The £7 million (?) (US$12m) swindle, engineeredby surveyors and lawyers, and implementedwith the assistance of tribunal, courts,accountant and police |
Seven years of harassment, intimidation, bullying and blackmail tactics
|
My Diary
Introduction to My DiaryAs suggested by the name, My Diary is a log of events covering the period from January 2002 to date. It is presented on a yearly basis. While many of the events are covered in other parts of the site, My Diary is more personal - probably making it an 'easier read' than other sections. Combined with the home page to the site which is a summary of the whole site and My Witness Statement , it provides a good overview of the whole site) On the home page of the site, I state that my life has been totally ruined by the events that have taken place since 2002 - ALL triggered by the fact that, when presented with a £14,400 (US$25,400) invoice in July 2002 , I 'dared' to ask the question "What are you going to spend it on?" - and I persisted in wanting to get an answer to what I consider to be a perfectly reasonable question to ask. Please note that I have consistently agreed that repair and maintenance works needed to be carried out. A fact recognised by Mr Lanny Silverstone , Cawdery Kaye Fireman Taylor (CKFT), Mr Ladsky's solicitors. Consequently, that I would need to pay my share (as, indeed, I did in the past). This is all I wanted to do: pay my just and fair share of the costs i.e. as per the terms of my lease - which is a legally binding contract - on both parties - landlord and leaseholder.
I was not prepared to 'shut up' and pay monies I did not owe.• I wanted to enforce the terms of my lease, as well as exert my statutory rights. • I wanted to comply with the instructions that had been given to me by a tribunal to NOT PAY (pg 5) the service charge demand until the tribunal had issued its determination - and it had been implemented. • I wanted legal advisers to provide me with what I believed I had paid for: proper, unbiased, informed, professional legal advice i.e. advice driven by the concept of 'fairness and justice'. • And I wanted to abide by my moral principles, my integrity: I wanted to pay my just and fair share of the costs for the major works (as captured e.g. on pages 3 and 4 of my 9 August 2003 letter to West London County Court ; in other letters) (This was held - and used against me). However, by the end of 2003, when I finally admitted to myself that I was dealing with a system that is heavily biased towards landlords (home # 4.14), I gave in "for the sake of bringing the dispute to an end". But, the sociopaths I am dealing with, led by Mr Andrew Ladsky, opted to pull me back down into the residential leasehold hell hole in 2004 out of revenge for 'daring' to challenge the 17 July 2002 service charge demand (My Diary 11 Mar 07; Martin Russell Jones # 18 ; My Diary Mid-Dec 07) - and because the dominant business model in the residential leasehold sector relies on beating leaseholders into submission. Second time round, I am no longer prepared to let a bunch of criminals walk all over me and steal from me - no matter what. While I am NOT the criminal; I AM THE VICTIM OF ORGANISED CRIME - my life has been totally ruined, and I have lost a very great deal. So, might as well go to the very end... and end-up on the pavement - being a 'great' advertisement for this country; more specifically: the current 'ruling class'.
Fair minded, reasonable visitor to the site, as you read through the site, please keep in mind: what is the ROOT CAUSE OF EVERYTHING CAPTURED ON THIS SITE? Mr Ladsky et. al. and their aides deciding that I (and my fellow leaseholders) would be made to pay for this: the CONSTRUCTION OF A PENTHOUSE FLAT, ADDITION OF THREE OTHER FLATS AND RELATED WORKS - FOR WHICH WE ARE NOT LIABLE. (This pack (2.3MB), as well as this pack (1.1MB) contain key evidential documents. As to the pay-off, it is evidenced by the block sale of flats in the latter part of 2006, beginning of 2007 which, of course, are in addition to the sale of the penthouse flat BGL 54 458 for £3.9 million (US$6.9 million) in December 2005, etc. In October 2007, the selling price was £6,500,000 (US$11.5 millions)
As you read through, bear in mind that EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID, DONE AND WRITTEN BY THE VARIOUS PARTIES COVERED ON THIS WEBSITE STEMS FROM THIS. UNBELIEVABLE isn't it? As I wrote to the then Leader of the Conservative Party, on 6 April 2005 , "It fills me with utter disbelief to see what 'the system' is prepared to do to help a rogue landlord build a penthouse flat at the cost of lessees and further increase his financial gains by getting flats cheaply as a result of extortionate service charges. At the end of the day, this is the essence of it." I am calling it ' project nightmare ' ('project sunshine' since the relaunch). It is on my mind all the time, from the time I wake-up to the time I go to sleep. And, when I wake-up in the middle of the night, it is also on my mind. As you will see from My Diary, there has always been something happening / hanging over my head, ensuring I cannot forget it. On occasions, it has led me to consider the option of 'ending it all'.
