Jun 10 2016
Twill be an interesting day today. You see I am due to appear at Southend on Sea Magistrates court at 9.30 AM this morning, so I will have to be swift in writing this.
Now, this case (according to the wholly corrupt Essex Plod) is the one for DISTRIBUTING – a more serious charge than that of possession – a Class C indecent image of a child… Namely the artist, Nan Goldin’s photograph entitled ‘klara and edda belly dancing’.
Nevertheless, Southend Bacon Buggers can describe the photo anyway they fucking want, but that don’t make it so because the fact is that Klara and Edda Belly Dancing is a perfectly legal work of ‘art’… Declared such by the Crown Prosecution Service no less.
So basically I am being prosecuted for doing nothing wrong… At the cost of wasting police time and taxpayers money.
However, as most of you know that isn’t the half of it. You see, what I actually published – and which is still on this site, found HERE – is a screenshot of THE RESULTS of a Google search for Klara and Edda Belly Dancing.
Therefore, if it was a Class C indecent image of a child that the Google search yielded, of which I merely took a screenshot to highlight that the image is perfectly legal being as at the time that I published the photo of the search results, I was due At Basildon CROWN COURT the next day for POSSESSING the very same image – you couldn’t make this shit up – then why the fuck are the big knobs at Google not in the dock with me?
And why is Charles Saatchi not joining us there since he is also distributing the image on the Saatchi Art Gallery website.
I had to censor the photo as it is illegal for people named Christopher David Spivey to publish the image… Incidentally, The Saatchi Art Gallery is located at The Duke of York’s Headquarters, Kings Road SW3.
And we all know about the Duke of York whose Mummy prevented him from being charged with raping an underage girl… Just sayin’.
You then have to ask yourself why the Big Knobs at Amazon and Ebay are not in the dock charged with distributing & selling the image since both internet giants have the image up for sale – which appears, uncensored in a glossy full page photograph in the book, ‘The Devils Playground‘?
Course,, you also have to ask yourself why SIR Elton John is not in the dock with us since it is he who owns the photograph along with the other 24 (if I remember the number correctly) in the collection.
In fact why has the former drug addicted, alcoholic, promiscuous, manic depressive, prone to mood swings, flamboyant, gay Satanist, who has, in the past been publicly accused of being a paedophile, Sir Elt the Melt not had his two young SONS taken away since the police and social services conspired to take my GRANDSON away on the strength of the photo?
And you would further think that the 1000’s upon 1000’s of website owners who are distributing the image would be easy pickings for the Bacon Buggers since a Google Search would point them in the right direction – with SEVEN of them appearing at the top of the search page this morning.
Course, as you also know my Trial at Basildon Crown Court for possessing the image was halted when I got there so as the police could investigate my publishing the screenshot of the results of a Google search the night before in order to highlight the constant police harrassment that I am being subjected to and the fact that I was being maliciously prosecuted after being on bail for the image for nearly two years – A malicious prosecution is a very serious criminal offence.
Nevertheless, there was no need to adjourn the trial for the new taxpayer funded investigation since it is a whole different charge – although the corrupt arseholes are after tagging it onto the original offence so as to bolster their case.
And obviously since there was a new investigation for the more serious charge of DISTRIBUTION, I was invited to go down the nick for a voluntary interview – which wasn’t voluntary really since when I first declined the invite they sent the CID round to my gaff.
Nevertheless, when I did “voluntarily” go for an interview I was not arrested and told that I was free to leave at any time… Indeed, I have never been arrested for this new DISTRIBUTION charge.
However, on the advice of my solicitor – whom accompanied me down the Pig Pen – he wrote out a statement which he read out in the interview and informed the defective that I would be answering “no comment” to all questions… Meaning the interview lasted about 10 minutes.
Now, as you can see in that Statement below, my friend was arrested – a year after the fact – in December 2015, by the wholly corrupt Greater Manchester Police (GMP) for publishing the photo on Facebook in solidarity with me… Despite Facebook not having a problem with it.
Yet when he answered bail 3 months later, he was told that there was no charge because the IMAGE IS LEGAL… Which is documented in the Statement and as such it only needed the defective to ring the GMP to confirm the fact.
Indeed, the GMP even confirm the fact in a 4 page letter that they sent to my friend after he complained about being arrested for a legal image.
However, instead of doing so they arrested me via a postal requisition – breaking the strict police guidelines in doing so – which was authorised by the wholly corrupt Essex Chief Constable, Stephen Kavanagh – which he has not got the authority to do.
PHOTO: The Postal Requisition although the case was adjourned until today because of my ill health.
Now the following is a list of wrongdoing in regard to that PR:
1. I am charged under Sections 1(1)(b) and 6 of the Protection of Children Act 1978. However, any prosecution under Section 1 can only be authorised by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions – S1(3). There is no indication that the DPP has given consent for these proceedings.
2. Essex Police updated its procedures for postal requisitions on 12th May, 2015:
Paragraph 2 ends with the note ‘Compliance with this procedure and any governing policy is mandatory.’
3. Paragraph 3.1 lays down conditions for a postal requisition for an ‘Offender arrested and unconditionally bailed for a decision.’ I was not formally arrested for the alleged offence.
4. The second bullet point under 3.1 states ‘The process only applies to offenders released on unconditional bail.’ I was not formally arrested on 2nd April (interview date) and there was no mention of bail. I was informed that I was free to leave Rayleigh Police Station at any time.
5. ‘Where an offender is arrested and a decision is made by the custody officer to release the offender on unconditional bail pending further enquiries, and the criteria is met, the Custody Sergeant will inform the offender that they may be considered for a Postal Requisition. The offender will be handed a leaflet explaining the process. The leaflet will also explain the legal basis and requirements under the legislation and implications of non-compliance with the process.’
I was not informed by anyone at Rayleigh Police Station that I was considered to be suitable for a postal requisition and was not handed any explanatory leaflet.
6. Further down the same page, the third bullet point states:
‘The officer will forward a copy of the Postal Requisition to the offender by first class post together with a post-charge pack and Her Majesty’s Court Service (HMCS) means form;’
I was not given, nor did I receive a post-charge pack or means form.
Basically, it is a stitch up. In fact I predict that I will get to the MAGISTRATES COURT and there will be a Circuit Judge presiding instead of 3 Magistrates.
I also predict that despite all of the evidence the charge will stand and will also be added to the indictment for the Crown Court Trial even though if anything it should be a separate charge.
So, you tell me who is really committing a crime here?
Wankers … Just sayin’.