| From: "Patrick Cullinane" <patrick.cullinane@tiscali.co.uk>
View Contact Details To: adrian.marshall@hmcourts-service.gsi.gov.uk CC: jamesonqc@no6.co.uk, rob.casey@switalskis.com, irene.brown@switalskis.com, Marian.Mahoney@hmps.gsi.gov.uk, strawj@parliament.uk, news@oldham-chronicle.co.uk, chris.benfield@ypn.co.uk, elaine.jinks@halifaxcourier.co.uk, a.taylor@the-sun.co.uk, paul.byrne@mirror.co.uk, editorial@examiner.co.uk, fogartyc@att.net, phillip.inman@guardian.co.uk, kizzykay@hotmail.co.uk, cp014d2774@blueyonder.co.uk, victoryusa@jail4judges.org, Steveharris11@aol.com, jhwilson@acay.com.au, ardeshir@mac.com, ladyl.cooper@btinternet.com, m.kellett@tiscali.co.uk, mayor@london.gov.uk, mail@europe-direct.cec.eu.int, Matthew.Blythe@itvwales.com, murphyp@parliament.uk, paperboy@nevis.scotsman.com, noelogara@yahoo.com, kimgold@btinternet.com, ms598@westyorkshire.pnn.police.uk, VisR@parliament.uk, p.fletcher@cchr.org.uk, NWexels-Riser@ohchr.org, paul.talbot-jenkins@virgin.net, maritimeinteriors@hotmail.co.uk, dccopen@emirates.net.ae, markcmetcalf@btinternet.com, colin@chwilson.demon.co.uk, Suzonfm@aol.com, mail@standyourground.co.uk, tomminogue@btinternet.com, meirionbowen@btopenworld.com, john.wallace@bbc.co.uk, newsdesk@bradford.newsquest.co.uk, yp.editor@ypn.co.uk, paul.horrocks@men-news.co.uk, public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk, which@which.co.uk, mail@ukip.org, rob.preece@ypn.co.uk Subject: IBRG's Submission for our client Ronald Castree to prevent a Frame-Up: Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 23:49:31 -0000 IRISH IN BRITAIN REPRESENTATION GROUP (IBRG)
Working Against all the Odds!! <>>>>>>>>>>>>>><><<<<<<<<<<<<>
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
11 November 2007 FAO: Adrian Marshall, Court Manager and Rodney Jameson, Barrister Bradford Crown Court, Drake Street, Bradford BD1 1JA, Tel: 01274 840 275
Mr. Marshall,
The incontrovertible evidence that Ronald Castree’s legal team are working for the other side are highlighted by the following legitimate points: -
Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to have the DNA independently tested?
- To protect my client Mr. Castree’s best interests? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that the sample of
DNA evidence is exhausted and cannot be re-examined? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to have scientist Dr Gemma Escott’s
evidence challenged by a defence DNA scientist? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that the police framed-up
Stefan Kiszko to exonerate Peter Sutcliffe for the Lesley Molseed’s
murder? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that the police framed-up
Anthony Steel to exonerate Peter Sutcliffe for the Carol Wilkinson murder?
Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that scientist Ronald
Outteridge had collected the following evidence: - “From the underwear,
what appears to be semen stains. He makes up microscopic slides from these
stains and looks further: his initial belief is confirmed. He can see
sperm heads: +H is the lowest, ++++H the highest. He writes ’+H’
in his notes. There was a low sperm count given the large area of seminal
staining.” Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that himself, the police,
the CPS and the (so called) scientists Gemma Escott and Ronald Outtridge
that they had ALL failed in their duty to ask Mr. Castree for a semen
sample; to test it against ‘+H’ ??? - Is this not the evidence
of the conspiracy and the frame-up? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that Detective Chief
Superintendent Max McLean who investigated the Molseed murder had failed
to enter the witness box to give his (fabricated / contaminated DNA) evidence
and be cross-examined, as to how he was so confident on the BBC Crimewatch
programme on 5 February 2003 that he would get his man? And what led McLean
to think that after 27 years; there couldn’t be a better time to
find Lesley’s killer? Please click the link and watch another fraudster
like Dick Holland in action here: -
Neither will they disclose the results of Peter Sutcliffe’s sperm count, as it will match the, ‘+H’ of Lesley Molseed’s killer. Sutcliffe NEVER fathered children: - Raymond Hewlett and Ronald Castree have fathered children; therefore, they will NOT be ‘+H’ - But Peter Sutcliffe will.
Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that Mr. Castree’s
trial was a complete sham and a flagrant abuse of process, as there was
NO equality of arms, as required under Article 6 (3d) of the ECHR? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that members of the
public who wished to see justice being done in Mr. Castree’s case:
were either turned away or banned from the court ever before his trial
began? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that Ronald Castree’s
case was NOT trial ready; and explain to them why it wasn’t trial
ready? Has Ronald Castree’s jury raised any questions themselves
with either the prosecution or defence about the inequality of arms in
the case before them? Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury of the different dates
claimed by the police and the CPS that Lesley’s clothing was destroyed:
in the 1970s as claimed by the BBC Crimewatch programme, and 1985 as claimed
by the Yorkshire Post, which can be viewed in the links below: -
Published Date: 24 October 2007 Related Topics: Lesley Molseed trial By Rob Preece Genetic testing advances led to suspect's arrest http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Genetic-testing-advances-led-to.3408220.jp Detective Chief Superintendent Max McLean was pleased by the public reaction, but is still urging more people to come forward. He said: "We have had a huge and encouraging response from the vast majority of callers who have given useful, focused information on men capable of committing such an attack.
"People should call in with any suspicions they may have harboured over the years to help us finally catch this brutal child murderer."
"The worst thing that anyone could do is not report their suspicions to us when the elimination process is so simple and so final." Detective Chief Superintendent Max McLean http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2731511.stm 05.02.03 BBC Crimewatch UK reveals developments in Lesley Molseed murder inquiry and speaks to schoolgirl's mother Officers from West Yorkshire Police will reveal that they are now in a position to eliminate people from their inquiry, based on a DNA profile they believe was left at the scene of the crime by Lesley's killer.
The discovery of DNA came as a surprise as most of the evidence had been disposed of in the 1970s and just a few fragments remained in storage.
In 2001 West Yorkshire police approached the forensic science service to review the case and any material left from the original inquiry.
After experimenting with new techniques, forensic scientists were able to generate a DNA profile from semen found on Lesley's body.
Various suspects from the original investigation have been eliminated, including Peter Sutcliffe http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2003/02_february/05/crimewatch.shtml Why did Rodney Jameson QC fail to inform the jury that my client Ronald
Castree was arrested by the police in 2005 under false pretences to be
swabbed and then fitted up for Lesley Molseed’s murder? To date, why has Rodney Jameson QC failed to call in Scotland Yard to
investigate the conspiratorial frame-up of Ronald Castree in Bradford
Crown Court by breaking all the rules and regulations on due process of
the law in his case? The following is an example of how good DNA is – You can add the high risk of deliberate contamination to draw a line under controversial cases like the Molseed murder when Peter Sutcliffe the copy-cat Ripper is in the frame: -
The Sunday Business Post Online - Sunday, November 12, 2006 - By Barry McCaffrey Controversial DNA tests identified schoolboy as part of Omagh attack
http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2006/11/12/story18791.asp
BBC NEWS | UK | Prosecutor reviews Madeleine case http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6986514.stm'Cross-contamination' During an 11-hour interview, detectives suggested to Mrs McCann that traces of Madeleine's blood had been found in the family's hire car, she said. The family say this is impossible as they did not rent the vehicle until 25 days after Madeleine disappeared. Allan Scott, a lecturer at the University of Central Lancashire's School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, said cross-contamination needed to be considered. He said "secondary transfer" of Madeleine's DNA may have occurred and that DNA is "so sensitive" that if two people met in the street and shook hands and then one committed a crime, they could possibly leave the other person's DNA at the scene.