Until recent times, the horrendous and very traumatic treatment I am being subjected to since 2002 (abuse, harassment, persecution, bullying, victimization, being terrorised, intimidation, blackmail, physical threats, including being told that I "don't have long to live", defamation of my name and of my character, etc.) brought on the tears; tears of utter despair, terrible loneliness, abandonment (e.g. My Diary 16 Jun 06 ; 20 Aug 07) from knowing that there is absolutely nothing there to help me (only God - to ask for the strength, and protection to carry on), but also extreme frustration, as well as immense disgust that - across the board - 'blind eyes and deaf ears' are turned to such injustice and inhumane treatment - in the U.K., in the 21st century. This is DEFINITELY NOT how I perceived this country I opted to make my home - because it was NOT like that. (As many people are saying since the 2008-09 scandals: those with the duty to do something about it, are too busy lining their pockets, and the police also operates on a 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing' basis: view of / assessment by others ; my first-hand experience with Kensington & Chelsea police in 2002 ; 2003 and 2007). I snapped out of it through anger and determination to fight to the death (My Diary Oct 05). I am not a door mat, nor a free access cash dispenser to be used and abused by criminals. I will not give in to their terrorist-like tactics.
To this I will now add: how many of those connected in one way or another with my case will be able to say that when they draw their last breath? And to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, on 22 November 2004 , I wrote (in the context of the impact that this 'war' is having on my health) "maybe my tombstone will read: "She died because the British government (*) opted to not only turn a blind eye and a deaf ear, it actually helped a greed-ridden bunch of people who wanted to make her pay for the construction of a penthouse flat and enlargement of flats on 4 floors - all in the name of the leasehold system. She fought for all she had: a flat which was going to be her pension fund". What an epitaph!" (*) 'et. al' Now, I have essentially stopped crying as I have reconciled myself to the reality that, while I will keep on fighting like a demon for justice and redress to the death, I am highly unlikely to achieve these objectives (e.g. My Diary Mid Dec 07 ; events with West London County Court - Post 2004 ; snapshot: My Diary 11 Nov 08 ; outcome of the SCCO hearing on 30 Jan 09).
You will see from My Diary that, when employed (I resigned in January 2008), I frequently stayed in the office until midnight, or later, as well as most weekends to avoid being in the flat. (In some groups, it was not unusual to work very late and at weekends). The office was my refuge, my 'safe heaven'. I only went to the flat or, as I call it, the 'hell hole', to sleep and wash. For the same reason, I have occasionally stayed in a hotel to get a good night sleep, in a safe environment e.g. My Diary 28 April and 29 April 2006 (as, in spite of paying for it through my taxes, I evidently cannot rely on the police for protection). Eventually, to bring back 'some kind' of normality in my life, in 2007, I rented a room in East London for seven months. (Only 'some kind' of normality as the surveillance continued: My Diary 2009 - Introduction). (The flat remained empty: no point renting it as the person would be harassed e.g. as happened to the tenant of other leaseholders; malicious leaks). Before reintegrating the flat, I had extra security installed so that now I no longer feel the need to sleep all dressed-up, with a knife by me in the bed. However, it only addresses part of the anguish of being in the hell hole e.g. My Diary 2 Aug 06.
