THE LLOYD'S SWINDLES AFFECT YOU ADVERSELY

Lloyd's underwrite almost every insurance policy issued in the UK. It is of importance that, if you are pursuing an insurance claim through the courts, you get a fair hearing. If you fail you will be saddled with a bill large enough to discourage you and others from challenging insurers again. As you will see there are no fair hearings for insurance claims. Part of the problem is that Lloyd's are short of cash. They accumulated losses of around £8 billion between 1988 and 1992 as a result of asbestos related illness, and disasters like the Lockerbie crash, the Piper Alpha fire and the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Names are currently suing Lloyds allegedly because they were enticed into syndicates without being advised of the extent of asbestos related claims. The judge in this case is, unbelievably, Colman J upon whose impartiality and integrity doubt is cast by the contents of the letter below. Many of the Names in the insurance syndicates are either members of parliament or members of the judiciary. It follows that legitimate insurance claims will be wholly or partly denied. Now form your own opinion but bear in mind that honest criticism of judges can land you in prison because in Law there is no such thing as an incompetent or crooked judge. Do not dare scandalise these rogues!

___

<<TEL. ELLESMERE 01691 622339 THE LYTH, ELLESMERE

FAX 01691 624134 SHROPSHIRE, SY12 0HR

January 1998

The Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, Lord Irvine of Lairg, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW

The Lord Chancellor

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE COLMAN & MR JUSTICE TUCKEY

Re The Society at Lloyd's (Plaintiff) -v- several hundred Names (Defendants)

A

1. Who, in 1996, put on this case a judge (Colman J) who had previously worked for the Plaintiff?
2. When Colman J was removed in 1997, after publicity about his previous role began to emerge, who put on this case another judge (Tuckey J) who had also worked for the Plaintiff?
3. At the time of their engagement by Lloyd's, in 1982/83, many of the originating wrongs had already been committed, and much of the great cover-up had already begun. Both these judges were, therefore, likely to have had prior knowledge of some of the underlying facts.
4. In the case of Tuckey J these facts seem to have been kept secret by Lloyd's, and hidden from the Names ever since his report.

6. Did Colman J advise the Court of this conflict of interest at earlier hearings in 1996

and 1997?

7. On Wednesday 3 December 1997 Tuckey J declined to recuse himself despite his involvement with PCW. He informed the Court that it was entirely untrue to say that the finding of his inquiry in 1983 was that "there had been no dishonesty: that was not the conclusion we reached".
8. If Simon Tuckey QC did find dishonesty (as implied above) he cannot, as a judge, sit for the Plaintiff; if he did not, as alleged elsewhere, he cannot sit for the Defendants, because there was dishonesty.
9. On 8 December 1997, the opening day of the current hearing, Tuckey J went to great pains to avoid making mention of the real conflict of interest, although twice given the opportunity to do so.

It is one thing for a judge to have been acquainted with details paid for by the Plaintiff, however long ago, and for whatever reason; it is quite another thing to keep silent about it in a relevant case.

10. Concerning both judges the Plaintiff knew these facts well. A summary and evidence about the events is attached.

B

1. Who decided that none of the hearings should take place in public, in flagrant disregard of the rights of the Defendants under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights? (see also B2)
2. Who decided that a closed court would be "in the interest of morals, public order or national security", or that "publicity would prejudice the interests of justice"?
3. The only publicity during the first year of the hearings was by way of carefully crafted press releases from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff used threats of legal action to stifle any attempt by this Defendant to criticise them in public.
4. Even in the Commercial Court justice should be manifestly done.

C

D

Further comment:- Another judge, Millett LJ, a leading Mason, has also been involved in Lloyd's scandals. He was a Name in a syndicate that, as deponed by Royston Leicester, swindled one of Mr Leicester's companies. He made judgements against Mr Leicester who was pursuing his company's claim. Millett also played a part in Geoffrey Scriven's persecution. He also made an adverse judgement against Bydand Limited in the Bucks. County Council/ Chiltern District Council/DTI/Official Receiver scandal. This is the man who has fought to keep the names of Masons secret. The Cardinal has just promoted him to Law Lord. He will be adjudicating in human rights cases. Here is how the Lord Chancellor might reply to L R Jebb, QC via Court Services.

<<Dear Jebbsie, The Cardinal went ballistic when he saw your recent letter. He spent hours eating oranges peeled by his minions and drinking elderberry wine from a Pugin decanter. An internal memo was issued to the effect that all judges have to be briefed to ensure that you never win another case. By the late afternoon he was pissed out of his mind with something stronger than elderberry wine. I was able to convince him that you wrote your letter to persuade your client that you were earning your corn. His message for you was "Tell the c-nt that he should never put his f-cking signature to a f-cking letter that might get into the f-cking public domain".

Tom Legg was probably the mandarin who did the Lloyd's fix with Colman, Tuckey and Millett. He had plenty of experience of dirty tricks. As Lord Chancellor's secretary, he worked with MI5 dirty tricks department in Ireland. He regularly visited IRA prisoners offering them leniency in return for their informing on their mates. It could be said that Tom has personality defects and is an embittered man. Tom's pride was severely dented and his mind blown when his first wife ran off with somebody like the milkman or dustman. Since then he has sacrificed decent human beings while he licked the arsehole of authority. What I did not know until recently was that he was a Labour Party supporter. Robin Cook's future would appear to be in a safe pair of hands in the Sierra Leone scandal that Tom is investigating.