As Mr. Castree’s legal team are selling him down the river; therefore, please rush a copy of this correspondence in its entirety to my client Mr. Castree in order that he can bring it to the attention of the jury himself before they deliver another verdict (having been hoodwinked) like the Stefan Kiszko jury did.
As the court manager, you have been made aware that there is a massive conspiracy going on right now under your nose in Bradford Crown Court to pervert the course of justice? How can my client Mr. Castree get a fair hearing with such an abuse of process and everything being stage-managed like the Stefan Kiszko trial was??? Please acknowledge and address my correspondence of 5 November 07 and 31 October 07 ASAP.
As the court manager, it is imperative that you clarify that you have carried out my legitimate requests at your earliest convenience
Please acknowledge the safe receipt of this correspondence by return of email.
Thank you in advance for your immediate attention to this conspiratorial abuse of process matter.
I look forward to hearing from you soon. But in the meantime why are you ignoring my legitimate correspondence? After all you are the Court Manager, are you not?
Yours truthfully,
Patrick Cullinane, Legal Adviser / McKenzie Friend / Caseworker for the IBRG and Victim of HM Partnerships. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
-----Original Message-----
-----Original Message-----
IRISH IN BRITAIN REPRESENTATION GROUP (IBRG)
Working Against all the Odds!! <>>>>>>>>>>>>>><><<<<<<<<<<<<>
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
5 November 2007 FAO: Adrian Marshall, Court Manager and Rodney Jameson, Barrister Bradford Crown Court, Drake Street, Bradford BD1 1JA, Tel: 01274 840 275
Mr. Marshall,
As the Court manager I bring to your immediate attention that my client Mr. Castree is being stitched-up by his legal team who were selected by the police.
Mr. Jameson’s following leading question to a prosecution ‘witness’ is the incontrovertible evidence that he is working for the other side to stitch-up Mr. Castree and pervert the course of justice: -
Asked yesterday by Rodney Jameson, QC for Castree, to confirm that she had told police Castree had removed his trousers, pressured her to touch him, pulled down her knickers and placed his hand on her bottom, the woman said: "Yes, that happened."
How did Mr. Castree manage to remove his trousers and hold on to a girl who was prepared to kick him and run away??? Did Mr. Castree remove his trousers with his shoes on??? If this nameless woman was brought in as a prosecution witness (to contaminate the jury) why wasn’t she questioned properly??? You can see the full story on the following link:
Halifax Courier Today - 01 November 2007 By Elaine Jinks Lesley Molseed murder trial: Woman tells of sex attack by Castree: http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/Lesley-Molseed-murder-trial-Woman.3435507.jp
This is further evidence that ‘Judge’ Openshaw is in on the conspiracy, as he said nothing about these unlawful leading questions
Like Stefan Kiszko they know my client Ronald Castree has NO case to answer, but they have him trapped in a massive conspiracy to fabricate a case against him like they did with Stefan Kiszko.
VERY IMPORTANT: My client Mr. Castree cannot explain how his DNA came to be found at the scene; therefore, when is Detective Chief Superintendent Max McLean going to be put on the stand and questioned thoroughly as to how Mr. Castree’s DNA came to be at the scene??? I am confident that the main witness in this case, Max McLean, will most certainly be able to shed some light into how Mr. Castree’s DNA came to be at the scene - when he takes the stand. Otherwise I will be calling for McLean to take a lie detector test, as he is a major player in the conspiracy to frame-up my client Mr. Castree.
Why has Max McLean NOT been called to the stand yet when he is to the Castree case what Dick Holland was to the Kiszko case?
Under Article 6 (3d) of the ECHR Mr. Castree is guaranteed an independent DNA expert: “to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him”
Therefore, Mr. Castree’s human rights have been violated as his legal team were selected by the police and are now working for, and with, the other side to pervert the course of justice. violated as his legal team who have been selected by the police are working for the other side him" aga
As Mr. Castree’s legal team are selling him down the river; therefore, please rush a copy of this correspondence in its entirety to my client Mr. Castree in order that he can bring it to the attention of the jury himself before they deliver another verdict (having been hoodwinked) like the Stefan Kiszko jury did.
