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

December 2006 - SUMMONS ISSUED & SERVED IN RESPECT OF FRAUDULENT & RECKLESSLY IRRESPONSIBLE ACTIVITIES & IMPOSITIONS THROUGH THE FAMILY COURTS

*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
[*L],
          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

...
To page Synopsis Relative to Realities Covered
This page is dedicated to some of the fraudsters who indulged as stooges and wilfully abused Mr Yiannides' time and his readiness to assist ALL victims of the Institutionally Organised Fraud & Corruption Through Abuse of the Courts facilities. (*Link to List)
len.htm                      KEY 
PageChanges 20 Jan. 2007
hrbnrsml.gif (1162 bytes) JOIN

others On Line and work with others for and in the necessary challenges and exposures for the common good. Link to Information Page

UPDATE. The person named in this page 'elected to leave the United Kingdom' following a number of peculiar states and scenarios that were and remain inexplicable. Visitors are requested to access the introduction on the right, and to await further revelations in respect of the developments as of the moment Mr Dave Ellison (the controller of the lbduk.org) contacted us. We have not heard from Mr Len Miskulin whose lack of consideration and failures to follow up on the issues he discussed with us, prior to his departure, need to be attended to. In the alternative it shall be for the visitors to draw their own conclusions as to the true scenario being related / stated in this page.

IMPORTANT:The visitor's attention is drawn to the words of Jesus Christ, as attributed to Him, by the editors / creators of The Gospel according to St. Luke. Access His words to the lawyers almost 2000 years ago. Many the dignitaries over the two millennia who shared His views (*Link). The exclusive material and elements we point to, arising out of an extract from the Old Testament we reproduce in our pages is a must for ALL VICTIMS OF THE LEGAL CIRCLES, THE COURTS  & THE POLICE. The element we point to IS the common factor through common connections

Page KEY List
Page CHANGES - List
LETTERS TO - List for Site
LETTERS FROM List for Site
Newspaper ARTICLES - List
Newspaper IMAGES - List
Letters TO - List
1. April 2003 Frank Field MP
2. Dec. 1999 Prime Minister
3. Dec. 1998 Home Secretary
4. Oct. 2002 Fam Reg. Court
5. Mar. 2003 Law Society ++
6. August 2003 ECoHR Fran.
7. x
<>
Letters FROM - List
1. SOLICITOR To Client
2. Prime Minister Nov. 1999
3. CEO HaringeyCouncil 200
4. Haringey Council Dreamer
5. Police Promoting Just LIES
6. Norman Seeks Information
7. LCD Expose Police LIES
8. An Illiterate LCDpt. Officer
9. ECoHR September 2003
10. Lord Chancellor's Dpt.
11. Police Complaints Autho
12. Invsetig. Police Officer
13. x
<>
Page Legal ISSUES - List
1. Matr. & Fam Proceedings
2. Family Law Act Provision
3. x
<>
Site NEWS Articles - List
1. L.E.S by David Blunkett 
2. D. Mail Free For All 2001

3. D. Express Boys Records
4. PM. Global Role For Britain
5. No Need to Raise TAXES

6.The Times-Plato Not Prozac
<>
Page IMAGES - List
1. 2 pages of letter  to Court
2. CHANGES - List
3. House of Lords RULING
4. Letter to Prime Minister
5. PM Sends Subm. to H/O
6. x
7.
Quotes - issues in Page
1. Abuse of Court Facilities
2. x
Page CHANGES List
March 2005

1. Pointed page to select grp.
2. Links to other pages
3. x

Images of the EXPLICIT LETTER

Page1 of the challenges
lm1co02f.jpg (68419 bytes)
Link to start of text P1.

Page2 of the challenges
lm2coo2r.jpg (109997 bytes)
Link to
start of text P2.

Images of an EXPLICIT FAX

Below the images of the fax / letter as settled for Mr Len Miskulin for submission to and challenges of HH Judge Charles. The content very clear and to the point. Page1
lsscjc1f.jpg (95216 bytes)

Page2
lsscjc2f.jpg (59622 bytes)
Below, in this page we reproduce the text in HTML from and to which links may be created by us for any other victim of the criminals who are in control of the courts and the police to link to from their pages. (*Link to the HTML text).

email from a victim of the Divorce Industry one Duncan who told others of our work.
duncanr.jpg (84274 bytes)
To read who else jumped in and what each one promoted WHEN IN FACT THEY HAD NO INTENTION TO CHALLENGE ALL ABUSERS OF TRUST BY USING THEIR RIGHT go to: /lawcompi.htm#F1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Len Miskulin - Houdini Incarnate * Page Created April 2003 Released 2005*
undercon.gif (286 bytes) *Page Revised: June 20, 2012(Additional information points to ORGANISED FRAUD through FALSE FRONTS - read the introduction)
Site under reconstruction to incorporate ongoing additions and improvements

Guidelines on Navigating through the extensive material: access instructions.  The first step for visitors to acquaint  themselves with the extensive material should be to use the SEARCH FOR facility. Just type in any word or combination of words / issues that are of concern / interest or need information and our views on the issues. Remember that our views rest on factual experiences and research with evidence in support. We urge visitors and in particular victims of the legal circles and the Law Enforcement Agencies to access the introduction page to the Community on Line [*Link].

As part of the reconstruction process our new pages and pages where changes and additions have been implemented (the improved / amended pages) are endorsed with the link 'Page Changes and the date of the last changes. The link takes visitors to a List of the changes implemented in the page. These include new material and links from relevant paragraphs to other or new relevant material in other pages. For further clarification email: webmaster@

