This should be of some interest to you. A legal conundrum and terrorist related to the judicial process of Lockerbie. Most importantly an exploration of serious limitations in Scottish Law.
(On the recommendation of DEFRA I have also advised the UK Cabinet Office on aspects of Regulatory Impact Assessment)
I haven’t gone into all the side issues etc just to try and keep this as brief as possible, with sufficient explanation. Any comment or advice would be most appreciated. Apart from friends who know what has gone on, we are without advice, as solicitors have explained due to the limitations of Scottish Law they cannot assist.
All content in this email can be referenced back to original documentation and evidence, though in case a spam filter blocks, it is better the message is minimal and reaches you. Any documents you may request, could be forwarded.
Gordon Brown said Lockerbie was the most devastating terrorist incident on British soil. This is only true in the context of investigated and prosecuted terrorist incidents.
In 1991 Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council in England had access to provisional flood models that the UK was going to experience catastrophic flooding on or after the 9th December 2006.
These were produced by a new technology which mapped the interaction of stability/instability of difference systems. In the case of flooding land use changes, which influence speed of run off and oscillation in projected patterns. The prediction was a critically would occur at the above.
A county councillor who knew a professor who had advised me, contacted me. He was very frightened. He told me CNBC were going to suppress the knowledge by any means available as part of a large scale fraud. The prevention of catastrophic flooding, amongst other things, would potentially create so many jobs in the area. It would reduce the grants and income the council received from central government. He was most emphatic that I did not approach the police, Cheshire Constabulary, for my own safety. What was happening was such a high level fraud the police would protect the local authority from any investigation.
Despite the warning I still had a moral and legal responsibility to prevent the flooding and save peoples lives. An appropriate project was set up. This was where Cheshire police now enter the situation. Officers committed some of the most serious offences to close the project down.
They hadn’t realised I had originally been a metallurgist and having worked on defence contracts, R&D, quality control, forensics etc so was an expert in the breaching of qulity control systems and associated evidential analysis.
A Sergeant Brierley had already told me I was going to be killed. The police were now furious, I had evidence on all those involved. I had a number of visits from a Sergeant Reg Orrett. He was most gleeful in telling me what would happen to me and on whose behalf he was issuing the warnings.
Despite the threats I still had to try and prevent the disaster, Cheshire police threatening me if I tried. As it was a civil matter and there were no civil solicitors in the area, I was advised to get one of the major London firms. None would help as they would not take a case so far out of London.
My only option was to make a complaint. I was told this was useless but it was my only option. This resulted in Cheshire Constabulary Professional Standards. Which I found was little more than the forces PR arm. In February 2002 Inspector Stephen Bailey knew and had all the evidence that the UK was going to experience a disaster. He was told the date and the extent. His reply was ‘it will be covered up’. Cheshire police were not going to expose their officers to the most serious criminal investigation and prosecution just to prevent the flooding.
Though I was a member of the the UK Government’s Sustainable Development Research Network, I could not warn them directly. If all they could do was refer it back to the police force where the offences were committed we were in very serious trouble. Cheshire police officers were now threatening my family. I had a long term girlfriend and her children to consider. What I did do was using my knowledge was recommend changed in legislation and farming and land use policy. Some of these did get through. But they had to be low key to protect my family from the police.
With time running out we had to make a decision. Knowing that Scotland had a different legal system, and with the case of Lockerbie had the ability to launch a large scale terrorist investigation, and that Scotland would not escape the impending flood disaster. I moved to Scotland where my family lived.
The children were all happy in school in England, despite all the threats. (My girlfriend had been with me when we had been threatened, 3 against 2 though.) We had kept the children out of the situation we were in. With my presence the children would always be in danger.
Having had deaths threats and warnings from Cheshire police if I pursued the matter. The flooding could not be stopped if I was dead. So with the help of a community councillor with a degree in law I applied for political asylum for protection. The reply from the Procurator Fiscals Office (March 2006) was this could not be granted as no such arrangement exists between Scotland and England.
They could only respond to an investigation by the police. As a resident of Scotland if I was being threaten or my life or other peoples was in danger I had first to report it to the police.
