h-rtitle.gif (7604 bytes)

Crime - Organised - Institutionalised - Corruption - Fraud - Protection Rackets, run and managed by judicial chair occupants, in a free-for-all state of abundance. Note below the arrangements between the administrative, the judiciary and the media; read of the all-embracing guarantee in place, in contempt of all law : the root shall be pointed to.

WHERE IS JUSTICE? Read below:-

"The court has inherent jurisdiction to stay an action which must fail; as, for instance an action brought in respect of an act of State"

*Link from here to founder's tribulations in 1972-75 and marvel at the creativity of allegedly honourable officers of Justice and the Law in the mother of all PSEUDOdemocracies

  • And by extension any act of any public servant who is appointed, retained and maintained by other public servants for all of whom, the state, as employer, is ultimately responsible, including abusers of judicial chair occupancy. Hence, the billions paid out as covered in the affidavit which visitors can link to directly from here [*Link].
  • Link also from here to the founder's conclusions as of 1972-75 when the great Metropolitan police were seen to be nothing but accessories to and abettors of the rampant fraud and corruption through the courts organised and processed to fruition while Members of Parliament were -as they still do- promoting the waffle that amounts to nothing short of:-

'independence of the judiciary to act in contempt of ALL LAW (national and international) in a pseudo-democracy.

*Link from here to proof of the parts the police play in promotion and expansion of the criminal activities instigated, processed and imposed on society by the legal circles. Read of assertions by a typical hypocrite, none other than the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Robert Mark QPM, when he spoke of FALSE RECORDS / FORGERIES by the legal circles while delivering his famous Dimbleby Lecture on BBC-TV in November 1973, 15 months after he received true copy of THE FORGERY advanced and promoted by the licensed criminals : solicitors and barristers for their evil ends in the case that opened Andrew Yiannides' mental eyes to the realities of life in the United Kingdom, a typical PSEUDOdemocracy. Can anyone enlighten Andrew and the millions of victims of the legal circles WHY NO PROSECUTION of the solicitors & the barristers in 1972 or thereafter?.

  • With such a facility in place (the words we point to above) and arrogant abuse of public office, can anyone assert, or argue, that Mr Andrew Yiannides, the founder of human-rights, was not right to determine that Justice has been abducted and that she is held captive in the dungeons maintained by her abductors who rape her daily in their courts? (>Hence the c reation of www.jusaticeraped.org <)
  • ALL Member States of the European Union are subject to the ruling which visitors, readers and researchers can access in the explicit page /yourrights.htm

*Link from here to the realities - in due course also a link to the warning (indirect but nonetheless very clear) for thinkers to recognise 

  • On 3rd March 2008 >someone's birthday< we released a House of Lords PRECEDENT CASE and reveal deliberations by their Lordships in respect of FRAUD - DECEPTION - CONSPIRACY & IMPLIED LIES BY KEEPING SILENT about any wrong imposed on any other.
  • >>> IN THE MEANTIME we have been naming and shaming a number who know of and engage in much more than just approve wrongs imposed on Mr & Mrs Average, the millions of taxpayers, in our allegedly civilised country / state / province / district of the European Union created by politicians, without reference to the taxed for fraud sucker-serfs, allegedly for the benefit of the citizens from FRAUD & CORRUPTION, among other promotions.

Needless to say the case entailed activities and practices by solicitors as Mr Andrew Yiannides was subjected to, decades later, by an old school friend, Mr Kypros Nichola of Nicholas & Co. in London. Mr K. Nichola bluntly abused the trust placed in him and indulged, in tandem with others, in criminal activities intended to cause the damages that were imposed on the targeted 'serf' by accredited - by the Law Society & Bar Council - allegedly Honourable Officers of the Supreme Court, the courts maintained by successive elected governments in the United Kingdom, one of many pseudodemocracies. In due course another revelation relevant to the arrogant 'inherent jurisdiction', through which to deny, obstruct justice & impose all manner of criminally created states on 'the serfs', who are taxed for the cost of maintaining criminals in public office, in pseudo-democracies.

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATE OF AFFAIRS, successive irresponsible Lord Chancellors and Home Secretaries who ignored and ignore all complaints and submissions by victims of the organised crimes we point to and expose in our pages, irrespective of the evidence and the law pointed to, by the victims of it all, the citizens who are called upon to pay taxes for the maintenance of criminals in public office.

[*Link from here to our exclusive page, covering confidential fraud as arranged THROUGH THE BEST KEPT OPEN SECRET in alleged democracies, European States. Elsewhere the foundations and corner stone upon which the operatives built the societies of their making using the bricks and mortar we cover in this and other pages. The visitor should not be under any illusion that the stars in the theatrical productions, covered in our pages were by any stretch of the imagination 'humans' who were / are gifted with any attributes that distinguish 'true humans' (>thinkers<) from animals.

Fraud in court  Council staff use Forgeries   Misconduct in Public Office. 2 cases relative to applicable law One Protocol says it ALL It betrays arrogant intentions Law Provides for THEFTS and it covers Judges too Judges' duties   TIME 4 CHANGE   & CHALLENGES Site CONTENTS - Table of Contents & ongoing work Your Rights & OBLIGATIONS to Society SITE SEARCH facility for any specific element / issue of concern to visitors / readers
COURTS : their Facilities Abused For ORGANISED CRIME : FRAUD Solicitor's Perjury & Victim Ignores it all Just like the Law Society always does Blackmailed or is it Just Conditioned & Subjugated Victims who join the club ? We name Lovers of blunt fraud through courts - Users of the facilities 4 illicit gains Local Authorities & FRAUD on 'serfs' the Taxpayers who are kept in the dark Police Party to & Endorsing Criminal Acts, Activities Arrogant Fraud FALSE Records & Contempt of Law by the legal Circles & Public Services The crafty ones & Vexatious Litigant PLOYS for the rewarded silent

* Information FOR victims who wish to co-operate by EXPOSING & CHALLENGING abusers of Public Office *

family.uk-human-rights justiceraped.org dssfraud.htm confraud.htm dadscare.htm contract.htm converts.htm MensAid
solicitorsfromhell.co.uk chancellor.htm theyknow.htm solfraud.htm sheknows.htm 4deceit.htm convicti.htm forward.htm


*Link from here to evidence. *Link also from here to a case when the abusers of the courts' facilities abandoned their plans for another targeted family

IMPORTANT INFORMATION for all victims of malpractice - misconduct - negligence, etc. TO NOTE

In the civil justice system in England and Wales, a judge presides over the proceedings that are argued by the opposing sides through the adversarial process. The process enables the court, judge, to reach a conclusion as to the truth of the facts in dispute. Thereat it is for the judge to apply the law to the facts proven, established at court.

The system as evolved is covered in the page 'English Legal System' and remains the same after the Woolf reforms.

An explicit Affidavit [*L] plus exhibits and
     letters to a Chief Inspector of Police
          one to solicitors
[*L] and another to the Lord Chancellor [*L] evince
               ORGANISED CRIMES
(Access and read the letter to the police in September 2006 [*L])

Access & read from one of a number of letters to the Prime Minister : * I believe that New Labour will deliver us from the wrongs we have been suffering for far too long. Use of our resources in terms of human potential and capabilities can and should be channelled through rights not wrongs, through positives not through negatives. It is our produce and ingenuity we can sell to others not the minefields of corrupt and bankrupt public services. * [*Link from here to the page, note the steps taken to ensure the Prime Minister forwarded / delegated submissions and evidence received at 10 Downing Street to the right Minister / Ministry because the submissions were in respect of ORGANISED CRIMES

3rd March 2011 added link [*L] to the BBC-TV Dimbleby Lecture in 1973 as the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Robert Mark prepared & presented to the sucker-serfs

crimesin.htm          KEY PageChanges 23/09/2009
Crimes Incorporated * Page created December 2006 *

hrbnrsml.gif (1162 bytes)

HOW & by WHOM are victims of Crime protected in the Republic of Haringey?
assault1.jpg (47489 bytes)
We invite other victims of criminal assaults by school thugs, in North London, the Borough.. oops the Republic of Haringey, in particular, to contact us and to consider first the facts stated in the explicit affidavit they can link to from the top of most pages.

assault2.jpg (34015 bytes)

A senior citizen, boards a 329 Arriva bus, standing, reading letters intended for copying and posting. He is punched on the back again and again by three secondary school thugs, in school uniform.
Apart from an elderly lady who was noted to be telling off the second thug who engaged in such vile activities, the rest of the passengers simply ignored it all.
Such apathy is not generated out of anything else but the evil ways with which the citizens are treated by those who are in authority.
From Senior police officers to politicians nothing but impositions of such a society CARE OF RECKLESS & BLUNT FAILURES TO APPLY THE LAW as each situation commands.
The creation of false records and reports in the order of the day as long as it all serves the plans of the evil-mongering organisers who ARE in control of an allegedly civilised democracy.
Visitors, readers & researchers are urged to access and read
[*Link to] an explicit letter which the founder of human-rights submitted to the editor of 'The Times' in 1996.
At the time EDUCATION & MORALS were part of ongoing debates and promotions by Ministers.
No prizes for working out why the letter was not published.
[*Link to an explicit letter on the right, 4 pages of it to Chief Inspector Thorpe who simply shoved his head in the sand as all abusers of public office do].


The victim will be seeking / demanding a true copy of the statement taken by the police from the victim. It covered HOW the assault was instigated and carried out by thugs from a school in Wood Green, Haringey. The school not far from Wood Green Police Station. The assault WAS RECORDED on Video in accordance with the bus company's practice because of the regular assaults on bus drivers, by the NEW GENERATION OF CRIMINALS  who are created by those who ARE in authority. It remains to be seen if the alleged guardians of the Law & the Citizens will comply and provide the warranted statement for publication in this page where it can be accessed by the World Jury, 'the targeted New Serfs of / for the expanding empire - by stealth - of the followers of the teachings by example stated in the most vile of works ever to have been presented to the sons of men, on planet earth'.






undercon.gif (286 bytes) Last Revised September 05, 2012 : Added links to page and from page to relevant material & evidence in other pages
Site reconstruction with ongoing improvements and additions to pages / site

The material and evidence in this page is released in the public domain because the Metropolitan Police, especially in North London, for the umpteenth time, failed to execute their public duties as the Law provides and as the fat retainers they receive from taxpayers' contributions stipulate. In so far as we are aware those who default to act, while in receipt of public funds, they are not simply acting in contempt of the rights of the citizens to protection from crime and criminals, they are receiving their fat salaries under false pretences by failing to perform as their retainers stipulate. (NOTE: Arrogant contempt for Article 29 of the Combined Treaties of the European Union

Visitors, readers & researchers are pointed to the elements spoken of by the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, when he returned to the United Kingdom, from the meeting of the European leaders in June 2005.(*Link to the page where we cover other elements of which the victims of the legal circles and the abused courts facilities are fully aware).

