from bringing any further legal action? What do the English have to hide?

Apparently other judges in the High Court namely Justice Stadlen, Justice Openshaw, Justice McDuff, Master Rose, have refused to throw the case out and recommended it for trial. It is only Justice Eady so far who is very keen to see the case thrown out and he protects a known supporter of Anarchist, Socialists and Communists in the process.

I think my best option is to put this to the world to judge for themselves because as things go on, I do not think I get any fair treatment in the court as soon as the case comes before Justice Eady. It is more than suspicious that always the same judge rules on the matter, it has never been allowed to come before a jury. I think it will do the United Kingdom harm if unsound judgments and dishonesty can creep into the English justice system and nothing annoys me more than dishonesty. That is why I have decided to dedicate my time to fight this case head on and if necessary unveil corruption, racism, sexism, if that is the case.

I was in the belief that a court would examine evidences to find the truth but instead the court ignores official written evidences and dismisses cases.

What is so really interesting is the fact that Der Spiegel was desperate to show me in an article about the Baader-Meinhof Group, that they made the association. Why is it that an English court defends that publication so much. It has to be said that Der Spiegel is originally an English publisher who settled into Germany and was then taken over by a German Rudolf Augstein and the Springer Verlag.  That then makes me think, why do the British want to drive Baader-Meinhof in the press forward, what is the British interest in Baader-Meinhof? Obviously the court strongly supports Osler’s Baader-Meinhof associations and the way he discusses it on his blog. Is there any interest of the British security services in it, that Osler gets those public discussions on terrorism going on his blog?  Is Osler’s blog a honey trap for left-wing radicals? It could well be because otherwise the courts were not so keen to defend the man. That would also be a good reason for them to ask the court to bar me from bringing any actions. The plot thickens. There could be even more sinister reasons of an interest the British may have or have had in the Baader-Meinhof group in Germany, but I suppose we’ll never find out about that.

Well, I have no choice but to defend my reputation and ultimately my finances as I do not work for the police or the security services and never did. I am almost blind and suffered from a debilitating crippling conditions from age 7 and therefore could never have participated in anything military in any case. And as we all know people with very bad eyesight are barred from police services everywhere. I spent the best of 8 years having hospital treatment (till aged 16) and never even heard of anything left-wing radical in those days in Germany. It is also possible that the whole incident is an attempt by Gray, Hilton and Osler to simply take the mickey out of a single woman who suffers from a certain amount of disabiliy. and that has now turned into a public spectacle.

What is however apparent that I had been interrogated by e-mail about whom I knew in Germany and what I did so that information was collected by the court and now I am being disposed of as I have not gotten any interesting information for them. I think it is as basic as that. But I am not a floorcloth to be used and then thrown away. I will stick up for myself and if it takes me years to do so.

Libel cases

I have noticed how now false stories about me are being spread via the Independent village-people blog and I have written to their legal department to correct the misleading version of things and also posted a reply to the story that has been posted there, which is also repeated on John’s Labour blog. Unfortunately my comment to correct the story cannot be seen in all publications on The Independent website, only the Independent Minds version shows my comment. Yet the main Independent online news section does not show my comment about this.

I shall write again to the Independent legal department to point out to them that my comment to correct the publication cannot be seen and is not visible when one uses the search.

Of course the defendants Gray and Hilton are pleading for a lesser defence and that story would cover that pleading, its just that the story is untrue. I was never suspected by German police of connections to the ………….gang.

I have also read allegations, again on John’s Labour Blog how my case is costing tax payer’s money. I have not used a lawyer on tax payer’s money. I am a litigant in person and I carry all the cost of the paper work. Applications and court fees are paid for on public expense because of Tony Blair’s Access to Justice Act I can get them for free.

However it is currently the defence that keeps on making applications to get the case thrown out of court, so far unsuccessfully, that prolongs the time the court has to deal with the matter. John Gray had very little cost, all  he did so far was write a few letters and defences, statements and appeared at some hearings, he benefits from the legal support for Alex Hilton, for which John Gray also collected money.

