I did some research following the spider bite and found the spider looked to be not dissimilar to a Wolf Spider.

Transcription

1 Diabetes at Tribunal At a tribunal where I was appealing on a decision not to allow my claim for Employment and Support Allowance I was asked by a Dr Stanton how I was controlling my diabetes, this astounded me as I didn t put anything in relation to diabetes on any documentation because I don t have diabetes and told Dr Stanton that I doesn t have diabetes. This can be clarified in the recording of the appeal hearing that I made. Venomous Spider Approximately two to three weeks or so prior to the hospital appointment and before the Employment and Support Allowance appeal I saw an unusually large spider running around my living room before I went to sleep, then whilst I was asleep I was bitten on the finger and my finger did swell up like a sausage. I did some research following the spider bite and found the spider looked to be not dissimilar to a Wolf Spider. Wolf Spiders are not indigenous to the United Kingdom. Of course I am no expert on spiders, diabetes or insulin but what if I had been diabetic, perhaps my whole body would have swollen like a mummy with the spider bite and I may have died, leaving the way clear for the conspirators to steal my domains and business ideas. Probation Lucky it wasn t Murder Then there s the Probation Officer who said at one of the appointments that I was lucky it wasn t murder, he knew that I had been the victim of an assault that was set up at the Chesterfield Royal Hospital but obviously it wasn t his concern, I recorder every probation session apart from the one where I had to attend on the morning of release on curfew from prison. This would then indicate that the assailant that attacked me at the hospital has done this before and possibly murdered someone and the Probation Officer knows of it to be making such a statement. There have been a number of attempts to cause and to inflict me with a terminal illness as well as an attempt to murder me. Assaulted In the Chesterfield Royal Hospital Then on the 05 th June 2006 I was assaulted at the Chesterfield Royal Hospital (where I had treatment for my injuries of which, I have a copy of the medical records in proof) by someone claiming to be a solicitor who stood trial along side of me as codefendant from the 13 th to the 17 th March 2007 where I was convicted and he was acquitted through deceit. I was then given a 12 month custodial sentence and incarcerated on the 03 rd August My affiliation of the BNP was then used against me at trial and the evidence in proof is that Terry Fox have inserted that I was the local fund holder of the BNP in the Statement of Facts that he asked me to compile? Terry Fox ed me stating that he had inserted that I was the local fund holder of the BNP and that was the final version with the only addition that he had made. The fact that I was a member of the BNP was a major factor in making decisions in complaints I made against my presumed legal defence team and then maintained in the refusal of my application for the granting of leave to appeal as all had no intention of adhering to their remit. Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 1 of 7 Martin Glasgow

2 All throughout, in recollection I can now recall where I have been purposely exposed to an excess amount of x-rays, given a skin condition and suffered a bite from a none indigenous venomous spider and on a number of occasions there have been attempts in having me put in the position of being set up, until finally I was assaulted in a set up arranged by the Derbyshire Police Authority at the Chesterfield Royal Hospital and maliciously prosecuted by Police acting on behalf of the Derbyshire Police Authority. Single Judge Whilst in prison located at North Sea Camp I managed to eventually lodge an appeal dated 30 th October 2007 on behalf of myself. The appeal went to a single appeal Judge by the name of Nigel Teare who refused leave to appeal, of which, I received his order dated 15 th January REASONS FOR DECISION I have considered the papers in your case and your grounds of appeal. The Grounds of Appeal, despite their length, do not disclose an arguable ground of appeal either against conviction or sentence. There are a great many allegations but no coherent explanation as to why any have a realistic prospect of success. For that reason leave to extend time is also refused. Full Court Hearing I received the single Judge s Order whilst on curfew at my home address and photocopied both side s front and reverse, completing the reverse signing and dating it the 28 th January 2008, I addressed it to the Criminal Appeals Office at the Royal Courts of Justice, posting it the same day. Then finally after written correspondence and telephone calls between myself and the Court of Appeal, where, it was agreed by a Court of Appeal barrister by the name of Ray Dhanawa who was supposed to be working on my behalf that the case was to be glossed over during one of the recorded telephone conversation. I received an appeal hearing date of the 29 th October 2008, of which, I and a friend attended. Strangely enough the Order I received through the post a few days later states:- The Appellant was not in custody and was not present. Yet, I and my friend have a London underground ticket each for that very same day the 29 th October Then after the Full Court Hearing, where I wasn t allowed to say anything and all the Court staff turned their backs on us details of the refusal to allow leave to appeal were publicised on a number of political websites. REGINA - V - MARTIN GLASGOW AND ANOTHER The following is a reproduction (copy & paste) of an sent on the 03 rd June 2013 to the solicitor named who works for Mackesys Solicitors in London. Hi Mr Ambrose Glad to hear you enjoyed your holiday. Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 2 of 7 Martin Glasgow

