LEGAL MAFIA 5

SOLICITORS FROM HELL MARK 2 (AND COUNTING)
solicitors from hell 2
CLICK IMAGE TO VISIT THE WEBSITE
  • THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE TUGENDHAT SHUTS DOWN 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE
  • THEY THINK ITS ALL OVER : SOLICITORS FROM HELL WEBSITE OWNER TO APPEAL CLOSURE
    WE HAVE KNOWN FOR YEARS THAT LAWYERS HAVE BEEN FORCING CLOSURE OF WEBSITES CRITICAL OF THEIR CRIMINALITY. THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST CASES THAT HAS SPILT OUT ONTO THE INTERNET AS THEY ARE STRUGGLING NOW TO SHUT DOWN THEIR HARASSMENT AND PERSECUTION CAMPAIGNS AGAINST ANYONE EXPOSING THEIR THUGGERY AND MASSIVE CRIMINAL THEFT OF LAND, BUSINESS, PROPERTY AND CHILDREN.

    They think its all over : Solicitors from Hell owner to appeal High Court’s website shutdown order ‘all the way to Europe if necessary’

    It’s not over until the European judges sing : Solicitors from Hell owner will appeal High Court order to close website after the ‘suffering’ of lawyers. IN RESPONSE to the publication of MR JUSTICE TUGENDHAT’s written ruling in the case of The Law Society, Hine Solicitors & Kevin McGrath v Rick Kordowski which granted the vested interests of the legal profession in England & Wales their demand to shut down the critical website known as SOLICITORS FROM HELL where clients could posts online reviews of their experiences with solicitors, Mr Kordowski, the owner of the now censored Solicitors from Hell website has said he intends to appeal the draconian judgement “all the way to Europe if necessary”. The judgement, dubbed by many as a blistering attack on free speech and the rights of consumers to express their views on services provided to them by their lawyers details in no uncertain terms the lengths to which the vested interests of the legal profession of England & Wales ‘had gone after’ Mr Kordowski.

    In one part of the judgement, Mr Justice Tugendhat brands the Solicitors from Hell website owner as “A public nuisance” who “is in effect a vexatious litigant”. Readers of the judgement will note there is not one single remark in the judge’s opinion which appears to be critical of the legal profession. As Justice Tugendhat’s judgement continues , the Law Society of England & Wales Counsel, Mr Tomlinson states that the Claimants and in particular, the First Claimant, have no objection to proper criticism of the legal profession or debate about whether a particular solicitor has failed to provide service of appropriate quality in a particular case. Informed debate on these issues is clearly in the public interest and a proper exercise of the right to freedom of expression. But he submits that the Website makes no contribution whatever to such debates but instead sets out to and does provide a forum for the publication of malicious and defamatory allegations about solicitors. The Website operates against the public interest and the Claimants have brought this action with the aim of ensuring that it ceases operation. The Law Society is concerned about the enormous reputational damage that is, and can be, done to firms and lawyers as a result of their being listed on the Website. It is also concerned about the disservice to the public. The dissemination of misinformation to members of the public through the Website may deter members of the public from instructing good solicitors.

    However, most see the Law Society’s claims against the Solicitors from Hell website as little more than an attempt to censor consumers online debate of how they have been treated by their lawyers, whether good or bad. The legal profession in general are firmly against clients being able to “name & shame” their solicitors in any venue, and have been known to threaten newspapers who carry reports of “crooked lawyers” with legal action or the withdrawal of advertising. In several well known instances in Scotland, individual journalists have had their careers threatened if they did not cease reporting on “crooked lawyers”. Diary of Injustice had earlier revealed the Law Society had hoped to use its battle with Solicitors from Hell to dissuade the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) from going ahead with its own policy of naming & shaming “crooked lawyers”, reported by Diary of Injustice here : English, Scots Law Societies ‘team up’ in legal moves against “Solicitors from Hell” in bid to stop Legal Ombudsman ‘Naming & Shaming’ crooked lawyers. However the attempt failed, after the LeO announced naming & shaming is to begin in 2012 reported earlier here : Scots to be ‘kept in dark’ on details of crooked lawyers while Legal Ombudsman’s ‘naming & shaming’ policy ‘will protect’ consumers in England & Wales