What is captured on this site in relation to these instances is what I have observed with my eyes - and those of three different, reliable witnesses -on three separate occasions. Admittedly, observation of the same events by other people might lead them to give a different interpretation to some of the events. However, when these events - including the 2007 and 2008 examples - are looked at in their totality, I believe that any fair minded, reasonable person would likewise agree that I am under surveillance. I captured these events in the hope that, one day, the truth will come out - for the purpose of showing what can happen to a leaseholder who 'dares' to challenge a 'sacrosanct' landlord and the supporting infrastructure to the residential leasehold system (snapshot in My Diary 6 May 08 ; 15 May 08). (I know of several leaseholders in a small block of flats fairly close to my area who have also reported being followed. They believe that it took place over a period of at least six months. Like me, they challenged a service charge demand. And, as in my case, the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal determined that the sum demanded was unreasonable. I do not know whether there is a connection between the two blocks). I also draw your attention to a whistleblower who "claims to have been followed by 'military types'" (See below the attempts intended to scare me). I also highlight media reports which include:
How many thousands of these snoops and criminals are operating across the country at any point in time - spying on people, gathering data on them? It certainly makes it easy to understand how somebody can be under constant surveilance for a very long time: when the snoops are not tailing one person, they are tailing another one. This country is widely reported to have the highest level of surveillance of people in the world (confirmed by the Lords in 2009) e.g. there are over 4 million CCTV cameras in this country = one camera per 15 persons. No wonder that many people nowadays are describing this country as a "police state". And 'Big Brother' keeps on growing, accessing private emails, telephone calls, planting bugging devices, etc. - as, among others, the police and MI5 have the power to hack into home computers - see extracts from the 4 January 2009 Sunday Times article, headed "Police to step up hacking of home PCs" - and a 'superdatabase' is being set-up. THE POLICE STATE PAR EXCELLENCE! The greater the level of systemic corruption in a country, the greater the need for surveillance of the 'little people'. And there sure is corruption in this country! e.g. My Diary Jan 09 ; 6 May 08 ; police Prior to launching the site, I suspected that my mobile phones were monitored. Events in 2007-2008 have confirmed this e.g.
In addition to the evidence compiled under 25 October 2007, who has the level of power necessary to undertake / instigate the above? I can only come up with one answer: THE POLICE (see also below)I bring to your attention an article in the Mail on Sunday, 14 December 2008, headed: "Phone firms net £9m for giving data to the police". "The companies keep records of the numbers contacted, times, dates, duration of mobile phone calls but not the actual contents of conversation. They also hold crucial information about the whereabouts of a mobile phone at any given time - which can be accessed by the police to build up a picture of a suspect's movements... Police can see the phone records without having to apply to the courts, with senior offices issuing a Section 22 notice under the powerful Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act... Last year, Section 22 powers were exercised more than 500,000 times... the Home Office paid the phone companies and internet firms almost £19 million in the past four years to store customer information. The amount paid rocketed from £84,582 in 2004 to £8,346,495 in 2007" And this article headed “Minister in ‘cahoots with mobile phone firms on price fixing’”, in the Mail on Sunday of 27 April 2008, states that “Culture Minister Margaret Hodge was last night accused of being in cahoots with the mobile industry amid allegations that one of her aides suggested a champagne celebration with Vodafone after the company defeated moves to cut its charges. Viviane Reding, the European Union’s telecoms commissioner, said she warned Mrs Hodge that the British people would be ‘very upset indeed… if they found out what was happening behind closed doors’” Even Members of Parliament appear to not be immune from having their telephone conversations being listened to (My Diary 7 Jun 08) - and nor are journalists (My Diary w/c 4 Feb 08) Prior to launching the site in September 2006, I kept on re-rewriting the remainder of this section as I tried to figure out: why? In light of events in 2007-2008, I rewrote it in October 2008. Assuming, fair minded, reasonable visitor to the site, that you are an 'average' person like me, if somebody had said to me in 2002 that they were under surveillance, I would have found it, to say the least, extremely difficult to believe considering, among others, the astronomical cost involved... ...and the key question: WHY?