If you want to help your client you should contact one of Labour's lobbyists who will put you in touch with the Minister delegated by Windbag Blair. Make sure that you pay the going fee for the go-between. Your client must make a substantial donation to the Labour Party. He must then fly to the Seychelles and deposit the same amount in a numbered Seychelles bank account. He will find the account number on his luggage ticket when he disembarks in the Seychelles. He will be shadowed by MI5 throughout to ensure that he is not too clever for his own good.

My messenger will deliver this letter into your hands. Shred it as soon as you read it or you could finish up like Gerald Bull. Yours fraternally, R SLICKER to the Cardinal.>>

***BILDERBERGBLAIRBILDERBERGBROWNBILDERBERGSTRAWBILDERBERGIRVINEBILDERBERGWOOLFEBILDERBERGBINGHAM***

THE CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION

This body, chaired by a leading Mason, has now a backlog of 1,000 cases and is looking for more money to keep up with its workload. It probably meets for only a few hours each month and has extended holidays. The backlog is a pointer to the quality of our judges and it does not include civil cases where there have been miscarriages of justice. Civil cases usually involve money. The outcome is determined by money. There are probably ten times as many miscarriages of civil justice. That is why there isn’t a Civil Cases Review Commission.

Consider also the massive backlog of complaints against solicitors and the failure of the Legal Services Ombudsman to deal with the shortcomings of the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors. If any of the regulatory bodies were of any use the offenders would not persist in offending.

For the annual report of the CCRC write to Brother Sir Frederick Crawford, Royal Arch Degree, at CCRC, Alpha Tower, Suffolk Street, Queensway, BIRMINGHAM B1 1TT.

***BILDERBERGBLAIRBILDERBERGBROWNBILDERBERGSTRAWBILDERBERGIRVINEBILDERBERGWOOLFEBILDERBERGBINGHAM***

Letter from Suzon Forscey-Moore to the Guardian on 21 July 1998.

<<Your leader write (Worrying Judges, July 21) is right to say that the undemocratic manner of elevating Sir John Hobhouse, Sir Peter Millett and Lord Justice Phillips to our highest court is an insult. The Lord Chancellor, as the writer states. "has been elected by nobody."

But it is not so accurate to imply that, following the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights, judges will be making decisions of principle for the first time.

The chief characteristic of British justice has been judicial deference to the principle of protecting privilege. Human rights are based upon the concepts of equality and respect, quite opposite principles. These Lords will have to make some leap to bridge that gap.

An elected Procedural Complaints Court to safeguard our rights would be more effective and progressive. Suzon Forscey-Moore , Organiser, CFAFH>>

Comment:- The Cardinal may have been elected by nobody. He was elected by a nobody, his former pupil, Windbag Blair - working to Bilderberg principles that put the Masons at the top table. The only countries that require Human Rights legislation are those with crooked judges. If the judges are not made accountable no legislation is meaningful.

***BILDERBERGBLAIRBILDERBERGBROWNBILDERBERGSTRAWBILDERBERGIRVINEBILDERBERGWOOLFEBILDERBERGBINGHAM***

WINDBAG BLAIR ……TODAY'S ROBERT MAXWELL

Welfare benefits are paid out of the Pension Fund. The UK Pension Fund is healthier than those of USA, JAPAN, Germany, France and Italy are. Projections show that it should be in surplus by the year 2050. Nobody wants welfare fraud but it is no greater than the frauds committed by the privatised companies that fleece the public and make fat cats of their directors. Blair is cutting back on benefits so that he can direct more money to education and health. However, he is waiting until 2001 before he passes the pension cash to the NHS and education. This is to increase his chances of being re-elected. This will result in suffering and death of the sick. Progress in education will be delayed unnecessarily for a further three years. The bottom line is that Windbag, like Maxwell, is robbing the pension fund to keep the government afloat. It looks more and more likely that Windbag's government will suffer the same fate as Maxwell's empire did. Have a sail in your yacht to Les Canarios, Windbag. Watch out for MI5.

***BILDERBERGBLAIRBILDERBERGBROWNBILDERBERGSTRAWBILDERBERGIRVINEBILDERBERGWOOLFEBILDERBERGBINGHAM***

WARRINGTON MAGISTRATES COURT

Sir Paul Condom is rooting out bent coppers in the Metropolitan Police. Happily there are no such scumbags in the Cheshire Constabulary. They may prosecute the Warrington Clerk to the Justices over misprision of felony. A Defendant was refused a Mackenzie Friend who was ejected from the Court. (see case R.v Leicester Justices ex parte Burrows 1991/92) The Clerk, Mr D C Swift, Ll.B. is now delaying exposure of the names of six magistrates and two Clerks of the Court. (see case R. v Malvern Justices ex parte Leigh 1986). One well-known solicitor from Liverpool states that he will never be surprised by what happens in Magistrates Courts. We have experienced repeatedly unbelievable corruption in Magistrates Courts even when the Bench includes women. There is something about magistrates and local councillors that leads one to question their sanity. They are essentially nobodies who have power thrust upon them and they simply cannot handle the power. Perhaps Windbag Blair will set up a training school for magistrates and councillors. Let us get the message over to them that we all fart but that we don't have to stink like them all of the time. ooooooooooooooooooo

Published by J M Todd, Misbourne Farmhouse, Amersham Road, Chalfont St Giles, Bucks. HP8 4RU