30^TH September 2011

The Rt, Hon. David Cameron,

Prime Minister

I have previously written to you when you were Leader of the Opposition and the response from your office was that, as I was not a member of your constituency you could not help.

However, as you are now Prime Minister and Leader of the Country, every single citizen now falls within your constituency or responsibility and therefore I am writing to you once again to bring to your immediate attention the same issues which has plagued my life and the lives of my family and friends for almost two decades.

It is difficult to know where to begin because my life is in turmoil and I continue to be a subject of ongoing corruption and grave violations of my rights as a human being and of the rule of law.

It is necessary however, to give you a background of events and the level of cruelty and wickedness I, my family and friends have had to endure for nearly 20 years now.

As a parent who has suffered the tragic loss of a child, you will know that there is no greater pain than having to bury your own child. Having said that, the pain turns into torturous suffering when the parent is subjected to inhumane criminal acts.

My fifteen month old son was left to die from dehydration at Kings College Hospital 3^rd September 1994.

Independent medical reports show that, on the balance of probabilities he would not have died if he had received the basic standard care when he was brought into the hospital.

In addition to my son’s death, if that wasn’t enough, I was subjected to the most horrendous psychological torture leading up to his death.

I arrived at the hospital one hour before he died and was repeatedly told he was not there and that he only had a tummy upset and did not need to be admitted.

The main reception suggested that I should also check the children’s section which I did and again I was told that my son was not admitted.  I then rang home, using a phone in the corridors, to see if I had passed my wife on the way, I got no reply.

I went back to the main reception and again I was told and re-assured that my son was not there.  I left the hospital with that re-assurance and went back home curious as to where my wife could be. 

Upon my arrival home, I received a phone call from one of my brother- in- laws telling me that my wife was at the hospital and that my son was not well. I was nearly at the point of arguing with him because I was telling him that my family were not at the hospital because I had just returned from there. I agreed with him to check again by phone.

As soon as I replaced the receiver my phone rang again, this time it was my wife, screaming  down the phone ‘‘Get the hell out of the flat the baby is not well’’. I slammed the phone down on my wife thinking that this was some cruel joke but I did not leave it to chance, I immediately rang the hospital and begged the receptionist to double check.

Whilst checking the first ward I could hear the receptionist having a casual conversation with her colleagues, it was obvious she had no idea my son was there. She went on to the second ward and the phone went silent, she said nothing further and put me straight through.

The next thing I heard was ‘‘Oh Mr Grant come quickly your son is here he’s not very well’’. I rushed back to the hospital in a state of fear and hope and upon my arrival my hope was dashed and my worst fear was borne out. My son had just died, my wife blamed for not being there.

Five months later, the blame levelled against me caused the breakdown of our 10 year marriage and we became separated. We also had a five year old daughter and my wife was pregnant with our third child. Our separation caused me to be grieving for my whole family and not just my son.

We had already retained the services of Bindman & Partners solicitors to pursue a case of medical negligence and one year after the separation from my wife and family, I told Bindmans that I wanted to sue the hospital for giving me false information which not only caused me additional trauma but which also led to me being absent at a time when my wife needed me most.

The false information also exposed me to the blame my wife levelled against me. Despite the fact that ever since 1964, the House of Lords ruled that the same law which covers negligent acts also covers negligent information, Bindmans  told me that there is no law in this country which allows anyone to sue for false advice.

Bindmans held this position even after intervention from my MP, at the time, Tessa Jowell and further despite the fact that the legal aid board had issued a certificate enabling them to pursue that case.

The case I wanted to bring was not about money, I simply wanted to have the blame for my absence redirected towards the hospital in the hope that I would have been able to save my marriage.

My marriage and my family were all that I had in this world; they were my reasons for living and thus would die for them, if necessary.

Bindman’s reluctance to release my legal aid certificate to another firm caused me to suffer a nervous breakdown resulting in the loss of my employment.

Eventually my certificate was transferred to Mahmood & Co solicitors who had agreed to act. However, when I told them that I also wanted to sue Bindmans for the injury they too had caused, Mahmood decided not to act at all.