Introduction to Len Miskulin and developments thereafter

  • An associate of Len Miskulin contacted the founder of human-rights, Mr Andrew Yiannides and stated that he 'was impressed with the content at the *human-rights* web-site. (GO FIND OUT how the initial contact came about and who set the wheels in motion)
  • He then introduced Mr Yiannides to a victim of the divorce industry, Mr Len Miskulin and Mr Yiannides to Mr Miskulin's work for www.lbduk.org stating in the process that his discovery of the uk-human-rights.org web-site will be made known to all other groups of victims, in order that common goals and aims should be promoted collectively.(*lbd stood for Live Beat Dads in the UK naturally)
  • Enters the scene a third party, Mr John Charville, an alleged legal guru. He exchanges private emails with Mr Yiannides and he promotes / relies on irrelevant and inapplicable legal cases and arguments; he, Mr Charville, is pointed to the UK's commitments founded on membership of the European Union and as a signatory State to the European Convention on Human Rights, among other pertinent realities. Mr Yiannides does so because Mr J Charville persistently promotes and refers to divorce cases and judgements by judicial chair occupants in the United States of America.
  • Mr Charville subsequently initiates group postings directed to Mr Yiannides, who welcomed the open dialogue while expecting of the 'guru' to keep in mind the legal position and the realities he had been pointed to, earlier. (*Reprogramming a robot would be easier - it was clear he came along with a specific agenda and it sure was not a case of collaboration but one of 'kill the goose' that provides the true legal position).
  • Enter the scene a fourth 'activist', the chairman of the UKMM (United Kingdom Men's Movement) Mr George McCauley. He 'welcomes the initial dialogue' (the email exchanges between John Charville and Mr Andrew Yiannides) and writes of the anticipated co-operation that everybody is expecting. (*Facts about the UKMM sucker-serfs should acquaint themselves with, in due course)
  • Like all others, however, he enters into ostrich acts, when subsequently Mr. Charville (the 'legal guru') sets about assaulting the work of Mr Yiannides and the material at this web-site.
  • Mr Charville's blunt attempts to discredit and offend Mr Yiannides WHILE one and all contemptuously ignored the submissions and the LEGAL ARGUMENTS that were settled, by Mr Yiannides, for Mr Miskulin, who lodged the pleadings and submissions at court, conveniently to be buried / ignored by all three challengers (Mr. Dave Ellison, Mr. George Macauley and Mr Len Miskulin). The CONTEMPT OF THE LODGED PLEADINGS by allegedly concerned leaders of the victims of the divorce industry, WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH TO INDICATE WHICH SIDE OF THE FENCE THEY HAD BUILT THEIR NESTS & WERE GRAZING TO THEIR HEARTS' DELIGHT. 
  • The submissions and legal arguments (and challenges of the abusers of the courts facilities) were and remain VERY CLEAR. It was a case of 'Heads I Win' & 'Tails You Lose' for the legal circles and their army of associates in the rape of families through abuse of the courts facilities. The issue of fraud on the men-suckers by the allegedly weaker sex AS USED BY the abductors and rapists of Justice and humanity, could not have been clearer, when one considered the denial of rights to 'the victim', for far too long.
  • Not one of the leaders of the fathers' / men's groups (who were pointed to the challenges from the founder of human-rights, as published at www.lbduk.org by Mr Miskulin) ever contacted us, with the exception of Mr Anthony Pace (*Link to email exchanges). However, even he announced, some time later, that he had joined the UKMM, the sham of an alleged group that allegedly 'fights for the rights of the men-victims'.
  • Most notable was the fact that although Mr Charville's offensive postings were posted through the lbduk.yahoo.groups, which Mr Dave Ellison and Mr Len Miskulin were in control of as the registered co-ordinators, neither bothered to post (through THEIR group) Mr Yiannides' responses and submissions to Mr Charville's intentional diversionary tactics and offensive rubbish. Neither recognised that by NOT REGISTERING as a member of *t*h*e*i*r* yahoo group* Mr Yiannides very simply cast his nets. Their failures to even post Mr Yiannides' responses to the rubbish from Mr. Charville made it VERY CLEAR WHERE THEY STOOD in the field of war against the abductors and rapists of Justice. Their failures also evinced that THEY WERE RAPING DEMOCRACY by ensuring the victims who were in contact with them and part of the sham they were managing were not made aware of the responses and challenges to Mr Charville.
  • Mr Charville's wilful defaults to address or even mention (among others failings and maligned defaults) in his postings the first legal challenges he received from Mr Yiannides (in the course of the private exchanges Mr Charville instigated) were indicative of the aims of Mr Charville and the possible plans / schemes in the background by the silent one's, Mr Dave Ellison & Mr Len Miskulin, the victim himself.
  • Although both Mr Dave Ellison & Mr Len Miskulin acknowledged the logic of the legal arguments (that rest and are found on the facts of the case AND EXISTING LAW) neither joined in or contributed any thoughts of theirs in the OPEN, through *t*h*e*i*r* lbduk.yahoo.groups list.   
  • The NOTED INDIFFERENCE to the intentional diversionary tactics was intriguing. There was only one oral comment to Mr Yiannides' observations, when Mr Len Miskulin told Mr Yiannides that Mr Dave Ellison had expressed the view that Mr Yiannides had the right to reply (AND WASTE HIS TIME) while the instigator of the assaults was benefiting FROM THE SILENCE OF THE OSTRICHES, the bystanders : Mr. Dave Ellison and Mr. Len Miskulin.
  • YET ANOTHER SCENARIO was in the pipeline. Apparently Mr Dave Ellison had been in regular contact and there had been ongoing exchanges, negotiations and dialogues with Dr. Kartar Badsha of the ELC (Environmental Law Centre) in Southport, Merseyside.
  • Three-way meetings followed in London. The discussions (between Dr Badsha of the ELC, Mr Miskulin of the lbduk and Mr Yiannides of human-rights NGO) were focussed on the need to deal with ALL public relations and Press Releases through a common centre for ALL pro-active groups and individual challengers.
  • Arrangements were made for a meeting at Mr Len Miskulin's residence in Debden. It was attended by a number of group leaders, movement representatives and individuals. Dr Badsha and an associate of his from Southport, left early because of the long drive back home. In the meantime the gathered group carried on discussing 'the constitution and aims of the INTENDED common centre' for promotion of the activities warranted to CHALLENGE & EXPOSE all abuse of Public Office by the citizens' servants.
  • Among the early arrivals was Mr Shaun O' Connor who exchanged, with Mr Yiannides, views on the problems in and with the courts, with the legal circles, with the judiciary, with the police and with other Public(!) Servants(?). He expressed interest in the issues that were covered in letters and exchanges between the Prime Minister's private office and Mr Yiannides, copies of which he read with interest. He, Mr O'Connor was definitely to go on line and he would be contacting Mr Yiannides in order to secure and benefit from assistance. What followed was another scenario, however. Whether he was party to such activities, as pre-planned moves, or to the activities that followed was just *a sucked in stooge* is and stands as an arguable issue.
  • Enter the gathering, one W.D who arrived late. He did not even bother to enquire as to any agreed issues or agenda and did not ask to read the minutes that Mr. Shaun O'Connor(!) was keeping(?). W.D. just proceeded to deliver a talk to the gathered 'victims of the legal system' as to HOW to apply and address the courts / judges. All the while he was tapping on a book that he was referring to, as he went along.
  • Mr Yiannides tried a couple of times to intercept 'THE LECTURE that WAS NOT ON THE AGENDA for the meeting he was attending. Mr Miskulin rather forcefully blocked Mr Yiannides from raising issue and inquiring as to the reasons for the 'unscheduled (as far as he was concerned) development and THE LECTURE to the gathered / invited group of attendees.
  • Mr Miskulin's obstruction led to a private meeting in the kitchen at the behest of Mr Yiannides, when Mr Yiannides clarified that he was not happy with the intrusion / arrangements he had NOT been informed of, hinting at the possibility that he had been invited to Mr Miskulin's residence under false pretences.
  • With all others gone Mr Miskulin and Mr Yiannides worked late and among the issues of concern was the name by which the centre of operations was to be known as.
  • As the initial idea was for 'a united front' for the groups and the individuals who embraced the original proposition, Mr Miskulin suggested Fathers United ...... and Mr Yiannides suggested Families United pointing out to the fact that Live Beat Dads, among its members and supporters, valued a mother / woman, and her very sound contributions.
  • Both slept on the idea and in the morning it was agreed to settle for Families United To Unconditionally Restore Equality : *FUTURE*. Mr Yiannides informed Mr Dave Ellison by email as to the name and intellectual property; the latter issue was warranted because of past experiences with planted mischief makers and 'diversionary tactics manipulators' of which more than enough had already been noted and recognised as manifestations by and from the organisers and controllers of ALL FRAUD & CORRUPTION THROUGH THE COURTS. 
  • TWO DAYS LATER, the telephone lines go hot.... and NO EMAIL EXCHANGES (most important the omission). Evidently Mr Shaun O'Connor and Mr John Charville had been running around and contacting persons who attended the meeting at Mr Miskulin's residence, with a view to 'taking over *FUTURE*, before it was even launched...!!!! The most intriguing bit of news, however, was the fact that Mr Shaun O'Connor did NOT forward copy of the minutes he volunteered to keep. There followed the allegation that the two were put up to the attempts to take over *FUTURE* by Dr. Kartar Badsha of the ELC.
  • Mr Yiannides simply contacted Mr Dave Ellison and reminded him of the issue of intellectual property and that he (Mr Dave Ellison) should inform Dr. Badsha accordingly, if he was involved or had any influence on the two 'would be abductors'. Mr Ellison was also informed that a URL (domain name was already in place, and the site would be put in operation as and when the right conditions and developments were manifestly APPROPRIATE & RIGHT FOR IMPLEMENTATION. (*Link to an explicit email below)
  • .