We request that visitors also access the page (*Link to it) where we released evidence in respect of the activities and the convenient defaults of arrogant and deceitful lovers of the system of operations and the activities we cover in an exclusive page. In the latter we relate the arrangements in place which ALL OF THE FRAUDSTERS WE ARE EXPOSING, IN OUR PAGES, FAILED TO ADDRESS WHILE PROMOTING THEIR FALSE POSITIONS & STANCE ON THE VERY ISSUE OF ORGANISED CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES. Needless to say the states exist because of and WITH THE BLESSINGS OF THE POLICE, as the explicit affidavit and the evidence we publish in this page establish without any doubt.

You will be reading in this page of THE POLICE THREATENING THE VICTIMS OF CRIMES. You will be reading of the police inviting one of the villains to attend hospital in order to create and secure false records for the scratches the villain caused to his arm when the villain and his brother-in-law smashed the window of a car in order to assault their victim while the victim sat in his car, & the victim's sister was making her way to the police station in order to report CRIMINAL DAMAGES TO PROPERTY, such as dents to the car the villains were kicking and to ask the police to attend the scene of the criminal activities. (*Link to transcript from a recording, the police intimidating, harassing, threatening other victims of criminal activities).

Read the affidavit below and learn of the background to the assault and what other alleged servants of the public had been up to as creators and users of criminals for their preferred kind of society. Read of how staff & officers from within the Local Authority had been and carried on engaging, as parties to false statements and creators of false records. Read of how the villains, the Local Authority staff / officers and the local police relied on solicitors, the local county court and the Magistrates Courts to act in contempt of the evidence and the law. Nothing but the best that CIUKU Enterprises offers.

Read of how Local Authority staff and officers were party to fraudulent misrepresentations. Read of HOW THEY RUSHED TO PROVIDE COUNCIL ACCOMMODATION TO THE STOOGES THEY WERE USING WITH OTHERS IN ORDER TO DEFRAUD A TARGETED LANDLADY OF RENTS DUE & PAYABLE FOR ACCOMMODATION TO THE USED. The used & ENCOURAGED IN DISHONEST & FRAUDULENT PROMOTION OF FALSE STATES, TENANTS, relying all along for protection by the local police who indulged in more than the threats to the victims of crime you read above. The activities of Council Staff & Officers for & in the creation of the false states, simply in contempt of the law. And their readiness to provide Council Accommodation to the encouraged and used in deceptions and fraudulent misrepresentations tenants, ONLY IN CONTEMPT OF THE RULES that stipulate : "Persons who make themselves homeless are NOT ENTITLED TO LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING".

IN THE INSTANCE AT HAND, the said tenants happened to be the stooges who were being used by others with the reckless co-operation of Council Staff & Officers, for and in respect of the FALSE STATES PROMOTED BY THE TENANTS &  LOCAL AUTHORITY STAFF & OFFICERS. ALL ACTING SO WITH INTENT FOR THE CREATION OF THE FALSE STATES and the elements that Stephen Knight wrote of in his work, 'The Brotherhood'. The information relative to the elements & matters the author wrote of, he attributed to a public servant.(*Link to the explicit extract).

ALL ACTING SO BECAUSE OF THE RECKLESS ABUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE from within the Local Authority, the Local Police, the Local Magistrates Court and the local County Court.

Needless to say the solicitors engaged in 'the usual activities and defaults for the creation of their own False States with co-operation from within the Local Law Enforcement Agencies INCLUDING STAFF & OFFICERS AT THE LOCAL COURTS, intended to lead to the conversion of targeted assets to legal costs.

Victims of similar activities, practices and wilful defaults by public servants who are reporting / publishing such matters in the public domain can place links in their pages pointing to this page and any other page they consider of value and relevance to the exposures they have published / are publishing. They should get in touch with us in order to inform us of such action and at the same time forward details of the URL's / web-sites and pages they would like for us to place links to such, in the left margin panel / window in this and other appropriate pages at this site.

Visitors who contact us after reading of the material facts and the elements we point to in this and other associated pages, who may wish to benefit from additional information can email the webmaster  

The Police promote falsehoods to the CICA
NOTE, for non-UK residents / citizens. CICA is the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority

  • Letter to a Chief Inspector whose name was given by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority as the senior officer who informed them that the victim of criminal activities and a violent assault (note plural) was responsible for it all.
  • A demand of the CICA officers / staff to confirm in a letter what was promoted & asserted, to them, by the police in Haringey was ignored. However the criminals in public office went one better and asserted that the exchanges between them and the police were confidential matters.
  • The moron who promoted such rubbish, was / is presumed to have been / be oblivious to the provisions of the DATA PROTECTION ACTS and  recklessly illiterate in law, if not wilfully Acting In Contempt of the Provisions of Articles 6 (& other Articles) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
  • Fraudulent in intent representations and abuse of public office in the order of the day. Gross dereliction in public office and all relying on one another. (Common factor)
  • Challenges and invitations - ALL IGNORED.
1it7ap7r_small.jpg (5048 bytes)
2it7ap7r.jpg (251913 bytes)
  • Contempt for the evidence.
  • Contempt for the Law.
  • Contempt for the right of the citizens to Protection from Crimes & Criminals.
  • Arrogant invisible services to fraudsters, and through defaults and omissions in the execution of public duties / office the initiation, of USED stooges, to crime; also the encouragement of recognised / known criminals.
  • Arrogant impositions on & abduction of the lives of the victim-citizens who are caused to research relevant law at the expense of their own plans for their lives and well being.
  • Blunt violations of the provisions of Articles 2, 3, 4, 5 and of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights.(Last pleaded in appeals lodged)
  • ALL thanks to the mentalities of Fraudsters club Recruits who are running around professing their fights 'for the rights of the serfs they target and use WHILE IGNORING THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO THE TAXPAYERS, under Article6 
3it7ap7r.jpg (274076 bytes)
4it7ap7r.jpg (234425 bytes)

The above letter with compliments to the following fraudsters club recruits. All, with the exception of Mr N. Scarth, arrogantly set about spreading malicious about the work & aims of Mr Andrew Yiannides' work; however, all without exception and with intent went about obstructing the work of Mr Andrew Yiannides for obvious reasons when one reads the exclusive page, at this website, which page ALL without exception failed to address the issues the activities raise and WE POINT to. One need only to know that ALL FELL IN LOVE with the arrangements in place FOR FRAUD APLENTY ON THE TAXPAYERS & THE CORRUPTION OF MORONS OF THEIR MENTALITY TO OTHERS & THE LAW. Their own practice of targeting victims of the legal circles and the courts FOR MORE OF THE SAME can be recognised by accessing material published in our pages and by looking into the practices of each one of the named. [1 Norman Scarth] [2 Maurice Kellett] [3 Johan Michael Richard Foenander] [4 Paul Talbot-Jenkins] [5 Veronica Beryl Foden] [6 Helen Patey]  [7 Ashok Mahajan] [ ]

January 1997 a letter to the Lord Chancellor
  • The issues raised with the Lord Chancellor nothing but the usual activities by and from the legal circles.
  • All with arrogant approval and endorsement of the criminal, in intent, activities by court staff and officers of the court.
  • The letter to the solicitors, below, covering such activities and, worse, an attempt to cause the client to endorse an affidavit that was laced with an element that did not reflect the truth of the matter or the real states of which the solicitor, who submitted such a document to the client was very much aware of.
  • Needless to say such activities are but the usual manifestations by abusers of trust and followers of the teachings, by examples stated in 'the most vile of works ever to have been presented to the sons of men'. [*Link from here to an extract from the work and to a comparison from another, which we invite visitors to this web-site, and researchers / investigators to consider]. 
  • One of the many elements and a typical fraudulent in intent activity in which all engage in with blunt arrogance, use of the Legal Aid facility in order to convert targeted assets to allegedly legitimate legal costs that invariably are born of theatrical productions enacted before tenth rate directors of the shows.  
Ignoring it all / 'the serfs' have no rights!
lc17ja7r.jpg (240357 bytes)
One of many, to numbers of solicitors who indulged
  • The very solicitors were writing to another firm of solicitors to forget the offer the other solicitors were making to their client for the damages they caused through breaches of trust and participation in abuse of the courts facilities as covered and exposed exclusively at this website. The reasons for their letter to the other solicitor? Simply BECAUSE the solicitors were expecting of the taxpayers to make good the damages the other solicitors caused to the client, care of the negotiations that were progressing at the Court in Strasbourg. [*Link to the other letter in the left margin of another page, *Link also from here to facts / realities stated on affidavit (below) for an eye opener].
  • The very solicitors also engaged in abuse of the Legal Aid facilities without ensuring that their clients had a case in the first instance. The clients, simply the used stooges who were assured protection for their parts in the constructive frauds on the targeted landlady, through ABUSE OF THE FACILITIES available to the staff and officers of Local Authorities as handlers of public funds for and in respect of Housing Benefit.[*Link fom here   to an explicit letter to the Fraud Section at the Department of Social Security - Leeds, Yorkshire]
  • Intriguing and interesting that the court ordered the solicitors to meet themselves the costs of what they engaged in without due process. And odd it was NOT that the process server the solicitor's used asked for directions how to get to the Eastern Avenue, Essex, the area where the procurer of invisible services resided(s). >In due course further particulars for the sucker-serfs<
  • In this page, below, a letter to another solicitor who engaged in the attempts to convert Housing Benefit, rents owing to a private landlady, to legal costs AS ORGANISED THROUGH criminals operating out of Haringey Council, as alleged public servants. Needless to say, the police not merely endorsing it all, but beneficiaries too; one need only consider the financial states of most Local Authorities burdened with the arranged influx of refugees and asylum seekers to the land of milk and honey, and fraud aplenty on the taxpaying 'serfs'. [*Link from here to the letter to the other solicitor who also engaged in attempts to abuse the Legal Aid facilities].  
antsolcr.jpg (63401 bytes)
Link to the very solicitors' parts in organised fraud on the serfs & the blunt corruption of morons through abuse of the courts' facilities.
Link from here to Chapter 21 from the work of the late Stephen Knight, 'The Brotherhood', his research on solicitors
Fraud, Corruption & None above the law - headlines (2001).
  • Let the headline news be a lesson to all who are running around proclaiming the type of rubbish others instil in them as if the law can be made an ass of, by such morons.
  • The headlines suffice and whether the police secured sound evidence or engaged in some cover-up cannot be treated by morons, as grounds for themselves acting in contempt of the law and the citizens' duty to report any criminal activities they have been made / are aware of, or victims of fraudulent court proceedings..
  • Yet we have victims of the type of fraud through abuse of judicial chair occupation as we expose in the page: http://www.uk-human-rights.org/solfraud.htm shoving their heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich.
  • When the illiterate in law promote rubbish that implies judicial chair occupants are not subject to the restraints of law and the same MORONS IGNORE THEIR DUTY TO REPORT CRIMINALS & CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES to the taxpayers, using idiotic excuses founded on failures by the police then the roles & the standing of such persons in society MUST BE QUESTIONED BY THE LAW ABIDING.

judarrer.jpg (73844 bytes)
The headlines suffice & whether the police engaged in a cover-up subsequently or failed to secure prosecutions is irrelevant.

