SHABANA MAHMOOD'S CORRUPTION BLACK HOLES

 

  FOR SHABANA MAHMOOD MP & JUSTICE MINISTER, THE HORIZON POST OFFICE SCANDAL IS JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG - CORRUPTION IS RIFE IN COUNCIL'S WITH LOCAL POLICE HELPING TO COVER UP CRIMES, BY FAILING TO INVESTIGATE. THIS IS A PROPOSED BILL TO BE PUT BEFORE PARLIAMENT AS NEW LAW TO RESTORE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN ENFORCEMENT AGAINST INSTITUTIOANLISED AND DISCRIMINATORY POLICIES THAT HAVE BECOME ENDEMIC - AS THE BRITISH WAY: SEE NO, HEAR NO EVIL - COVER UP CULTURE

Please use our A-Z INDEX to navigate this site or visit our HOMEPAGE

 

 

 

 

 

The so-called 'Labour' Party is not representing the workers at all. They are supporting administration jobs where those in these roles of trust are doing nothing at all, except invent problems that cost the tax payer even more. Heaven forbid we should actually promote Britain's heritage, creative writers, film makers and most of all the farmers and fishermen who keep us fed. As to water, well that is another issue, for sure selling off our utilities was one of the worst mistakes old Conservative Maggie ever did. More selling British workers into slavery.

 

 

 



As a result of the length of time it takes to uncover injustices in the British Empire based system of "hear to evil, see no evil," we are concerned at the lack of investigation of certain crimes in the United Kingdom.

 

These include town and country planning related corrupt practices and high level fraud in other matters related to expenses and procurement. Where, law enforcement agencies, including police, are paid for by local taxes from the parties and persons they are investigating. Hence, there is a marked lack of independence and impartiality as per the common law case of R v Sussex Justices ex parte McCarthy 1924 KB, Kings Bench Division.

 

We feel sure, that as the Attorney General of a newly elected party, that Lord Richard Hermer, and Shabana Mahmood, as Justice minister, will be keen to introduce legislation to plug the gaps in the safety net the British public should be able to rely on.

 

Whereas, it is a crime in the UK not to investigate crimes that identify colleagues, or seek to apprehend criminals in the course of law enforcement duties, as per R v Dytham 1979 QB 722, Queen's Bench Division, where an officer failed to intervene in a night club beating, hence abandoned his duty to protect a member of the public. Other common law includes:

 

1. Greener v DPP (1996) - The defendant was the owner of a young, powerful Staffordshire Bull Terrier. He had left the dog chained in an enclosure in his back garden. The dog had strained and bent the clip releasing its chain. It had escaped from the enclosure and entered a nearby garden where it bit the face of a young child. Section 3(3) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 provides that if the owner of a dog allows it to enter a place which is not a public place but where it is not permitted to be and while it is there it injures any person, he is guilty of an offence. It was held by the Divisional Court that an offence under s3(3) could be committed by omission. The word “allows” included taking and omitting to take a positive step. In the present case the defendant had failed to take adequate precautions. Similar precautions had been taken in the past but they were obviously inadequate as the fastening was not good enough and the enclosure not secure.

2. R v Pittwood (1902) - The defendant was employed as a gatekeeper at a railway crossing. One day he went for lunch leaving the gate open so that road traffic could cross the railway line. A hay cart crossing the line was hit by a train. One man was killed, another was seriously injured. Pittwood was convicted of manslaughter based on his failure to carry out his contractual duty to close the gate when a train approached. This common law establishes the duty of all citizens to report crimes that cause harm to others, including the duty of law enforcement officials to actually investigate all reported crimes that may cause long term mental trauma.

 

And yet, where any failure to investigate crime is reported to MPs, the informants are then arrested themselves in some cases, and in extreme cases, where activists will not let go of their bones, instead of their allegations being investigated, they become a target of a smear campaign, with bogus allegations and even convictions. The aim being to keep the activists on a short leash. It appears to be established protocol, for MPs to report matters to the police, and for the police to arrest complainants, typically to fabricate evidence of trumped up charges of harassment. As has happened in a number of recorded cases.