I was left with no choice but to use my basic common sense, following court procedure, to issue a writ against Bindman & Partners for a breach of contract. This was done August 1997. Although the writ was very basic in its content and format, it was nonetheless indefensible.

The representatives of Bindmans, Reynolds Porter Chamberlain, attempted to have my claim struck out by District Judge Litchfield, sitting as Master.

They claimed that I was suing their clients for “missed opportunity” in other words; they were alleging that my claim against their clients was for causing me to miss the statute of limitation in which I could bring a case against the hospital.

This was emphatically denied by myself and it was made clear that I was suing their clients for a breach of contract. Judge Litchfield issued an order that they should not interpret any part of my claim as a missed opportunity and that if they wanted clearer particulars they should have requested it. In addition to the judge’s order and whilst they were still present, the Judge told me to hurry up and file my case against the hospital because I had a very good case.

It is obviously clear that if I had a good case against the hospital that I had an even better case against Bindman & Partners.

As a result of the order from Judge Litchfield, they had nowhere to turn other than using the influence of their friends within the system.

Reynolds Porter Chamberlain presented the same argument before a different Master and got my claim unlawfully struck out without ever reaching court.

With no one to help, I began writing to members of Parliament, Downing Street, The Press, Her Majesty the Queen and various other organisations who claimed to stand for justice. I also tried to force the issue back into court by spray painting the windows of Bindman & Partners.

The responses came flooding in but none could help directly but the reply from Buckingham Palace was very helpful, the reply made it clear that the Queen could not intervene directly but had given instructions that my letter of complaint be handed directly to Lord Irvine who was Lord Chancellor at the time. Lord Irvine failed to act and allowed judicial corruption to run wild.

My attempt to get the issues into to court had begun to work and I was arrested and charged with an allegation of criminal damage and released on unconditional bail. I was later re-arrested on an allegation of breach of bail conditions. I was held in police custody overnight at Holborn Police station and presented to Clerkenwell Magistrates before Stipendiary Magistrate judge Baker. Despite the fact that there were no conditions attached to my bail, judge baker remanded me in custody to Brixton prison. This was my first experience of prison and I completely feared for my life.

Four days later, I was taken back to clerkenwell before a different judge, judge Johnstone, he asked the prosecution why I was in custody and the prosecution replied breach of bail. Judge Johnstone replied by asking and stating, how could that be possible when there are no conditions of bail attached. The prosecution mumbled something to the judge which I did not hear but the judge`s response was very audible. He made it clear that he did not want to become involved in any underhand dealings and released me from custody.

I was now sure that there was collusion going on between various departments of the State but my appeals for help continued to go unheard.

Although I had elected to have a jury trial for the allegation of criminal damage, it was eventually dealt with in a Magistrates court and upon my wrongful conviction I appealed to the Crown Court. My appeal was successfully heard at Middlesex Guildhall Crown Court on the grounds presented.

I re-issued my writ against Bindmans and others in September 1998, my writ included several violations of the solicitor’s code of conduct. It was once again unlawfully struck out.

By this time the letter from Buckingham Palace had already been referred to Irvine but his inaction caused the corruption I was facing to go on unabated. The escalation of corruption and violations of the rule of law was beginning to spiral out of control.

The senior partner at Reynolds Porter Chamberlain Alan Toulson obtained an injunction from his brother Mr Justice Toulson sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice ordering me not to contact their clients directly. The injunction was obtained ex-parte so I had no idea about its existence. The Toulson brothers then conducted proceedings in the High Court alleging I had breached the said injunction. I was not present or legally represented, worst of all I had no idea these proceedings were taking place. I found out about its outcome from one of the defendants named in my writ, Kings College Hospital. They told me in a telephone conversation that a warrant had been issued for me to be taken to prison.

The fear for my life was such that I went into hiding but after a few weeks of feeling like I was imprisoned I went to Scotland Yard to hand myself in, from there I was taken to Belgravia police station where I was held overnight and collected by Tipp Staff from the High Court and taken direct to Pentonville Prison where I remained for two months before the Prison Authorities realised I should not have been there.

