Malicious Phone Calls ?

[Kertbache]

I have not yet had time to look at the Twitter but I will.

I appreciate that you are very busy. But did you find time to look at my Twitter feed which confirms that the entire system of justice has failed me for over a decade ?

[islandgirl]

Yes I have sorry for not getting back to you. It is a shocking read. I have no idea what you could do next - maybe others here will. What a terrible situation.

[atticus]

Take care. Your tweets are highly defamatory. It is probably a good thing that you only have 5 followers.

[Kertbache]

[QUOTE=atticus;n1651637]Take care. Your tweets are highly defamatory. It is probably a good thing that you only have 5 followers. [/QU

I fully intended my Tweets to be defamatory, because I'm absolutely certain that Jane Oxley will not take any action for very obvious reasons. I'm currently trying to have her deported from northern Cyprus as she has also committed a crime there, and she would certainly be arrested on arrival in the UK if that were to happen. I'm also attempting to find representation so as to sue Sussex Police. Please note that almost 800 people have viewed my Twitter feed, and that includes the Police and Crime Commissioner of Sussex Police, who is ultimately responsible for allowing this absurd situation to develop, as she was made aware of this a decade ago, but she failed to act.

[Kertbache]

Yes I have sorry for not getting back to you. It is a shocking read. I have no idea what you could do next - maybe others here will. What a terrible situation.

This entire problem could have stopped in it's tracks if it were not for the fact that Probate Courts in the UK are "non contentious." As I made the judge aware of the fact that the executor had both committed perjury in his probate affidavit, and that he had also failed to supply two crucial material documents to the court. The judge ignored those facts even though she saw the photographs of the documents that had very likely been destroyed, because of the non contentious nature of the probate hearing. That failing enabled the executor to apply for a Grant of Probate prior to the hearings in the Chancery Division,

I maintain that a Grant of Probate should not have been issued prior to a full hearing of the evidence. And that it's was totally inappropriate for the executor to be able to obtain summary judgement and strike out of my claim in those circumstances. I also note the Probate Courts are contentious in the vast majority of countries. And that had that been the case in the UK. The executor could have been charged with perjury right at the start of the legal process.

Your thoughts on this aspect please ?

[atticus]

The Courts of England and Wales do handle *contentious* probate cases. I can say this from my own first hand experience when in practice.

For example, I have obtained court orders removing executors and requiring the defaulting executors to pay damages to beneficiaries.

[Kertbache]

The Courts of England and Wales do handle *contentious* probate cases. I can say this from my own first hand experience when in practice.

For example, I have obtained court orders removing executors and requiring the defaulting executors to pay damages to beneficiaries.

You have missed my point. This all started with a predatory covert marriage so as to remove me both as the executor and a major beneficiary. The executor applied to have my probate caveat removed so that he could obtain a grant of probate. He and his solicitors, with the assistance of his barrister, were able to pervert the course of justice in the Principal Registry with impunity and obtain a grant of probate, because of the grossly outdated "non contentious" nature of Probate Courts.

[atticus]

If you didn't drip feed information your point might be easier to see.

Predatory marriage is a problem which English law is not equipped to deal with after the death of the "prey". I think the Law Commission may be looking into it, but don't expect quick results.

You appear to have been shafted, with little scope for redress.

[Kertbache]

If you didn't drip feed information your point might be easier to see.

Predatory marriage is a problem which English law is not equipped to deal with after the death of the "prey". I think the Law Commission may be looking into it, but don't expect quick results.

You appear to have been shafted, with little scope for redress.

You have still not commented on the fact that probate courts can be misled with impunity. And that Probate Courts courts are absurdly outdated.

The Law Commission has known about the lacuna concerning Section 18 / 1837 Wills Act which facilitates predatory marriage fraud since 1980, but they have failed to address the problem.

My redress is to sue Sussex Police for their gross incompetence when failing to realise that the evidence that I have provided confirmed that the executor and his wife had been involved in organised crime for 15 years before they deceived my late uncle. And to also have the police pursue charges against the solicitor and barrister for perverting the course of justice, as everything as you know was recorded during all of the court hearings, and the evidence is irrefutable.

[Kertbache]

[QUOTE=atticus;n1651682] If you didn't drip feed information your point might be easier to see.


If you had taken the time to read more of the information on my Twitter feed, you would have had a much better understanding of the situation.

[Kertbache]

My Open Letter to the Home Secretary, James Cleverly MP, exposes a series of failings in the Criminal Justice System. X [ Twitter ] https://twitter.com/ConstableMister