The Royal Courts of Justice: The part in the organised crime.

"Think I'll give up living and take up shopping instead" BB King

The Royal Courts of Justice (RCJ - misnomer if ever there was one.)

See link http://www.criticalreader2004.blogspot.com and Metropolitan Police to be linked later.

January 19th 2004.

After the rush to get me in for the final stage of my appeal after the travesty in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) after the one in Manchester tribunals (M.E.T.) (link referenced above and also http://www.criticalreader2007.blogpsot.com/ respectively, the delayed date (delayed by me because I knew my rights) approached.

I drove to London on the 18th and stayed in a hotel overnight to make sure I was in the court at the right time. I had been warned that contentious cases were quickly struck out if the litigant was a few minutes late.

I had never been to the RCJ before, but despite its size and maze of corridors common sense told me what to do.

The assigned judge was LORD JUSTICE PETER GIBSON and I was his first case of the day - he was so keen to start (presumably hopefully without me) that the hearing began early and I was alone, my witness hadn't arrived.

Gibson was in a hurry, I was not allowed to read my skeleton argument.

My witness arrived soon after we had begun, he also witnessed Q C McMullen in the EAT (see link above) and was quite experienced within the RCJ.

He arrived just after the first issue had been raised.

This was the out of time factor and Gibson told me that it would not be an issue.
The file in front of Gibson contained documents showing perjury all down the line, false court documents from M.E.T. and the EAT, witness statements from those witnessing perjury and one document in particular.

This was the DTI document that I had not had at the time I had been forced to hand Lancashire County Council (LCC) see link above via M.E.T. for the bundle in M.E.T.

The EAT will only accept documents that have been utilized in the lower court so the EAT had not had a copy of that document either. Now I could add it and it showed that my whistleblowing of 2001

(see link http://www.criticalreader2006.blogspot.com/ had been entirely correct. LCC had acted illegally.

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 was relevant.

Gibson became agitated, it was a behavioural pattern I learned to recognise so well. They begin reasonably enough thinking that I won't know what I'm doing and when they see that I do they show annoyance, then extreme irritation and finally anger. (See link http://www.woodsresearch2003.blogspot.com)

I reminded Gibson that no case could be won on perjured evidence or testimony and quoted case law: R v Sharpe/Stringer 1937 and the 1917 case law R v Hewitt. I seemed to have made them up.

My points on Employment Law drove Gibson almost to fury. He was struggling with law books in front of him but only for effect, he wasn't seriously trying. Gibson said that he had never heard of Croner's Employment Law including Health and Safety and I had made it up. My witness couldn't believe what he was witnessing.

Gibson began rambling in disjointed manner, he was clearly well past his sell-by date.

I'd had enough of being part of this charade (for which I had paid), it was an insult to my intelligence and a waste of my witness's time - again.

I asked Gibson, "Have you finished?"

"Yes, yes, yes".

"Right, I'm reporting you to the police".

He went bright red, drip white and fled the court.

We were all left to assume it was over.

My witness and I went straight to Charing Cross station on Agar St that being the nearest police station and after being laughed at for some time my persistence paid off.

A PC Roger Smith began taking my statement, then his sergeant joined us. He decided matters were serious and could see evidence from my copy file. The CID were invited in and a Mark Brigham joined us. My statement was completed in two hours.

Roger Smith would ring me if there were details missing and he did, he rang me at home a few days later wanting, for example, the full address of M.E.T.

I was to wait and see if I was to be allocated a crime number.

Towards the end of January 2004 I was in London as guest speaker at a conference, my research was being published, but I took time out to visit Charing Cross again. I spoke to Mark Brigham who told me there was an allocated crime number. 6200836/04.

Lord Justice Peter Gibson was to be investigated as the criminal he was.

Gibson had an MO. I knew he was complicit in ignoring false county court documents that ruined a farmer. Gibson had a duty to order an investigation into the production of those documents under the County Court Act 1983 Sec 133, 135, 136 or the Contempt of Court Act 1981 Sec 1 and 2(2) at least. He had not.

McMullen in the EAT should have taken that route also (see link referenced above) and Gibson should have acted in McMullen's failure to act.

It was all a joke, all at my expense again and if Gibson hadn't blinked an eye in the ruination of a farmer then he wouldn't lose any sleep over the travesty taking place in my case.

Falconer knew about Gibson as he had known about M.E.T. and the EAT and did nothing.

More parasites on society - a criminal in Gibson committing criminal acts at the tax payers' expense (one can only presume that he was paid for his time on the 19th Jan 04.)

The Met police told me I would hear from a NICHOLAS WOOD, a more senior officer given the seriousness of matters and N WOOD and the Met police will have their own entry under http://www.criticalreadercw8.blogspot.com/ yet to be added. Gibson and the RCJ will be shown again to be what they are within the Met police entry.

http://www.criticalreadercw4.blogspot.com/ is next in the series, Lancaster County Court again, more pieces of the jigsaw are being fitted. This is organised crime with Lancashire County Council and Freemasons running the show.

Carol Woods Lancaster May 12th 2007.