Brief update

Quick recap: I have been falsely accused of online harassment by publicity seekers, and I was tried in my absence. This case is going to be re-tried. My hard drives were confiscated in this context. The hard drives contain research into undisclosed Special Branch material. The Chief Commissioner is suing me over this material; he seeks a gagging order. Currently my defence need access to the hard drives in order to successfully defend the criminal re-trial. There is extensive Special Branch interference with this.

All goes well in respect of the retrial in the Crown Court, and time is taken up by interim hearings which explore issues relating to evidence disclosure. The endless, 'never ending storeeeee' about my confiscated hard drives containing Special Branch material (unconnected to the criminal case) continues, with the Metropolitan police and CPS refusing experts and my counsel access, except under absurd circumstances ( eg constant surveillance by a police officer) which no less than Five Court experts are stating that they simply can't work with.

There is another interim hearing on Friday, where the matter of evidence disclosure will again be raised.

Hickman and Rose are pretty heroic in this affair, I was working with them today. They laughed off defence case sabotage attempts that are going on on the Internet. 'Jees, these are nasty bastards'. Was one mild quote about these false accusers I have been subjected to.

They continue to receive lengthy and extremely rude letters from Senior Special Crimes Unit* Prosecutor , which attempt to dictate the Justice system. ...accompanied by lengthy quotes from criminal justice manuals...oh it's funny.

In respect of the criminal case, the CPS have not written up their activities in respect of disclosure as ordered by the Court last week, at the last interim hearing, possibly because he hasn't done anything about disclosure since October 2006, and will have nothing to say; he'll run out of ways in which to phrase this after a while. 'I was without activity,' and 'I refrained from action', 'I was inactive', 'I was without action,'...it will run out, I expect.

The way he carries on, you'd think that the prosecutor didn't simply became a prosecutor because neither a solicitors' firm nor a barristers' chambers would have him.

The timewasting they all go in for in a certain office is baffling. Mind boggling, mind stretching, bewildering. Astonishing, even. Still, they've got their problems I suppose and how trying it all must be. (Nitwits who give chase for no reason, and all of that.)

The civil case against me in Chancery Lane, lead by the Chief Commissioner's Office who stipulate that I ought not to disclose what they feel is sensitive information, has not been advanced any further, the likelihood being I'll ( Hickman and Rose rather) will win it, and there will be no further excuse for police to retain the hard drives in this current criminal matter ( I have been falsely accused of 'harassment on the web', and was convicted in absentia, when no evidence was present in Court.)

I had some drinks with some barristers yesterday, criminal defence, the Lincoln's Inn lot. They were crossing over Kingsway. One likened the backlog of unreleased police archive documentation as a nasty splinter in the Special Branch foot. Hauling it out is painful. But out it must come, I say. 'Get it out,' they insisted. 'And I hope you get alot of puss with it.'

(charming!)

Lawyer's discussions with google re the reinstatement of my blog and the deletion of the worthless sabotage blog ( which currently has a frenetic readership of two) are in process.

* deals with matters relating to Special Branch usually.