    In what some may see as a spiteful move against Mr Kordowski, who has been made bankrupt by the legal profession in their pursuit of him, the judgement also revealed the trustee in bankruptcy had also gone after the solicitors from hell website domain and all its contents, gaining an interim injunction to prevent Mr Kordowski handing over the website to someone else to operate. Quoting Mr Justice Tugendhat’s ruling : As a result of the Defendant's bankruptcy the intellectual property rights in the Website and its contents are vested in his trustee in bankruptcy, but he has not taken any steps to transfer them. Rather, on 2 November 2011, he announced that he had decided to "give the website away" to "experienced owners who operate overseas". The Claimants successfully applied for an interim injunction to restrain this transfer on the basis that it would constitute unlawful data processing and harassment. An interim injunction was granted by Langstaff J restraining the transfer ("the Transfer Injunction"), returnable at this hearing. The full judgement in the case can be read here : The Law Society, Hine Solicitors & Kevin McGrath v Rick Kordowski

    Speaking to Diary of Injustice, Mr Kordowski said : “The judgment contains claims that both the second and third Claimants had long suffered significant damage, upset and could not work who the author of the published allegations were. It is interesting to note that neither of these Claimants ever asked me who the author of the posted allegations were. No letters, emails, nothing! As to why they continued to allegedly 'suffer' in the way for many months without contacting the publisher, one can only imagine.” Mr Kordowski continued : “My argument was (and still is) that the current libel laws are sufficient to protect the defamed. However, Justice Tugendhat states that even if I could prove that every single listing was true and justified or of honest opinion that harassment & data protection laws supersede the current libel laws. Which is quite simply outrageous.”

    “He [Justice Tugendhat] states that I am someone who 'STILL attempts to charge lawyers if they want comments to be removed'. He didn't have any evidence to back this up - as there is no evidence. I do not charge lawyers. Justice Tugendhat also goes on to say that I am a 'Public Nuisance' like an environmental hazard!” “I will appeal, which will be thrown out, obviously. So it seems that both I and the public will not get justice in this country. I will most definitely take this matter to the European Court in Strasbourg. The High Courts decision is simply tyranny - we are not in China, Iran or an African despot, this is the democratic UK!”

    Not all lawyers welcomed the terms of the written ruling which shut down Solicitors from Hell, with one solicitor branding the decision as “costly, unbalanced and in the long run, counterproductive to the interests of the legal profession at large” COWBOYSOLICITORS.COM, a new website to allow consumers to rate their lawyer online. While the battle for Solicitors From Hell looks set to continue all the way to the European Courts, a host of new websites offering consumers the chance to air their views of how they were served by their legal representatives have emerged, the latest one being COWBOYSOLICITORS.COM. The new website, which is free to become a member of, states Solicitors have ruled the roost for far too long, the law society is completely bias against any complaints. The truth is that many UK legal practices are filth ridden and need exposing. Become a free member and start shaming your solicitor within minutes. Manage all listings from your personalized dashboard.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • HOW LAWYERS GLOBALLY THIEVE HOMES TO TURN INTO THEIR OWN OFFICES VIDEO
    'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE LYNCHED BY LAW SOCIETY AND LAWYERS
    LAWYERS AND THE LAW SOCIETY ARE BULLYING WEBSITES OFF THE INTERNET USING DRACONIAN COURT ORDERS FROM JUDGES THAT ARE LAW SOCIETY MEMBERS OR PAST MEMBERS, NO JURIES. THIS IS HOW THEY ARE TRYING TO HIDE THEIR CORRUPTION AGAINST MILLIONS OF MEN GLOBALLY.

    THEIR MEDIA LAWYERS CONTROL THE COMPLICIT MEDIA AND NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO DO THE SAME WITH THE INTERNET TO STOP THEIR CRIMES BEING DIVULGED BY THEIR VICTIMS ONLINE. FREEMASONS ARE ALSO BEHIND THE BANKRUPTCY AND STEALING HIS RIGHTS OVER THE WEBSITE AND SOMETHING THEY DO TO ANYONE WHO DARES CHALLENGE THEIR CRIMINALITY.THE ULTIMATE HARASSERS USE HARASSMENT LAWS TO STOP EXPOSURES OF THE VILE PERSECUTION OF THEIR VICTIMS. HOW DO WE KNOW? WE ARE SOME OF THEIR VICTIMS.