A few days ago David Osler has finally settled my copyright claim against him and it was this dragging out of paying up that cost tax payer’s money, he should have settled the claim long ago before it even had to be listed with the Chancery Section of the Royal Courts of Justice. So that cost was brought on by him not settling earlier rather than me listing it at the Chancery on order of Mr Justice Easy.

I have read a lot of negative stories about Mr Justice Eady on the John’s Labour blog again, allegations of allowing foreign claims in this country and I must say that Mr Justice Eady does not hesitate to throw out claims of foreign claimants against foreign publishers, see the Jamaal case, he personally dismissed my claim against Der Spiegel.

It does not help to lament about the cost of libel cases as the UK now is on a big drive to cap the earnings of lawyers to do with libel. It would be an unjustified interference in the rights of claimants to cap their damages. Libellous reporting can seriously damage a person’s ability to earn money and ruin their careers forever. That brings me to say that what those Labour bloggers forget serious allegations not only damages my own but also my children’s and grandchildren’s futures.

It is in my view also very much in favour of the bloggers already that the proof of publication is very much in their favour, they already have a lot of benefit of doubt on their side. They cannot expect to be able to ruin people’s good name without that person being able to address this problem in court if necessary and do not forget in my case, the bloggers refused to take down the blogs for 2 years and now the spreading of untrue stories about me continues and is supported by their blogs, especially John’s Labour Blog. I have printed out the proof.

The Labour curse

Having just visited the sickening John’s Labour blog, I must make a few comments.

Unfortunately I have to visit that blog regularly as Mr Gray spends a lot of time publishing more lies about me. Of course everyone knows by now I am suing the man for libel in the High Court but otherwise do not care much about his views because he has a right to his opinion but the more I look on his blog and see the constant stirring up of hatred about this, that or the other, I wonder what choice I have when I am confronted with such persons who provide services to all of us.

In this blog John Gray criticised the Conservative Housing policies; and Mr Gray himself wrote that he criticised a Chief Executive whom Mr Gray accuses of wanting to get rid of family friendly policies. Yet Mr Gray wanted to interfere into my private and family life by accusing me of under-occupying my flat, when it is none of Mr Gray’s business, job or whatever to involve himself in my private life. In fact Mr Gray constantly sends me e-mails asking about my private life, past or present.

 Incidentally Mr Gray used to be a senior housing officer with my landlord Tower Hamlets Council when he wrote defamatory stories about me.

All Mr Gray ever seems to be doing is going on pickets, meetings and protests. His friends always seem to strike and protest about something too, Yet they are public servants of one type or another and I am asking myself, would I be safe in the hands of such persons, when I as Tory need any health treatment or other public assistance.

I have already experienced how Mr Gray acted in his position as housing officer towards me.

Luckily when I needed an operation a couple of years back the NHS referred me to a private hospital, and there I was not reliant on the services of a left-wing unionist. I was actually operated on by a Harley Street Surgeon.

I would like to have a choice not to be treated or having to deal with left-wing trouble makers in whatever service I need. Obviously the way they speak about Tories makes one frightened about them, as they are not objective in their views.

Considering such radicals have access to confidential data, for example Mr Gray, who works as housing officer but hates anyone right of the Labour Party, what guarantee is there that he doesn’t abuse such data? Mr Gray keeps on asking me about private matters and makes the most ridiculous suggestions from the data he does obtain during that libel trial; suggestions that he is not remoteley qualified to make.

I do not think that people are safe with left-wing personnel if they are not left-wing themselves and that might be a key as to why boroughs like Tower Hamlets find it hard to escape the Labour curse because people could be afraid of the left-wing staff that serves them in all kinds of services.

Residing here in Tower Hamlets I cannot escape the left-wing dribble in the shape of East End Life, and despite having informed the council that I do not want that paper, they do deliver it anyhow. In it, I don’t think there is one person that is not left-wing friendly unless they have been voted in, like a few Conservative councillors.  Recently the Chief Executive has been forced to leave his post too.

There must be stricter monitoring of employment laws to ensure that there is a good mix of political opinions in the work place. I do not even think that elected councillors, council leaders should have a choice in the employment of personnel so that people cannot get employed by the colour of their political skin.