Arrangements were made for me to be produced in the High Court and I appeared before a Mr Justice Buckley who after hearing me said, “Mr Grant the background of your case is extremely tragic and there are many ways in which you can pursue it, go home to your family”.

Sometime after my release from my unlawful incarceration I anonymously contacted Reynolds Porter Chamberlain and enquired about the name A.K Toulson on their letter head, I asked if it was the same Toulson sitting at the High Court and the receptionist told me it was not, but that they are brothers. I revealed my name and she replied, “Mr Grant I’m not sure I should be talking to you”.

Armed with this evidence I wrote to Tony Blair again and told him I had no desire to go into court, but that I wanted the matter of my false and unlawful imprisonment resolved. The matter was referred to the Lord Chancellor’s Department. The reply from the Lord Chancellor’s Department is enclosed but basically it stated that there were no grounds to substantiate an allegation of bias.

So despite the very clear rule of law guaranteeing  the right to a fair independent impartial hearing or tribunal, despite the fact that I was not made to be present or represented at court, despite the fact that no one can be sentenced to a term of in imprisonment in their absence unless they are legally represented and despite the fact that it is not necessary to prove bias before a judge must stand down from hearing any case which could potentially lead to a claim of bias, the Lord Chancellor’s Department denied any breach of procedure or of the rule of law.

Between 2001 and 2003 there were many other incidents of false imprisonment, including the false imprisonment of others who had come out in public to show their support against the perversion of justice that was taking place by the judiciary and other State agencies. However, I will move on to 2003 when I was unlawfully convicted on 8 counts of importation of cannabis and sentenced to 8 years imprisonment, I was further ordered to pay a confiscation order in the sum of £85,000 or serve a further 18 months in default.

My defence against the allegations was justification including, Self Defence, Duress of Circumstances, Necessity, Last Resort and Article 7 of the Human Rights Act  1998 and of the European Convention of Human Rights which guarantees No Punishment without Law. My action had resulted from the overwhelming number of times the judiciary had locked me up in prison unlawfully and the fact that I was being denied all protection of law as is guaranteed against an abuse of power. I was being persecuted by the administrators of justice with nowhere to turn.

Common sense dictates that in a civilised society governed by the rule of law, any law that does not offer protection cannot be used to punish, this is, without doubt, the intention and guarantee of article 7.

The issue in this case was for a jury to decide whether or not my action was justified within all the circumstances. Although I have doubts about the impartiality of the jury, it is of no relevance in this case because even if they were impartial, the trial judge withdrew the issue from them and falsely directed them that there is no defence of justification in English law. Apart from everything already mentioned, the deliberate false direction was a sufficient ground of appeal. As an irony, he concluded his directions by saying,

“So finally he asks you to acquit him for the reasons he has put forward ...because if he is right no jury or court can stop him or convict him of anything”.

The judge acknowledged the fact that if all the evidence I presented was true then I could not be found guilty for my actions.

I attempted to appeal against my unlawful conviction but was denied all access to court. My application seeking permission was refused by the single judge and when I renewed it for an oral hearing, the court refused me legal aid and refused me my absolute right to represent myself and conducted proceedings without me being heard or present. This was not a simple breach of procedural rules; it was a fundamental violation of the rule of law and a severe perversion of justice committed by the judiciary.

As a result of this grave perversion of justice, I was forcibly and falsely held in prison for 6 years and one month. I was released 14^th September 2009 and the persecution has not ceased. Some months after my release the proceeds of crime unit claimed that it had just come to their attention that I had a share in a property in South Norwood. This was an investment I had made on behalf of my children long before I became embroiled in any legal struggle and had nothing to do with any alleged acts of crime. My share in this property was a meagre £15,000 but once again the judiciary chose to continue their criminality and robbed my children of their investment. There was also an attempt to send me back to prison for alleged contempt of court but the committal order gave me an automatic right of appeal which did not require permission, so I gained entry into the appeal court via “the back door”. This was to be my first opportunity to have all the issues reviewed according to the law and it took place in May of this year.

