dear ***** I have sent you an email with all information ;; like this but more
CONCLUSIVE PROVEN DEVALUATIONS OF THESE JUDICIAL REFUSALS
Financial result of compensation case was £18,654 to complainant, £2,333 Psychologist fees, and complainants’ solicitors fee £33,858 taken “illegally emptying my bank and £18,790 still “owing”
- A. Now I am informed by our Justice System that my revealing of these untruths would be a “potential unfairness to the respondent who has had an unchallenged order in her favour for so long” which in my mind this statement may be prejudiced or is a bias that sweeps aside innocence as a nonentity and favours fabricated evidence, an evidence that conclusively proves a crime was perpetrated against the courts. My question being - Why is this?
B. It was also stated “However, the applicant was at all times capable of mounting his own appeal” and the words “I cannot accept that a difficulty in finding representation is an excuse for a delay of over 2.5 years in filing the appeal” This is an incorrect viewpoint and is understandable for we live in different worlds. In my world I was incarcerated in HMP and quickly found in October 2010, when the complainant’s solicitors imposed a freezing junction upon me, that I could not obtain legal aid because I had no access to funds. Also in the following two years I was refused permission to do legal work, refused permission to enter the internet to find knowledge of how to appeal – until I left incarceration in January 2014 and most seriously refused permission to access my frozen funds by the complaints’ solicitors in order to obtain legal representation for my many judicial problems. This was needed for the knowledge I sought was necessary for in my 74/75 years of age I had had no dealings with judicial system and I even tried many solicitors but all naturally wanted payment – which was constantly and I allege illegally, refused me by the complaints’ solicitor. I understand that this was because they were seeking compensation from me, then later the payment of their clients fee and they even refused several court orders to release to me £2,500 so as to obtain legal representation in my dispute of their clients’ fee of £52,648, a fee charged for a this 30 minute compensation hearing which was not contested – because they refused the realise of any funds to my “potential” defence solicitor – this refusal to allow funds for any legal representation continued for 42 months. This serious fact is that I spent these 42 months seriously attempting to obtain funds for legal representation but during all this time the complaints solicitors abused their right to a freezing order and denied me access to funds for legal representation – and at each month I believed that the next step would see the legal realising of these funds – especially funds to the criminal solicitor who had been chosen in December 2011 to appeal the accusations attached to this said compensation court - but all to no avail.
All these continuous time consuming attempts were for the purpose of obtaining funds for legal representation and not only for my appeal against conviction, but also for my “defence” at this said compensation case and now for an appeal, against its findings. (There was only one occasion that they did allow funds to Blacks solicitor, but it appears it was only for negotiations regarding the amount of complaints’ compensation- a target which I immediately refused – because my religion forbids me to negotiate payment to a false witness for being a false witness and at all times I reiterated that I wanted a defence that would prove that over 90% of the evidence used for the purpose of seeking compensation – was incorrect.
It was also a fact that the complainers’ solicitors’ did not allow any funding for the six hearings (none in which I spoke) in which I disputed their charges for their clients fee, this being despite that in several hearings they were informed by the courts to release to me £2,500 for legal representation in this dispute of fees – which they never complied with and nor did the comply with the £100 per week allocated by law to me at this Injunction hearing – this being work which took up a great deal of my time for I continually thought I could break this deadlock and that I would have access to my fees so that I could pay awaiting and well-chosen solicitors and the reader should fully understand that in all my 72 years my first experience in the “judicial system” was at the time of my 2010 conviction. (Which I now understand is the reason why I was falsely convicted). – But the release of funds never happened, for the complaints solicitors refused all attempts to withdraw money from my accounts for legal representation purposes -for they continued to refuse me access to legal fees so that I could not combat them. . (Now I realise that I will have to borrow money in order to pursue these claims).
Why the delay in attempting this appeal is because after many months of my constantly trying and failing to obtain legal representation, with the two main attempts being an appeal against my conviction in which no corroborated evidence was used against me and to refute the findings of the compensation case. It was with this compensation appeal in mind and my inability to release of money for legal fees, that I then sought lay people and charities to complete this “defence” work which also included the
seeking and compiling police statements and signatures of independent witnesses– but all attempts failed for many various complicated reasons. (It should also be noted that it took six months for me to get the format of the evidence typed in preparation for the insertion of corroborating evidence – these being formats that I sent to Blacks solicitor 3 months before this said compensation hearing) - It should be noted here that a court hearing has been allowed in order to decide if the complaints solicitors did illegally withdraw these disputed fees from my account and to also accuse the complaints’ solicitors of illegally stating to me, via a business letter, that it was the presiding judge who decreed that no funds should be made available for legal representation for any appeal against conviction – as was shown in the bundle of evidence to this Royal Court of Appeal page 17 – and which the complaints’ solicitors s developed into allowing no fees for any other legal representation.)
I therefor found, during my incarceration, that it was impossible to collate the evidence required that needed to be itemised from former police statements and to the obtaining signatures from independent witness – some of whom I have still not found – it even took me six months to accomplish this upon my release. I understand that the words“However, the applicant was at all times capable of mounting his own appeal” are an incorrect viewpoint and my questions is - Why was it stated?
C. It was further stated in this denial Order that “it is clear that the applicant has not told the full story of Blacks solicitors who were representing him” and “He had refused to accept their advice”
This is an incorrect viewpoint. I did not realise that I had to put forward, in my quest to obtain this appeal, proof that Blacks solicitors refused to follow my instructions. The following evidence now shows that it was Black’s solicitors who refused to follow my instructions even though I was the paymaster.