As the court manager, are you aware that there is a massive conspiracy going on right now under your nose in Bradford Crown Court to pervert the course of justice? How can my client Mr. Castree get a fair hearing with such an abuse of process and everything being stage-managed like the Stefan Kiszko trial was??? Please acknowledge and address my correspondence of 31/10/07 ASAP.
As the court manager, it is imperative that you clarify that you have carried out my legitimate requests at your earliest convenience
Please acknowledge the safe receipt of this correspondence by return of email.
Thank you in advance for your immediate attention to this very, very serious matter
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Yours truthfully,
Patrick Cullinane, Legal Adviser / McKenzie Friend / Caseworker for the IBRG and Victim of HM Partnerships. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
-----Original Message-----
IRISH IN BRITAIN REPRESENTATION GROUP (IBRG)
Working Against all the Odds!! <>>>>>>>>>>>>>><><<<<<<<<<<<<>
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
31 October 2007 FAO: Adrian Marshall, Court Manager Bradford Crown Court, Drake Street, Bradford BD1 1JA, Tel: 01274 840 275
Dear Adrian Marshall,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 2 October 2007, which was postmarked/franked; “09.10.07” and delivered on Friday 19 October 2007: - banning me from Bradford Crown Court; while my client Ronald Castree’s trial commenced on Monday 22 October 2007, without his chosen independent legal advisor, Mckenzie Friend.
As I am unlawfully banned by ‘Judge’ Openshaw from Bradford Crown Court; therefore, in the public interest and IN the interest of justice on behalf of my client Ronald Castree I am forwarding you the following Lesley Molseed link: http://yorkshireripper.com/molseed.htm and the correspondence below, which is self-explanatory and warrants you as the Court Manager to rush a copy of this submission in its entirety to my client Ronald Castree in order that he can ensure that his solicitor and counsel can give every member of the jury a copy of our submission, which will in turn clear my client Mr. Castree of this outrageous police frame-up.
Has my client’s jury also been stacked against him??? From Times Online - October 24, 2007 Jury service: should the Government turn the clock back? - Times Online http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/columnists/article2734301.ece “So in 2003 under the Criminal Justice Act the Government brought in a law aimed at ending the exemptions enjoyed by a range of people — judges, lawyers, doctors, priests — while tightening the rules to make it harder to get out of jury service. Since, scores of judges — including members of the Court of Appeal — and lawyers, including Cherie Booth, QC, have sat as jurors.”
In the interests of justice and on behalf of my client Mr. Castree, I demand that if there are any judges, police, solicitors, barristers or doctors in the makeup of Mr. Castree’s jury that they be removed immediately as they are NOT independent and impartial as required by law under Article 6 (1) of the European Convention of Human Rights.
How can my client Mr. Castree get a fair hearing if the jury are not made aware of the FULL facts in his case by his legal team? Does the jury know that my client Mr. Castree had NO access to the ‘two
van loads of evidence’ to prepare his defence and instruct his legal
team accordingly? This is a clear legal ambush of my client and a serious
violation of his human rights under Article 6 (3b) of the ECHR with regards,
“to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his
defence” - I would have brought this criminal violation of my clients
fundamental rights to the attention of the jury had I not been arrested
myself by Detective Steven Ridge and Detective Constable Paul Sherwood
on 6 September 2007; and sentenced to 4 months in prison by ‘Judge’
Gullick (for recording the ‘hearing’ of my client’s
bail application) on 7 September 2007 - and banned from the court by ‘Judge’
Openshaw on 2 October 2007 - This while I was still in Hull Prison awaiting
the appeal of Gullick’s corrupt judgement, which I won at the Court
of Appeal on 4 October 2007. Does the jury know that my client Mr. Castree has NO history whatsoever
of violence and that he has been denied bail by ‘Judge’ Gullick
and ‘Judge’ McKinnon who are involved in a huge conspiracy
against him to pervert the course of justice? Does the jury know that the police and the Armley Prison authorities
