Ever hear of Hon Barrister John Miller?
93426
Do a Google search for the phrase "nigerian bank scam".  The email that you received is one of the most common scams on the  internet.  \n\nSome poor soul passed away, leaving behing millions of dollars and you as the only known heir.  An attorney or some government official wants to get the money out of the country and wants to pay you a percentage.  Suddenly, they need money for transaction fees or bribes.  You send them money and suddenly you never hear from them again.\n\nI get lots of these emails.  Law enforcement doesn't have time to deal with it.  I forward a copy of the email to the abuse department of the ISP were it came from and leave it at that.
852122
NO.! Corruption.\nIn what has become a predictable annual event, the EU Court of Auditors, once again refusing to certify the EU accounts as legal and reliable, listed a catalogue of institutional problems in its report of 24th October 2006.\nThe Court found "weak internal controls for the majority of EU expenditure”, The Court also reported a "high incidence of errors in the underlying transactions" and that "overdeclarations and ineligible expenditure [ie fraud] continue to go undetected within the majority of EU expenditure areas.\nDid you know this?\nPerhaps the most disturbing part of the Amsterdam Treaty was its provisions for the legal system known as Corpus Juris to be introduced throughout the EU. (Corpus Juris can be introduced by Qualified Majority Voting, so the EU can introduce it even if we were to refuse it by a 100% majority in Westminster.)\n[Section II, Chapter 8, heading (d): "Measures for countering fraud against the financial interests of the Community"]\n\nCorpus Juris will set up a European Public Prosecutor with over-riding criminal law jurisdiction throughout Europe, initially on matters of fraud against the EU budget, later to be extended to all criminal activities, which will thus come within the EU purview. Habeas Corpus and Trial by Jury - rights enjoyed by Britons since Magna Carta - are explicitly to be abolished under these proposals. \n\n[ The proposals are being drawn up by EU Commission (XX DG) which details an EU criminal code and code of procedure. Article 26.1 explicitly provides for cases (where the sentence can be up to seven years) to be heard by Courts "consisting of professional judges, excluding simple jurors and lay magistrates."]\n\nThe implications of this proposal cannot be overemphasised. As Churchill wrote "...the great principle of Habeas Corpus and Trial by Jury ... are the supreme protection invented by the British people for ordinary individuals against the state. The power of the executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him judgment by his peers for an indefinite period, is in the highest degree odious, and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments."\n\n[ Winston Churchill, minute to the Home Secretary, 21 November 1943]\n\nThe obligation to conform to the requirements of the Amsterdam Treaty explains the Government's determination to press ahead with the abolition of the right to Trial by Jury for certain offences, despite defeat in the House of Lords and widespread opposition from lawyers and civil rights groups.\nVisit the website below,it certainly is an eye opener!!!
991737
Hi Flavormint!\nI've heard about the Lying Lawyer. He's a good family man but has a bad habit at the race track. He welshed on a loan so, some goons had to be sent out to collect a payment. When the good affable attorney couldn't cough it up and instead mooned them them with butt cleavage, they had to tie his fingers together in a most unpleasant way.\nFlavormint, my girlfriend was unfortunate to be applying as a receptionist that day when she had to witness the unfortunate events. I don't know if the Lying Lawyer is still practicing law or not.\n-Zealnik
728417
i think it is disgraceful!!-we have lost the freedom of speech in the UK and are now being forced to bow down and comply with the wishes of individuals and organizations who preach racial hatred far louder than the two gentlemen to which you refer. when you consider that certain characters were allowed to preach hatred on the streets of london only a few months ago unmolested by the law only serves to fuel my disgust and contempt for this puppet government. the only reason the two gentlemen are in court is because certain government officials know they have ballsed up on the asylum issue and all they want to do is bury their head in the sand and pretend its not happening-well i am afraid it is. and but for the two men in the dock no-one would know the truth. i wish them good luck.
1058917
Its miller time! what? lol
981644
Might be worth asking the CAB (citizens advice bureau) can fix you up with a legal-aid solicitor on one of the £5 for 20 minute style things they use to do.\n\nIf you cannot find someone to do this, then call a few solicitors, MOST will give you a free initial consultation to decided if there is anything thay can help you with - it is then up to yopu if you decided to proceed with them or not.\n\nIGNORE anyone who say "yes" or "lots of problems" - unless they can specifically quote WHAT law you are breaking - and also if it is a UK law.\n\nThere is a defence against libel and defamation IF it is in the public's interest. I would suggest that alerting people to unethical and underhand practice could be construed as being in the public interest. However I am not a solicitor or barrister - so would suggest you speak to one.\n\nFurthermore, in the UK, we do not tend to toss people into jail with quite as much enthusiasm as they do in other countries - and if you have little money to lose (no house etc) then you would not really be worth suing. So what they can REALLY do against you is probably fairly minimal.\n\nIt is intersting to note that presumably the domain name issuers has not chosen to take the domain away from you and award it to this niblo character. Something I would ave thought his legal folks would have done rather than waste their time.\n\nGet your site regsitered with google (search for "search engine submission") then even if you lose the site in the end, it will remain cached on search engines for a long time to come.\n\nAnd if you lose he website? then "allan_niblo_is_dishonest.com" or "allan_diblo_leaves_bad_debt.com" might be available. Just keep it true and keep the information in the public interest.
