Talk:Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are there other articles on WP about the crookedness of the legal professions? Try and start a category and an external links section - there's lots of information on the net, but it's not coherent.--Shtove 02:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Its not quite the same elsewhere. In my jurisdiction we have just moved to independent (lay chaired) regulation, although there have not been any serious accusation of corruption in recent years. It was felt that it was more transparent to do so. In fact there are several layers of independent regulation. I suspect that is why you might find different reactions elsewhere. Francis Davey (talk) 21:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Removed a section until it can be cleared up. As it was it was unclear, Point-Of-View and porrly worded. Some questions: what case? How did the property 'fall into' the hands of lawyers? Through what mechanism? Should be replaced with a more objective account. LM-Mac 14:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crooked Lawyers and Barristers

Dear Sirs I note the web site. Please note this: the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel employs many of the corrupt and criminal barristers in the UK. The named persons I have cogent evidence of in corruption are the following (can be found on the CICAP Audit site). Harry Narayan Barrister Manchester Mohamed Asif Barrister Manchester (not included in audit trail) R Huggins Solicitor Reading perjurer and pillar of the community Robin Kwill-Jones FRCS liar and criminal, aides and abets Erica Norton another pillar of the community OBE which she is unfit for aiding and abetting criminals as she does. Narayan has Asif impersonate him in cases where claimants do not know the persons involved on the panel. I have all the cogent evidence that different name plates are taken to hearings and chairmen change names if there are witnesses who can testify later against the corruption. The bench was hysterical in my hearing telling me that the court was closed,I was not allowed witnesses to the proceedings,I was not allowed to take notes, I was not allowed to ever name the panel members, I was not allowed to ever show my documents,I was not allowed to ever say what went on. Perjured document produced with help from CICAP members including Sharon Price and Richard Gachagan (the forgery of my signature by that person also to offer me a detriment). I can show whatever I want, as data subject I own the copyright and publishing rights to all data with myself as subject. Finally,none of that happened apparently, there are no records of the claim, I was deprived of a travel claim form as was my witness becasue it never happened and my documents from the CICAP are scotch mist. This is public interest. The fraud is on the public paying wages of such as these criminals. Yours etc Carol Woods Lancaster —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.150.177.10 (talk) 15:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)