have already perverted the course of justice in this case, by denying
my client, Mr. Castree, access to his address book, his list of telephone
numbers and adequate facilities for the preparation of his defence? Does the Jury know that my client Mr. Castree has complained to me where
he states: “My defence is being restricted by the Legal Services
Commission; eg one hour to read a complete file of some 1,200 + pages,
Statements etc, etc.” Does the jury know that I had to give Mr. Castree a writing pen at our
legal meeting in Armley Prison on 28 August 2007 – when his pen
was broken? Does the jury know that documentation / correspondence sent by Noel O’Gara
and Patrick Cullinane to Ronald Castree in Armley Prison was NEVER given
to him? Notwithstanding, that I had requested that a copy of my correspondence
be passed immediately to Mr. Castree. Does the jury know that my client Mr. Castree has been drugged and assaulted
while in Armley Prison to prevent him from defending himself in order
to pervert the course of justice? Does the jury know that 2 days before my client’s application for
bail, in June 07, the West Yorkshire Police sent the local police and
the Child Protection people around to Karen Castree (Mr. Castree’s
wife) and the children and told them that if Mr. Castree got out on bail
they would take the children into care? Does the jury know that my client Mr. Castree was NEVER asked to take
a sperm test? Does the jury know that it was Detective Chief Superintendent Dick Holland,
and scientist Ronald Outteridge who framed-up Stefan Kiszko and NOT Ronald
Castree, as was claimed by prosecutor, Julian Goose QC, on Tuesday 23
October 2007. Report by Jerry Lawton of the Daily Star on 24/10/07: -
“TAXI driver Ron Castree stabbed to death an 11-year-old girl then
let an innocent man serve 16 years behind bars for the crime, a jury heard
yesterday.” Does the jury know that ‘Judge’ Openshaw is criminally on
the side of the prosecution for allowing such a malicious unfounded rant
from Julian Goose QC (at 7 above) against my client Mr. Castree on the
opening day of his trial - in order to mislead the jury and pervert the
course of justice? Is it not clear from this outrageous rant that Openshaw
and Goose are also trying to fit-up my client Mr. Castree for the despicable
crimes Dick Holland and Ronald Outteridge committed against Stefan Kaszko
and left him rot in jail for 16 years knowing that he was an innocent
man: - And how can this be Mr. Castree’s fault now??? Does the jury know that my client Mr. Castree’s previous minor
conviction in 1976; was dealt with by a court of law that, ruled the offence
was so minor that it did NOT warrant a prison sentence? Why did ‘Judge’
Openshaw and Mr. Castree’s legal team allow the prosecutor, Julian
Goose QC, to blow this minor conviction out of all proportions in front
of the jury? Having NO sustainable DNA evidence to link my client Mr.
Castree to the Lesley Molseed’s murder; Julian Goose has to revert
to dirty tricks to contaminate and influence the jury to produce another
Stefan Kiszko type closure to the Lesley Molseed murder. Does the jury know that ‘Judge’ Openshaw and the police are
selecting the people in the ‘public gallery’, which is illegal
in a court of law? Does the jury know that my Client Mr. Castree is trapped in a much bigger
conspiracy now than the conspiracy poor Stefan Kiszko was trapped in in
1975? Please acknowledge the safe receipt of this correspondence. And also can you clarify that you have carried out my legitimate requests at your earliest convenience
Thank you in advance for your immediate attention to this very, very serious matter
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Yours with gratitude,
Patrick Cullinane, Legal Adviser / McKenzie Friend / Caseworker for the IBRG and Victim of HM Partnerships. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
-----Original Message-----
IRISH IN BRITAIN REPRESENTATION GROUP (IBRG)
Working Against all the Odds!! <>>>>>>>>>>>>>><><<<<<<<<<<<<>
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
22 October 2007 FAO: Mr. Rob Casey, Senior Partner Switalski’s Solicitors
Dear Mr. Casey,
Further to our telephone call to Irene Brown this morning on behalf of our client Ronald Castree, we are forwarding you the correspondence below that we sent to Mr. Sheik, which is self-explanatory and warrants your immediate intervention as the Senior Partner at Switalski’s Solicitors.