3 Please find attached to this a pdf document containing three letters from the Derby Crown Court concerning the dates of attendances that were contained within the alleged (what I was told) defence copy of the prosecution file that I collected from solicitor Robert L. Bashfort after I had dismissed his and the services of barrister Alastair Munt on being found guilty with their help and incompetence s. I managed to copy the file between collecting it and delivering it to my new solicitors, Howell s of Sheffield. As a matter of fact they re not incompetent at all. They were actually part of an elaborate plot and worked along with the prosecution and this imposter Amandip Singh Johal and his defence team. They all conspired in order to have me convicted and the person pretending to be Amandip Singh Johal the son of Kashmir and Malkiat Singh Johal acquitted. Getting back to these letters contained in the pdf document, they are dated the 13 th & 28 th of December 2006 and the 14 th of February 2007 and all state GLASGOW Martin and another with the exception that the letter dated the 28 th of December 2006 which contains a further listing referencing a JACQUES Leon R. The fact that Amandip Singh Johal has been replaced with another in the letters indicates that the administration at the Derby Crown Court along with everyone else connected with the case knew Amandip Singh Johal to be an imposter and as a precautionary measure and in an attempt of not committing themselves they changed Amandip Singh Johal to another. After all, the listings have to be drawn up before the letters can be produced and posted, and then the further six page pdf file attached titled and dated Derby Crown Court Listing I downloaded and from the Derby Crown Court fully shows every individuals name associated with each case and none are changed to another. Proof of a wider conspiracy perpetrated against me for the purpose of a malicious prosecution and in order to pervert the Course of Justice. Kind regards Martin Glasgow THE CO-DEFENDANT WAS CALLED AS A DEFENSE WITNESS. During the trial the co-defendant gave evidence on behalf of himself and under cross examination was directed into what to say by my trial barrister, in that, when he was asked about criminal litigation training the co-defendant stated that he had had none, so my trial barrister rephrased the question and then the co-defendant agreed that he had had criminal litigation training. The co-defendant appears on the front cover as Amandip Johal and then appears on the List of Witnesses, The following were called on behalf of the defense as Amandip Singh Johal. There is another person by the name of Andrew David Spence that was allegedly called on behalf of the defense that I don t have a clue as to who he is. Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 3 of 7 Martin Glasgow

4 There is no witness statement given by Andrew David Spence and he does not appear anywhere in the defense copy of the prosecution file or in any other documentation. DECEIVED INTO HAVING NO WITNESSES During the trial I was badgered into signing a declaration that I didn t wish for two witnesses to give evidence on my behalf by Alastair Munt, the barrister pretending to be working in my defense, he said that if I didn t sign the declaration then he wouldn t be prepared to have the only witness (Karen Virginia Wheeldon) he wanted to give evidence to take the stand, so I would have no witness at all. Karen Virginia Wheeldon then gave evidence on behalf of the prosecution and appears on the list of witnesses included with the Judges summing-up, up to and including the verdict as Katherine Virginia Weildon for the prosecution. WITNESS INTIMIDATION I also have a recorded conversation with one of the deterred witnesses where he states that the other witness was told don t give evidence and to keep his mouth shut or he will go to prison as well, this is before the trial is over. I lodged an appeal from within prison which was refused by the single Judge. I then forwarded the appeal to the Royal Courts of Justice where a Full Court Hearing was held in the Criminal Division where again I was refused leave to appeal. FRAUDULENT WITNESS STATEMENTS Then I made an application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) who informed my by letter dated 16 th January 2009 that it was known at the trial and therefore prior and at the Chesterfield Magistrates Court that the evidence used against me in order to bring about a conviction was fraudulent (as are all the other statements) but refused my application. It then became apparent through compiling a 92 plus page report containing the comparison and cross-referencing of the witness statement of nurses and visitors claiming to have witnessed the events at the hospital that they were also fraudulent due to major inconsistencies and that those who gave evidence at the trial were in fact employed phony witnesses. POLICE OFFICERS HAND WRITING I then lodged civil litigation against the person that had assaulted me. The person pertaining to be a solicitor produced their own defense case statements where it became evident that the statement allegedly given by him in 2006 was fraudulent as the two signatures were completely different. I then obtained the signature of the police officer a Pc 2970 Alex Edwards that had signed the witness statement allegedly given by Amandip Singh Johal on the 05 th June 2006 in his own handwriting contained on a witness statement to the fact that he had took part in interviewing me at the Chesterfield police station on the 14 th December Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 4 of 7 Martin Glasgow