This was the worse scenario. My girlfriend and children were 400 miles away, Cheshire police had warned me what would happen. Did I risk the safety of my family only on the prediction of catastrophic flooding. (A prediction others beloved was 100% correct).
The mental conflict and stress was enormous. Convinced the flooding would occur I had to take the decision to report the impending flooding and the threats to my life and family. As the intention of the criminal acts was to cause indiscriminate death and destruction I reported it as a terrorist incident at Perth police station on 24th October 2006.
Despite reporting it as a a terrorist incident, and no specific details taken at reception it still took 3 stomach churning days before and officer was available to interview me. Then Tayside police sent a local community constable not a specialist anti-terror, serious crime, fraud officer.
I was accompanied by the community councillor who had seen the evidence and could verify all I said to the police. The police officer said he could not look at the evidence as he didn’t consider it was probably a terrorist incident and would therefore not be under the jurisdiction of Scottish Law.
Though he took details of a future massive incident. The deliberate catastrophic flooding of the UK due to criminal acts to ensure known flooding was not prevented, with an intention and consequence of causing loss of life and destruction. He said he would have to check with his superiors whether they could look at the evidence.
He said before Scottish police could look at the evidence of terrorist activity. An independent member of the public would have to assess the evidence to determine whether conspiracy to pervert the course of justice had occurred. This would be the minimum requirement before Tayside police become involved.
We did this and the community councillor was satisfied as the independent assessor thatconspiracy to pervert the course of justice to commit a terrorist act had been committed. We notified Tayside police as instructed. We waited and waited for Tayside police to launch a terrorist investigation. Six of the some of the most stressful weeks past. I had put my families and my own life on the line. Tayside police would not provide me or my family with any protection, despite the threats to us and our knowledge of an imminent terrorist incident.
On 13th December 2006, Tayside and other parts of Scotland suffered catastrophic flooding. The flood models had proved nearly 100% correct, only 4 days out over 15 years.
The next morning a letter arrived from Tayside police. They would not investigate or look at the evidence as they considered it outside of their jurisdiction. The intelligence supplied to Tayside police having been proved accurate, though the delay in deciding not to investigate a terrorism report resulted in no warning being available to those affected. The letter having been sent second class post crossed in the post with the flooding Tayside police had had 6 weeks warning of.
Despite knowing of the Scottish flooding 6 weeks before, Tayside police did not launch a terrorist investigation. They had been told it would be catastrophic and UK wide. Still they did not warn other police forces. They would not provide protection for me or my family or any assistance for me to warn other police forces.
In 2007 beginging in Cumbria, then Yorkshire then southern England and Wales. Apattern of flooding spread across the UK exactly as intended. 13 people died and £5 billion in destruction. Had a school bus, train, nursing home etc been caught up then the death toll could exceeded that of the Lockerbie incident.
Two police forces knew of the UK flooding with plenty of opportunity to prevent most of it at least issue a warning. But apparently decided to take no action to protect those guilty of the atrocity.
Tayside police despite letters saying they will interview me re the incident, then write back saying they won’t. Tayside police had 6 weeks warning of the biggest terrorist attack on the UK mainland, decided to do nothing and now will not investigate.
Despite all the resources the police have for terrorism. They expected me to provide protection for me and my family. Raise the finance to verify the models. Raise the alarm and evacuate areas threatened. Then take legal action against those who caused it. All without any resources or support. This raises the question of why do we have a police and justice system, if it abdicates the responsibility to protecting society to individual members of the public.
Lockerbie wasn’t the most devastating terrorist incident in the UK. The floods of 2006/7. All the evidence exists to bring those responsible to justice. Unfortunately because of those involved the police have turned a blind eye, to allow them to escape justice.
Tayside police and Scotland have turned away £billions for the country’s economy. If they had acted before hand or carried out a terrorist investigation. The global reinsurance companies aware the technology existed and was proven would have put billions in to the economy to prevent other similar events. (Potential global market £500 billion pa).
Tayside police may have allowed the biggest UK incident to occur and without investigation just to protect police officers in Cheshire from criminal/terrorist investigation prosecution. As the threats against me and my family are from England they will also not offer us any protection.
Scottish Law was incapable of protecting Scotland from terrorist attack as the offences and planning was committed in England.
Related posts for further imformation