    Between : (1) THE LAW SOCIETY
    (in a representative capacity on behalf of all the Solicitors and Law Firms in England and Wales and other individuals or organisations that are at serious risk of being named on the Website www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk)

    (2) HINE SOLICITORS (A FIRM)
    (on behalf of itself and in a representative capacity for all the solicitors firms and organisations presently listed on the Website www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk)

    (3) KEVIN McGRATH
    (on behalf of himself and in a representative capacity for
    (a) all solicitors and individuals presently listed on the Website www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk; and
    (b) all the Solicitors in England and Wales and other individuals that are at serious risk of being named on the Website www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk) Claimants

    - and -

    RICK KORDOWSKI (Solicitors From Hell)

    1. This is a claim for injunctions requiring the Defendant, the publisher of the "Solicitors from Hell" website ("the Website"), to cease publication of the Website in its entirety and to restrain him from publishing any similar website. The causes of action relied upon are libel, harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 ("the PHA") and breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 ("the DPA"). The claim is brought as a representative action on behalf of all those currently featuring on the website and those who might, in the future, feature on the website.

  • FULL JUDGEMENT HERE
  • They think its all over : Solicitors from Hell owner to appeal High Court’s website shutdown order ‘all the way to Europe if necessary’
  • 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' FORCED CLOSURE BRINGS MORE NEW WEBSITES
  • Solicitors From Hell removed from internet as UK High Court grants injunction to Law Society of England & Wales to censor client reviews of lawyers
  • 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE LOSES SLANDER CASE AGAINST LAW SOCIETY CHIEF
  • Criminal in nature ? Law Society Chief Des Hudson off the hook over ‘criminal’ jibe against Solicitors from Hell website owner as judge dismisses case
  • NAMING CROOKS IS CRIMINAL? BUT ONLY IF IT'S A LAWYER
  • SOLICITORS FROM HELL LAUNCHES £1m DEFAMATION CLAIM AGAINST LAW SOCIETY CEO
  • LAW SOCIETIES TEAM UP AGAINST 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE
  • LAW SOCIETY AND LAWYERS TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE INTERNET
  • LAW SOCIETY TAKES ON 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE
  • 'Phone hacking was wrong and shameful': NoW lawyer's apology to inquiry
  • 'The Law Society is worse than a pit full of vipers'
  • Greedy lawyers blamed as 'cash for crash' scams boom
  • CROOKED LAWYERS BEHIND CAR INSURANCE SCAMS (VIDEO)
  • LAWYERS BEHIND THE NEWS OF THE WORLD HACKING SCANDAL
  • LAWYER TOM CRONE BEHIND THE MURDOCH HACKING SCANDAL
  • Lawyer Tom Crone behind NOTW hacking scandal resigns
  • WHY DID ROYAL MAFIA'S LAWYERS HIDE HACKING EVIDENCE?
  • LAWYERS HELPED MURDOCH TARGET FORMER PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN (VIDEO)
  • 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' FORCED CLOSURE BRINGS MORE NEW WEBSITES
    The Lawyer at the http://www.thelawyer.com reports a story written by Joshua Freedman

    Host of Solicitors From Hell Style Sites Appear Following Court Action.

    They reported The Law Society spent roughly £150,000 on shutting down the website Solicitors from Hell but faces a latest setback as it has emerged that similar websites attacking UK firms are appearing online, with some said to be hosted abroad to protect them from the British authorities.

    The websites Cowboy Solicitors and Solicitors from Hell 2 and a site that mimics the Law Society homepage but calls itself ‘Avoiding Bad Solicitors’ have all appeared online, as has Solicitorsfromhell.com, which is understood to be hosted abroad so that it cannot be banned by UK regulators. However, Solicitorsfromhell.com’s registered address appears to be in Kent.

    It follows the decision by Mr Justice Tugendhat last week to grant the Law Society injunctive relief and order the site, which claims to expose lawyers’ allegedly poor service, to be taken down (16 November 2011). A domain name search for cowboysolicitors.com shows that the domain was created on 21 September this year, while solicitorsfromhell2.com was registered last Friday (18 November). The web addresses for Solicitorsfromhell.com and Avoiding Bad Solicitors, however, appear to have been registered as far back as 2008. It is understood that the owners of Solicitorsfromhell.com were supporters of the campaign by Solicitors from Hell owner Rick Kordowski to exposes solicitors’ alleged bad practice online.

    A Law Society spokesperson said in a statement: “The Law Society is monitoring these sites but is not proposing to take action against them at present as they do not pose a danger to the public or the profession.” Commenting on the cost of the action taken against Kordowski, the spokesperson added: “The Society understands Mr Kordowski has been sued for libel on at least 17 occasions, and over £170,000 in outstanding judgments and orders have accrued against him. “The cost of the action was outweighed by the benefits of protecting members of the society, who would have had to meet the costs of individual libel actions themselves, and the best interest of the public.”