5 AKA & NO SCAR IN VIDEO I then sourced video footage where this alleged clinical negligence solicitor uses a different name and showing him not to have the scar that is stated he has been told is permanent within one of his two his Record of Taped Interviews (ROTI), both dated the 24 th June This person that assumes the name Amandip Singh Johal also goes by the names, Aman Singh and Aman Johal but through research I believe his real name to be Ravinder Johal, he and his brother Harjinder Johal both at sometime worked for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Harjinder Johal appears in the Derbyshire Times as prosecutor in a case held in the Chesterfield Magistrates Court, of which, I have the article. SOMEONE OTHER THAN HE IS It has materialised through research and the production of screen prints of 192.com that all throughout the co-defendant claimed to be someone other than he is and that he is using variants of the name used at trial as explained to Mr Ambrose of Mackasys Solicitors in London. Dear Mr Ambrose Further to our telephone conversation held on the 28 th January 2013, please find enclosed 192.com screenshots of Anmandip Singh Johal in Chesterfield. The screen shots depict; 1) Amandip Singh Johal, Age Guide 35 39, Electoral Roll 2009, Director Info. 2) Amandip Singh Johal, Age Guide 18 21, Electoral Roll ) Amandip Singh Johal, Age Guide Addressing the extremity of each variable. 1) 2009, at age 35 minus 3 would put the subject at the age of 32 years in ) 2008, at age 21 minus 2 would put the subject at the age of 19 years in ) 2006, subject not of voting age. From the 192.com screenshots there are two persons with or using the same name Amandip Singh Johal and each pretending (when it suits) to be the other in Chesterfield. A, Subject 1 is in the proximity of 32 years old in B, Subject 2 is in the proximity of 19 years old in C, Subject 2 and 3 is the same person residing in the same household as depicted in the 192.com screenshots, Other Occupants and (not in the same order) Malkiat S Johal, Mukhvinder S Johal, Simmi Johal, Kashmir K Johal, Anita Johal and Dharmender S Johal. Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 5 of 7 Martin Glasgow

6 Please also find enclosed, The Law Society Find a solicitor printout:- Details: Johal, Amandip Singh Director ID: Admission Date: 01/10/2003 There is only one Amandip Singh Johal on the Law Society Find a solicitor website. Subject 1 Amandip Singh Johal became a solicitor in This then would make subject 1 29 years old in The Law Society information would then make subject 2/3 16 years old in In order to attain a law degree to become a solicitor takes a minimum of 3 years, unless it is achieved through a top up from another relevant degree or by going through the Institute of Legal Executives (ILEX) route. The top up degree and ILEX route invariably takes longer, and that said, a straight law degree would make it that subject 1 would be 26 years old and subject 2/3 would have been 13 years old at a maximum on starting their degree. Malkiat S Johal and Kashmir K Johal both gave statements stating that it was their son involved in the incident who became the co-defendant and Malkiat S Johal even gave evidence to that fact under oath at the trial held at the Derby Crown Court on the consecutive days of 13 th March 2007 to the 17 th March 2007 inclusive. Subject 1, was at the trial, a solicitor as per the witness statement of Amandip Singh Johal dated 05 th June I then have to ask myself the question, why would Malkiat S Johal and Kashmir K Johal claim subject 1 to be their sibling subject 2/3 with there being such a large age difference and such a contradiction to the facts? Perhaps it could be that subject 1 Amandip Singh Johal is actually someone other than Amandip Singh Johal and a relation (family member) of the Johals in Chesterfield! It doesn t take up to the age of 29 to attain a degree, therefore subject 1 could or would have had another profession before and now could possibly have been working as a prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Yours sincerely Martin Glasgow Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 6 of 7 Martin Glasgow

7 NO LEGAL AID NO DEFENCE I have in my possession a copy of the defense copy of the prosecution file I obtained whilst in transition from my original solicitors Robert L. Bashforth & Co to the next solicitors Howells of Sheffield that also faked applying for Legal Aid and it contains a copy of FORM B titled Statement of Means for right to representation in criminal proceedings in the Crown Court and the first paragraph states: Now that you have been granted publicly funded representation in the Crown Court and is signed by me and dated 2/10/06. I submitted a freedom of information request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for an inventory of solicitor firms/organisations that have claimed Legal Aid on my behalf from the year 2000 and during a recorded telephone conversation held on the 19th June 2013 I was told that the Legal Services Commission have no legal aid funding certificates on their system. I then received an on the 20th June 2013 stating that no solicitors firm has applied for public funding on my behalf in either legal help, civil or criminal legal aid cases. I also have a digital recording of my next solicitors (Howells of Sheffield) completing the legal aid form, faking applying for Legal Aid on my behalf. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION I have been maliciously prosecuted and there has been a concerted effort in a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by everyone I have complained of and complained to. SUPREME COURT OF GREAT BRITAIN I lodged a Notice of Appeal with the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on the 26 th June 2013 and subsequently received a response dated 1 July 2013 stating the Court has limited jurisdiction in criminal cases and that permission to appeal to the Supreme Court in a criminal matter may only be granted if it is certified by the court below that a point of law of general public importance is involved. On page 5 4. Permission to appeal PART B it is stated on the Notice of Appeal: The appellant applies to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal. There doesn t need a certificate to be granted from the Appeal Court as PART B indicates. The substantial, fresh, new, compelling and credible evidence was not available at the Appeal hearing that I attended which was held on the 29th October 2008 and as such there could not have been a certificate granted at that time. It is my belief that he Supreme Court has jurisdiction in all Courts below in England, Wales and Northern Ireland whether they are civil or criminal cases that s why it s called the Supreme Court. Your Ref: 44167/13 Page 7 of 7 Martin Glasgow