Victims of the constructive frauds through abuse of the courts facilities are ignored by one and all. It all leads to the states we cover in our pages, care of gross dereliction in public office by the police. They systematically fail to execute their public duties as their retainers stipulate because they serve undeclared agendas and other plans for the sons of men, 'the serfs'.

Challenging ongoing contempt by police in 2006
  • Below the content of the letter in HTML for links to and from.
  • We will include communications that ensued as a result of the submissions in the letter that was delivered prior to events that raise further questions as to the attitude of the police in Haringey in respect of criminal activities that secondary school children engage in as packs of wolves that are let loose on society, in an allegedly civilised state and member of the European Union.
  • Nothing of concern to the persons whose priorities have been to create the societies of their own making, and as dictated to their conscious through the teachings the higher ranks among them have been following for decades, which creations we experienced and know of.
pcs06p1r.jpg (151761 bytes) pcs06p2r.jpg (233872 bytes)
In 1997 challenging solicitors for improprieties
  • The solicitors and the firm are to be registered at SolicitorsFromHell.
  • Presently the individual solicitor and the firms he was working for are to be included in a list of firms & named individuals who failed to act on very clear instructions from their clients.
  • The Law Society is to be called to account for issuing annual Practise Certificates to abusers of trust, to persons who indulge at their clients' expense and subsequently simply rely on one another PLUS the Law Society and its clone, the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors to shove all complaints and evidence in support of the contemptuous of the law activities of persons it licenses, in the trash cans of the Law Society's Centres of operations.
  • Each firm and individual named and to be named, exposed, simply defaulted and indulged as each pleased, IN CONTEMPT OF CLEAR INSTRUCTIONS.
  • Solicitors engaging in defaults, the usual scenarios intended to lead to legal costs charges leading to the need to challenge the Legal Aid Board [*Link to Legal Aid letter]
  • Of the very elements, the creators / editors of the New Testament informed the sons of men, as of the time when they included the words attributed to Jesus Christ in The Gospel According to St. Luke. (*Link to the quotes page)
  • Visitors / readers should NOTE the challenges in the letter on the right.  
gw29my7r.jpg (169186 bytes)
Reference to the extract from the work of the late Stephen Knight, relative to the capabilities and practises by solicitors / legal circles, proof that they follow teachings by examples stated in the Old Testament (*Link) 
Evening Standard - London lesjl99r.jpg (86177 bytes)

CORRUPT --> Detectives!

CORRUPT --> Judges!

CORRUPT --> Lawyers!

CORRUPT --> Government Ministers!

It all sounds familiar somehow
Where did we hear of such?

One reads in our pages of the common factors 'the serfs' are victims of in pseudodemocracies.  The article refers to 'a contender whose credentials and record of success somehow were by-passed by one who was instructed to investigate such matters in the UK in 1998.

Researchers, readers, visitors and victims of the rampant Fraud & Corruption can access the page where we publish the text, in HTML for links to and from, by using this *link.

The capabilities and purposes of the police are clearly depicted in 'The System' the operatives have been running for far too long. One thing is for certain, however, the average citizen CAN work things out, especially WHY AND WHAT FOR. [*Link to plans followed]

Letter below addressing the issue of ongoing CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES  & denial of rights to protection from KNOWN CRIMINALS
NOTE please, that the original text is copied below in italics & additional information, by way of links, etc., is presented in a smaller and not in italics font.

Telephone (Intl.0044) (Local / United Kingdom) 020-8888-9275 email: - yiandrew@bulldoghome.com
(Visitors / readers / researchers see Footnote & note the above email address is outdated and use of the amended connects to the webmaster)

4 September 2006

Borough Commander - Haringey Police
London N17



To be signed for [Image of delivery signed for, later]

Our Ref.:        BCHPYECD

Your Ref.:      THE LAW & Public Duty.




Dear Mr O’Brien

Re: Attached documents, present and past promotions asserting reliance on the police.

I attach hereto self-explanatory communication covering criminal damages to property WITH INTENT.

The reasons for referring the issues covered in the letter are twofold.

In the first instance, the persons to whom the attached letter was addressed indulged in a moonlight flight. They defaulted to make good the damages they caused to the property and to deliver the keys to the flats they had been occupying, They also failed to offer a forwarding address where they could be contacted. When I telephoned both on their mobile telephones they undertook to return the keys and in the course of telephone exchanges with Mr. Yasa (Stuart) T-Brown, for the first time, he asserted that he and his partner had no intention to make good the damages they caused to the property. He also qualified that, ‘such were their intentions and that was why they failed to comply with the terms of their contractual obligations and why they ignored the reminders as covered in the letter, reprint of which is attached hereto. However, Mr Y (Stuart) T-Browne went further; he asserted that they broke the glass after they went to the police to ask for assistance, in order to gain access to the ground floor flat. IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIS PROMOTIONS the police officer they saw told them to break the glass; he also stated emphatically that he had kept / noted the number of the officer who so directed them.

In the second instance, this is not the first time when persons who indulge themselves and cause ‘criminal damages, WITH INTENT, to the properties of others’ appear to rely or assert reliance on the police to support or acquiesce their criminal acts. On each other occasion, when similar reliance was promoted by such persons, the ‘failures of the police to act as the law stipulates’ were duly recorded. Reliance on the local police was and has been promoted one’s too often, Mr O’Brien. I have, over the years, recorded and reported more than enough in respect of such matters and it was not just issues that rested on breaches and defaults by the police to execute their public duties in accordance with the evidence delivered plus the law pointed to the police. Records were kept, when the police did not just fail to execute their public duties, as the evidence and the law commanded, but certain officers also went as far at to promote deliberate falsehoods to other government departments and alleged servants of the public.

I request that you or your personal secretary acknowledge this communication by return. It is imperative that you write back within 14 days, to inform me whether or not ANY POLICE OFFICERS would or could instruct / direct persons (of apparent low IQ, and or moral standing) to act as the ‘criminally motivated Mr. Y (Stuart) T-Browne & Miss Emma-Louise Finlay appear to have been / be.

Note please that at this juncture my intentions are to either eliminate the promotions by Y (Stuart) T-Browne as false assertions or to secure confirmation that the police did / could have acted as he stated to me over the telephone. The assertions, by Mr. Y (Stuart) T-Browne implied reliance on the police as instigators. In the alternative the issue could be promotions on reliance for anticipated support by the police. In the past such matters were part of ‘the law and order as practised by public servants in Haringey’ and in other London areas, that I kept records of.

I hasten to add that criminal acts were part of the scenarios in which officers and members of staff, at the Local Authority were more than just implicated. They were playmates as of inception and planning of the offences; they were parties in the very execution of the criminal in concept and execution acts. Such matters are partly exposed in the public domain, on the Internet, where letters and supporting evidence (as reported / delivered to the police) will presently be released because enough is enough. [This PAGE and other pages (*F2), NOW UNDER re-construction, simply using RIGHTS & ABIDING TO THE CITIZENS' OBLIGATIONS to inform the suckers - the tax paying ill-informed 'serfs' as arranged through abuse of public office and the media barons. The last with their Intellectual Prostitutes too busy informing the serfs 'where a high profile person, a Lord, went for dinner because his appetite was not satisfied at home].

It is about time that the police in Haringey cleaned the slates I have been keeping for far too long. In the circumstances a personal meeting with you will be appreciated, prior to the submissions and claims I am preparing for delivery to The Treasury, to the Home Office and to the Prime Minister’s private office. Needless to say the issue of ‘contempt for the law’ is the overriding element as all (including your predecessors at Haringey) received more than enough submissions and reports from my person over a number of years. The issue of maintaining at the taxpayers expense, in public office, persons who bluntly breach their duties to the public and ARROGANTLY ACT IN CONTEMPT OF THE LAW THEY ARE MEANT TO SERVE, happen to be issues that are unacceptable and offensive to ‘decent law abiding citizens’.

For an example of submissions and challenges as received by Haringey Council (among other Councils) and Ministers, access the page, below, on the Internet. There I published (among other pages) under what circumstances, how and why the government was caused to announce the introduction of the Bill of Rights, in 1997.


Please note that I act also for and in respect of blunt and arrogant defaults / breaches in public duty to afford to me personally, that which the law provides to victims of crime.

Andrew Yiannides
Agent For Mrs. D. Englezakis

ENCL.   Reprint / copy of letter and attachment as per text.

To whom It May Concern

Above, the institutionalised - as organised by alleged public servants - for fraud on 'the serfs' & for corruption of morons. Nothing but contemptuous of the law activities and defaults, care of reckless abuse of public office, by the Law Enforcement Agencies : Police & Courts.

Below, stating on affidavit, the facts, the realities and the practices as organised by and through alleged servants of the public, within the Republic of Haringey. The deponent, a victim of ORGANISED CRIMES THROUGH THE LEGAL CIRCLES & SYSTEM, the Law Enforcement Agencies : the Police & the Courts can testify to the fact that Haringey Borough Council was & is NOT the only Local Authority from within which such practices and activities ARE treated as acceptable & normal, as opposed to illegal & indictable. The activities and events covered by the deponent are but the tip of the iceberg when it comes to application of the Law by those who are retained and maintained by the State to serve, allegedly, the law and the citizens. The citizens are simply subjected to such imposed CRIMES, on the unsuspecting, the naive and the gullible: the serfs who are ALWAYS directed & advised to go see a solicitor, as Members of Parliament invariably advise their constituents. Of such advise was one of the targeted victims, Mrs. Despina Englezakis, the sister of Mr Andrew Yiannides, the beneficiary. ACCESS, READ & DIGEST THE AFFIDAVIT BELOW [*Link from here to a good starter paragraph relative to the case it covered]. Read of blunt contempt for the law, from and by a used stooge, to the police and solicitors, one and all  relying on abusers of judicial chair occupation to entertain and endorse ALL OF THEIR CRIMINAL IN INTENT & FRAUDULENT ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES. Refer to the exhibit, the letter from the Legal Aid Board, which we released in our pages as of the days when our challenges produced such results. [*Link from here to it and consider the arrogance of the blunt abuse of facilities by alleged servants of the law and the citizens]. Thereafter we expect of thinkers to use grey matter and to recognise that THE ACTIVITIES ARE UNACCEPTABLE in any allegedly civilised State, let alone one that allegedly rests and is founded on principles of Law and Order. (*F3 : important footnote pointing to a House of Lords Ruling & Deliberations on elements of law applicable in the states covered)

Affidavit EXPOSING THEM ALL - CIUKU Enterprises & New World Order Code of Ethics
  • The uninitiated and victims of Crimes Incorporated, are requested to access and read the extract from the work of Stephen Knight, 'The Brotherhood' for a grasp of the evil forces at work. [*Link from here to the extract]
  • Mr Andrew Yiannides, the founder of human-rights was experiencing the very elements and was the victim of the practices within the Law Enforcement Agencies and the courts. For years he had to endure the arrogant contempt for the Law by the police, from juniors to Senior police officers right up to the private office of Sir Robert Mark, and his successors, as Metropolitan Police Commissioners of the time the licensed criminals indulged within the Royal Courts of Justice (1972-76 ).
  • Many the alleged victim-challengers who promote the powers that be yet fail to report the criminal activities they were victims of especially after going for and converting to lovers of the facilities in place for the corruption of morons of their mentality & adopted new moral code.
aaffp01r.jpg (125697 bytes)
aaffp02r.jpg (175085 bytes)
aaffp03r.jpg (187159 bytes)

Affidavit CHALLENGING the idiotic proceedings instituted by the solicitors who, 'allegedly', had been representing the tenant who 'allegedly' had been made redundant. For months on end the tenant was not meeting his contractual obligations while blaming Haringey Council's Social Services for failing to process an 'alleged' Housing Benefit application. The very Council Services fully aware of the extensive liabilities just playing along and promoting all manner of false assertions about the scam / conspiracy they were party to. They simply ARRANGED for the tenants to benefit from A MOONLIGHT FLIGHT / move to a Council property AS SOON AS THE DEFAULTERS WERE SERVED WITH a Default Summons. Needless to say the move was in contempt of the rules that persons who render themselves homeless DO NOT QUALIFY for Council Housing, & in contempt of sections of the law, the Theft Acts. Party to the whole scam, Haringey Police the officers of which set about intimidating and threatening the victims of ORGANISED CRIMES, failed to bring about prosecution of the tenant and his associates for the VIOLENCE & ASSAULT THAT CAUSED GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM to one of the intended victims, as arranged by all who took part in ORGANISED ABUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE : INSTITUTIONALISED ORGANISED CRIME.