What I AM is a law-abiding, decent, honest person, who pays her taxes, minds her own business, etc. So: WHY?The only obvious answer: I am the innocent victim of fraud and corruption (confirmed by: the threat of forfeiture and bankruptcy proceedings, as well as court claims = FRAUD TOOLS) - of limited financial means and no influential connections - who was 'rocking the boat' before the launch of this website (overview of my complaints), and has since increased the 'rocking' factor by an exponential amount by exposing 'chapter and verse' of my case on this site, in the process exposing incompetence / malpractice / collusion / fraud - and by continuing to fight back, as well as start going on the attack (e.g. my 3 June 2008 Witness Statement ; My Diary 26 Aug 08 ; 11 Nov 08 ; 30 Jan 09). For an overview of the evidence against various parties see also: My Diary 15 May 08 ; 3 Jun 08 ; 7 Jun 08 - including "I am NOT the criminal. I AM THE VICTM OF CRIME " , my fellow leaseholders ; the links to various statutes included under the definition of 'criminal' e.g. Protection from Harassment Act 1997 ; Theft Act 1968 / Theft (Amendment) Act 1996 ; Malicious Communications Act 1988 - which include examples of breaches of statutes "punishable by emprisonment" As a visitor to my website wrote (# 16) "I think the parties concerned must be extremely worried..." Consider the profile of the sector: a multi-billion £ 'industry' controlled by very powerful oligarchs e.g. 'Who owns Britain?' ; the 'Great Estates', examples of new entrants - with far reaching tentacles e.g. New Labour's 1997 'An End to Feudalism' v. 'New Labour 2008 decision to retain residential leasehold ; a history of the landed class blocking legislation (NB: in the House of Lords, you can also buy your own 'made to measure' legislation), the 'rubbing off' of the power on the supporting infrastructure e.g. the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors threatening to issue defamation proceedings against me - and evidently (and UNBELIEVABLY) encouraging Martin Russell Jones to do the same thing (RICS from # 11 ; # 12). The power of money... What's the purpose of the surveillance? Mainly to determine who my contacts are, so that the 'appropriate' contacts can be approached / actions taken - see e.g. My Diary 2009 - Introduction. Why? Predominantly: 'damage limitation' / to hinder/counteract my moves (e.g. legal proceedings) / to get back at me, punish me for 'daring' to fight back, including going public. (Leaseholders are not 'meant' to do that, as the system relies on the victims being isolated and gagged through FEAR - and leaseholders are definitely not meant to defend themselves by gaining legal knowledge through self-learning: it makes them very dangerous). (It is fascinating to observe how, having the guts to take the moral stance and stand-up by your principles, stand-up for your rights and speak out against injustice and wrongdoings - turns you into a pariah, being persecuted, and leads you to face a 'lynch mob' - including receiving death threats. (See also what happened to some whistleblowers). Even senior Members of Parliament appear to not be immune from retaliatory action, and nor are journalists. I think you will agree that all of this speaks volumes for the current state of affairs in this country. It is extremely sad to see that it has come to that). Take also the culture / political / current 'ruling class' environment into consideration e.g. at October 2008: it is fascinating to observe in media interviews how the parties who have contributed to the economic crisis dodge responsibility, playing 'pass the parcel' / 'ping-pong games', and the uniquely British (probably more accurate: Oxbridge) euphemisms used to play down their actions. (Yet again evident when the bankers faced the Treasury Select Committee in February 2009. It was followed in April-June 2009 by MPs shamelessly defending their misappropriation of public funds, with some lying until faced with the evidence). Add to that a government described by a party Leader in November 2008 as "one of the most secretive and unaccountable in the world" That's obvious to many people. And it has, yet again, been made abundantly evident by the outcome of the 'peers for sale' scandal in January 2009, the blacking-out of MPs expense receipts, and Gordon Brown announcing, in June 2009, an inquiry into the Iraq war (without consulting the other parties) - with a "ban on apportioning blame". He very clearly has a unique interpretation of "transparency" and of demonstrating that wrongdoings are "offensive to my Presbyterian upbringing". (Other examples In November 2008: (1) when Her Majesty The Queen opened a new building at the London School of Economics, she asked "How come that nobody predicted this awful [economic] mess?". Reply (I am paraphrasing) "Due to lack of coordination in communication"; (2) Following the death of a toddler who died as a result of the most appalling injuries sustained over an extended period, and had been seen by 60 social workers, as well as a number of doctors, the media described the authorities as "passing the buck". It comes as no surprise to hear that a social worker who had blown the whistle on the council in question, was 'made to pay' for it: whistleblower # 3; (3) Jack Straw, Head of the Ministry of InJustice reported in The Times, 10 June 2009: "Jack Straw accused of buck passing over murder of French students")