We feel that in the public interest and the interest of justice that it is very important that we bring this correspondence to your immediate attention, as there is a frame-up of our client Ronald Castree in place to pervert the course of justice and produce yet another ‘Stefon Kiszko type closure’ to the Lesley Molseed murder case once again.
Please ensure that Mr. Sheik bring this correspondence in its entirety to the attention of EVERY member of the jury hearing Mr. Castree’s case: - Irrespective of the obstruction that he may encounter from ‘Judge’ Openshaw, who have barred Patrick Cullinane, Noel O’Gara and George Wescott from entering Bradford Crown Court for NO good reason other than to stitch-up our client Mr Castree.
Under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights the UK High Contracting Party has already seriously violated Mr. Castree’s human rights and prejudiced his chances of having a fair (and public) hearing in the UK.
Please acknowledge the safe receipt of this correspondence. And also can you clarify that you have carried out our legitimate requests at your earliest convenience
Thank you in advance for your immediate attention to this very, very serious matter
We look forward to hearing from you soon.
Yours with gratitude,
Patrick Cullinane, Legal Adviser / McKenzie Friend / Caseworker for the IBRG and Victim of HM Partnerships. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
-----Original Message-----
IRISH IN BRITAIN REPRESENTATION GROUP (IBRG)
Working Against all the Odds!! <>>>>>>>>>>>>>><><<<<<<<<<<<<>
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
22 October 2007 FAO: Mr. Sheik and the Senior Partner Switalski’s Solicitors, 2a Darley Street, Bradford, West Yorkshire BD1 3HH, Tel: 01274 720314, Fax: 01274 721206
Dear Mr. Sheik,
We bring your immediate attention to the following Lesley Molseed link: http://yorkshireripper.com/molseed.htm which is self-explanatory, and in the interests of justice you must give a copy of this crucial document to ALL 12 members of the jury hearing Ronald Castree’s case.
Please note: I would have been in Bradford Crown Court today myself to give a copy of this vital document to every member of the jury, but for ‘Judge’ Openshaw who is stage managing Mr. Castree’s trial; making an order on 2nd October 2007 banning me from entering the Bradford Crown Court until 31 December 2007, which the jury and you must peruse, as it is now on the Lesley Molseed Web link in order to prevent our client Ronald Castree becoming another Stefan Kiszko.
It is also imperative that you ensure that the jury is also made FULLY aware that our client Mr. Castree’s human rights have already been seriously violated by the UK High Contracting Party under Article 6 (1) of the European Convention of Human Rights with regards independent and impartial tribunals established by law
How can our client defend himself when he is NOT allowed to bring any notes that he made in prison into court? And why is he NOT allowed a pen and paper to make notes of his hearing in court?
Please refrain from advising our client Mr. Castree: - NOT to protest his innocence in court. With the evidence that is available here to prove that our client is innocent of the trumped up charges against him should you not be advising our client the very opposite?
Who is now going to inform the jury that our client Mr. Castree was badly beaten up by the police in 1981 and told that he was going to be fitted-up for the Molseed murder? And who is now going to inform the jury that the (so called) DNA evidence is so minute that it cannot be retested? And who now is going to challenge the ‘two van loads of evidence’, which is being wheeled in as a smokescreen to mask the DNA, which cannot be retested?
Please ensure that our client Mr. Castree is given a copy of the whole contents of the Molseed Web link and a copy of this/our correspondence to you, forthwith.
Please acknowledge the safe receipt of this correspondence, and also your clarification that you have carried out our legitimate requests at your earliest convenience. Under such circumstances our client’s best interests are of the utmost importance to us now: - As we do NOT want our client framed-up like Stefan Kiszko was.
Thanks in advance for your immediate attention to this very, very serious matter, which the jury MUST be made aware of.
Yours truthfully
Patrick Cullinane, Legal Adviser / McKenzie Friend / Caseworker for the IBRG and Victim of HM Partnerships. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
BACK TO MAIN WEB PAGE MOLSEED MURDER TRIAL |