 

Where complaints are referred to a Crime Commissioner, more than once, the Commissioner will then make a complaint as to stalking. By this mechanism, serious fraud and conspiracy to cover up malfeasance in public office is not investigated. Instead, the victim informant is framed for a crime they did not commit. With bail and other conditions, preventing complainants from pursuing such complaints.

 

The ideal being for the police to gain a bogus conviction and imprisonment. They can then monitor the would be informants using Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements, which is a set of arrangements in England and Wales that manage the risk posed by certain offenders. The real purpose of MAPPA is to protect the public by working together to assess and manage the risk posed by violent and sexual offenders. But the system is open to abuse, infecting bank accounts and anyone associated with those informing on planning crimes and serious banking fraud, in particular.

 

It is an easy matter for a corrupt police force to obtain a bogus conviction. The burden of proof is Article 6 reversed in sexual cases, meaning any person (more often a woman) can make a claim of being assaulted, and without any physical proof whatsoever, a jury will convict. It is even easier where their targets cannot afford proper legal representation, in that Legal Aid limitations prevent a robust defence in sexual cases. And that is one reason prisons and other costs in a surveillance state are blossoming out of all proportion. Where it would have been more cost effective in the long run to simply investigate the crimes reported by innocent citizens.

 

This is of course, a serious abuse of a position of power and trust and a wicked abuse of the justice system.

 

It must then be time for a draft Bill for Parliament, where officers of the law at any level in local or national government who turn a blind eye to reported crimes, might be automatically suspended and subject to disciplinary action, in serious cases involving instant dismissal with forfeiture of benefits.

 

In investigating crime, there can be no bias. Or any investigation become tainted and suspect. Ultra vires!

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST = BIAS 

 

Where there is any possibility of a conflict of interest, such as a local police force being funded by a local council that may be the subject of an investigation. That is such cases the local police force should recuse themselves to ensure investigation by an outside force or National Crime Agency, the aim being to ensure impartiality as far as is possible, and assure the public of at least the appearance of impartiality. In more serious cases, such as the Horizon Post Office scandal, needing a Public Inquiry into the institutionalised failings that led to the wrongful conviction of more than 700 innocent people. In the end identifying cover up on cover up with MPs involved in the failure to investigate. And the CCRC (at first) refusing to refer any case back to the Court of Appeal, in needing a Petition of over 100,000 signatories to trigger action.

 

Another glaring, but not so well reported example is the complaint by 11 independent informants to Wealden District Council in 1997, by way of a Petition. It should be noted that there is no Statute of Limitations on conspiracies to pervert the course of justice. In this case even Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and His Majesty King Charles, were petitioned, but declined to get involved. And quite right to. How could it be that with umpteen Justice Ministers, Attorney Generals, Chief Constables and a Crime Commissioner, that a cover up involving Sussex police providing blank headed paper to the officers of a local authority, they were supposed to be investigating, for those officers under investigation to write their own letter of exoneration, mainly to protect the jobs of chief executive Derek Holness, District and Assistant District planning officers Ashley Brown and Ian Kay. Sounds impossible, but yes, it is true. And that/those reported crime(s) remains un-investigated to this day, but is a historic allegation that will not go away.

 

Of course there were other police and council officers involved in this particular cover-up, including Detective Sergeant Keith Lyndsay. Allegedly married to a councillor's daughter. He was the principle police officer and conspirator. Who handed an empty folder to the CPS, who then said there was not enough evidence to prosecute - in the full knowledge that nobody had been interviewed. I.e., there had been no investigation.

 

That means the Crown itself was part of the cover up. So where do you go when the State is covering up crime?

 

 

Adolf Hitler at the 1936 Olympics, Sieg Heil mein Fuhrer

 

 

ADOLF - In the eyes of many looking on at the antics of Vladimir Putin, there is an inescapable similarity between the Russian president, effectively a dictator, and the former German chancellor. We are also reminded of Sussex Police, who also beat up prisoners who are asserting their rights to a fair hearing, and when they don't get that, an effective remedy. The United Kingdom is rife with human rights abuses that fall far short of Putin's Russia, but nevertheless, are serious issue on our radar. MPs and Councillors just attend meetings and talk a lot. Then they have meetings to discuss what was said at other meetings. It is a job creation scheme for people who talk a lot of hot air, but actually do nothing.

