Brian Pead writes to Baroness Lawrence re forthcoming Unfair Trial

Darby Farm
115 Leziate Drove
Pott Row
King’s Lynn
PE32 1DE

06 January 2015
Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon, OBE
House of Lords

Dear Baroness,


I refer to your letters to me dated 05 June 2014 and 14 August 2014. I was illegally held in prison at the time but I am nonetheless grateful that you took the time to respond.

Please find enclosed a copy of a letter to my Member of Parliament, Henry Bellingham. It is self-explanatory. Please also find enclosed the INFORMATION MEMORANDUM SHORT VERSION version6 outlining the abuses of my human rights, together with those of my daughter and grandchildren.

Please note, however, that I think you ought to widen your work into police corruption to include judicial corruption, too. Let me explain why.

I am due in the Inner London Crown Court on 12 January 2015 on a charge of the alleged Harassment of my son-in-law and one of my granddaughters, (Emily, 16).

The Crown alleges that I sent a card including evidence of my innocence to my granddaughters who attend Bexley Grammar School. The Crown alleges that this caused ‘alarm and distress’ to my elder granddaughter and son-in-law, but not, apparently to my younger granddaughter (Lauren, 13) and not to my daughter or grandson.

As you might imagine, an intelligent barrister would call as Witnesses for the Defence the following people:

1. my daughter
2. my granddaughter Lauren
3. the Head Teacher of the school where this alleged criminal activity took place
4. the Form Tutor of Emily, 16
5. the Head of Year for Emily
6. the Detective involved in the case
7. the arresting police officer

That would be the minimum number of witnesses that an astute barrister would call to trial. However, on December 23, 2014 Judge Mark Bishop refused me the right to call these Witnesses. It follows as night follows day that there cannot be a fair trial and thus you are being provided with advanced warning of yet another likely miscarriage of justice.

Furthermore, I served Witness Summonses on all of the above, and the Head Teacher has failed to reply. Indeed, Simon Bailey – the National Lead on child abuse in this country (who also happens to be the Chief Constable of Norfolk where I live) – has refused to allow his officers (including the arresting officer) to attend the trial. Since when did Chief Constables dictate the legal process? It is evident that the Arresting Officer needs to be in attendance at trial so that I might cross-examine him. I believe that you need to bring this to the attention of the House.

Furthermore, I contacted Imran Khan of Imran Khan Solicitors on your recommendation with regard to representing me in this Matter and in initiating a Judicial Review, to which I am entitled. I feel sure that you will be horrified to learn that Mr Khan has failed to contact me.

I have written to Mr Khan asking for assistance with the following:

1. Charge of the Harassment of my daughter and granddaughter
2. Charge of Impersonating a Barrister
3. Appeal against conviction of Breach of SOPO
4. Appeal against conviction of Incitement
5. Appeal against conviction of Criminal Damage
6. Appeal against conviction of Harassment
7. A Judicial Review on all of the above Matters
8. Action against the Police with regard to all the above Matters
9. Actions against the State for three illegal imprisonments
10. Actions against the State for its failure to respond to an Official Complaint under Article 3 of the ECHR

As you will see, these are very serious matters and the Government is legally obliged to respond to my Official Complaint under Article 3 of the ECHR which refers as I expect you will know to inhuman and degrading treatment. The State has persecuted me since 2006 when I blew the whistle on child abuse in Lambeth, something since corroborated by DCI Clive Driscoll whom I am aware you have met since he led the investigation into Stephen’s murder. (I was living in Sidcup at the time and followed the case closely.)

Might I respectfully suggest that you ask the Home Affairs Select Committee to investigate Abuses of Process in the Court system which allow innocent men such as myself to be further persecuted by the State. I have written to the CPS to invite them to issue a Notice of Discontinuance, but it persists in wasting public money. If I am correct, there is a Committee which investigates such public expenditure and I would be grateful if you would pass on my case to that Committee since it is clear that the persecution I have endured for more than 8 years has cost the taxpayer millions of pounds. As I have previously informed you, my communications (in all formats) have been interfered with since 2006 and that alone will have cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds.

I have informed Henry Bellingham about all of this, but – despite being a barrister – he has failed to write to a single third party or Agency of State listed in the Information Memorandum (which is the minimum requirement as an MP). He has only undertaken one action. I asked his PA to send to my daughter and grandchildren on my behalf birthday and Christmas cards since there is currently a BOGUS restraining order against me.

I say ‘BOGUS’ because on 01 November 2011, whilst I was illegally held in Belmarsh maximum security prison on a charge of the witness intimidation of my then 12-year-old granddaughter, Emily, who has never been a witness in any trial or hearing (a fact which you can easily prove by writing to her and her mother.)

Whilst being illegally held in prison, I was dragged to Bexley Magistrates’ Court and found guilty of the Harassment of Emily and my daughter, Sorrel.

Neither party was a witness at Court. Neither party made a statement against me. It is clear under the Rule of Law that I could not be (and am not) guilty of the Harassment of either of them). The single Magistrate clearly made an error in law.