An explicit letter to abusers of the courts facilities

The text of the letter, below is in HTML, for links to and from:

130 Hanson Drive
Loughton
Essex
IG10 2EA

24-Oct.- 02

To:
The court manager
Principal Registry of the family Court
High Holborn London

Case number ED00P01206

For reference to and the attention of District Judge Green

Copies to whom it may concern
OPEN LETTER

Dear Sir/Madam

I beg to refer you to my facsimile of 14th of October 2002 to and for which I have as yet to receive acknowledgement let alone the necessary response.

I acknowledge receipt of a document from your court purporting to be a legitimate court order proper.

I point to the following:

  1. Under M & F, Pr. ACT 1974
  2. Assignment of Circuit Judge to matrimonial proceedings

    The jurisdiction conferred by the preceding provisions of this part of this Act on divorce, County courts, so far as it is exercisable by judges of such courts, shall be exercised by such CIRCUIT JUDGES as the Lord Chancellor may direct.

  3. When the direction is given pursuant to part III of the family law Act 1969 for the use of blood tests in proceedings in the Family Division and divorce County courts the arrangements for the taking and testing of blood samples will be made by the solicitors for the party on whose application the direction was given.

The above make it abundantly clear that the document is a false instrument even if the case was legitimately and properly within the jurisdiction of "your court". In the premises the alleged order is null and void.

I must therefore insist that on the basis of the above you withdraw the false instrument and apologise for the attempt to abuse the courts processes and facilities with fraudulent intent.

I submit three documents downloaded from the Internet that qualify my rights as established by law, Statutory and Common:

     3.  18/9 clarifying the right to plead any elements during proceedings at any time.

Below the text of page 2 (refer to image in left panel, above)

  1. 18/12/11 establishing the rights to plead intent when the occasion demands it and evidence to support the pleading exists.
  2. 18/8/4 pleading fraud when there is clear and sufficient evidence to support it.

On the basis of the above and in particular 1 and 2, the rights under 3, 4 and 5 are crystal clear. In the circumstances I am confused as to how legally trained persons appear to be indulging in contempt of 1 and 2 above, unless self assured perpetuation of established practices has made them feel invincible when in contempt of the law.

As pointed in my previous communication, my Application was placed before the court and had been on record as of August 2001. Also on record is the application of the respondent's solicitors (to my Application) seeking and securing the transfer of the case to the Chancery Division, RCJ, Strand.

Defaults to deal with my Application, irrelevant if arrangements between the Respondent's solicitors and the court, were and remained in contempt of the rules of procedure for well over a year. The aforesaid facts and the realities were and are in contempt of rulings of the European Court of Human Rights.

There was no application and certainly no consent would have or could have been secured from me for the transfer of the case back to an inferior court and, most certainly, NO right would have been granted to any abuser of public office to indulge in the creation of the false instruments such as the document posted to me by your court. Further to the aforesaid, there subsists the element of HH Justice Charles (RCJ) granting rights to the solicitors acting for the Respondent to be in command of MY rights whereby they had free hand to issue directions as they determined. The need to appeal the abuse of the courts processes and to grant freedom of action (to my opponent's solicitors) in respect of MY rights further enhances my claim of 'intent to defraud'. NO PERSON IN HIS/HER RIGHT MIND WOULD HAND OVER THE MANAGEMENT OF HIS ARMY (RIGHTS IN LAW) TO THE GENERALS OF THE ENEMY AND THIS MAKES LAUGHING STOCK OF JUDGES WHO ARE MEANT TO BE NEUTRAL, IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDENT OF ANY OTHER INFLUENCES.

In view of the above, copy of these submissions are to be delivered to:

  1. The Lord Chancellor who is responsible for the courts and those running, managing and acting as officers of the courts.
  2. My member of parliament.
  3. Home secretary in view of the announcement last May (Re: white collar fraud).
  4. The press/media and
  5. Published on the Internet, the only true open court.

I conclude by qualifying that I expect and demand of your court to return the case to HH Justice Charles of whom I expect proper attention either to my rights or the forwarding of the demanded, by me, an order directing that transcripts of both hearings before him be made available and the right to appeal on the basis of the objections (served on him) to the railroading and hijacking of the case by the Respondent's representatives in law.