IN THE 19TH DECEMBER 2010 LETTER(Enclosed) shows that I stated to Black solicitors that I was seeking a defence – This being twelve months prior to this compensation hearing. This letter shows that I clearly approached Blacks clearly requesting that they act in my “defence” at the forthcoming compensation hearing. It was further stated that I required that their Mr John Bailes to defend me. This request for a defence approach was reiterated many times throughout the year 2011. My instruction clearly spoke about a defence for I knew that I could refute as fabricated over 90% of the statement to be used by this compensation courts for evaluation purpose – thus showing that the complainant was a very unreliable witness. (Unlike my court of conviction I was not going to be caught twice by thinking that the court had to prove my guilt for I now know that this is an incorrect viewpoint and that a man so charged with sexual assault had to prove that he is innocent for he was naturally and culturally assumed to be guilty – this being a very heavy but natural prejudice).
Within the next 12 months there was over 60 letters of correspondence with Blacks, most to Mr John Bailes but sadly Mr Bailes left the company late in 2011 and sadly I think took the capabilities of my defence with him. (Dates of letters to Blacks from December 2010 to December 2011) (enclosed)
THIS 14TH OCTOBER 2011 LETTER (Enclosed)from Blacks shows how I was continuing my constant pursuit of defending my innocence, this being in answer to my previous instructions regarding defence matters, they answered “there is a good chance that the court will accept that the attack took place in the way described in the report, unless there is solid convincing evidence to the contrary”.)
IN THIS 25TH OCTOBER 2011 LETTER, (Enclosed) sent to Blacks solicitors four months before this compensation case, I clearly issued my “defence” in writing stating :- MY INSTRUCTIONS TO BE: 2. (10) Questions for a Polygraph Test upon myself. 3. The Refuting of over 8o% of the complainant’s Psychological report. This information was on page 5 within the bundle of evidence supplied to this Royal court of Justice and yes! I clearly provided to Blacks this “solid convincing evidence to the contrary” that that I understood they had requestedfor my “defence”. This being my clear instructions and this was long before this compensation hearing took place.
THIS 22ND DECEMBER 2011 LETTER ARRIVED FROM BLACK’S (Enclosed) STATING THAT THEY REFUSED TO DEFEND ME THIS BEING THREE WORKING WEEK BEFORE THE COMPENSATION CASE. They informed me that they would not defend me with the first inclination being the words “it is apparent that you have now found a solicitor to start your appeal (against conviction) that it would be sensible for them to deal with this matter too.” It further stated page 2 “ Indeed we do not consider that we can follow your instructions” Thus informing me that I had no defences at the compensation hearing to, be held on the 30th January 2012 - in 3 working weeks’ time – the problem being that this “newly chosen criminal solicitor had just been approached and was requesting pre-payment, which I could not obtain, especially since there were only 3 working weeks before the hearing was to take place.
My reply to Blacks, with copies to The Court, The Claimants solicitor, the Halifax bank on the 27th December 2011, (Enclosed) stated “I therefore believe that if you organisation cannot follow my defence instructions then you should seek to stay the present proceedings or to postpone the dispersal hearing etc” THEY DID NOT DO SO.
ON THE 25TH JANUARY (Enclosed) 2012 five days before the compensation hearing I received an application notice form Blacks asking to be removed from the court records as acting on my behalf.
I understand that the above corroborating evidence clearly shows that it was Black solicitors who refused to follow my instruction which were continually repeated over a twelve month period. The above also shows that I did not “refuse to accept their advice”. Sadly, I did not know this until a few days before the compensation hearing was to take place.. Indeed it was such a short notification time that they had to appear before this compensation hearing to inform the presiding Judge that they were no longer representing me. Therefore, at the commencement of this hearing the presiding Judge asked me if I wished to represent myself – I thought this meant to negotiate and I answered His Honour by saying “My religion stops me form negotiating a payment to a false witness for being a false witness – there was nothing I could do at this hearing except to listen for I had no corroborating evidence to put to the court
Thereof with this clear evidence I should not be accused of not accepting advice from Blacks solicitors?
D. It was further stated in this denial Order that D. “the burden lay upon him to show in the civil proceedings that he had not in fact assaulted the respondent. So far as I can see, he did not attempt to do so”. I had no knowledge nor and understanding that I should have also put forward a defence against my criminal conviction at this hearing. For this single page information I could willingly and easily have provided to this hearing (enclosed). My target for this compensation case was to conclusively prove, by the use of former police statements and independent witness that over 90% of the complaints’ statements given to this court for compensation evaluation purposes –were fabricated. This was also the information given to Blacks solicitors who, stating that they had no expertise in these matters and so declined to use it but which is now evidence that I finally and successful achieved 6 months after my release and which was finally presented to Royall Courts for appeal purposes – but sadly it was not to be considered. Why is this being stated?
E. It was further stated in this denial Order “In any event, he was advised by the CCRC how to go about appealing and was sent the necessary forms. He could have completed them himself”.
I do not understand the above statement for the forms that the CCRC sent to were in answer to my request for them to appeal against my conviction - this mail to them being within two weeks of my conviction. There clear answer being that they only seek appeals for those who have been refused an appeal by the courts. The forms they sent to me were forms to complete and send to them if and when an appeal I had made had been refused or rejected—the CCRC do not do first time appeals against convictions – which is something that the complaints’ solicitor constantly refused me access to – by NEVER releasing funds to me for legal defence representation even when I, two solicitors, my bank and several court orders requested them to do so. Therefor this above judicial viewpoint regarding the CCRC – is incorrect?
My final question being
“Why am I also refused an oral hearing to consider the above merits of these accusing statements?
The simply put final question being why is this order protecting the guilty and not the innocent? –
Why is this?
William Finley 08 03 2015
SHOULD NOT PEOPLE BE HINDERED FROM DOING WRONG AND NOT FOR DOING WHAT IS RIGHT? AND WHERE ARE THE WORDS “THINE WILL BE DONE!