The first problem I had with the bench constituted for this appeal was that one of the judges was the same judge who refused me access to court for the hearing of my appeal application against conviction in 2003. I protested about this but the lead judge insisted it was perfectly lawful for his colleague to be on the bench and declined my request for him to stand down. This echoes succinctly the gravity of the entire situation. How can I ever get justice within a system where judges sit in judgment of their own actions and decisions? Does the principle of “no man can be a judge is his own cause” not apply to the judiciary, but most importantly, am I not entitled to a fair independent and impartial tribunal or hearing as is guaranteed by law or is it only a misconceived perception that the rule of law applies to all persons including all public authorities.

Having failed in my attempt to have the obviously bias judge stand down, the appeal hearing went ahead but despite the unequivocal clarity of section 7(1b) of the Human Rights Act which states, (A person who claims that a public authority has acted or proposes to act in a which is made unlawful by section 6(1) may rely on the convention right or rights concerned in any legal proceedings brought by or at the instigation of a public authority) and despite the equally unequivocal clarity of section 6(1) which states,(It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a convention right) the judges hearing my appeal stated in their handed down judgment that they had no power to interfere with orders made by other courts on other occasions, even if they wanted to. This a mockery of our system of appeal, what else is the purpose of the appeal courts if not to interfere with previous court hearings where necessary following an appeal.

The judiciary is openly acting in defiance of the wishes of Parliament but fundamentally its actions are in a gross violation of the rule of law.

By now you will be fully aware of the constitutional crisis the criminal actions of the judiciary has caused and the fact is, whilst the judiciary continues to be in breach of the law, every single case which it presides over will be unlawful for the simple reason, no lawbreaker can be a law enforcer.

The situation which confronts you is best described in the following quote from Justice Brandeis which was brought to my attention in an article written in the Times newspaper by Lord Goldsmith;

“In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperilled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Government is the omnipresent teacher, for good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example, if the government becomes a lawbreaker it breeds contempt for the law, it invites every man to become a law unto himself, it invites anarchy”.

As you can see and will agree, the former Blair, Brown government left you much more than a mere financial crisis, it also left you with a constitutional nightmare which cannot be ignored.

The silence of the media cannot guarantee that this will never get into the public arena and although I’m not afraid of dying, killing me will not kill the issues.

The judiciary clearly will not rule against its self but that does not mean no wrong has been committed by it and there has to be a resolution. I know what natural justice demands but I’m not looking for a collapse of the rule of law, however, I cannot and will not obey any law which does not offer me protection against an abuse of power and no remedy for any such abuse. I cannot accept the hypocrisy, to do so would be consenting to both physical and mental enslavement.

The action of the judiciary is an insult to those who bravely without thought for their own selves sacrificed and continue to sacrifice their lives in the name of Human Rights, Democracy and Justice.

In a recent judgment handed down by Sir Nicholas Wall he said;

“If anything I say in this judgment is wrong or unfair, the court of appeal will tell me so. If the court of appeal gets something wrong, the Supreme Court tells it. If the Supreme Court gets things wrong, Parliament can pass an act democratically to reverse the decision of the Supreme Court”

From the above statement, it is clear you have the power to intervene and to pursue a resolution for the wrongs committed by the judiciary.

The facts of this case would never be believed if it was not supported by documented evidence hence I am enclosing the following;

 Court transcript, Judgments, Medical Reports previous replies to my appeals for help including replies made on your behalf, reply from Buckingham Palace, the Lord Chancellor’s Dept, Sexed up Probation Report, Parole Board’s Refusal

I will be copying this document to Buckingham Palace and all senior members of the cabinet, if within fourteen days I have not had a positive response from you or your office, copies will be sent to every single Member of Parliament and thereafter issued to members of the public.

In the meantime, I and others involved with Campaign for Truth & Justice continue to be subjected to the ongoing injustice, harassment and false imprisonment. Please call an immediate halt to this persecution.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Caul Grant

Campaign for Truth & Justice