Yours truly

L. Miskulin

Encl. As text

    The users of the gestation vessel transferred the case from the Royal Courts of Justice, to the Family Registry.
    Howeve, after the above letter was received, the case was shoved back to the Royal Courts of Justice.
    Genuine victims, readers and researchers will do well to point all alleged leaders of family court victims groups, such as the FnF, the UKMM, etc. to the above challenges and to THE STATED REALITIES pleaded, served on the gestation vessel's legal team and lodged at the R.C.J as the submissions we reproduce below.
    All should enquire of such persons to express their opinions and views as to WHY WAS THE CASE, a hot potato?
    Why was it shoved back to the Royal Courts of Justice?
    Above all, WHY did one and all, allegedly concerned leaders of the victims of the legal circles and the abused courts facilities, shove the above realities
-challenges to the abusers of the courts facilities- in the dark corners of the caves where they congregate in order to plan how to further abuse the trust they secure from the sucker-serfs they 'suck' into the false fronts they use as alleged movements headed by alleged legal gurus who, allegedly, are challenging the very abuse of the courts facilities such as the abuses (plural intended) as covered and pointed to in the letter each and every one conveniently buried in the sand next to their heads devoid of grey matter?
* Link from here -below- to explicit pleadings and challenges to the abusers of the courts facilities as settled for Mr Len Miskulin by Andrew Yiannides; the latter qualified and clarified to Mr Miskulin that the foundations for the challenges, founded on facts and law, were to be used, in due course, by Mr Yiannides himself for and in respect of the impositions he, Mr Yiannides had been subjected to by abusers of the courts facilities, 'through use of the gestation vessel' he had married in accordance with the assured rights qualifying 'respect for the persons' rights under Articles of the European Convention for Human Rights
* Link from here to a page where part of the provisions of Article 14, also of Article 2 of the First Protocol of the European Convention, are partly reproduced; there we relate facts and publish evidence relative to a father's conscerns born of and attached to the use of created, encouraged and used 'feminasties' as of 'their education years', such as Mr Yiannides first got to know of and recognised when his best friend's family was destroyed in the early & mid 1970s care of the New World Order policies and regimes which the Politically Correct were implementing in the London Borough of Islignton, as in other parts of the asllegedly civilised PSEUDOdemocarcy, as the United Kingdom has been and is being promoted as if, true and factual the assertions / proclamations.
* Link from here to the page where reference is made to the fact that 'a gestation vessel who was used years later', had been made aware of the ways used in and FOR the destruction of the family of the friend of 'the one she was to marry as agreed at the time, because of and in respect of the issues that were too obvious and warranted the essential challenges and public exposure. 

The right to reply & justify behaviour and or activities covered in our pages, is assured to any one we name in our exposures relative to the FRAUD THROUGH THE LEGAL SYSTEM. Unlike James Todd, the puke production machine, of VOMIT repute we do not suppress the right to reply - JUSTIFY.

This page is dedicated to all abusers of the time of Andrew Yiannides and the trust they were benefiting from, while their activities and defaults were under investigation. The page is more particularly dedicated to all evil-mongering fraudsters, charlatans and stooges who are listed in the page /corruptcourts.htm; to persons such as Johan Michael Foenander and his soul mates from within the LIPS crowd-mob; also to all other charlatans who allegedly care or are concerned about 'the serfs', they draw in their nets FOR MORE OF THE SAME, as the Hussein fellow who introduced Johan M R Foenander to the circuit and to other 'fraudsters club recruits'* [*Link to definition] did. Also to the agents of the UKMM who, in 1998, wrote to Andrew, the founder of human-rights (NGO) while of opinion that they were addressing an idiot or as others inspired or caused them to believe. Their unsolicited invitation caused Andrew to contact them and asked of them to furnish specific information, which, needless to say they failed to provide. They received letters to that effect later but typically, they failed to comply, like all other charlatans and ostriches when confronted with legitimate demands or pointed to the realities which they conveniently shove in the dark corners of their corrupted egos.

An explicit email that was called for when the true colours of alleged victim-challengers shone through
    Dave & Len
     the copy paste below more indications AND PROOF of what *human-rights* 'IS' all about.
     No copy-cat monkey business; no parrot renditions INTENDED TO IMPRESS the 'uninformed and gullible' AND NO OSTRICH ACTS.
     Grappling with 'the wild horse' and galloping on, by mounting it, is a matter for those who wish to reach another destination than the one OTHERS ARE LEADING THEM TO.
     I trust that you recognise the fact that *human-rights* will be moving on whether FUTURE or yesterday are alive and kicking. I never liked being in limbo just because others relish in such situations and or love stagnant waters.
     As of April and May the government made moves. All I have been faced with was a planted mischief maker
[*F6] and many a silent onlookers, while the parrot would mess around with INEXCUSABLE & UNJUSTIFIABLE, even worse, all sorts of IRRELEVANT issues: I explain, 'No one has uttered a word about the STATED FACTS & THE PLEADED VIOLATIONS already REGISTERED at the European Court of Human Rights. It is as if no one suffered from similar practices.
    The last words above RAISE A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION:
    "If there be no common causes, WHY THE NEED for any grouping let alone the proposed and adopted FUTURE, now on ICE?
    My best to you and yours. Time to get on with what has to be done OFFICIALLY at government level, as in the courts.
     Andrew
12 August 2002
===========
     Go to:
http://www.human-rights.demon.co.uk/2lipstalk.htm#clear (routed to another server)
     Read the succinct introduction that covers maligned interference by the instructed. READ THE VERY ISSUES (police defaults and court fraud) that you have wasted too much time over, REPETITIOUSLY. NOTE THE CONTENT OF THE LETTERS that others, including Ebert, who acted like all others who set themselves up as sole saviours of abducted Justice WHILE PRESENTING THEATRICAL PRODUCTIONS WITH OTHERS BEFORE THE ABDUCTORS & HIJACKERS, to impress victims who as suckers got raped in the process by actors of the worst denominator in the presence of the directors of the shows - the rapists of Justice.
     READ OF THE co-operation that existed between Norman Scarth and *human-rights* before he sold his soul to the devil FOR THE GLORY AND POWER he sought, as 'our hero', the sole and soul of the 'resurrected legal aid scheme under another name and with the new partners, as *human-rights* covers in the exclusive page:
http://www.human-rights.demon.co.uk/confraud.htm (routed to another server)
     To the page I MOVED (from previously un-linked material only available to pro-active embers in the CoL) and PUBLISHED IT FOR ALL TO ACCESS.
READ of: "The Convention in Legal Terms". Copy of the part of the page you received yesterday and IF YOU USE IT AS I ASK, it is simply a matter for you and you alone.
You will receive tonight copy of exchanges with other groups and you will no doubt NOTE my present attitude about persons who fail to act as the occasion , FACILITIES & DEVELOPMENTS COMMAND & INDICATE VERY CLEARLY.
---
webmaster [*Link to the FOOTNOTE of the page /lawcompi.htm where more details & developments as of contact are laid bare]