We must rid ourselves of this uniformity of left-wing habits. It’s already too much that people automatically feel affiliated to the left-wing scene just because they are poor. We must break the mould, so that you do not feel you only can be a Tory if you can afford your own home or a Mercedes. You can become a Tory if you buy economy food and wear cheap clothe and live in a council flat. There must be better values and perceptions of Conservative thinking.

The constant discrimination of Conservative Executives is more than rude, we should make it clear that such discrimination is not appreciated. Because that is what it is, it is sheer discrimination if people lay down their work just because someone who is affiliated to the Conservative Party made an order or is in charge of workers. The dimwit philosophy practised by left-wingers is so stupid, people should be ashamed to be seen with left-wingers who can do nothing but picket, strike and be against something instead of contributing something to be proud about. We must break the mould so that left-wing activities become something only slobs and lazy people do. It’s not good for our morals in the work and family sense, we must reinstate good morals into Britain.

Customers of any service who are confronted with a left-wing activist at work should complain to the management and say that they do not want to be served by that person to discourage their striking habits.  Complain say the strikers cost money and it pushes up prices if time is wasted by them.

the changing face of Labour

double standards

Labour's double standards have become apparent in more than one way

Now a new member of the Privy council has been appointed, MP Sadiq Khan. I suppose it is to keep all those Muslim voters on board with the Labour Party fellowship. Mr Kahn MP has been campaigning against the laws under which the US wants to extradite his constituent Babar Ahmad. Mr Ahmad is accused of running websites raising money for the Taleban but faces no charges in the UK.

But the double standard becomes more than obvious and becomes apparent in more than one way. When Conservative MP Damian Green had his office searched by anti-terror police, Labour has now appointed a new member of the cabinet for transport who was twice bugged for visiting a terror suspect in jail.

Not to mention here in Tower Hamlets Respect Councillor Oli Rahman was questioned at Heathrow Airport where he was held by anti-terrorist police when he returned from an anti-war conference in Cairo, Egypt. Incidentally the Tower Hamlets Labour party is urging all Respect members and especially Councillors to join Labour. See here John Gray’s posting. “Happy Days! Galloway/SWP Councillors join Labour”

In my own case left-wing Labour members are desperate to proof that I had alleged ….. connections. I left the Labour Party and do not wish to stay a member of a party that seeks to find connections to terrorism rather than individual members seeking to distance themselves.

Just look at David Osler, paid for membership of the Labour Representation Committee but is being sued by me over his posting of discussions, for which my name was used but which I do not wish to support.

I am trying to argue that so much McBride style smearing is undertaken because there is no proper logging of Internet users and in this report people are again urged to re-think their attitude towards call and Internet logging because one has to prevent the exchange of terrorist conversations, aimed to harm our communities.

There we see the double standard of Labour, seeking to enforce rules strictly against Conservative opponents and now playing with the Human Rights record of a newly appointed member of the Privy Council, who himself was bugged twice when he visited terror suspects and in Tower Hamlets Labour urges for Respect members to join Labour and one of the sitting Tower Hamlets Respect Councillors, Oliur Rahman, has also once been held by terrorist police.

Personally I do not wish to have anything to do with Labour. In my case individual Labour members want to make a connection between me and …… Of course I never ever had anything to do with them, do not know one single member, never met, never communicated in any way whatsoever. Yet the UK Labour Party members trumpet out an old article from Der Spiegel, that is defamatory and now work desperately with German left-wingers to get evidence for that alleged connection.  Even Der Spiegel has removed that article from public view and has never put on a defence of justification or fair comment for their allegations but argued no jurisdiction instead, whilst UK Labour wants to find a way to get in touch with German left-wing radicals over this issue. That just says it all, no further comment necessary.

For those who are not aware of my history, I briefly was a member of Labour then Respect and am now a member of the Conservative Party since September 2007.

What is most fascinating is the obvious scrupulous propaganda machine of Labour who do anything just to stay in power and use propaganda without any apparent threshold of any particular aim but use it just to keep voters and use it in any way to do so with no set ideological standard. The changing face of Labour.

On the more established side of Labour even Lord Falconer now queries Gordon Brown’s leadership but unfortunately also has an unrealistic outlook when he considers that the Conservatives look vulnerable, when the Conservatives just won a landslide victory in English council elections.