 

 

 

 

 

The Public Service Protection Law Enforcement Police Accountability and Integrity Act 2025

 

Preamble: An Act to ensure accountability and integrity in law enforcement by mandating the investigation of reported crimes, providing protections for informants, and imposing penalties on officers who neglect their duties. This Act seeks to strengthen the accountability and integrity of public officials in the United Kingdom by ensuring the proper investigation and prosecution of all reported crimes, regardless of the individuals or entities involved. This Act seeks to strengthen public trust in law enforcement and public administration by ensuring the impartial and independent investigation of all suspected criminal activity, particularly where conflicts of interest may arise. Making it the duty of every citizen, including those practicing law, in such cases suspending professional legal privilege in the interests of protecting the public and interest, instead inserting in all codes of conduct, the duty to report uninvestigated crimes and cover-up perversions of the course of justice.

Sections:

1. Purpose of the Act:

a) To mandate the thorough investigation of all reported crimes.

b) To protect informants from retaliation.

c) To ensure accountability and integrity within law enforcement agencies.

2. Definitions:

a) Law Enforcement Officer: Any individual employed by a law enforcement agency at the local or national level.

b) Informant: Any individual who reports a crime or misconduct to law enforcement authorities.

c) Neglect of Duty: Failure of a law enforcement officer to investigate or take action on reported crimes.

d) Conflict of Interest: A situation where a law enforcement agency or officer has a personal or financial interest that could affect the impartiality of an investigation. To include being paid by or receiving any form of remuneration, even at arms length, from a person, organisation or other body such as another local authority (council or police force).

 

e) Where one organisation works with another organisation to cover-up crime, in failing to conduct a proper investigation, or no investigation at all, a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice will have been committed.

 

f) This extends to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), who on being presented with a case where there has been no evidence gathering, interviews of the complainants, and no interviews under caution of the suspected offenders, on the part of an investigating authority, including the police, then the CPS will be party to the offence.

3. Investigation of Reported Crimes the D
uty to Investigate:


a) All public officials, including police officers, civil servants, and local authority employees, shall have a legal duty to investigate and report any suspected criminal activity that comes to their attention in the course of their duties. Failure to fulfill this duty shall be considered a serious breach of professional conduct.

b) All reported crimes must be thoroughly investigated by the responsible law enforcement agency.

c) Law enforcement agencies must document and report the steps taken in each investigation.

d) Independent oversight bodies shall review cases where allegations of neglect are made.

4. Protections for Informants:

a) Informants shall be protected from arrest, detention, or any form of retaliation when reporting crimes or misconduct.

 

b) There shall be strengthened protections for whistleblowers who report suspected criminal activity within the public sector.

 

c) Any retaliation against a whistleblower for making a protected disclosure shall be considered a serious offence and subject to severe penalties.

 

d) It shall be the duty of any person, employee of a local authority, or company providing services to a local authority, including legal firms, secretaries, solicitors and barristers, discovering a cover-up of a crime to report the crime, or fall foul of the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861, themselves becoming part of the, or any cover up and failure to investigate crime.

 

e) This extends to the provision of advocacy services and providing legal advice as to ways to avoid detection of any cover-up or failure to investigate crime, or report a suspected crime that has not been investigated, or it is suspected or reasonable to assume, may not have been investigated.

f) Legal support and protection shall be provided to informants to ensure their safety and rights.

g) Whistleblowing protections under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 shall be extended to informants in criminal cases, who need not necessarily be employees.

 

h) There shall be established an independent body to investigate and adjudicate whistleblower complaints.

5. Accountability and Disciplinary Action:

a) Law enforcement officers who are found to have neglected their duty to investigate reported crimes shall be automatically suspended pending investigation.

b) In serious cases of neglect, officers shall face disciplinary action, including potential dismissal and forfeiture of benefits.

 

c) The failure to investigate or report suspected criminal activity shall be subject to disciplinary action, including:

 

  i) Suspension without pay
  ii) Demotion
  iii) Dismissal from employment
  iv) Forfeiture of pension benefits in serious cases

  v) Criminal prosecution and imprisonment of up to 10 years in more serious cases

  vi) Life imprisonment in cases of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice

d) An independent tribunal shall be established to adjudicate cases of alleged neglect and determine appropriate penalties, forfeiture of pension benefits (as proceeds of crime) and prosecution in the public interest.

