Sunday, 22 August 2010

Corrupt Judges & Judge Hobbs. The OJC.

The OJC for the uninitiated, means the Office for Judicial Complaints. Sounds grand doesn't it? It is yet another useless bunch of civil servants whose sole purpose in life to to do the opposite of what one would think they are there to do........namely look into complaints made by the long suffering British Public over other incompetent civil servants in the judiciary. Fat chance, they are a yet another gross example of how devious civil servants play at making a show that they are looking into legitimate complaints, when all the time all they are doing is covering up for themselves. It should be renamed the OPJ or Office for the Protection of the Judiciary.
I find whenever I am faced with having to go through this type of farcical process of trying to get justice against incompetent civil servants who have messed up my life, it is an absolute pantomime. This mob were no different.
The farce started on the 5th September 2009 when I sent in my complaint letter about Judge Hobbs. A six page page run down of what is basically to be seen in above posts, outlining the transgressions of Hobbs. A month later with no acknowledgement of receipt, I sent an email
complaining about this. From here on in, every letter or email took one to two months to reply to. I do not intend to outline what was said in each one as I want to keep my blood pressure down!
I did not get a definitive reply until the 10th November and the writer a Miss Kumalo obviously did not understand the English language, for despite laying out exactly what my complaint was, after a page of wafflespeak, she laid out a list of what she thought I was complaining about. After reading that I knew I was either dealing with an idiot or with a civil servant practising their devious methods of muddling up the issues and turning what you had said into something entirely different. She said I had complained about:-
1/ Hobbs showing bias AGAINST ME, when what I said was he showed bias TOWARDS the applicant before him (Busbridge)
2/ That Hobbs accepted the evidence of an expert witness, when I said no such thing as no expert witness appeared in that hearing!!
3/ That Hobbs referred to MY CASE as a 'long sordid history', when I had no case at this hearing as I was not even present. The case of course belonged to Busbridge.

How do these people get jobs in the civil service, I wonder? Is it as I have said, they do not understand what they read, or is it them playing games in such a way as to throw out your complaint?

She then goes on to saying that the case concluded in 2006 and there was a time limit for me to complain. Now I made a big point of explaining why I was complaining long after the case. How the IPO deliberately held from me the outcome of it and how it was not until 2009 that I managed to get a transcript. How I was ex-parte to the case. I was obviously talking in Indian to this woman, and even though she sounds Asian she obviously does not understand Indian or even English.

She condescendingly says she did flip through my letter and it appeared to her that many of the issues I complained about fell into the category of 'judicial decisions or case management' which were outside their remit. How convenient!! You see how they work, these devious bastards. For what was said in this transcript of the hearing, could not be said to be a judicial decision as the appeal was dropped and therefore no decision was ever made!! Similarly with case management, as the hearing finished without a decision as the appeal was dropped, what was said at that hearing could therefore not be said to be 'case management' as there was no case, in the end. That so called 'Hearing' was no more than a get together by Busbridge and his legal representatives, as would be the case if he went to his solicitors and they got together to discuss his legal position!
What I had complained about was the behaviour of Hobbs which was contrary to the rules of a hearing officer, which I told her I had got, and I quoted them.
She then waffled on about how Judges are allowed to say what they want in a case. This was said as if she was dealing with a full blown case in which I was involved, which of course I was not. She also said that a judge could comment on the merits of evidence presented, yet it is obvious that my complaint was that what he commented on, was not 'evidence' but case history of a case not even to do with this hearing. That his comments were of a personal nature about me, a person who was not involved in that hearing, so why was I brought into the matter at all, let alone had these personal comments made against me?
She then went on to say that I would need to show evidence as to my complaints about, bias, slander about me, Hobbs conduct, his inappropriate behaviour and the way he conducted the hearing. This woman was quite obviously a total idiot because my letter of complaint laid all that out in full and I asked them to get a transcript of the hearing and to read all of it and they would see how the hearing had been conducted. Obviously they couldn't be arsed to do that but maybe expected me to copy all 46 six pages and pay the extra postage on that thick bundle of papers. It is strange they never asked me to provide them with a copy if they were not prepared to get one themselves.
She then goes on to say I could ask for an extension of time and I should write in again listing my reasons. This when I had already given a full explanation as to why I was late in complaining. They just make you want to vomit, these absolute oafs, and we the Public have to pay their huge wages.

I replied by email the next day (11/11/2009) saying in detail what I really thought about her vacuous letter. Telling her she had ALL the evidence she needed and I was not satisfied, due to the vacuousness of her replies, that she was up to the job. I asked her to pass it onto her superior.

I got her reply on the 21/12/09 so it took the useless entity a month and a half to reply and instead of my getting someone else dealing with it, I get her again!
She astonishingly says she has not got a copy of the transcript, as she does not need one. So how can she possibly understand what went on at that hearing and all that was said and how??? She says that my accusations as to Hobbs 'personal misconduct' do not show this to be the case!!
She goes onto again saying that Judges can run a hearing how they like. It seems this oaf has never read the rules for Appointed Persons as those rules clearly show otherwise. This is obviously someone who has been told to just not admit that Hobbs behaved against the rules. I find this is what civil servants do all the time. You can stand in front of them with a huge big sign stating the rules in big red letters and they behave as if it is not there, or they cannot see the words.
She then again states that the decisions that had been made by Hobbs, they could not challenge.
So Hobbs slandering me over matters that had nothing to do with the case before him, are Hunky Dory by her. They were not 'decisions' but personal observations!!!!!!!!! They were not 'relevant' in the resolution of the hearing either!! This as no resolution or decision was ever made as th appeal was formerly dropped!!!!!!!!
Of course she completely ignores my complaints of blatantly giving free legal advice, which is clearly against the Rules and of the bias towards Busbridge the applicant, which is also against the Rules.
She again says I was out of time having taken absolutely no notice of my explanation as to why I had not even known of what had been said until 2009.
If I did not like it I could complain to the OMBUDSMAN.

Sir John Butterworth 2001 May he enjoy his retirement with his ill gotten gains!!

However as I already know this, I am bound to have to go the whole hog because if I do not, then I cannot take all this to the highest levels. I would be accused of not using levels of complaint open to me, if I did not. So onwards Christian soldiers it is..........................................................>

No comments:

Post a Comment