    Kordowski said: “Up until recently it was perceived by the public that the Law Society were there to protect us all from rogue solicitors. This is clearly not the case and the penny has now dropped. “There will be dozens more [sites] popping up in reaction to Mr Justice Tugendhat’s injunctions against me.” Meanwhile, Tugendhat J has not yet handed down a written judgment following his verbal judgment last week.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • SOLICITORS FROM HELL JUDGEMENT
  • LAWYER PRAISES NOTW HACKERS WHO DON'T EXPOSE CROOKED LAWYERS
    paul mcbride Lawyer Paul McBride praises the NOTW hacking journalists while failing to mention they NEVER expose crooked lawyers. The law society's and their members have been getting away with vast criminality thanks to the total control they have over the mass media. If it wasn't for their victims exposing their crimes with massive land, property,business, assets and child stealing we would NEVER know what the hell was going on.

    McBride queries merits of Leveson Enquiry into media ethics

    Paul McBride QC has questioned the merits of the Leveson enquiry into media ethics which has been ongoing in the last week, while speaking to members of the media at the Scottish Journalists Lunch. McBride, invited to be a keynote speaker alongside former chancellor Alistair Darling, said that there was ‘very little evidence of journalistic wrongdoing’ and also added that he believed that the proportionality of the allegations of criminality surrounding journalists did not measure up “Where is the enquiry about missing persons when there are thousands of missing children? What resources have they allocated to that, whereas we have millions of pounds of police officers dedicated to investigating the contravention of the telecommunications act?” McBride asked.

    He went on to highlight stories that have been broken in recent years, including that of politician Liam Fox, corruption among Pakistan cricketers. “We wouldn’t know about elected and unelected members of Parliament stealing from us or of being taken to war on a false basis”, he continued, also citing the financial “scandal” that had ‘brought the world to it’s knees’ or of racism in football. “I know many of you to be fair, decent people,” he continued. “We’ve known in the past that police officers are corrupt, so does that mean we take away police officers? Of course not!”

    Earlier this year the Crown Office announced an investigation was underway to probe into police corruption involving journalists. The lunch was hosted by Glasgow and West of Scotland Branch Chairman David Dinsmore, GM at News International, Scotland.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • 'Phone hacking was wrong and shameful': NoW lawyer's apology to inquiry
  • LAWYERS BEHIND THE NEWS OF THE WORLD HACKING SCANDAL
  • LAWYER TOM CRONE BEHIND THE MURDOCH HACKING SCANDAL
  • Lawyer Tom Crone behind NOTW hacking scandal resigns
  • WHY DID ROYAL MAFIA'S LAWYERS HIDE HACKING EVIDENCE?
  • LAWYERS HELPED MURDOCH TARGET FORMER PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN (VIDEO)
  • Greedy lawyers blamed as 'cash for crash' scams boom
  • CROOKED LAWYERS BEHIND CAR INSURANCE SCAMS (VIDEO)
  • 'The Law Society is worse than a pit full of vipers'
  • Much more on Murdoch mafia here
  • SOLICITORS FROM HELL WEBSITE SABOTAGED BY LAWYERS, LAW SOCIETY AND COURTS
    A VERY BAD DAY FOR THE INTERNET

    After battling the legal crooks who have utterly controlled every other form of media the 'Solicitors from Hell' website run by Rick Kordowski has been sabotaged and forcibly removed from the internet. If there is ANY doubt as to who is trying to now control the free flow of information across the net it is as we have warned for so many years the legal mafia trying to shut down any site that dares challenge their complicity to commit crimes that have remained undetected because of a complaint media that is censored by media lawyers and controlled by the law society's and ultimately the Inns of court and UGLE in London.

    The internet is being squeezed of its ability to warn the public that it is the legal mafia NOT as the 'OCCUPY' movement suggests the bankers who are destroying the world's economy as it is THEM and THEM alone that devise the dodgy contracts that have seen millions of people and trillions of dollars wiped off the face of the earth and into THEIR coffers.