990892
Rieschels daughter Angela is the best connected best lawyer still practicing in Buffalo.  If you can get dad, Wayne, that much to the better.  Most people hire them so if nothing else, the other side won't get them.  They are honest and good people on top of it.  They have handled my legal stuff for years.  I have lived and worked in that area and part of my job is hearing all the gossip.  I only repeat the kindly stuff and here is an example of a time when it is no chore.  If I can otherwise help contact me at oddmom3@yahoo.com   Laura Bennett
427942
Hey the prime minister of Jamaica is Portia Simpson Miller, she the first women in Jamaican History to become a P.M. and you can trust me on this one because I'm a Jamaican.\n-jace
526840
Michael Hunt, has a lot of fun with his mates in the pub, when the barmaid recieves a phone call for Mike and has to shout his name over the noise to tell him to take the call\nIs Mike Hunt here? Has any one seen Mike Hunt? To which all shout YESSSSSSSSSS.\nMaster.
784637
Is he a political prisoner? If so try Amnesty International. They have phone and other contact address at the website listed below.
616359
No.  Who's John Howard?
768735
I doubt if there has ever been one. If there has, I have not heard of it.\n\nThe British establishment does not work like that. If necessary they turn a blind eye, but they never forgive if they can possibly help it. Look how hard it was to campaign for a pardon for the traumatised World War I soldiers who were shot.
774974
Hi Jacq,\n\nI have not heard of this, but if that is the case then you do have extenuating circumstances and that would be given full consideration.\n\nI suggest you contact the Guildford School of Law. They will have all the info you need.\n\nGood luck.
969963
i didn't think his name was john i thought it was bertie?!!!!\nbut if his name is john then no i haven't.
760989
Gerald...it goes like this; when the populist press squeals and sneers, it makes it hard for the law...and even harder for probation officers, as they get the boot when some oik gets 12 months of your service rather then the 4 or so years of clinky, via the influence of the press (Mail/Sun/Express the main stirrers). They thus watch the criminal theirselves and judge if you are watching him as you apparently should. It indeed is not easy, but the hysterical press is doing nowt to make the general public see both sides of the stories.\n\n  Nice one, Mr. Sceptic.
1160964
your comment about the law lords coming up with laws with the help of their friends is complete bull. Law lords are simply the highest level of judge in the UK. They dont proactively make laws. Like the courts below them they must wait for a case to be brought before them, and then decide on the disputed points of law that would be in the best interest of the parties, and society. There is no doubting the intelligence and ability of our law lords. They are among the best in their profession, in the world, let alone in hte country. \n\nAs for a conspiracy in law, well, judges are very hard to remove. The circuit judges and above can only be removed due to infirmary (physically/ mentally unable to do the job) Retirement (age 70 or 80, i forget which) Resignation, and dismissal. Since the only way to dismiss a judge is for parliament to petition his removal (virtually pass a law to remove him) there really is no need for them to 'use the law to cover themselves' And in practice that wouldnt happen anyway. Albeit only one high level judge has EVER been dismissed and one low level (for smuggling drugs in his yacht) Besides, not wanting to amend parts of the law? hell they'll amend it as the public see fit if they want to get elected again. Just to point out how well the law has been used to 'protect' the government in their sleaze allegations. I think the only way for what i think you're suggesting to happen would be for one of the arms of state (montesquieus theory, The legislature, The executive and the judiciary) gains too much power. But then the other arms act as a check and balance to bring them back down to earth.\n\n\nNotyou311- The law lords are the top judges in the UK. The house of lords, whilst being a chamber of parliament, also houses the highest court in the land. They decide on only THE most socially important cases and are bound by no courts (except the European court of Justice but thats debateable). THe only thing stronger than the law coming out of hte house of lords is an act of parliament.\nHotirongirl- Nobody has absolute power. There is always a check and balance to cancel them out.
660155
He's not breaking the law.\n\nYou can change lawyers.\n\nHowever, if you feel that he is not actually doing anything then you can contact his Professional Organisation to check what the formal grievance procedure is.