The victim was made to feel as bad as the perpetrators, and that can't be right"
Rowe Sparkes Lawyers
The link below produces a letter from Rowes Sparkes, who supplied the duty lawyer on the day I was arrested.
There is every indication that this lawyer didn't take much notice of me, or what was being said. The following points need to be made
- He talks about me referring to a specific person as a wierdo. In reality I complained about being 'followed around by a wierdo', etc. - which is not the same thing
- These complaints were transmitted to other residents purely because they were part of an attempt to garner witnesses with a view to taking legal action in view of the continual harassment (with threats of violence) to which I was being subjected - i.e. they were bona-fide attempts to initiate legal proceedings
- W.r.t. complaining about the person who assaulted me only being awarded a caution, I'll leave you make your own mind up (given that I was assaulted [I still have problems with my eyesight occassionally] and my attacker did only get a caution). He has latterly spent time in a mental institution, and (if his statements on Twiter are to be believed) he has been classified as a psychopath. He has threatened violence against the head of BBC TV, and his wife, for continually hacking his phone; he has issued support for Osama Bin Laden and Abu Hamza and publicly stated on Twitter that he is going to kill someone; etc. etc. etc.
- There is mention of 'possibly losing him his job'. There is no indication of any realization that this 'job' involved working about an hour a day as a paperboy while simultaneously claiming unemployment benefit (i.e cheating on benefit).
- There is mention of Kent Police telling me to stop sending letters to his father (an Inspector of Police). This is not true. And if it were, the police have no right to stop me communicating with a police officer anyway - such communication is not a criminal offence.
Letter from Rowe Sparkes lawyers
Rowe Sparkes named and shamed, No 2
I include these links above on this law firm as some sort of catharsis.
There are some relevant points. Rowe Sparkes are accused of paying wages below the national minimum.
As implied above, the other party in my case was working as a paperboy and you can bet a pound to a penny that he was being paid less than the minimum wage. This would have presented an obstacle to me constructing a defence because his employer would be reluctant to give details of his employment, precisely because the employer would have been breaking the law by paying such low wages, and presumably paying no insurance etc., etc.
Rowe Sparkes complain about not receiving a reply to their correspondence on this matter. Well I am unhappy about not receiving a reply to my correspondence with Sparkes Rowe on my matter.