(It seems to me that only the 'little people' get prosecuted, down to the ridiculous level of ending-up with a criminal record for overfilling their dustbin by 4 inches; for forgetting to wipe their pass on the automatic register on buses; being thrown in jail over an apple core, etc. - and that control through FEAR is the modus operandi through, among others, a "police that are a law unto themselves" - as I have experienced with Kensington & Chelsea police + the incident on 9 January 2008. Meanwhile, those behind the gigantic 'trompe l'oeil', including politicians, are apparently 'above the law'. If like me, you are not intimidated by the fear tactics, and 'dare' to stand-up against crime, challenge and expose incompetence / malpractice / collusion / fraud and other criminal activities / practices, you get persecuted - because the 'little people don't do that!'. The 'little people' don't 'dare' to challenge the 'big people's scams (see whistleblowers) Therefore, those who do 'must be made to know their place': that contrary to the window dressing (*) legislation, regulations and codes of conduct, they are there to be used and abused... and that the 'big people' will go after them with a vengeance for 'daring to step out of line' by demanding their 'rights'. But, the tide may be about to turn. (*) As blatantly obvious from e.g. the outcome of my complaints - overview in My Diary 6 May 2008) How? By getting my contacts to obtain information from me, in particular my plans e.g. My Diary 2009 My so-called 'friends' (some people's persistence in trying to get me to answer their questions is hilarious, as are their means) / supply information on me; provide me with trick assessment and advice, set-up traps, etc. e.g. My Diary 2009 - Introduction Why is human nature as it is? :-) Also, while human psychology is very complex (and I am not an expert), my guess is that alignment with the 'other side' - among others, by people I trusted - may also stem from the fact that they would not have the guts to do what I have done, as well as resent my ability to do it. Rather than stand on the sideline, in case it leads to the perception that they are 'siding with me', they opt to join the 'lynch mob', in the process happily swallowing 'the pill' they are given to make them feel better about themselves by helping them rationalise their cowardice, betrayal, deceit, and overcome their self-doubts. Like a police officer said to a Plane Stupid campaigner "People would sell their soul to the devil" While, of course, nobody has the guts to tell me anything (how could they defend their position?), my guess is that the main 'ingredient' of 'the pill' is something along the line that my website is damaging to the country, the institutions, etc. That's the usual 'line of defence' adopted by people in government and their cronies - when exposed. (It is also used as an excuse for not releasing 'inconvenient' information e.g. as appears to be the case with the MP, not reporting on it e.g. the case of the journalist). They try to deflect attention away from themselves - and usually succeed because of an audience that wants to believe them (to protect their comfort zone) - by claiming that the criticisms / allegations / accusations are targeted at their position - instead of the reality: that they are directed at them. This is manipulation on a grand scale! Yet, anybody with average intelligence - prepared to read, and think - would arrive at the conclusion that the parties who have acted against me (lawyers, surveyors, 'regulators', accountants, judges and tribunal chair, court and tribunal staff, police, local council, Ombudsmen, heads of departments) ARE the people who are debasing their position, departments, institutions to which they belong / they represent, and by extension: the country. I have done nothing other than respond to THEIR actions / challenge their inaction. (With some of the 'noble' peers and many of the 'right honourable' and 'honourable' MPs doing the same thing, this conduct is evidently the institutional norm: a state of total lack of morality and probity). (NB: In case you have only just read this section: to those who have / are acting against me, I highlight that, back in 2002, I had absolute blind trust and faith in 'the system'. It proved to be a MONUMENTAL MISTAKE that has caused me to be treated as though 'I' am the criminal, instead of the victim of organised crime and, in the process, suffer unbelievably appalling treatment - My Diary 6 May 2008). It is clear that this cooperation is achieved, in part, by discrediting me (including sinking as low as portraying me as being "mad" ) (a typical tactic). In the male-only environment that drives the scams, my being a woman means that I am perceived as being, 'of course' "emotional" = easy to label as "mad" - , as well as, 'of course', "stupid" = easy to crush. Add to that my other 'handicap': being of foreign origin (e.g. the comment made to me by Deputy Master Hoffman at the 30 Jan 09 SCCO hearing "In this country..."). In addition to the stereotyping by men, this is easy to do as, given the nature of my website, unless they have a specific interest in the matters covered, most people are not going to bother reading it - preferring to accept the version they are being fed by individuals in 'authority' / with power / with money (regardless of how it has been