An e-mail intended to put on notice persons who were serving other agendas, than they had been asserting orally.
davlen1c.jpg (164611 bytes)
Whether the other agendas were on the cards as of first contact, or 'evolved' subsequently through the involvement of others (a known user of the system in place, for personal advantage and pecuniary gains) was irrelevant. However, the failures to move on, promote the challenges lodged at court, when added to the convenient silence & failures to get on board and to address the rubbish from the mischief making John Charville, were MOST REVEALING.
(*Link4more)

Filed at the Family Registry covering the rights under the law, for BOTH SEXES, when all relevant law is taken into consideration, with EQUALITY being of the essence. The submissions were settled by Mr Andrew Yiannides, for Mr Len Miskulin who lodged them, as his challenges to the High Court, meant to be published at http://www.lbduk.org

  • On the right three images of the final draft (with minor corrections) as settled for Mr Len Miskulin who submitted / lodged the pleadings at  the High Court Court.
  • The pleadings / submissions were to be used later by Mr Andrew Yiannides, who had prepared for such challenges years earlier but for later use with additional submissions founded / resting on fact & law.
  • The submissions were / are intended for use by victims of the arrogant abuse of the family courts for assaults on the institution of 'family commitment' with the attached 'plundering of family assets'. [*Link to LAW]
  • The assaults, always through encouragement and or use of naive / greedy women, as happens to be the case always.
lmfrsp1r.jpg (142615 bytes) lmfrsp2r.jpg (287641 bytes) lmfrsp3r.jpg (289664 bytes)
  • Practices & arrangements resting and founded on the creation of false records & pre-scripted scenarios as in the case of pre-trial meetings between judicial chair occupants in the Foenander -v- Foenander divorce case. [*Link to such facts which the corrupted moron did not wish to expose]
  • No prizes, for those who read his solicitor's letter to another solicitor, as to why the convert to / lover to the system of operations HAD NO INTENTION TO MAKE PUBLIC, like the rest of the LIPS crowd/mob, the arrogant abuse of the courts' facilities for fraud aplenty.
  • One and all relying on the promotion of incompetent and inexcusable assertions about the defaulting media lap-dogs and corrupted / corrupt police officers.
  • Each and every one ACTING IN CONTEMPT OF THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO THE REST OF SOCIETY, to the 'serfs who are called upon to pay taxes for the maintenance of arrogant criminals in public office'.
Above the three images of the final draft that were re-typed, then signed and lodged at the RCJ (Royal Courts of Justice) by Len Miskulin - Houdini incarnate. (NOTE: in early April 2007 searches for the name pointed researchers, readers / victims of the divorce industry to the pages at this web-site. All victims, concerned with the arrogant abuse of the courts facilities MUST access, read and draw their own conclusions as to why Mr. Len Miskulin simply ignored all and everything lodged at court, and why the invitation for an undisclosed venue, at his residence!)
Below the submissions in HTML format for links to and from other pages and web-sites. Read of rights assured in law, of precedent cases and of challenges to the abusers of the courts facilities. Read of foundations relative to the equality assured to all under the law. Victims of the Divorce Industry should relate to the element of equality between the sexes, for it is far removed from the issues allegedly addressed by the courts in our allegedly civilised democracy, as happens to be the case in other 'pseudo-democracies'.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE             

FAMILY DIVISION CASE NO.ED00PO120

                       

PRINCIPAL REGISTRY

BETWEEN

HELEN SARAH FAYERS APPLICANT

AND

LEN MISKULIN    

RESPONDENT

                       

WITNESS STATEMENT AND ARGUMENT OF AND BY

Len Miskulin

                       

I, LEN MISKULIN of 130 Hanson Drive, Loughton, Essex, the respondent in this action say as follows:-
1.  I have read what purports to be a factual and accurate stamen of events by Helen S. Fayers, the applicant, as submitted by the applicant's legal representatives, who instigated the proceedings in what are obvious attempts to bypass proceedings set in motion by me in respect of paternity of the two children residing with the applicant. (pages 7,8, band nine of the exhibit "LM1")
2.  I beg to submit to the court the following:-

a) 

Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights covering equality of the sexes as enacted by parliament in the Human Rights Act 1998. (refer to page 1 of the exhibit "LM1" submitted in support)
b)   Article 29 of the combined treaties of the European Union covering fraud and corruption  (page 2 of exhibit "LM1")
c)   Theft acts of 1968 and 1978 covering false instruments, dishonesty, concealment and deception. (page 3 of exhibit "LM1")
d) The duties of solicitors as covered by the Myers -v- Elman (1940) A.C. 282 HL that was enshrined in section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 (as substituted by section 4 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990) and Order 62, Rule 11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court Act. The practice now included in Part 48 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. (pages 4, 5, and 6 of exhibit "LM1")
e)  Various acts of parliament covering partnerships, that should cover the circumstances applicable to the relationship between the applicant and the respondent.
3.   Having regard to the issues covered above in law, statutory and precedent cases stated, it is patently clear that the persons who settled and submitted the statement  of the applicant, purporting to be factual (pages 11 and 12 of exhibit "LM1"), contemptuously ignored the above provisions.

