Prima Facie Case 2

Ahmed Abayomi Balogun

V

The Metropolitan Police Department

Overview

This is a substantial claim of unique revelations into ODIOUS Institutional Corruption Culture, rampant Hypocrisy and abject demonstrable Failures, Omissions and Unwillingness of the Metropolitan Police Department and its Commissioners to RECORD and INVESTIGATE, momentous Judicial Criminal Perversion of Justice complaints, without fear or favour, as in accordance with:

a) PUBLIC BODIES CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT 1889, S1

b) PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT 1916, S1

The claim provide insight into over two decade long of unrelenting community pursuit of the primary victim (Caul Silford Grant) who resort to enlisting the support of his Community in order to dispel, the UK Authoritarian State, age old tactics of separating victims into isolated individuals, on their own with little resource and opportunities to face its organised and well resourced machinery of the state.

Ahmed Balogun and the members of Campaign for Truth and Justice, Human Rights activist group remarkably demanded FULL ACCOUNTABILITY and REDRESS of THREE KEY British Institutional authorities simultaneously. 

In particular, the claim focus on the long, and arduous, out of the spotlight community battle with the Metropolitan Police Department and consecutive Commissioners (Mark Rowley; Dame Cressida Dick; Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe; Sir Paul Stephenson; Sir Ian Blair; Sir John Stevens; Sir Paul Condon) for the law to be applied and enforced equally on all people and communities, irrespective of social economic status of perpetrators.

This claim is set to revel the consequential years of state Persecutions, Human Rights Violations, False Arrest, Unlawful Detentions in Police Custody, Malicious Prosecutions, Unlawful Imprisonments, including Failures to provide Redress and Compensation to Community Human Rights activist members of Campaign for Truth and Justice (CTJ) where they were due for cases the State lost on full ACQUITTAL of all charges appearing on Indictments before the Courts, or outright abandoned in haste (without its customary decorum) when confronted with INDISPUTABLE evidence of Judicial law-breaking.

Postponement of limitation period in cases of Fraud; Concealment or Mistake

This issue stem from whence a High Court Judge failed to RECUSE himself from Adjudicating in a Matter involving his blood relations DIRECT APPARENT interest.

First the matter was taken-up with the Judicial Authorities, but in a bid to cover-up its members Witting/Unwitting Corrupt Indiscretions and law-breaking, the Judicial establishment resort to deliberate Mis-representation, Mis-interpretation and Mis-application of the law, in order to avoid Systemic ACCOUNTABILITY.

The matter was then raised in complaint with the Metropolitan Police Department who in turn astonishingly refused to Record or Investigate the Judicial Criminal Perversion of Justice complaint, even though it had a duty to do so. Unfortunately, the prevailing Institutional Racism and Prejudicial Bias of the time in which Police Officers were indoctrinated into enveloped the Judicial Authorities and its members, in an infallible cloak of unquestioning IMPECCABILITIES; that made accusations of British Judges engaging in deliberate acts of Criminal intents, let alone Odious Judicial Criminal Perversion of Justice, INCOMPREHENSIBLE.

Consequently, with the Home Office having the Oversight management and Supervision responsibility for the Metropolitan Police Department, the matter was reported in complaint to the Home Secretary, who equally failed to act and resort in a protection of establishment at all cost mentality, conspiracy to extricate itself, the Metropolitan Police Department and the Judiciary; (both of which may have been under its overall care of responsibility) initiated a clandestine execution of an wholly UNLAWFUL Hostile Environment Agenda Policies, spear aimed to prevent and conceal attention away from an highly sensitive unrelenting pursuit of the dissident African and Caribbean Community organisation (CTJ) demand for Systemic Accountability that threatens to expose to the British public an UNHOLY joint collaboration (of the Judiciary’s Lord Chancellor’s Department, Metropolitan Police Department and the Home Office) to deny justice in a gross and most odious STATE attempts to cover-up institutional wrong doing.

Under normal circumstances, this matter would have been placed out of time by Part l of the Limitations Act 1980. However, because of deliberate acts of Fraud, Concealment and relief from the consequences of Mistake made by the Judicial Authorities, Part ll, Exclusion of Statutory Limitation Act 1980; Clause 32 provide for the Postponement of limitation period in case of Fraud; Concealment or Mistake, APPLIES.

Brief Intro and Summary to Key Point

As the secretariat of Campaign for Truth and Justice (CTJ) African and Caribbean Community Affirmative Action Group, from the incorporated inception in 2000, Ahmed Balogun dutifully took-up a seemingly fictional complaint, that charged the Judiciary of England and Wales, including the Lord Chancellor and his entire Department with Corruption of the Due Process of Law.

On closer examination of the facts, it suffice the accusation was an understatement, because the entire incident that took place was in fact, a Criminal Act conducted by members of the British Judicial establishment with the possible complicity of the Metropolitan Police Department and other Co-conspirators high up within the Lord Chancellors Department who knowingly sought to Misrepresent, Misapply and Misinterpret the law for ulterior personal gains and possible (perceived) repayment of owed favours and obligations to long standing friends and colleagues in the legal fraternity. 

A Criminal Complaint of these specific Charges were made to the Metropolitan Police Department, but the Department at first refused to take any RECORD of the Criminal Complaints, because it involved members of the Judicial establishment, (whom wrapped-up in god like personas and placed upon imaginary peddle-stools of impeccability) appeared too incomprehensible for the undoubtedly over Indoctrinated Officers to to accept the fact that British Judges are not infallible, human beings, beyond acts of deliberate Criminal intents, let alone Judicial Criminal Perversion of Justice. 

Only after persistent pressure and insistence, did the Metropolitan Police eventually, GRUDGINGLY sought to give (false) impressions it was ready to entertain an opportunity to consider the complaint on a most unusual demand that everything be sent for processing through the post. 

Naturally, the sole purpose was to prevent an all important ORAL delivery of the Criminal Complaint from being electronically taken or Recorded for any possible investigation. Bearing in mind an ORAL delivery of the complaint, could have easily been taken over the telephone, if providing a physical station appointment was so inconvenient.

However, it suffice to say the Metropolitan Police department were merely perambulating so as to frustrate the intent, in order for the Statutory Time Limitation Period to run and expire; unaware that the levels of institutional deception, Mistake, deliberate attempts to Fraudulently conceal and Misrepresent the law (by the very institutions charged with Interpreting and Enforcing the law) UNWITTINGLY elevated the seriousness of the complaint beyond all initial superficial simplicity of PART ONE of the Statutory Limitation Act 1980; and instead propelled it straight into Part II of the Statutory Limitation Act 1980 which provide for the '... postponement of the Limitation Period in case of Fraud, Concealment or Mistake ...'