  • We apologise to visitors for our inability, for the time being, to publish the text in HTML for links to and from as in other instances, in our pages.
  • The content of the affidavit WILL BE RELEASED in HTML as soon as we have resolved a problem with 'the conversion of documents saved as .doc to the html format.
  • For the time being the interested and concerned citizens, readers and researchers SHOULD click on the thumbnail images of each page and when the full frame version opens up, use of a programme such as Photo Editor (Microsoft) should provide the platform to print the images.
aaffp04r.jpg (193255 bytes)
aaffp05r.jpg (186402 bytes)
aaffp06r.jpg (155366 bytes)
aaffp07r.jpg (152074 bytes)
  • We point visitors, readers and researchers to the copyright stipulations and conditions at the bottom of all pages at this web-site.
  • We do not expect nay of the many charlatans and stooges who contacted Andrew Yiannides as victim challengers who were/are serving other interests, to consider the implications IN RESPECT OF THE ORGANISED CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY which morons alone are capable of overlooking & the criminally motivated shoving in the dark corners of the evil / corrupted minds.
  • We urge a visit to the holocaust image of one such 'victim' who was party to issues covered at... [*Link]
ukhumanrights/aaffp08r.jpg (197393 bytes)
ukhumanrights/aaffp09r.jpg (183356 bytes)
Page10ukhumanrights/aaffp10r.jpg (138684 bytes) Page11
aaffp11r.jpg (149538 bytes)
  • Use of the material should be made with the mandatory reference to the origins of the material, and no commercial use (for pecuniary gain or profit should be contemplated) is to be permitted / attempted without license in writing from the creator of the web-site and the intellectual property owner(s).
  • Linking pointing to the material and the evidence at this website is invited, and encouraged. We will gladly provide / create anchor points, bookmarks for direct links to material of interest to other web-masters and victim citizens who act as their OBLIGATIONS to other citizens command.
aaffp12r.jpg (188764 bytes)
Page13aaffp13r.jpg (151788 bytes) Page14aaffp14r.jpg (75127 bytes) Page14 as swornaaffp14r.jpg (75127 bytes)

Below the content of the affidavit in HTML format for links to and from the text - elements


The solicitors who indulged in the application were made aware that their clients had been served with a Default Summons founded and resting on unpaid rents. Yet they had the audacity to apply for Legal Aid for the concocted case their client was to make at court with their assistance AS OTHERS ORGANISED, including Haringey Council staff and officers and the local police engaged in, care of the husband of the First Defendant, Mr Sotirios N Englezakis.

Victims of similar practices who ARE STATING SUCH ACTIVITIES in the public domain, are invited to contact us in order that we may arrange for LINKS to and from the respective statements & thereby co-operate on the issue of OBLIGATIONS TO SOCIETY AT LARGE


PLAINTIFF Mr Nihal Wijemuni


SECOND DEFENDANT Mr Andrew Yiannides



I Andrew Yiannides of 65 Abbott's Park Road London E10 6HU in the London Borough of Waltham Forest Designer / Technologist and Consultant in Clothing Manufacturing MAKE OATH and say as follows:-

1. Save where otherwise expressed I depose to the facts set out in this my affidavit from my own knowledge and from documents I had and or have in my possession, documents I perused and from conversations I had with any other party referred to herein who in the past confirmed the factuality of what I herein repeat and I firmly believe to be true because conversations and or matters herein deposed of by me were not at the relevant times denied and or challenged by such other parties as I refer to.

2. I am the elder brother of Mrs Despina Englezakis, the First Defendant, hereinafter referred to as the landlady in this action. I was instrumental and it was through me that Mr N Wijemuni hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff, negotiated with and secured a Shorthold Tenancy Agreement from the landlady in respect of the rooms on the First floor at 68 Rathcoole Gardens London N8, hereinafter referred to as The Premises. Throughout all relevant periods I was and have been acting as agent for the landlady. The Landlady and the tenants signed the said agreement on 20 November 1994; true copy of the said agreement appears on pages 1, 2 and 3 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" attached to this my affidavit now produced before me. When moving in with his wife, the Plaintiff stated that his wife Ms P C Congalves was pregnant; in consideration of that fact the landlady asked me to endorse the agreement with an additional term/undertaking on her behalf; it was anticipated at the time that an elderly lady in occupation of the ground floor flat was to move to a newly built old Peoples home round the corner. For the purposes of this my affidavit Mr Nihal Wijemuni and Ms P C Congalves will be refereed to as The Tenants, jointly.

3. I beg to refer to page 1 of the said Agreement; it was duly signed by the parties thereto in my presence. The landlady's address was not endorsed on the said agreement at the time for her intentions were to walk out of the matrimonial home in Ilford, because of verbal and physical abuses by her husband. As her elder brother I did and was doing my best, over a long period of time, to cause her husband to recognise that impositions on any other through violence were unacceptable in our society. At the time of the signing of the agreement the landlady's interests had not been registered at the Land Registry and she had been advised not to abandon the matrimonial home until her interests were so registered.

4. Soon after the birth of The Tenants child, the tenants announced they were to go to Portugal to visit the parents of Ms P C Congalves and the Plaintiff asked me and the Landlady to transfer and use funds from the security deposit held under the terms of the Agreement and he promised to make good the tenants liabilities upon their return. While the Tenants were away the Plaintiff asked an uncle of his to stay at The Premises. Upon their return to the United Kingdom, The Tenants brought along as their guests, two younger brothers of Ms P C Congalves. Soon afterwards they invited along another brother of Ms P C Congalves with his pregnant wife. It became apparent at the time, through conversations that The Tenants were seeking to secure Council accommodation, because of overcrowding and I told the Landlady there was nothing we could do; it was a matter for Council officials to draw their own conclusions. It was not long afterwards that the plastic cups to the taps in the bathroom and later in the kitchen 'somehow' broke. The landlady and I looked for replacements while these were temporarily fixed; the Landlady and I looked upon such matters as additional attempts by The Tenants to secure Council accommodation; the Landlady and I agreed that it was a matter for Council officials.

5. Notwithstanding the additional working occupants at the premises the Tenants failed to make good their promise to make their rent payments and rather than replace the security deposit as the Plaintiff had promised the Plaintiff allowed the rent arrears to build up. From £ 600 in February 1995 these gradually built up to £ 2350 at which time the Plaintiff announced that he was to be made redundant. I advised the Plaintiff to ensure that if he was not offered alternative work to register at the unemployment office and to apply for Housing Benefit, and to produce all necessary documents to the relevant departments. I specifically asked of The Plaintiff to submit to me copies of his application for I wished to avoid delays and or mistakes at and or by himself and or Local Authority staff who had built up a notorious reputation for 'sitting on applications and delaying to deal with such matters for weeks and months on end. The Plaintiff defaulted to comply.

6. Between February and May 1996 the Plaintiff remitted to the Landlady two cheques in the sums of £ 500 and £ 300 and by 20 May 1996 the outstanding balance due had risen to £ 3130.00 which was unacceptably high; the relevant entries appear on sheet 2 of the Schedule of charges and remittances as recorded for the Premises under the respective tenancy agreement. True copy of the aforesaid Schedule appears on pages 4, 5 and 6 of the exhibit "A.Y.1" attached to this my affidavit. In the meantime, for over two months the Plaintiff had been asserting there were ongoing negotiations between his union and his ex-employers in respect of his redundancy entitlement. By May the Plaintiff also asserted that a solicitor had been briefed and was handling his redundancy claim and negotiations and that he was anticipating settlement within a week or two. I asked to see evidence and copies of correspondence to that effect; none was produced. In the circumstances I was left with no choice but to chase up myself the Housing Benefit Section at Haringey Borough Council which I contacted back in March after I was told by the Plaintiff that he had lodged his application there. My renewed enquiries were treated with contempt by the staff at the Local Authority and they asserted and relied on promoted 'confidentiality principles governing the applicants submitted documents'. Staff at the local Authority refused to state if an application had been submitted and even if one had been they were not obliged to state so and or to give any information to the providers of the accommodation in respect of which HOUSING BENEFIT is remitted.

7. It was not the first time that I had to deal with such mentalities from the staff of the Local Authority and I decided to take matters further. I demanded for a copy of the application by and from the Plaintiff. Eventually on 28 June 1996 the Plaintiff furnished me a single page copy Headed " Haringey Housing Benefits, Documents Received Form". True copy of the submitted copy document appears on page 7 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" . It evinces a visit and delivery of payment slips on 19 March 1996. I decided not to pursue the matter further with the Plaintiff, for he could easily assert 'past payment slips', before the claimed redundancy which he used to rely upon in justification for his failures to remit rents due to the landlady. I was concerned at what were, on the face of it, further evidence of inordinate delays by staff of the Local Authority. I telephoned and a young man I spoke to was arrogantly rude to me, so I telephoned again to obtain the Chief Executive's office and after speaking to his private secretary I transmitted my hand-written comments and the copies evincing pay slips handed in on 19 March 1996 and a subsequent visit on 15 / 4 / 1996. I wrote later to the Chief Executive a letter detailing other matters as well in order to bring home the message that Local Authority staff fail to co-operate with Landlords and or their agents thereby creating problems all around and giving rise to many a questions being raised by one and all.

