James Colton’s Kafkaesque Trial
“Kafkaesque trial denies justice even after death” – Amnesty International
Two stepdaughters made Affidavits prior to the defendants divorce (2000) for a 3-day fact-finding hearing before Judge Cooper. The stepdaughters made allegations of sexual offences in support of their mother’s financial claim in divorce proceedings.
After the defendant published, (internet and DVD) evidence proving the allegations as lies. PC Spencer (Dorset Police) took it upon herself to harass the defendant who was not committing any offence. Finally, PC Spencer made a malicious arrest at the defendant’s home in Norfolk. The Crown Prosecution (Mr Duffy) refused to prosecute on the harassment charge, because the defendant had exposed his wife and stepdaughters as liars, along with crimes they committed.
12 months later DC Darkin with the support of her colleague PC Spencer approached the mother and stepdaughters pleading with them to resurrect the sexual allegations. They refused. Nor could DC Darkin gain permission from the Crown Prosecution (Mr Montague) to prosecute the defendant.
These two women police officers now spitting nails approached Kate Brown Chief Crown Prosecutor for Wessex seeking her support. Kate Brown agreed to overrule John Montague, Senior District Crown Prosecutor, in bringing a prosecution. Providing Judge’s House, Jarvis, and Wiggs supported the prosecution, by means of withholding defence evidence and refusing to follow Criminal Procedure Rules, along with the Human Rights Act 1998. These judges agreed, along with the stepdaughters.
The following exposes how this Kafkaesque trial was, achieved along with cover-up after cover-up.
The Criminal Case Review Commission
The Application Ref: 00080/2011. 11 March 2011
2010/11 the defendant made an ‘exceptional circumstance’ application to the CCRC because his trial was no trial at all. In brief:
Dorset Police breached the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.
- Arrested without warrant
- Arrested by DC Darkin no reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed
- Refusal of an ‘Appropriate Adult’ to be present at the defendant’s interview
- Collusion with CPS (Wessex) to bring a deceitful prosecution
- Collusion with defence lawyer (Ms Tracey Watson) who would ignore irregularities. Finally refusing any contact with the defendant. Therefore, the defendant appointed Miss Powell. Court Agent to represent the defendant.
The Magistrates Court (Bournemouth)
- Judge House refused bail on grounds that did not exist. Holding the defendant on remand. Part of a growing conspiracy Judge House stamping his fingers hard on a printout of the defendants website, shouting “what about this website”. Which no longer existed. Judge House also breached Article 5 of the Convention on Human Rights. The right too bail.
- No Case Progression Form completed
- make a ‘Defence statement’ (sets out the defendants case against the prosecution)
- complete the Plea and Case Management Form (i.e. what witnesses the defendant had requested)
- use previous inconsistent statements (Affidavits) made by the complainants
- have any contact with the defendant (documented) and a friend on his behalf (documented). Therefore Court Agent appointed to represent defendant
- hand over the full police statements of the complainants, which contain evidence of admitted perjury in Affidavits made in 1999. Also different accounts too same allegations used in divorce proceedings.
- hand over 2 (unused) witness statements both highly relevant to the defendants case