obtained) / people they know. (Note at May 2009: 'Maybe' those who have acted against me have finally 'seen the light' following media reports on the 'noble peers' and 'honourable MPs'?) One thing that ALL the individuals who have acted / are acting against me - in one way or another - can say is: "I did what I did, said what I said, wrote what I wrote because Mr Andrew Ladsky et. al. decided that Noëlle (and her fellow leaseholders) were going to pay for the construction of a penthouse flat and addition of three other flats to Jefferson House - costs for which Noëlle (and her fellow leaseholders) are not liable. The outcome is a multi-million Pound jackpot for Mr Ladsky et. al. So, what can be said about me? Not only do I approve of deceit and fraud (NB: threat of forfeiture and bankruptcy proceedings, as well as court claims = FRAUD TOOLS), I also endorse the other illegal, and often "criminal"' tactics used against Noëlle (and her fellow leaseholders) in the pursuit of this objective: harassment, bullying, victimization , blackmail, extortion, intimidation, defamation of name and character, etc." Also key to the manipulation is the fact that the majority of people are in the dark as to what is actually going on (as I was... and, no doubt, still am to a large extent :-) ) because we are all fooled by highly orchestrated 'masters of deceit' - and the victims are gagged through FEAR - leading them (as I did) to believe that it's only happening to them, and consequently doubting their assessment / conclusions (e.g. comments # 16 , # 8 , # 19). Furthermore, the victims lose support from family and friends who get fed-up hearing about their drawn battle, and find it extremely difficult to believe that the system can be so vile, so cruel, so vicious, so barbaric, and that parties which, on the face of it, 'should not' be connected, actually conspire with each other. (I am not the only one arriving at the above conclusions - see e.g. Stand Your Ground - www.standyourground.co.uk) Even individuals capable of objectivity find it difficult to believe experiences like mine... until it happens to them. (As the propensity to prosecute the 'little people' is on the increase, more people are finding themselves at the receiving end of the legal system / "vicious" operators e.g. debt collector agencies who issue proceedings for bankruptcy and repossession of people's homes "for as little as £1,800" (The Sunday Times, "Persecuted for bank debts of just £750", 11 Jan 09). (Events since the latter part of 2008, with the banks, the scandal in the House of Lords and the House of Commons, reports on whistleblowers, reports on 'surveillance Britain', etc. are also helping more and more people to 'see the light' - making me feel somewhat less isolated) Another objective in having me followed is to scare me and intimidate me so that I give up (Mr Neil Mitchell, a whistleblower, also reported being physically threatened) e.g.
What kind of people can do that? Obviously: very, very sick, morally depraved, despicable, beneath contempt scums. Who is having me monitored?
However, considering, among others, the time scale, resources, and therefore the cost implication - which must be astronomical - there are definitely other parties involved - with a 'big pot of money'. I This conclusion is reinforced by the type of people involved. I have concluded that I am being followed / observed principally by men, but also women, as well as couples. They come in all shapes and sizes, skin colour and age and, by definition, origin / nationality. In the hope that the truth will eventually come out, for the purpose of evidence, I have generally captured my impressions / perceptions of their physical characteristics and appearance. (As well as taking numerous photographs). To further add to the evidence, I have also captured my impressions of their racial origin. Although I have come in contact with many nationalities as a result of, among others, working in different countries, clearly, what is captured are just 'my impressions' i.e. I may be wrong. These people can be on foot, bicycle, scooters, motorbikes, as well as in cars (of which I have noted the number plate of many). It is my impression that, at times, some are 'in disguise'. These include, among others, black London cabs and minicabs, bicycle taxis (all three types likely to have been employed for the evening / 'one-off job'), pretend street cleaners and window cleaners. There can be several people doing this at a given time e.g. one person located on the corner of one street, another in an adjacent street. Most of the time, the people I suspect to be following / observing me are different. 'Most of the time' as, on several occasions, I have recognised some of them (e.g.10 September 2005, 27 February 2006, 18 March 2006, 24 April 2006 and 25 October 2007) (There have been other occasions since, which I have not recorded in My Diary - but I have taken some photographs). An amusing reaction of a significant proportion of those following me on foot is the tendency to start yawning when I look at them. Some also stretch themselves. There is also a high proportion of smokers. (Having your place of your work in the street allows you to do that). Among the men, I have noticed two distinct types, one of which I would describe as amateurs, leading them to behave in a disorientated manner when taken at their own game - see e.g. My Diary 26 Oct 03 ; 16 Jul 05; 17 Aug 05 ; 26 Aug 05 ; 29 Aug 05 ; 31 Aug 05 ; 10 Sep 05 ; 25 Dec 05 ; 15 Jan 06; 19 Apr 06; 16 May 06 , 5 Augu 06, 8 Sep 06)... ...but who have also attempted to scare me (e.g. 6 Aug 05, 16 Aug 05, 19 Apr 06; 17 Jun 06), as well as take retaliatory action (e.g. 21 Dec 05) In relation to 'TYPE 2', my impressions are that this type has some experience of following people - although not all that great (I have tricked them on numerous occasions (e.g. 4 Jan 06 and 15 Jan 06; 30 July 06, 2 Aug 06), much to their annoyance (e.g. 