8. Following exchanges of letters with the Chief Executive's office the Landlady received eventually a letter dated 3rd July 1996 wherein she was informed for the first time that the Plaintiff had applied for Housing Benefit to be remitted to the claimants direct; true copy of the said letter from the Chief Executive's office appears on pages 8 and 9 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit. The document also refers to 'Payment is being reinstated..' which matter alone gave grounds to suspect dishonesties indulged in and covered up all along. I told the Landlady it was time to give notice and to act. Following letters to the Plaintiff demanding evidence as to the alleged redundancy and the ongoing negotiations he had been asserting for months, and his failures to comply, still relying and asserting Council Staff faults I advised the landlady that we should issue a Default Summons for and in respect of the outstanding and due rents. The relevant notice was also given to the Chief Executive in a letter by the Landlady; true copy of the said letter, dated 17th July 1996, appears on page 10 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit.

9. The issue of remitting rents to tenants at the tenants' discretion/direction alone, had been the subject matter of numerous telephone calls and conversations with Local Authority staff; inclusive of and with the Secretary of the Chief Executive. The revelation that the tenant had applied for payments to be made to the claimants and not to the landlady, the provider of the accommodation, caused me to raise issue yet again with the Chief Executive's office. Following failures by the Plaintiff and the Local Authority to act and correct the errors of their ways the Landlady and I proceeded to Edmonton County Court in the afternoon of 24 July 1996 where the Landlady applied for the issue of a Default Summons in the sum of £ 4180.00 inclusive of costs for the Summons. The following morning, 25th July 1996, I telephoned the Chief Executive's office and informed his secretary, Miss Jan McNicholas, that a Summons had been applied for and that in accordance with the information furnished to me and the Landlady by the staff at Edmonton County Court it would be issued that day or the following day. Miss McNicholas telephoned back in the afternoon and asserted that remittances had been posted to the Landlady's address. The landlady and I informed Miss McNicholas that no remittances had been received; following further telephone calls it was asserted that the tenant had given to the Local Authority staff the address of the Landlady as 27 Bawdsey Avenue; I pointed out that the landlady's address, given and used in correspondence for months, was not as 'given by the tenant' and that references to their correspondence should clarify the issue. In a long conversation with Miss Jan McNicholas I stated that if indeed any remittances had been sent to the address as given to the authority by the tenant should be stopped and that the landlady was not residing at the address where remittances had been directed to by another person without reference to the landlady. I then explained the landlady's circumstances and Miss Jan McNicholas requested of the landlady to write requesting cancellation of the stated on the day 'uncleared giros' and in the meantime replacement giros would be sent to the landlady at the address where she had been and was residing in Wood Green. The requested letter was transmitted to the Chief Executive's office; true copy of the said letter from the Landlady appears on page 11 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit. In her letter of the same date Miss Jan McNicholas confirmed receipt of the Landlady's latter through a post script in her handwriting. In her letter of 25 July 1996, true copy of which appears on pages 12 and 13 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" attached to this my affidavit. In her letter Miss Jan McNicholas refers to three remittances in the sums of £ 1868.75, £ 187.72 and £ 187.72 stated to have been posted on 3rd July, 8th July and 22nd July respectively; it was noted that the first was not sent until the 3rd of July on the very day the Chief Executive's office was writing to state the tenants had asked for remittances to be made directly to them. The author states also that she had information the cheques remitted had not been cashed.

10. In the evening of 25th July 1995 the landlady and I visited the Plaintiff to deliver a letter and a statement of account showing the amount due and owing as had been the basis upon which the Landlady applied for Default Summons. I spoke to the Plaintiff and explained to him that if indeed he had received no funds no Housing Benefit over the period March through to July 1996 he should contact his solicitor upon service of the Default Summons and to ask his solicitor to serve Third Party Notice on the Local Authority; I also told him that he might be able to Claim damages arising out of the failures if its staff to deal with his application if what he had been stating to us was true and factual. I further explained that the Landlady and myself had been patient and understanding whilst we believed every word he asserted to us; I informed the Plaintiff that his failures to act after given notice and after the landlady and I had received letters from the Chief Executive's office the situation had somewhat changed. True copy of the letter dated 25 July 1996 (evincing unchecked spelling before printing) and the attached statement of account as was delivered to the Plaintiff in the evening on the date appear on pages 14 and 15 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit.

11. In the mid-afternoon of Wednesday 29th August 1996 the Landlady received a telephone call from the wife of the Plaintiff; she stated that she had gone to the Local Authority and that Housing Benefit staff told her their Landlady was wrong to issue the Summons because they had paid the rents due. The Landlady informed her that the letters received from the Local Authority established a catalogue of errors and mistakes and that in any event the cheques allegedly sent to the wrong address hardly represented half of what was due and owing to her at the time. As a result of their telephone conversation it was agreed that the Plaintiff and his wife would secure proof of Housing Benefit remittances banked and the Landlady should telephone them Saturday evening to arrange to call on them at the premises on Sunday 4th August when and the Plaintiff would adduce the documented evidence and issue a cheque for the balance in order to settle the Plaintiff's liability and to avoid entering judgement in the case before the Court.

12. In the afternoon of Saturday 3rd August 1996 I received a telephone call from the Landlady. She herself had received a telephone call and was informed that the tenants on the first floor at 68 Rathcoole Gardens were busy moving out and that over the previous three nights they had been seen moving boxes and other items out of the premises. I proceeded to collect the Landlady from her mother's address where she had been staying since leaving the matrimonial home in Ilford. We went to The Premises, rung the bell and the brother-in-law of the Plaintiff opened the door for us. I followed him to the first floor while the Landlady dropped in to the front room at the ground floor to see the old lady living there. I enquired of the guest of the Plaintiff where his sister and brother-in-law were; I was told his sister had got her own flat and moved away and he was packing some of her things to be collected; he said he did not have an address to give me; asked if he knew where the Plaintiff was he stated he did not know where his brother-in-law was. The guest took me to the kitchen where I noted he had and was busy packing kitchenware in boxes; the side and wall kitchen cabinets were empty already. I asked if I could have a look in the other rooms and I was taken to the front room; the Landlady joined us there; in her presence I asked again where the Plaintiff and his wife were; the guest repeated what he had already stated to me; the Landlady asked him if his sister had separated from the Plaintiff; his reply was "I don' t know my sister has got her own flat now". I then informed the Landlady that the guest was busy packing items in the kitchen; she followed me there with the guest accompanying us. I enquired again of him if he knew where the Plaintiff was; again he stated he did not know. I enquired of the landlady what she thought of the situation; she said it was obvious the tenants were 'skiving off', disappearing to destinations unknown in their efforts to evade meeting their rent liabilities. She then told the Plaintiff's guest that it was not a nice thing to do; asking her to wait until Saturday, to telephone that evening to arrange a meeting the following day when the idea was to disappear without meeting their rent liabilities. I asked him if he knew of the Plaintiff and or his sister having entered any appearance at Edmonton County Court; he said he did not know; they had told him nothing about such things; he said he was only asked to pack items for his sister because she got her own flat; he added that he was going to stay on until he moved to Windsor in a few weeks time. I informed him that the Landlady and I had made no issue of his presence in the Premises for well over a year, because we looked upon him only as a guest of those who had secured a tenancy agreement; however, because of the fact the contracted parties had been and were moving away changed the situation; he was not party to the tenancy agreement and as such he could not stay on even if he offered to pay rents in advance, because as far as the landlady and I were concerned he was party to organised deceptions; I told him that he would be treated as a trespasser if he was to attempt to stay on. The Landlady and I decided that we should take action in order to jolt the Plaintiff and his wife to recognise that they could not simply walk out of their contractual obligations in the manner they had elected. The Tenants knew of both our telephone numbers and our addresses; they knew how and where to get in touch with us; there was only one possible action for us to take to safeguard the interests of the landlady. I told the guest that in the circumstances the Landlady and I had no option but to take possession of the luxuries the Plaintiff and his wife could afford to pay while ignoring their rent liabilities which they had allowed to built up through the unemployment claims and the redundancy negotiation assertions. I emphasised that the luxuries we were to remove would be held on lien until such time as the rents owing were paid to the Landlady; the said luxuries are a new television set, a new Video, a stack of Hi Fi equipment with speakers, and a satellite receiver. The guest stated he did not wish to get involved with and in police matters and that he had nothing to do with the situation. The items were placed on the back seat of my car and I handed to the guest two sheets of A4 paper. I had listed the items taken possession of and I qualified the reason, the causes and the terms under which the items would be returned to the Plaintiff and or his wife. As evidence the tenants had been caught in the act of moving the landlady and I took into the car also two small boxes of packed (as wrapped by the guest) kitchenware, which it is quite possible I did not list on the paper I gave to the guest. The Landlady was about to enter the car when the guest called out the Plaintiff wished to speak to us on the telephone; apparently he had contacted the Plaintiff with the mobile phone he was holding; the Landlady remarked it was odd he knew how to contact the Plaintiff considering he was stating earlier he did not know where the Plaintiff was; she told the guest of the Plaintiff that the time for talking was over; she stated she would rather have a letter from the Plaintiff; it should be posted to the address he had known for months and the Plaintiff should also quote the address where the Landlady and I were to respond. As she attempted to get in the car the Plaintiff, his wife, their child and a friend of theirs emerged from the corner of the road and hurried towards the car.

13. The Plaintiff came over to the driver's door and begun to call the Landlady and myself thieves; challenged if he had put in any Defence to the Default Summons he said he had passed it to his solicitor and that I should get in touch with him; I informed him that his solicitor should either submit a Defence and Serve Notice on the Local Authority as I had recommended, provided that it was their fault no rents had been received by the landlady, the party he had contracted with, or they write to state how their client intended to make good his liabilities after advancing many an unsubstantiated yarn. There was only one action for the Landlady and I, as her agent would advise her to take, if his solicitor failed to act as was essential and deemed proper in the circumstances; it was to apply for Judgement when the time for entering a defence had lapsed. Thereafter it would be a matter of public records with the credit standing of both, him and his wife adversely affected. I told him that it was a matter for him and his solicitor to secure evidence that any of the stated Housing Benefit remittances posted to the Landlady to the address he had given to the Local Authority had in fact been received and banked by her. I emphasised that IF the local Authority had been at fault his solicitor would have written to the Landlady in the first instance and proceeded to serve Third Party Notice. His landlady and I would be prepared to discuss the balances due from The Plaintiff AFTER the Local Authority had made good their remittances stated to have been posted to the wrong address, cancelled and reissued but never received at the correct address. It was therefore imperative at that point in time for him to secure either remittances for Housing Benefit and his own remittance to clear the rent liabilities or an application for Judgement failing satisfaction of the debt. The Plaintiff ignored my statements carried on calling the Landlady and my person thieves and demanding the return of the luxuries we had taken possession of. He threatened to call the police because we stole his hi fi and television and I told him that indeed it was his right to call upon the police but he should first read the two papers I gave to his brother-in-law earlier; he walked away and his friend came over to renew the allegations that the Landlady and I were thieves. I informed him to read the very two papers the Plaintiff had been asked to read; there followed a long conversation as to how the matters unfolded over the previous three months; the many questions that arose in respect of statements by the Plaintiff and staff at the Local Authority. I heard the Plaintiff calling out to me as he approached the car while he was crushing the papers his guest gave him; he threw them down on the road. I told his friend that he should speak to a solicitor because theft implied taking illegally, without due cause and or reason; taking in order to benefit, to pass on as ones own, to sell, to profit from. I then informed him that what the Landlady and I had done was to take possession of, to hold onto on lien, until such time as the debtors met their liabilities; the notes I had given to the guest, earlier on, were clear; the luxuries would were to be returned as collected upon satisfaction of the outstanding debt. The friend moved away and the Plaintiff took over his position by the door which he first hit hard with his knee and then begun to kick at while banging hard at the window. He started shouting to me to get out and to fight him like a man. I told him I had no intention to lower myself to his level; I preferred to act and deal within the law; I pointed out that my notes were clear and he ought not to discard them as he did if he intended to rely on either a solicitor or the police they would be referred to the said notes. The Plaintiff became more aggressive as I repeatedly refused to open the car and get out (I had used the electric central locking system to stop him opening the doors). His guest walked over by the driver's door and the two of them begun to bang on the door and the window. At that point I shouted at the Landlady to call the police; she called out that both she and the others had spoken to the police and both had been told it was civil matter; I told the Landlady to go to the police station up the road and to explain personally that matters had by then developed into criminal damages to property because of the kicking and the banging of my car.