I beg to draw attention  to the following:-    

"As a balance and to protect the abuse of the process, the courts and subsequently parliament, developed the wasted costs jurisdiction. The jurisdiction is used to penalise those whose conduct of litigation had been "improper, unreasonable or negligent" as a result of which loss has been caused to a party to the litigation. In effect,  statutory duty has been imposed on legal representatives to conduct litigation properly, reasonably    and with due skill and care. The duty is owed to the court and to all the parties to a case. If the duty is breached, and any party, whether the client or the third party, can seek to recover any costs wasted by the breach from the lawyer". (page 4 of exhibit "LM1")
In the circumstances the persons who settled and submitted the challenged statement ought not to submit unsubstantiated statements that are based on false instruments, lacking   accountability, are in contempt of statutory provisions:-
a)  Cash payment slips are submitted as alleged payments by the applicant 14 years after the events. And by the applicant's own admission she had not received any funds from the sale of the matrimonial home at the time these payments were allegedly made by her alone, as if there were no contributions from me. (page 3 section 17,1.b of the exhibit "LM1")
b) A transfer of Whole (Rule 98 Land Registration Rules) document is submitted purporting to be evidence in support of   assertions and allegations in respect of beneficial tenants "holding" in common upon which there is no evidence to corroborate knowledge of by me of such matters. This is the      first time the alleged percentage holding in the first property has ever been referred to me. The fact that the allegation is raised with the intent to seek pecuniary advantage without proof that such was the case, as alleged establishes intent (if true and can be proven refer to page 3 section 17,1 of exhibit "LM1")
4.   In view of the aforementioned and in particular the fact that in the instance at hand the relationship between the applicant and myself was not a marriage but a partnership, it is covered by law on partnership and equality of the sexes, national and international. At no time did I contract with the applicant to be the alternative Social Security financial provider for a family consisting of "a woman and her children". (page 1,  see article 14 of exhibit "LM1")
5.   Until such time as the applicant and her advisers have complied with my application for paternity tests, with further procrastination and the courts co-operate in the matter precedent to the application by the applicant in the matter of the property which the applicant and her advisers have set their sights on, I maintain and I will establish the following:-
a) In the event that the children born of the applicant during the relationship are proven to be, both or either, my natural offspring I shall be establishing a claim against the applicant for emotional distress and I will seek damages for and in respect of feelings and emotions, both for myself and for the children in view of the fact that the applicant and her legal advisers are using the children for their own ends jointly and severally, irrespective of damages caused to others.
b)  In the event that the children, either or both, are proven not to be my natural offspring I shall be establishing and claiming damages against the applicant and all who support and promote the creation of scenarios arising out of the freedoms and benefits assumed, presumed and bestowed upon persons of the caliber and mentality of the applicant. The claims will be based on deception, dishonesty, securing benefit (financial and emotional) through concealment of the truth and the wrong doing by the applicant over a number of years, whose financial contributions towards the family she created, while in 'a partnership relationship with me", are called to strict proof for the entire period of the relationship (page 10 of the exhibit "LM1")
6.  Further and in addition to the above admittance by a lawyer I submit statements by Lord Irvine, Lord Chancellor in his responses to the Home Affairs Select Committee in November 1999. His Lordship referred to, and acknowledged the milking of the system, and the he was only referring to the Legal Aid funds in criminal cases and not to the Legal Aid facility as used by lawyers as evinced in pages and 12 of exhibit "LM1":
a)    I submit true printout of his Lordship's submission to question No. 11 where highlighted are the above points. (page 13 of exhibit "LM1")
b)  I provide also evidence of his Lordship's submissions to question No, 8. Therein highlighted references to family and other avenues that are available and ought not to be side-stepped by solicitors who use membership of the Law Society's Law Panel (page 14 of exhibit "LM1")               
c)  I further provide evidence of the Lord Chancellor's submissions in respect of family and "marriage". In the circumstances I challenge any assertions and assumptions based on any other issues, than those pleaded herein.  I must therefore demand the right of establishing first and foremost the paternity commitments and obligations as presumed and assumed by the applicant and her legal advisers and that my rights as pleaded under 5. a) and 5. b) above.

7. 

 

In view of the aforementioned relative to family, marriage and partnership to which law applies as herein above covered I submit also and draw attention to page 16 of the exhibit "LM1" pertaining to origins of English law. Highlighted is the requirement of the judges to interpret statutory law and the relevance of European Union law to which reference is made above under paragraph 2. b) and page 2 of the exhibit 'LM1", Finally, under the third highlight until such time as the law is changed or superseding law is introduced, decisions of higher authorities are binding on the lower courts (*F7). In respect of the aforesaid I also submit, and draw attention to pages 17 to 22 of the exhibit "LM1" wherein the duty of the judge to apply the law (page 17), references to the Myers -v- Elman House of Lords ruling in respect of abuses of the legal system (page 18, Limitations Act 1980), references to discovery of causation (page 18, Stephen -v- Riverside), references to concerns by the judiciary about hardship on blameless parties and moral grounds (page 19, Cave -v- Robinson Jarvis & Rolf), reference s to UBAF Ltd -v- European American Banking Corporation covering agents for their clients and employees and I respectfully submit to the court that solicitors act as agents for their clients and not as principal (page 20). I conclude by pointing to the Grundy -v- Naqvi case wherein the erratic denial of rights to access to justice and the imposed cost to the parties because of the necessity to appeal erratic rulings and judgements (pages 21 and 22).

 STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true:

Signed ......................................................................

Len Miskulin

Dated .........................................................               

FAX to Len Miskulin, evincing clearly stated issues of relevance

The draft of the letter as settled and submitted to HH Justice Charles, in HTML

http://www.uk-human-rights.org

To: Len Miskulin - lbduk.org Fax: [Click here and type fax number]
From: Andrew Yiannides - London - UK Date: Printed 01/04/05 Created: 9 Jan 03
Re: Challenging Railroading Tactics & Obstructions to Justice Pages: TWO– with cover sheet
CC: CoL - Folder Reference: 9JCJCDAT
¨ Urgent ¨ For Review ¨ Please Comment ¨ Please Reply ¨ Please Recycle

MESSAGE

Len

The letter to the court / HH Justice Charles should be as follows:

Your Honour

Re: Miskulin -v- Fayers now ………. (whatever)
I beg to refer you to my letter of …(..date…)…. The letter and my objections to the attempts to railroad and hijack the proceedings, as 'determined' by counsel representing the other party, were delivered within time, bearing in mind the late delivery of the Order, to me.

I beg, also, to draw your attention to the Application for Leave to appeal the abrogation of your public duties and the relinquishing of the matters before the court, for transfer of the case to another.

I attach, hereto, self-explanatory communications, copy of my letter and submissions to the ……….. court dated ………… . I request that you do consider my rights in the circumstances stated in my said communications and the facts covered in pleadings and applications lodged at and filed with the court.

I further refer you to my request for transcripts of the hearings before your honour. To that effect I submit copies of a facsimile that another citizen was caused to submit to another court with material accessed on the Internet. The documents clearly qualify and attest my own sentiments, in view of the manner in which my applications to the court have been treated so far.

Kindly ensure that:

EITHER
the transcripts requested and now demanded are put in hand forthwith and that your office forwards a written account stating any justified explanations and reasons for the obstructions to my rights and justice,

OR
your Honour stands down, in view of the fact that fundamental wrongs were attempted so far within your knowledge and because of the obstructions to my rights. When coupled to the obvious late posting of the 'directions' drafted and settled by my opponent's legal representatives. In consideration of the fact that the late delivery, to me, was ignored by your honour when obstructing me and denying, to me, my rights, irrespective of the fact that I was not late in responding to and challenging the unacceptable 'railroading and hijacking of the proceedings, there arises the issue of failures to adhere to the principles of 'due process'.

In the circumstances I will appreciate acknowledgement of this communication. I will also appreciate recognition of my inalienable right to fair audience and to the right to appeal your endorsement of the attempts by the legal team of my opponent. (*F5)

Sincerely

ENCL.