Kaschke v Gray

is another one of my libel suits currently going on at the High Court. I also applied for an injunction for Mr Gray to take down his scandalous blog about me. Better late than never, being a litigant in person, I find it hard to learn all the rules in the time they are required to be carried out.

Mr Gray now had 2 years to spread his rumours about me and all I did was go to the court and file my case and go to hearings and more hearings but the blog is still up.

I thoroughly object to the whole blog, sporting not only ….. in the title but also the … logo of the illegal …… I am genuinely concerned that this may induce violent thinking or behaviour. I am surprised that the court did not try harder to assist me in getting this removed.

I find it quite interesting in this context how Mr Gray agitates his union colleagues to take a stand against the BNP. He has 2 postings about that and in one he calls someone Herr Griffin, putting a positively German connection to a distinctively British Party.  At the same time I read in today’s Daily Mirror, the largest Labour supporting daily tabloid, that postmen are paid 3p per leaflet to actually deliver BNP leaflets to our homes. The Daily Mirror records that only 30 royal mail workers opposed the delivery of those leaflets. Other posties were glad for the extra income this generates.

Whilst Mr Gray associated Mr Griffin with Germany he simultaneously accuses me of a former association with the …… I also read in some blogs that I am thought now to have turned from left-wing to right-wing similar to ……

What a lot of nonsense in any case, firstly because I never ever met anyone from ….. in all my life, never communicated with anyone from …..and certainly am neither left-wing nor right-wing. I am a member of the Conservative Party and on middle ground, rather leftish than rightish.

Whilst in Germany I was a paid up member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, here I was a member of the Labour Party, joined after my children had grown up and now am a member of the Conservative Party.

I think some people have a genuine problem associating ideology with actual persons and cannot relate this to jurisdictions.

Back to the libel case. Mr Gray is hoping to have the case thrown out soon. But I can proof on the matter of publication that he had 77.250 other website linking to his blog, has over 75.000 visitors to his blog and is prominent in search engine results.

I think Mr Gray is the one who is digging himself in deeper and I ask him now, before the hearing on Monday at 11AM at court 37 before Mr Justice Openshaw to take down the offending blog and apologise unreservedly to me.

In the case of Mr Osler I can proof that over 212.000 other website link to his Dave’s Part website.

Mr Gray says it is a criminal waste of time to have made that application to be heard on Monday, criminal waste of time being the proof of how Mr Gray likes to overreact and dramatise things. He will write to the appropriate authorities about it as if the court is not the appropriate authority and it is a Mr Justice who is going to hear it.

Since Mr Gray is now associating Germany with Mr Griffin in general I am worried about the fact that I am of German origin and Mr Gray persecutes me for alleged ….. associations in the past.  Mr Gray seems to have a general problem with Germans or people of German origin, I am actually British now and have a British passport.

What worries me even more is that Mr Gray asked me for the names and dates of birth of boyfriends and people I used to share flats with. What is he going to do with that information or is he even entitled to such information. I shall ask he judge about that on Monday, because that really worries me.

It seems someone like Mr Gray has a wild fantasy and the names and dates of birth of people I knew over 30 years ago may not be safe in Mr Gray’s hands.

I am actually now pleading for legal support for Mr Gray, because I find it hard to cope with the unprofessional approach Mr Gray has to the libel claim as a whole and judging by his blog contributions is strongly biased against Germans in general.

Also Mr Gray’s only defence for his blog about me is to proof that I actually had connections to ….. and since I myself do not know of any such connections, the German police could not find any such connections, I doubt Mr Gray will find such connections.  See also my comments in the Kaschke v Osler case here. Maybe Mr Gray wants to construe such connections with the names of former friends I supplied him with.

A solicitor could help Mr Gray to be realistic about his prospects in the case and also streamline the proceedings. Mr Gray accused me of wasting the court’s time but it is his constant letters to the court, that the court takes as applications, they are entitled to do that, that drag out the resolution.

I do not deny that Mr Gray is a genuinely concerned guy who wants to do good and he probably does in some respect but how can he accuse me of a ….. association just to smear me as political opponent? That is far out and beyond any respectable method to win a political argument.

Blog Stats

  • 52,762 hits