14. The Landlady walked away and the attackers begun to bang with all four hands on the window; it shattered glass falling inside all over. The Plaintiff grubbed my right arm which I had stretched out in an effort to switch the engine on; he pulled it up and over the shattered window and his brother-in-law went for the keys in the steering column. With my left arm I attempted to stop the repetitious efforts to grub the keys; in the process the attacker caused the wiper mechanism to switch on; the wiper hit his right arm which he was resting on the windscreen; he pushed the wiper back with force; later I discovered the mechanism was damaged and has to be replaced. By then I noticed that my hand was bleeding badly above the wrist; I demanded of the Plaintiff to let go of my arm so that I could got to hospital to have the haemorrhage seen to; he ignored my pleas and demands; blood was coming out of the cut at force indicating either an artery or a vein had been punctured or cut. The friend who had been standing in front of the car moved out of the way; the brother-in-law of the Plaintiff refused to return the keys he had managed to pull away from the steering - ignition lock. Luckily the ignition key had broken in the lock itself and I was able to start the car. I drove with my right hand holding the steering wheel and with my left holding down with the pressure the vein that was bleeding badly. I called at a friend's on the way to Whittington Hospital because I was concerned for the safety of the properties taken on lien and knew I would be responsible for, if something happened to them.

15. I was taken straight in to the emergency rooms because of the bleeding; a nurse attended to it immediately and a doctor saw me soon thereafter; he dealt with my injuries; I was told not to worry about the swelling in my wrist for it was blood that had accumulated under the skin from the punctured vein. When I was asked to take off my top and shirt I found out that my right top arm area was very painful as I stretched it out; the pain got incruciatingly high as I tried to lift my arm up and outwards; the best I could manage was about 45 degrees; I could not stand the pain beyond that position; on proper investigation I was told it was not a dislocation or fracture; I had pin-pointed the centre of the pain in the muscle; I was told if the pain did not subside over the next week or so I should see my doctor; I was prescribed tablets for the pain after X-rays of my arm. I am presently to attend physiotherapy at my local hospital because the pain persists. The damage to the vein has healed, but I cannot use my right arm freely and I am restricted from carrying on with the usual work that I can get nowadays as a pattern cutter / grader.

16. From the hospital I made my way to the Premises; there was nobody there and I asked the old lady on the ground floor if she had seen the Landlady; I was told she had gone to her mother's. I went there and I explained what happened to me, why my arm was in a sling, and why I had not been in touch earlier. I explained that I needed for her to go with me to the local police station, at Wood Green; I wished to give a statement to the police in respect of that afternoon's events. As we walked to the police station I was told the police who attended the scene after I drove away had ignored the shattered glass on the street and her statements whilst they concerned themselves with the properties taken on lien; also the bandaged forearm of the guest which the police invited him to have seen to and recorded at the Hospital, but he refused to do as he was invited. The police at Wood Green took details of the events that afternoon leading to the attack and issued a Victims of Crime leaflet to me and told me to contact Hornsey Police station on Monday. True copy of the Victims of Crime leaflet front page appears on page 18 of the Exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit.

17. In the morning of Sunday, 4th August 1996, I arranged for a professional photographer to visit the place where my car was parked in the afternoon of the previous day and to take photographs of the shattered glass on the road which the police ignored; also of the car damages as were caused by the attackers. I also arranged through my insurance company for Autoglass to supply and fit a new glass to the driver's door; I also obtained a replacement second hand door mirror and casing in order to make the car road worthy. I wrote also a hand-written letter to the police which I asked the landlady to deliver to the police at Wood Green stating the crime reference number. True copy of the said letter dated 4th August 1996 appears on page 17 of the Exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit.

18. On Monday morning, 5th August 1996 I telephoned the police at Hornsey and left a message for the Crime Desk to telephone me in respect of the events the previous Saturday. I received a call back later and it was arranged that I should call there at 10 am when an officer would write down my statement. I telephoned the landlady's solicitor; the landlady had telephoned him at home the previous day and informed him of the threats to arrest and imprison both of us unless we returned to the Plaintiff the luxuries taken in possession and held on lien. He was aware of the issues and we arranged for him to attend with me the meeting with the police for I wanted to clear up any misunderstandings and or misinterpretation of any fact and or statement as had arisen out of the dishonest activities of the Plaintiff. I arranged thereafter to visit the premises with the Landlady and to inspect these. We were informed by the old lady on the ground floor that the tenants on the first floor had been busy all night Saturday moving staff out of the premises including the fringe and the cooker. Inspection of the kitchen and the bathroom (which were open) confirmed her statements to us; we could not access the other two rooms and it was decided to change the barrel lock of the front door and to issue keys to the new lock to the other tenants in the event the guest of the Plaintiff elected to stay behind and in occupation of the premises.

19. In the morning of Tuesday 5th August 1996 I arrived at Hornsey police station five minutes earlier and was waiting outside; the Plaintiff arrived within a couple of minutes and walked past me straight into the police station; a police constable came outside and begun to assert that I was in a lot of trouble; that the landlady and I would go to prison for five years because we stole the properties of the Plaintiff and his family. I pointed out to the constable that we had never met, that he ought not to address me as he was doing because it was not up to him to declare and or determine judgement through by accepting and or relying on the statements of one party whilst ignoring the statements of another; I enquired of him if he was by any chance the person who had ignored the shattered glass on the road and the fact that one of the assailants had refused to take him up on his invitation to go to hospital; I told him that the refusal by the party indicated enough and he should look at my arm in the sling and the cut vein records at the Hospital; enquire of me how that was so and cease intimidating and threatening me for I was not as naive in law as the landlady; if he wished to repeat his threats he should do so in the presence of the solicitor I was waiting for.

20. With the solicitor I attended inside the police officer who had invited me to attend there in order to take my statement in respect of the injuries I had sustained in the course of the assault on my car and my person. I was asked what the position was with the items taken on lien and I stated that they had been left with a friend in safe keeping on Saturday. I re-iterated that the Plaintiff's agent (guest) was handed with written details and conditions on Saturday; that the Plaintiff may had thrown them on the road but my information was that the police had seen the papers because the landlady had picked them and passed them to the police. I emphasised that the Plaintiff had received the Default Summons, that he failed to enter any Defence and had indulged in moonlight flights, in Houdini acts. The landlady and I had merely taken steps to ensure the Plaintiff either met his liabilities, or justified his failures to do so and or entered an appearance in Court where he could then be caused to give his new address and place of work. I emphasised that one was speaking of luxuries and not of essentials and the Plaintiff would be hard pressed to justify acquiring such possessions while failing to meet his rents. I stressed that as soon as the Plaintiff met his liabilities to the landlady, his luxuries would be delivered unto him, as and in the state these were when taken possession of on lien. The police and the solicitor discussed the implications and the police officer went to meet with the Plaintiff; he returned and announced that the Plaintiff had told the police he had borrowed £ 2,000.00 (two thousand pounds but had spent £ 500 in moving; he was proposing to remit to the landlady the £ 1500 in hand and would like to have his properties back; I stated that it would be up to the landlady to accept his offer and that I was prepared at the time to recommend acceptance of the offer if the Housing Benefit remittances were to reach her as had been promised by the Local Authority and in particular the Chief Executive's office. It was agreed there and then that I should collect the properties and meet with the Plaintiff outside the police station on Thursday 8th August 1996 at 11 am where exchange could take place; I asked of the police to tell the Plaintiff that he should bring the keys to the two rooms he had taken away when he and his family left late Saturday night, because it was essential that the premises be inspected, photographed and arrangements made as to repairs arising during and out of the occupation of the premises by the Plaintiff and his extended family and guests. The police then took down my statement which I was left to read and sign; I had to make a few changes and add a number of pertinent points missed and or overlooked by the officer who took my statement. I signed the document and initialled all changes, amendments and additions; I told the officer of the changes and the reasons why I had acted as I did.

21. On Thursday morning 8th August 1996 I prepared an appropriate document which I headed acknowledgements and went to the police station at Hornsey as arranged after collecting the luxuries held on lien; true copy of the acknowledgements document appears on page 20 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit. The Plaintiff was already there; he had given to the police two computer print-outs. Both carried the word REPLACE in a prominent place; one was endorsed with remittances as had been allegedly posted to the Landlady at the wrong address as given to the Local Authority by the Plaintiff and included the replacement remittance which officers and staff of the Local Authority had stated was posted on 29th August 1996 to the Landlady and to the right address; that remittance had not reached the Landlady by that morning I informed the police. The other print-out was endorsed with what was meant to be the correct address for the Landlady; it was wrong but I did not inform the police of that 'mistake'. The Plaintiff sought to and relied upon the printouts to assert that the two printouts were proof the Landlady had received all the rents as printed thereon and as someone had added the entries to a total which was well above the Landlady's claim as issued out of Edmonton County Court. I informed the police that the Landlady had not received a single remittance and in the circumstances it was their duty to investigate the validity of and to satisfy himself the documents relied upon by the Plaintiff was relying upon to assert that he owed nothing to the Landlady, the person he had contracted with. True copies of the two computer print-outs as advanced by the Plaintiff on 8th August 1996 appear on pages 21 and 22 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit.

22. I asked for copies of the two print-outs and proceeded to call upon the secretary of the Chief Executive, asked her to make copies of both, pointed out the new 'mistake' as evinced in the wrong address where the replacement cheque allegedly had been posted; worse I informed her their staff had allowed someone to make misrepresentations to allege that all listed remittances had actually been received and banked and that was grossly insulting the Landlady's and my integrity as well as our honesty; their staff and she knew no such remittances had been received and or banked by the Landlady; even worse I pointed out, the wrong address as used indicated that someone was deliberately causing problems all round. Following that visit the Landlady and I went to the Housing Benefit department where we demanded a meeting with those responsible and demanded tat they correct the errors of their ways; they also took copies of the two print-outs and promised to look into the 'complaints'. We were informed that the police had also paid them a visit in respect of the very same issues.