The content and the issues raised, above, as clear as can be. The targeted victim's rights ignored and alleged servants & officers of the law (solicitors, barristers and judges are officers of the Supreme Court) acting in contempt of it with impunity and arrogance. Millions of victims in allegedly civilised, states, in pseudo-democracies that are promoted as the genuine article, and the victim in the instance at hand, caused(?) to scram(!) to other lands; allegedly because he could not take any more...... as if the scenario and the defaults following the gathering of the invited lambs to his residence, and the attempts thereafter by two 'tutored & used stooges' were not enough to point to the reckless indifference, of all, to the suffering of the millions of suckers  world-wide. The victim who suffered many an indignity, after the gestation vessel desired a change of dildo, himself exhibited his contempt to the rights of others and in particular the rights of the person who assisted him to challenge, in legal terms as covered in the settled and lodged submissions to the courts, evince. Visitors, readers and researchers should access the page [*Link from here to the page] where we expose a person who was noted to have been acting as one of the many sold to the system as is, charlatan; an egocentric and arrogant user of others for more of the constructive frauds on the taxpayers such as he, himself, had been subjected to and later a conscious player in, as a fraudsters club recruit; one who HAD BEEN a victim of the practices & the activities he subsequently fell in love with. In short a convert to that which he and his associates / affiliates set off to complain about, in the first instance.

A second FAX to Mr Miskulin, 4 days later and documents transmitted for use in the course of the hearing as listed in the Witness Statement & Legal Arguments / Submissions, in support of the rights and facts pleaded / lodged at court soon after he was introduced to Mr. Andrew Yiannides. Access the heads I win & tails you lose challenge to the abusers of the courts facilities, above. Not one of the allegedly concerned 'leaders of organised men's groups bothered to refer to or address the issues founded in law & resting on court practice rules.  

  • Note what was involved and how Len Miskulin was assisted.
  • Consider what other forces and elements were at work while millions of 'serfs' out there were and are subjected to the same treatment as Mr Len Miskulin had been.
  • Many were sent along or introduced as 'challengers, ready to WORK WITH & FOR OTHERS.
  • Access the web-site Mr Miskulin set up; click on the Holocaust link in the left pane / window. Look up the state he ended in after two months of HUNGER STRIKE, because he was denied access to the two boys taken away.
  • Ask, 'WHY did Mr Miskulin 'run away'? Above all, who has been MAINTAINING THE WEB-SITE for over three years since he left the U.K? And WHY did he negate on his promises to co-operate with us for and in respect of THE RIGHTS OF THE TARGETED VICTIMS OF THE DIVORCE INDUSTRY?
  • Access and read the events covered in the FOOTNOTE at the page http://www.uk-human-rights.org/lawcompi.htm
  • Stated there enough; consider the ever-present 'offers which many a ruined victim, cannot refuse when all they care about / are after is some financial gain & NEVER MIND if their children will inherit & benefit from the very same practices. And SUCH PERSONS run around proclaiming themselves to be 'loving, caring fathers, yet somehow all appear never to have heard of the word 'CONSIDERATE' of the future for the very children!
Working with and for a victim who run away and negated on his agreement with us.fja03chr.jpg (148194 bytes)

The issues we point to above must be considered by genuine victims who wish to USE their legal rights WITHOUT ignoring their OBLIGATIONS to the rest of society, present & future. Visitors, readers and researchers will be reading of and about *FUTURE* in the footnote pointed to above. *FUTURE* being an acronym for Families United To Unconditionally Restore Equality.

Covered below the facts and activities that led to the challenges in the letter we publish above in respect of the issues that Mr Len Miskulin related to the founder of *human-rights*. The legal arguments were called for, after his associate Mr Dave Ellison contacted Andrew Yiannides and introduce him to the www.lbduk.org website and to the creator of the site, Mr Miskulin. It was a case of just another irrelevant male / father. Mr Miskulin was targeted [*Link to another victim-case] by the abductors and rapists of Justice. An application for DNA tests and other relevant challenges had been lodged with the court and it was noted that among other issues, not one of known & notified leaders of  male / fathers / divorce industry groups had taken any interest in the legal RIGHTS OF THE TARGETED SERF. Most intriguing was the arrival on the scene of an alleged legal boffin who subsequently engaged in more than the usual waffle from planted mischief makers [*Link from here to plans for the use of such creations] and maintenance engineers of the system as is. At the very least it was a case of another 'peacock showing off his plume' [*Link to how and when such a person moved in only to move on after failing to impose the ways the person was promoting as an alleged legal guru].

With links to and from page images, also to other material

  • We request of and urge visitors, readers of this page to access the web-site created by Mr Len Miskulin http://www.lbduk.org. It was maintained by him until he decided to disappear and contact only selected 'associates and mates' of his, with whom he shared more than the elements he raised with us and for which we worked in order to challenge all offenders within the context of the law. (*Link to the explicit page where a professional, a barrister, exposed his part for and in the usual activities attached to deceitful and fraudulent misrepresentations. Read of invitations intended for the naive and gullible who fall to such idiotic schemes & scenarios. Many the lovers of the system as is, who engage and partake in such vile activities while asserting and alleging to be 'challenging victims' WHEREAS SUCH PERSONS ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC IS OFFERED ONLY PART OF THE PICTURE by suppressing the most important elements).
  • It is imperative and of paramount importance that the reader / visitor should be acquainted with the forces and the influences at work, when considering THE FACTS & THE REALITIES we are to cover and expose in this page. (*Link to the parts and activities of another 'victim' of the courts and legal circles and HOW that fraudster abused our time and readiness to work with and to assist 'victims').
  • It is also most important that visitors / readers should access the following pages:
    Con of a Victim (/convict.htm) - Primed For Deceit (/4deceit.htm) & Actors & Fraudsters at work (/actors.htm).
    The realities and realisations covered in the aforesaid pages should assist the reader to draw the right conclusions as to the inferences drawn out of the behaviour of victims-come-challengers (as they misrepresent themselves) YET CONVERT-LOVERS and maintenance engineers - users of the system as is for more fraud on the tax-payers, hence their assaults and evil activities in the background in propping up the ORGANISE FRAUD ON THE TAXPAYERS).
  • We expose, in our pages, the root to it all, the foundations and the corner stone upon which societies have been and ARE being built for such 'victims' by abusers of public office. (*Link).
  • All is achieved care of 'the teachings by examples noted, observed and mimicked by automatons, non-thinkers, STOOGES who succumb to personal greed and simply ignore all others. Such persons either 'submit to blackmail by or with help and or coercion from agents and or lovers of the system as is'. Thus they act as 'maintenance engineers of the arrangements in place' through reckless defaults and omissions. Their contemptuous mentalities to others, including their their 'false or abandoned promises', if not vile misrepresentations as to the elements that caused them to contact human-rights are but the elements that extend the hold on 'the serfs' as organised by the controllers of CIUKU (*Link to definition) Enterprises .
  •  