'Rest of week beginning 23 Jan 06'), at times, to the extent of taking retaliatory action (e.g. 1 Aug 06, 23 Aug 06). Generally, this type tends to display an extremely arrogant air and grossly inflated sense of superiority and self-importance. They attempt to convey a 'macho' image: 'I am superior to you / smarter than you'; 'I am all powerful, you are not'. It seems to me that 'type 2' first appeared around mid 2005 (e.g. 5 Aug 05). Why around this time? In My Diary 15 Jan 06, I considered the possibility that I might have been reported for 'suspicious behaviour', and maybe due to my trip to Yemen. While they might have been a trigger, I dismissed both as warranting this prolonged surveillance. The main thing I was doing in 2005 was fight head on - through my complaints - with the legal sector, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and the Institute of Chartered Accountants for England and Wales - see My Diary 6 May 08 for the overview. Considering what happened in 2007 and 2008, among others, with the police, West London County Court, as well as [ADD], my guess, as stated earlier on, is that my complaints got me 'flagged up' as a threat . When I launched the website in 2006, I wrote "It is my impression that there is a connection with the police... I emphasise that I have NO EVIDENCE to back-up my claim i.e. I may be wrong (and I certainly hope that I am because of what it would imply). I am simply capturing my impressions. It may be that they are ex. policemen employed by the private sector". La Fontaine was right: "Patience et longueur de temps Font plus que force ni que rage" - as, while I still do NOT have hard evidence (yet :-) ) to back-up my conclusion - I believe that I have since accumulated enough evidence to support my conclusion that the police is involved - and give the following in support of my position:.
The above, added to the fact that, in 2008, a senior Member of Parliament was arrested by no less than counter-terrorist officers for revealing blunders at the Home Office (= an outrageous, direct attack on democracy) - lead me to conclude that...
Difficult to believe that it would lead to my being placed under surveillance - and for such a long time? Consider what I have done; the evidence I have against various parties; the power of the sector; the system described as "one of the most secretive, unaccountable system of government anywhere in the world", what has happened to other people (Member of Parliament, journalist, whistleblowers)... ... AND consider that taxpayers' money is spent on an army of snoops to e.g.
(If only the same scrutiny and follow-on sanctions were applied to e.g. the expense claims from the 'honourable' and 'right honourable' Members of Parliament and the 'noble' Lords - and action taken against those who abuse the system... some, to the tune of several hundred thousand Pounds) (based on media reports). Also that "Phone firms net £9m for giving data to the police", and "Police to step-up hacking of home PCs" Consider also these examples:
'Your card is marked' from the moment you expose incompetence / malpractice / collusion / fraud and other criminal activities / practices - and the whole cavalry swings into action - as also demonstrated by the experience of the whistleblowers, that of the senior Member of Parliament, and of the journalist. I don't know about you, but to me this rings of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. (A substantial number of people say that the current situation conjures up the "Stasi" (GRD) / a "police state" / a "Stalinist state").
Up to roughly the end of 2005, I used to refer to these people as 'my minders'. Since then, I have been describing them as [ morally depraved ; evil ; scums ; despicable ; rejects from the sewer; beneath contempt; low life [ Note] ] If these individuals are unhappy with this association, they are welcome to contact me and I will substitute these words with their name. Likewise, if they object to the visuals I have used on the site to represent them, I am happy to replace these visuals with the photographs I have taken - or other photographs of themselves if they care to supply them. (I reverse the right to have the final say on the selection). While my being under surveillance is peripheral to my case, considering that I am the innocent victim of crime, it makes me extremely angry that morally depraved scums have carte blanche to commit such blatant breaches of my Human Rights: Article 8 "Right to respect for private life" comprised under the Human Rights Act 1998, as well as commit criminal offences against me under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. But then, this is now a country where the likes of Mr Andrew Ladsky are free to carry out and command inhuman acts against leaseholders (My Diary 15 May 2008 ; my fellow leaseholders ;Comments) |