23. Resting on the very erratic printouts the Plaintiff and his wife entered appearances at Court in respect of the Default Summons, proceeded to assert no liability to the Landlady and to allege Counterclaims in respect of and arising out of the alleged value of the luxuries held on lien (their guest had stated a much lower value on 3rd August 1996); and on reliance of the erratic printouts they were seeking to make a claim and the return of their deposit which was only £ 480 and not as they remembered it to be £ 960, which included the first four weeks rent in advance. True copy of the Defence and Counterclaim statements of the Plaintiff appears on page 21 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit. I proceeded to prepare a Reply to Defence for the Landlady which she signed on 10th September 1996 and it was posted to Edmonton County Court with copy of the Schedule of charges and remittances in support thereof. The Schedule as attached evinced the fact that Housing Benefit was not remitted to the Landlady until 19th August 1996 when it was received at the correct address and banked by her on the day. True copy of the Reply to Defence appears on pages 21, 22, and 23; True copies of the Schedule as attached appears on pages 24, 25 and 26. The last document is a true statement of the account in respect of the premises occupied by the Plaintiff and his family; all remittances, including the only remittance received and banked by the Landlady from the Local Authority. The balance shown as due and outstanding is in the sum of £ 3,067.67p. The Landlady posted to the Plaintiff and his wife a Recorded Delivery letter dated 23 September 1996 to which she attached copies of the Reply to Defence and the Schedule as should have been received from the Court; The last paragraph of the aforesaid letter was clearly endorsed with Notice that the landlady will apply for Judgement unless the Plaintiff and his wife meet the outstanding rents and or submit grounds upon which they wished to challenge the outstanding balance as shown in the Schedule document. The Plaintiff and his wife have failed to respond to the Reply to Defence as should have been served by the Court and since same have been delivered by Royal Mail. True copy of the letter dated 23 September from the Landlady to the Plaintiff and his wife appears on page 27 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" as attached to this my affidavit.

24. The landlady and I were served with bundles of documents in respect of liberties indulged into by the Plaintiff. If indeed the Plaintiff in this action had been Legally represented at any time as he had been asserting then his solicitor, if the party who took it upon himself to endorse and apply for Legal Aid in support of the allegations made by the Plaintiff, that person grossly erred. At no time prior to the service of the bundles of documents had the firm of solicitors acting for the Plaintiff contacted either the Landlady and or my person. In the premises I personally was not surprised that the Court and in particular District Judge Morley refused to entertain the application as entered by the Plaintiff's solicitor. In the bundle of documents as served by the Plaintiff' solicitor the Plaintiff included copy of the tenancy agreement which the Plaintiff and his wife entered into signed with the Landlady on 20th May 1996; that document was and is clearly endorsed with the Landlady's address at the time which fact qualifies that the Plaintiff had with intent been furnishing wrong information to the Local Authority in order to create and generate confusion and delays until such time he and his extended family had made their escape as indeed they did in the instance at hand. In a letter to the solicitor representing the Plaintiff in this action I challenged the manner with which he rushed into Court action without ever bothering to get information from those he and his client were keen to assert false allegations about. Indeed had the solicitor written to either the Landlady and or myself he would have been informed of the outstanding balance and a copy of the Schedule as served on the Court and the Plaintiff and his wife at their new address. The said solicitor would have been informed of the facts deposed of in this my affidavit and that the Plaintiff and his family were given an undertaking in writing; the goods held on lien will be returned on settlement of the outstanding balance due with the additional condition since and after the violence and the assault on my car and my person; the latter part being of course conditional on what action the police have taken and how this will progress through the Court. In the premises an appropriate Defence and Counterclaim has been served and filed at the Court.

25. I respectfully submit to this Honourable Court that the Plaintiff's case and action is ill founded, frivolous unjustified and an inexcusable abuse of the Court's process. In consideration of the original cause of action arising out of the failures to meet rents due the Default Summons, I humbly request of the Court to consider that the Plaintiff having applied for Housing Benefit he DID ask for remittances to be sent to him and or his wife direct. The Plaintiff has submitted to the Court and is relying on the Tenancy agreement entered into and signed on 20 May 1996; yet the Plaintiff gave a wrong address to the Local Authority in full knowledge that he was doing so with intent to cause delays and bring about confusion in order to gain time and make his escape from the premises he abandoned after service of the Default Summons. The Plaintiff's allegations that he and his family were locked out in no way represents fact. The Plaintiff's friend upon whom the Plaintiff relies to support his assertions admitted that he disconnected and removed the cooker, the washing machine for the Plaintiff and his family.

Sworn this the ......................day of ......................1996    )

at     ..............................................................................    )

       ...............................................................................    )

       ...............................................................................    )

Before    ........................................................................   )

Below exhibits in support and PLENTY of FALSE INSTRUMENTS among the exhibits : evidence of the parts played by alleged servants of the public, the law and of justice, acting as instructed, guided, allowed to indulge and or as used by the criminals (and the agents / followers of the criminals' plans) who descended on planet earth in order to impose on the sons of men, their practices and morals that are instilled in the followers of the alleged creator of all and everything, as misrepresented to the sons of men by the followers of the creators of the phantom, the evil one you can read of about at the page.

[*Link from here to the page where we expose one of many recognised fraudsters-club-recruits who fell in love with the abused facilities of the courts, and read of the root for the conclusions that all is born of and built on the same foundations].

This is the exhibit referred to in the affidavit of Andrew Yiannides marked "A.Y.1"

Sworn this the ........................ day of .................. 1996

before me

Exhibits cover sheet
afexp01r.jpg (31929 bytes)
See paragraph 2
Tenancy Agreement
afexp02r.jpg (119877 bytes)
Names & Addresses of the contracting parties.
Terms of Agreement afexp03r.jpg (148907 bytes)
See paragraph 2
Terms continued afexp04r.jpg (89669 bytes)
See paragraph 2
Unpaid Rents Schedule
afexp05r.jpg (98784 bytes)
Part 1
See paragraph 6
The Rents Schedule 
afexp06r.jpg (139596 bytes)
Part 2
See paragraph 6
ukhumanrights/afexp07r.jpg (82697 bytes)
See paragraph 7
ukhumanrights/afexp08r.jpg (133832 bytes)
See paragraph 8
ukhumanrights/afexp09r.jpg (121078 bytes)
See paragraph 8
afexp10r.jpg (118781 bytes)
See paragraph 8
afexp11r.jpg (34813 bytes)
See paragraph 8
afexp12r.jpg (117217 bytes)
See paragraph 9
Exhibit 12 is a must for all citizens who really care & are interested in the reality of ORGANISED CRIME by & through Public  Servants.

Thousands of pounds targeted for misappropriation by the organisers. 17 months physiotherapy for a victim of the CRIMES organised by and through public servants. And all the police did, in the instance at hand, was to submit A FALSE REPORT to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, as part of their obstructions to rights assured, in law, to 'the serfs' in an allegedly civilised.... pseudodemocracy, one that is promoted by the media barons as the genuine article.

afexp13r.jpg (100276 bytes)
See paragraph 9
afexp14r.jpg (93227 bytes)
See paragraph 10
ExP15afexp15r.jpg (41381 bytes)
See paragraph 10
afexp16r.jpg (54532 bytes)
See paragraph
afexp17r.jpg (75566 bytes)
See paragraph
afexp18r.jpg (110268 bytes)
IGNORED & their
rights obstructed !!!

Read paragraph 16
Police failed to prosecute the criminals; they even engaged in submitting false information to the Criminal Injuries  Authority as part of the invisible services on offer by Officers of the court / law. 
afexp19r.jpg (154773 bytes)
See paragraph
afexp20r.jpg (90134 bytes)
See paragraph 21
afexp21r.jpg (95587 bytes)
See paragraph 21

FALSE RECORDS arrogantly created and misrepresented as genuine by Public Servants

afexp22r.jpg (55445 bytes)
See paragraph 21
afexp23r.jpg (167655 bytes)
See paragraph 23
afexp24r.jpg (106704 bytes)
See paragraph 23
afexp25r.jpg (108362 bytes)
See paragraph 23
afexp26r.jpg (148120 bytes)
See paragraph 23
afexp27r.jpg (92705 bytes)
See paragraph 23
afexp28r.jpg (121873 bytes)
See paragraph 23

FOOTNOTE common to most web-pages at this website
MOST IMPORTANT:- In October 2010, the coalition Government's Attorney General, in an interview published by 'COUNSEL' the mothly legal banter magazine, specifically spoke of the police distancing themselves from cases of (small-fry) fraud and he asserted that he was making that element his department's priority*

*Link from here to the evidence.

IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN, WHAT the coalition of the Con-LibDems, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY WILL IN FACT ATTEND TO THE RAMPANT FRAUD, and IF IT WILL DEAL with the criminals who abuse public office, especially when faced with appropriate submissions and claims that will be delivered in due course. Visitors/readers are urged to read the article published in the London Evening Standard, as settled by the Rt. Hon. David Blunkett, Home Secretary in 2003
*Link from here to the article we reproduce in another webpage and consider "Why tolerate the arrogance of the legal circles who had and have the audacity to assert to the lawmakers that they, the lawmakers have nothing to do with the law"?
While there, above it, the explicit letter to ex-Minister, the Rt. Hon. Frank Field MP, delivered a few days earlier. ALL alleged victim-challengers who contacted Andrew Yiannides, by the time the letter was sent to the Minister, received copy of the letter just as they received copies of other letters submitted to government maintained Ministers and other official appointees to public office. Accessing the material pointed to from the letter (URLs) is of utmost importance. It should assist 'recognition of the citizen's rights at work', when called upon properly in truly democratic states. The above in 2003; there were other 'submissions' and among such civilised and, within the law, approaches by citizens that led to the right actions by governments, the explicit challenges when we set about exposing one of the most evil of alleged victims of the legal circles to have ever contacted us.

*Link from here to our explicit submissions to (a) the Prime Minister, (b) the Chancellor / Treasury, (c) and, the Home Secretary. We acted so after we had secured more than enough evidence about the parts of an alleged victim whose only interests were (i) the rewards under the table FOR KEEPING QUIET about the ORGANISED FRAUD THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES and (ii) her parts in blunt attempts that were intended to discredit the person she was sent along to mess about with, Mr Andrew Yiannides.

Access please the letter to the Home Secretary, the Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, in December 1998

*Link from here to the letter

& note the results evinced in the newspaper article (Hornsey Journal) also within days of the letter reaching its destination. Many the charlatans and stooges -lovers and 'promoters of the system as is'- on the job for decades; one and all acting as sold souls always do

*Link from here to the evidence we point to relative to the parts of one of a number of sold to the system fraudsters who were sent along / introduced to Andrew Yiannides by the managers / organisers of the LIPS crowd / mob..