FOOTNOTES
   1. Late delivery of the Order to the party. Had the Order been pronounced in open court and the party was present (or his/her agents : solicitors and their agents : Barrister) in court, at the time of the pronouncement, THEN the time for appealing would start as of the pronouncement. In the instance at hand, it was a case of EVEN MORE IMPROPRIETIES & FOUL ACTIVITIES as the settled letter pointed out. "Letting the generals of the enemy's army to direct one's soldiers / army was but an insult to the intelligence of the targeted victim.
   2.Applications lodged at and filed with the court. Simply pointing out to the Court the fact that there existed on file the Application for DNA tests, in order to establish Article 8  VIOLATIONS (because of denial to normal contact with the two boys) and or FRAUD BY THE GESTATION VESSEL should she have deceived the targeted 'serf' into believing he was the father of both boys when / if such was not the true state.
   3.  Another citizen was caused to submit to another court. The text as settled for submission (by the targeted serf) to the court WAS ALSO INTENDED as part of the education the targeted serf was receiving IN RESPECT OF HIS RIGHTS. And, more so, in respect of the anticipated and expected FROM GENUINE VICTIM CHALLENGERS who were to benefit from the creation of the Citizen's Alternative Precedents (CAP data) such as the cases we point to in our pages and the obstructions to 'due process' as covered in the letter/FAX. In the instance at hand Mr Miskulin received copy of the FAX COMMUNICATION (exchanges) WITH THE FRAUDSTER Veronica Beryl Fodden and he was fully aware of her idiotic excuses for suppressing the realities from the public (her failures to act as had been agreed from the onset to publish it all in the public domain). The FAX can be accessed from here. Visitors, readers and researchers should READ ALSO THE EXPLICIT CHALLENGES relative to ARROGANT PERJURY BY A SOLICITOR, for which matters Mr Len Miskulin had no time or opinions. All the while he was complaining about the solicitor who took his money and did nothing in return, as the explicit letter settled by Andrew Yiannides, in another page, covers.
   4.
  Parrot renditions relates to the usual promotions of anything else, JUST EVADE ISSUES OF ESSENCE & RELEVANCE. These happen to be the most pronounced elements used by the idiots & the morons who are accosted by the agents of the system's organisers / controllers. Of such capabilities the programmed robots and the conditioned non-thinkers who are drawn into the scheme of things. They simply act as 'diversionary tactics' operatives while working in tandem with the promoters of the 'subliminal indoctrination of the targeted serfs' repetitious scenarios about the powers that be..... "Look at what they did to me.... to him,.... to her.... there is no way.... AND such persons ignore the law that cuts down to size abusers of public office, ANYONE WHO ACTS IN CONTEMPT OF THE LAW.
   5.
Recognition of my rights to fair audience. No need to emphasise that the offending abuser of judicial chair occupation FAILED TO ACKNOWLEDGE the rights, and the court managers arranged for another, known Divorce Industry judicial chair occupant to take over the case for furtherance of whatever had been planned by the evil who assault families relentlessly. The case was simply put on the list of Justice Singer who engaged in the pre-scripted arrangements with both legal teams in the Foenander -v- Foenander fraudulent court proceedings AS ORGANISED PRE-SCRIPTED SCENARIOS, we cover in another page. (*Link to the relevant page /. stated facts).
   6.
  John Charville was the chap and you can find more about the person especially as to when and how he made contact. Find out what he benefited from when he came in with all manner of waffle as an alleged genius in matters legal, and what he engaged in with another in the matter of an agreed agenda for the creation of an AFFILIATED INFORMATION CENTRE. The centre to act for ALL affiliates in the area of promotion and distribution of developments and activities by organised group or individual who wished to co-operate for and in the common cause, a Press Release centre. *Link from here directly to the FOOTNOTE of the page /lawcompi.htm#F1 and recognise the elements about which a solicitor wrote to a client in March 2003.
   7.  *Link from here to a page where we publish evidence to the effect that the Court of Appeal allowed Mr Norman Scarth to record the hearing of an application before THREE LORD JUSTICES, Master of the Rolls, LJ Woolfe presiding. The venue, naturally, was organised for the occasion by the planners of all and everything that is imposed on 'the serfs in a pseudodemocracy' THROUGH THE COURTS. Notwirthstanding that SUCH A PRECEDENT CASE HAS BEEN ON RECORD FOR YEARS (published at this website as soon as the submitted transcript was received by by Mr Andrew Yiannides) our hero, Mr Scarth, who had gone down the road of *the fraudsters club recruits*, elected to SHOVE THE PRECEDENT CASE in the dark corners of his corrupted mind. He accepted an invitation to act as the Honoary Secretary of the Litigants In Person Society AND as he had, apparently, determined. In so far as he was concerned, the USE OF VICTIMS OF THE LEGAL CIRCLES & PUBLIC SERVANTS, FOR THEFT OF TAXPAYERS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE NATIONA BUDGET WERE LEGITIMATE (as he personally understood the legal implications). HE EVIDENTLY DETERMINED THAT THE USE OF VICTIMS (created by the legal circles, through abuse of the courts' facilties) FOR PERSONAL GAINS & PECUNIARY ADVANTAGE VIA THEFT OF TAX INPUT TO THE NATIONAL BUDGET WERE  WITHIN HIS GRASP OF THE LAW. *Link from here to the evidence as to HOW & WHICH FACILITIES IN PLACE (as organised by alleged servants of the public - of the serfs who pay taxes for the maintenance of criminals in public office) ARE USED FOR THE PLUNDERING / THEFT OF TAXPAYERS CONTRIBUTIONS by public servanst (judges in controol of it all) and the managers / controllers / organisers of victims who are pointed to and sucked into the fold of the LIPS crowd / mob and their affiliates / associates, other similar setups.  XXXX
   8.  XXX

Link to:   Lord Chancellor's Dpt. Link to:  Judges Schooled on racial issues Link to:  Judges independent of, FREE to ignore The LAW
Link to:  Judges ALLOWED(?) to indulge(!) Link to:  Frank Cunningham-case Link to:  Typical Response from Lord Chancellor
Link to:  h-r Home Page   Link to:  The CAMILA Project  Link to:  The LAW
 

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)

> MOST IMPORTANT <
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
...