6. Conflict of Interest and Recusal:

a) In cases where there is a potential conflict of interest, such as a local police force being funded by a local council under investigation, the local police force must recuse themselves from the investigation.

 

b) Independent Investigations: Where a conflict of interest is identified, or there is a reasonable perception of bias, in the investigation of a crime, the relevant law enforcement agency, including the CPS, shall be required to recuse itself from the investigation.

 

c) In such cases, the investigation shall be transferred to an independent agency, such as the National Crime Agency (NCA), or another appropriate law enforcement body with higher standing.

d) As may be determined by any outside law enforcement agency, a Judicial Review or Public Inquiry or may be deemed necessary to conduct further investigations such as to ensure impartiality and fuller investigation into any failings of the system.

These measures aim to ensure impartiality and maintain public confidence in the investigation process.

7. Public Inquiries:

a) In cases of systemic failures or widespread misconduct within public bodies, the government shall establish a statutory public inquiry to investigate the matter thoroughly and independently. The terms of reference for such inquiries shall be determined by Parliament and shall include the power to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence.

 

b) In serious cases, such as institutional failings comparable to the Horizon Post Office scandal, but not necessarily on that scale, where any member of the public has been the victim of long term institutionalised discrimination, as part of any investigative failings, a Public Inquiry shall be conducted.

 

c) The failure of any law enforcement authority to investigate any complaints on any one matter numbering five in total, shall warrant a public inquiry.

d) The Public Inquiry shall be independent and have the authority to investigate all aspects of the case, including systemic issues and individual accountability.

 

e) In relation to historic allegations that remain un-investigated, there is no statute of limitations. Historic cases may be retrospectively reviewed, with Public Inquiries into any failings by way of providing an effective remedy in the United Kingdom.

 

f) Where the United Kingdom fails to adequately address issues under truncated domestic legislation, such as to offer no effective remedy, the victims shall have a recognised right to petition the European Court of Human Rights and/or the International Court of Justice in the Hague the primary judicial body of the United Nations (UN) or World Court.

8. Independent Oversight:

a) The State shall establish an independent body to oversee the investigation and prosecution of all reported crimes, with a particular focus on complex cases involving public officials.

 

b) This body shall have the power to conduct independent investigations and make recommendations for further action.

 

c) An independent oversight body shall be established to monitor the implementation of this Act and ensure compliance.

d) The oversight body shall have the authority to conduct audits, initiate investigations, and recommend disciplinary action.

e) Annual reports on the effectiveness and impact of this Act shall be published and made accessible to the public.

9. Public Confidence, Transparency and Accountability:

a) Law enforcement agencies shall implement measures to restore and maintain public confidence in the justice system.

 

b) There shall be increased transparency in the investigation and prosecution of crimes involving public officials.

 

c) There shall be regular reports on the progress of investigations and prosecutions shall be made publicly available.

d) Transparency initiatives, shall include easy public access to investigation reports and disciplinary actions, free of any hindrance, masking attempts or restriction, all such reports to be deemed as public documents on the public record.

 

f) In the event of an attempt to limit public access to investigation reports, there will be an investigation as to who and why such investigation reports were hidden from members of the public.

10. Compliance with Human Rights Act 1998:

a) All actions taken under this Act shall comply with the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) to ensure the protection of all individuals’ rights, most especially the complainants and victims of any failure to impartially investigate reported crimes.

 

b) Any failure to investigate reported crimes impartially, shall be deemed to be a violation of Article 14 of the HRA, as institutionalised discrimination.

 

c) Where the United Kingdom fails to adequately address issues, such as to offer no effective remedy, the victims of crimes that have not been investigated shall have a recognised right to petition the European Court of Human Rights and/or the International Court of Justice in the Hague (ICJ) as the primary judicial body of the United Nations (UN) or World Court.

 

d) Where the UK is unable or unwilling to provide a/any effective domestic remedy, Legal Aid shall be provided to the victims of un-investigated crimes, such as to prepare an application to the European Court in the first instance, and failing that, to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

11. Effective Date:

a) This Act shall come into force six months after receiving Royal Assent.

 

b) A dedicated unit within the Home Office shall be established to oversee the implementation of this Act.

 

c) Regular reviews of the Act shall be conducted to assess its effectiveness and make necessary amendments.