    1.    Note please that bulldogdsl.com / bulldoghome.com / pipex / Cable & Wireless HAVE BEEN INTERFERING with Mr Yiannides' rights under International Law and have been obstructing the communication lines in contempt of Mr Yiannides' rights to freedom of expression, exchange of ideas and the distribution of true and factual information as of the third week of October 2006. In the circumstances contact / use the webmaster@uk-human-rights.org email address and your email will be forwarded to Mr Yiannides by the mail-server of the ISP corporation used for hosting this web-site.
    2.    Readers, researchers and victims of the bluntly Organised Crimes Against Humanity, (the law abiding, the frugal and the creative citizens of the European Union) should access the provisions under Article 29 of the Combined Treaties of the European Union and thereafter acquaint themselves with the contents of the pages we list here: (1) .org/uaccount.htm - (2) .org/abuse.htm - (3) .org/attempts.htm - (4) .org/contempt.htm - (5) .org/convicti.htm - (6) .org/4deceit.htm - (7) .org/confraud.htm - (7) .org/poliforg.htm - (8) .org/evilones.htm and THEN read the content of the following pages : (9) .org/protocol.htm - (10) .org/humraped.htm - (11) .org/intropro.htm - (12) org/abusers.htm -
    3.    For over 11 years we were / have been pointing to a precedent case relevant to activities and defaults (most convenient the defaults as far as we are concerned) by solicitors. Victims and readers / researchers are urged to access, from here, an extract from the work - research - of the late Stephen Knight, parts of which we copied in our pages; we ask of all to read and note the very elements of which an insider spoke of to the author / researcher of the work 'The Brotherhood'. Not one of the alleged victim-challengers who contacted us & we pointed them to the precedent case ever considered the implications we were / have been pointing to since 1997 - in our pages and for over 15 years earlier through 'The CAMILA Project'. In March 2008 we added the explicit House of Lords precedent case to material we released through the page .org/4suckers.htm & we have since, revamped the page by pointing to their Lordships' deliberations in 1939-1940 on the issues of (a) conspiracy, (b) dishonesty, (c) lies, (d) deception, (e) misrepresentation (f) LIES through failures to speak up thereby obstructing the righting of wrongs known to persons who elect to remain silent while in command / aware / knowing of the truth and the realities that could lead to the righting of wrongs imposed on third parties, (g) FRAUD through the aforesaid elements at the heart of it all & SOLICITORS THE ENGINE & GENERATORS OF IT ALL.  
    4.    xxx
    5.    xxx
Back to HomePage   Back to Haringey  Back to Fraud through the Courts Back to forgery by the police Back to Contempt for the Law Back to Misconduct



The creator of this website was inviting victims to access URrights & join him there with other victims to expose & challenge abusers of trust & public office until the providers of the facilities >ning.com< introduced new terms and conditions for the provision of the facilities. Access from here and read of the imposed states by the brains behind ning.com and consider only one element "WHY OBSTRUCT & HINDER THE DOWNLOAD of the existing material at URrights.ning.com >the intellectual properties of the creator of that presence on the Internet and those who joined him there? Read below of the unacceptable conduct and behaviour by the reckless abusers of trust, who set out to obstruct and blackmail the creator of URrights.ning

Persons who are genuinely concerned and object to the ways they were / are being treated by alleged servants of the publicand the law >in any PSEUDOdemocracy, or whatever states / conditions they are subjected to< by abusers of public facilities and public office >as we cover in our web-pages< should contact webmaster@human-rights.org for information relevant to the creation of similar facilities for INFOrmation on URrights, for facilities for URrights EUrope and for a NETwork of URrights activists.

  • APOLOGIES to friends and persons who could not access URrights following the recent changes by the providers of the facility (ning.com) Andrew Yiannides created and used the portal to create the presence on the Internet for the group of victims / challengers who joined with him to expose and challenge the arrogant and blunt abuse of public services in all allegedly civilised societies > PSEUDODEMOCRACIES <.

  • The changes related to the introduction of charges for the facilities, included the facility for ning.com to archive the material at URrights; also the facility to download the archived material to the creator's system (computer) while the creator and his group of friends considered which of the level of charges and service the group was to adopt.

  • HOWEVER the creator, Andrew Yiannides, WAS UNABLE TO DOWNLOAD THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL and all attempts to engage the providers and their staff in reasonable explanation as to WHY THE FAILURES TO CONNECT / DOWNLOAD from the ning.com servers THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL, were contemptuously ignored.

  • Emails to the Publicity, to the Promotion, to the Public Relations, also to the Chief Executive's Office merited no response whatsoever from anyone acting for ning.com

  • In the circumstances Andrew will appreciate any information related to the problems covered above. Andrew will also appreciate any information relative to exchanges with or email postings, from ning.com to existing members.

  • EXISTING URrights members, victims of the legal system, victims of solicitors and the courts should access the updated pages at .org/solicitors.htm and .org/solfraud.htm by using the links from the list below.

Below pages where we expose known lovers of it all, users and maintenance engineers of the system as is

.org/1999dfax.htm .org/1ofmany.htm .org/2lipstalk.htm .org/4deceit.htm .org/absolute.htm .org/abusers.htm
.org/account4.htm .org/actors.htm .org/actors2.htm .org/adoko.htm .org/bankers.htm .org/beware.htm
.org/blunket1.htm .org/chaldep1.htm .org/confraud.htm .org/contract.htm .org/convicti.htm .org/courts.htm
.org/corruptcourts.htm .org/crimesin.htm .org/dreamers.htm .org/evesused.htm .org/evilones.htm .org/famfraud.htm
.org/govolso.htm .org/guesswhy.htm .org/len.htm .org/mauricek.htm .org/media.htm .org/solfraud.htm
.org/solicitors.htm .org/someplan.htm .org/someploy.htm .org/thefacts.htm .org/theproof.htm .org/thenerve.htm
.org/twisted.htm .org/uaccount.htm .org/ukmm.htm .org/uwatchit.htm .org/watchit1.htm .org/yourtax.htm
  • Every single person we name and expose in the above pages elected to ignore THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO REPORT (to 'the serfs' = 'the taxpayers'), THE ABUSERS OF PUBLIC OFFICE & PUBLIC FACILITIES. All were/are relying on the Intellectual Prostitutes, from within the media, to keep it all in the family closet.
  • All, as typical twin-tongue hypocrites carry on complaining about the media for failing to report & for suppressing the facts and the realities they allegdely reported to the hard of hearing, to the otherwise committed angels blowing their silent trumpets for decades, all ready and gearing to welcome the expansion of the New World Order.
  • Of such parts the contributions from and failings of the persons we name and expose, AS IF THEIR OWN SILENCE, THEIR FAILURES  & THEIR BLUNT OBSTRUCTIONS to the work and other actions by the creator of this website, Andrew Yiannides, treated by one and all as if non-existent with the exception when the wily Norman Scarth, set off to abuse the trust he was allowed to benefit from, while his parts and questionable activities / performance were under scrutiny, specifically after HE FAILED to publish the full transcript of the Court of Appeal hearing HE WAS ALLOWED TO RECORD* [*Link from here to the food for thought page created by Andrew Yiannides, in the first instance].
  • Not one ever bothered to address the issues we expose in the explicit page, despite the fact that we have been pointing all of our contacts, since May 1992, to it all.
  • Visitors, readers and researchers are urged / invited to access and read the letter which the Hon. Secretary of the Litigants In Person Society, Mr. Norman Scarth sent to the founder of human-rights, Mr. Andrew Yiannides, reproduced in the page .org/4deceit.htm* [*L]
  • The author's statements, such as 'what for and why seek additional assistance', thereby spelling out his parts as a lover of it all.
  • Common sense dictates, that he should have directed his request to his partners in deceptions aplenty, one & all engaging in fraudulent misrepresentations AND NOTED TO HAVE, WILFULLY, BEEN SUPPRESSING, FROM THE TAXPAYERS, THE FACTS OF LIFE RELATIVE TO THE RAMPANT ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES as the failure of all to co-operate as covered and pointed to at:- [*L]. One and all fallen to the facilities for fraud aplenty on the taxpayers and the corruption of illiterates in law, the conditioned victims of the legal circles & courts who fall to the blackmail element attached to the REWARD for keeping the realities away from the taxpayers; just like the media and the Ministers responsible for the application of long existing law to the criminal activities we cover in our pages, do.
  • All the while one and all were / are engaging in the scenarios we cover in the exclusive page, which page the author of the letter which Mr Norman Scarth sent to Andrew Yiannides, afforded us the opportunity to address the issue of the contributions of his partners and affiliates in fraud aplenty on the taxpayers; despite the reminder one and all, named in the new page simply shoved it all in the dark corners of their devoid of grey matter skulls, their perverted / corrupted mind(s)

On Sunday morning, the 19th September 2010, the Deputy Prime Minister, leader of the Liberal-Democrats in the course of the BBC TV politics programme, spoke of the coalition government's commitment to address the element of waste and fraud through the public services sector. We trust and hope that the elements we expose in our pages and the parts adopted by the conditioned victims of the legal circles, the persons who engage in PROMOTING & EXPANDING THE ONGOING CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD ON THE TAXPAYERS, THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES, will be on the top of the list of government priorities.
Visitors, readers & researchers are urged to access the letters to Minister Frank Field [*L] after he had been directed by the Prime Minister to think/do the unthinkable.
Link also from here [*L] to the explicit letter to the Home Secretary in December 1998 with submissions arising out of the RAMPANT HOUSING BENEFIT FRAUD
On Tuesday 23rd November 2010, 'the Guardian' in its Comment & Debate page carried an article by Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister. In the evening of the same day the Deputy Prime Minister addressed a large audience at Kings place in respect of the government's changes on university students fees / loans.
Access from here the page where we reproduce an image of 'the Guardian' article & consider the simple fact that we, alone, have been asserting and proclaiming our objections to the theft of funds from the national budget leading to the ever-increasing annual deficit in the state's balance of payments.

ACCESS:  http://www.justice-uk.human-rights.org/ (For an important message at this Community-on-Line web-site) & thereafter,
Access also http://www.law.society.complaints.and.human-rights.org/ (Judge instigates Fraud On Tax Payers - he knows not the difference between 'imposed' & 'no undue influence'). APOLOGIES FOR THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THIS WEBSITE.It appears that the beneficiary of the work, both for applications to the courts in the United Kingdom and the submissions to the European Court for Human Rights* [*Link from here to the Statement of Facts submitted to the ECoHR], arranged with the providers of the free web space to erase the Intellectual Property of Andrew Yiannides, the founder of the human-rights Community-on-Line, without any reference to the creator of the website and owner of the Intellectual Property!
鼯font> Copyright subsists on all material in our web-site, owned by the authors of same.
Visitors can refer to these pages in any non commercial activity, so long as attribution is given as to source. License to use, for commercial or other specific use of the material, shall have been secured in writing first, from the owners of any property and material from these pages. No material shall be reproduced in any form and by any means without prior agreement and or license in writing from the copyright owners. The Press are invited to contact us if they wish to publish material in the Public Interest, As We Do.
For any problems or questions regarding this web-site contact:  webmaster