In his book The Discipline of Law, Lord Denning stated: “…(any tribunal, court or public authority) which falls into an error […] does exceed its jurisdiction and I am quite clear that at the same time it falls into an error of law too: for the simple reason that it has ‘not determined according to law’…”

Denning added: “…If it went wrong in law, it went outside the jurisdiction conferred on it. Its decision was therefore void. It had jurisdiction to decide or act rightly but no jurisdiction to decide or act wrongly…”

Furthermore, Lord Denning has stated: “…It is beyond doubt that, if a tribunal, court or public authority fails to observe the rules of natural justice, or is biased – its decision is a nullity and void; and it can be quashed on certiorari; or declared void by a declaration to that effect…”

a. The Bexley Magistrates’ Court clearly fell into error and it therefore exceeded its jurisdiction because it did not determine ‘according to law’. Because it went wrong in law, it went outside the jurisdiction conferred on it. Its decision was therefore void. It had jurisdiction to decide or act rightly but no jurisdiction to decide or act wrongly. It is beyond doubt that, if a tribunal, court or public authority fails to observe the rules of natural justice, or is biased – its decision is a nullity and void; and it can be quashed on certiorari; or declared void by a declaration to that effect.

Given that these current proceedings on 12 January 2015 at the Inner London Crown Court are based on a previous trial which is in itself a nullity and void it stands to reason that this Trial is also a nullity since something cannot be founded on nothing. (Lord Denning in MacFoy v United Africa Co. Ltd. [1961]).

And given that on 14 July 2013, I Served on Bexley Magistrates’ Court a Notice of a Void Order – which I was not according to law required to do since the Order was inherently and incurably void – it is apparent under the Rule of Law that these present proceedings have no legal merit in and of themselves since they are based on a nullity.

And given that any ill-founded Order of the Court can be set aside by the Court that made it upon application to that Court and a person affected by the order has a right – ex debito justitiae – to have it set aside.

I took the legal steps – according to due process and the Rule of Law – to write to Bexley Magistrates’ Court and have the Order against me set aside. I did not hear back from the Court and thus my application for set aside was not rebutted and it therefore stands in Law.

And given that a person affected by a void order has the right – ex debito justitiae – to have the order set aside (which means that the Court does not have discretion to refuse to set aside the order or to go into the merits of the case) (Lord Greene in Craig v Kanssen [1943] KB 256 CA). I also refer you to the work on void orders by Shirley Lewald, Solicitor Advocate Higher Rights (Civil and Criminal Courts), MSc (Psych), PGDip (SocSc), PGCPSE, LLB (Hons).

And given that on 09 October 2014, my Member of Parliament, Henry Bellingham, (himself a barrister) stated to me in the presence of witnesses that the conviction for Incitement at Southwark Crown Court in 2009 and the conviction for Harassment of my daughter and granddaughter, Emily, were both “…clearly deeply flawed…”, it is self-evident that the current charge of Harassment brought against me by the State has no legal merit whatsoever.

And given that, Lord Denning stated “…a ‘void’ order or claim has no legal effect ab initio (from the beginning/outset) and therefore does not need to be appealed, although for convenience it may sometimes be necessary to have it set aside (Lord Denning in MacFoy v United Africa Co. Ltd. [1961] and Firman v Ellis [1978]). Therefore, a void order or claim does not have to be obeyed and can be ignored and its nullity can be relied on as a defence when necessary (Wandsworth London Borough Council v. Winder [1985] A.C. 461).

For the avoidance of doubt, I shall be relying on the fact that the Restraining Order against me is a nullity as part of my Defence in this matter. There are other significant abuses of process which I will also rely on at Trial. For these reasons, there is no case to answer and the charge against me should be dismissed under the Rule of Law.

I fully understand that you will respond by stating that no serving MP or Peer can become involved in such matters, I am writing to you so that there is an Abuse of Process on the public record, since the State has a worrying propensity to send me to prison without just cause and on a whim.

I refer you to Magna Carta, 1215, which is still current Law in this country:

39. No freemen shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.
40. To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.

I have been illegally imprisoned on several occasions by the State and my right to Justice has been delayed. And, in denying me my right to Justice, the rights of my daughter and grandchildren are similarly denied.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am neither a Barrister nor a Solicitor. I have attempted to instruct a high quality Barrister or Solicitor, but they always claim that they are “too busy” or they never respond at all.

Furthermore, I have little doubt (speaking from experience) that the Court will offer me a barrister who “just happens to be in Court today) so that the Court can try to claim that it offered me the tools to ensure a fair trial. Since only an idiot or a madman (of which I am neither, although the Police did try to Section me under the Mental Health Act when I reported police and judicial corruption) would have someone represent him in Court whom he has never met before, I will be left to represent myself.

And the Court will then have an opportunity – when I respectfully point out to it the Abuses of Process/ corruption that always takes place at my trials – to send me to prison for Contempt of Court. For the record, I am never in Contempt of Court – it is the judges and the prosecutors and the police in my trials. I try to live my life under the Rule of Law.

As always, I am grateful to you for reading this letter. It is likely that you will respond some time after the 12th January 2015 and I may even be in prison again when you do respond, but I am always grateful that you do, in fact, respond. So many agencies of State have failed to respond at all and I include in that the National Crime Agency after I sent in a 76-page document highlighting all the police, judicial and local authority corruption in my cases.

I shall be posting a copy of my latest book 10 Prisons 12 Weeks to you in the next week or so. It is a record of yet more judicial corruption. I hope you enjoy reading it. May I also draw your attention to the following websites in connection with my work:

May I also take this opportunity to wish you, your staff and family a Happy New Year.

Yours sincerely,
William B. Freeman (formerly known as Brian Pead)

In: Latest news

Still quiet

Leave a Response