12. Short Title:

This Act may be cited as the The Public Service Protection Law Enforcement Police Accountability and Integrity Act 2025.

 

 

 

 

Sir Keir Starmer's first speech as newly elected Prime Minister, Number 10 Downing Street 5th July 2024 - Labour Party

 

 

Sir Keir Starmer - Prime Minister

 

 

THE CLASS SYSTEM - In the UK, the rich get rich by exploiting the workforce, using battalions of surveillance administrators at a ratio of 4 seat polishers to every 1 productive worker. The system is geared to draining every last ounce of blood from their victims via taxes. It is like one vast concentration camp, where the guards outnumber the inmates 4:1

 

     

     

 

 

 

 

Nazi death camp executions. Direct action killing of humans inconvenient to their cleansing and world domination agenda was a World War Two horror exemplified by the factory gassing of concentration camp inmates. Putin's Russia is not that different, when push comes to shove. Effectively, this is what Russia is doing to Ukrainians at the moment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If social injustice leads to crime, then building more prisons is surely a sign that government policies are not working.

 

 

 

THE PLAYERS HEADING INTO 2025

 

 

 

 

Sir Keir Starmer

 

 

 

Angela Rayner

 

 

 

Rachel Reeves

 

 

 

David Lammy

 

 

 

Yvette Cooper

 

 

 

 Lord Richard Hermer KC

 

 

 

 Shabana Mahmood

 

 

 

 Lisa Nandy

 

 

 

Steve Reed

 

 

 

 John Healey

 

 

 

 Wes Streeting

 

 

 

 Ed Miliband

 

 

 

Bridget Phillipson

 

 

 

 Pat McFadden

 

 

 

 Louise Haigh

 

 

 

Ian Murray

 

 

 

Jo Stevens

 

 

 

 Hillary Benn

 

 

 

 Peter Kyle

 

 

 

 Liz Kendal

 

 

 

Johnathan Reynolds

 

 

 

 Lucy Powell

 

 

 

 James Timpson

 

 

 

 Sir Patrick Vallance

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

European Court of Human Rights The International Court of Human Rights Adolf Hitler World War Three

 

 

 

    

 

 

Adolf Hitler and chum They are proponents of the Renting Age and Financial Slavery, as part of their kleptocratic agendas - not that far removed from Putin's vision where Russia dominates the world, supported by allied nations. Until, the final conflict, when there can be only one. And it will not be China that comes out on top. Though, many think they have commercial domination plans of their own.

 

In Wealdenland, they have been building executive houses to enable Russian oligarchs and other drug dealers and oil barons to launder their money. It appears not to bother this council's conscience one little bit. Just so long as they get a fat pension, by investing in oil and gas companies. To date, no British prime minister has made any effort to close the legal loopholes that have allowed the United Kingdom to become the money laundering capital of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

LINKS & REFERENCE

 

 

 

     

 

Adolf Hitler

 

Adolf Hitler

German Chancellor

 

Herman Goring

 

Herman Goring

Reichsmarschall Luftwaffe

 

Heinrich Himmler

 

Heinrich Himmler

Reichsführer Schutzstaffel

 

Josef Goebbels

 

Joseph Goebbels

Reich Minister Propaganda

 

Philipp Bouhler

 

Philipp Bouhler SS

NSDAP Aktion T4

 

Josef Mengele

 

Dr Josef Mengele

Physician Auschwitz

 

Martin Borman

 

Martin Borman

Schutzstaffel

 

Adolf Eichmann

 

Adolph Eichmann

Holocaust Architect

 

Erwin Rommel

 

Erwin Rommel

The Desert Fox

 

Rudolph Hess

 

 Rudolf Hess

Auschwitz Commandant

 

Karl Donitz

 

Karl Donitz

Submarine Commander

 

Albert Speer

 

Albert Speer

Nazi Architect

 

 

     

 

Nazi executions of prisoners in World War Two   What is the modern meaning of the word (adjective or noun) Nazi?

 

 

 

 

Nazi Swastika german flag

 

 

 

 

 

 Copyright © Injustice Alliance 2024. This website is protected by Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention, and Articles 18 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Injustice Alliance avers that the right to impart information is a right, no matter that the method of communication is unpalatable to the State.