  • Solicitors From Hell removed from internet as UK High Court grants injunction to Law Society of England & Wales to censor client reviews of lawyers
  • 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE LOSES SLANDER CASE AGAINST LAW SOCIETY CHIEF
  • Criminal in nature ? Law Society Chief Des Hudson off the hook over ‘criminal’ jibe against Solicitors from Hell website owner as judge dismisses case
  • NAMING CROOKS IS CRIMINAL? BUT ONLY IF IT'S A LAWYER
  • SOLICITORS FROM HELL LAUNCHES £1m DEFAMATION CLAIM AGAINST LAW SOCIETY CEO
  • LAW SOCIETIES TEAM UP AGAINST 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE
  • LAW SOCIETY AND LAWYERS TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE INTERNET
  • LAW SOCIETY TAKES ON 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE
  • 'Phone hacking was wrong and shameful': NoW lawyer's apology to inquiry
  • 'The Law Society is worse than a pit full of vipers'
  • Greedy lawyers blamed as 'cash for crash' scams boom
  • CROOKED LAWYERS BEHIND CAR INSURANCE SCAMS (VIDEO)
  • LAWYERS BEHIND THE NEWS OF THE WORLD HACKING SCANDAL
  • LAWYER TOM CRONE BEHIND THE MURDOCH HACKING SCANDAL
  • Lawyer Tom Crone behind NOTW hacking scandal resigns
  • WHY DID ROYAL MAFIA'S LAWYERS HIDE HACKING EVIDENCE?
  • LAWYERS HELPED MURDOCH TARGET FORMER PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN (VIDEO)
  • 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE LOSES SLANDER CASE AGAINST LAW SOCIETY CHIEF
    THE COMPLETE AND UTTER TYRANNY OF BRITISH COURTS WHEN THE LAW SOCIETY IS PROTECTED BY THEIR JUDICIAL BROTHERS WHO ARE MEMBERS OR FORMER MEMBERS OF THEIR FUNNY HANDSHAKE LEGAL CLUB. UNTIL A COMPLETE RESTORATION OF JURY TRIALS IN CIVIL ACTIONS IS IMPLEMENTED PEOPLE WILL CONTINUE TO BE VICTIMS OF THE MOST VILE SCAMMERS ON THE PLANET.

    A man who owns a website claiming to 'name and shame' allegedly underperforming solicitors has lost his slander action against the chief executive of Law Society - after claiming his own reputation had been damaged. Rick Kordowski had sued Desmond Hudson over a brief exchange between Mr Hudson and Professor John Flood in which methods used by Mr Kordowski - who runs the Solicitors From Hell website - were described 'criminal'. The comment was made as Mr Hudson and Professor Flood were leaving the BBC studios in July this year after taking part in Radio 4's You and Yours. The conversation, as posted by Prof Flood on his weblog, went: 'As I came out of the BBC yesterday with Des Hudson, the chief executive of the Law Society, he said Rick Kordowski was a criminal. I reminded Des that the police didn't think so. He wasn't happy.' Mr Hudson's case was that he did not say Mr Kordowski was a criminal but told Prof Flood that Mr Kordowski's methods of collecting payment to remove comments from the website amounted to criminal behaviour.

    His defence to the claim at London's High Court also included a plea of justification. Mr Kordowski, who had originally claimed £1 million damages, then applied for summary judgment in his favour and a declaration that Mr Hudson's statement was false and defamatory plus an apology and £10,000. Striking out the claim as an abuse of process, Mr Justice Tugendhat said it was not a case for summary judgment as there was a conflict of evidence and it was impossible for him to say that the defence had no real prospect of success. He added that, although the allegation of criminality was in principle very serious, the alleged wrong in the present case was of a relatively low level of seriousness.

    He concluded that it would not be just to allow the case to proceed, given that the words complained of were spoken to a single person and that there was no evidence of any real or substantial harm to Mr Kordowski. Mr Kordowski, who claims he is bankrupt, now faces a £14,000 costs bill. It is not the first time Mr Kordowski has appeared in the press.

    Last year a female solicitor who discovered defamatory postings about herself on the Solicitors From Hell website won her battle to have the allegations removed from the site. Anna Mazzola, a solicitor with London law firm Hickman Rose, won the rare ‘interim injunction’ against Rick Kordowski, who runs the website. Mr Justice Edwards-Stewart granted the order against Mr Kordowski in the High Court following an application by barrister Guy Vassall-Adams who represented Ms Mazzola.

    Mr Vassall-Adams argued that the material about Ms Mazzola on the website - www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk - was undoubtedly defamatory and that there were no grounds that it might be true. Mr Kordowski had not pleaded a proper justification defence, or produced evidence to support the allegations, but had simply argued that they might be true, and there was also evidence of his intention to continue publishing the defamatory material, Mr Vassall-Adams said. The barrister explained that Solicitors From Hell was a ‘grievance website’ which allowed members of the public to post anonymous complaints about solicitors, and he said that Mr Kordowski had published serious defamatory allegations without checking their truth or accuracy.

    He added that Mr Kordowski, who represented himself in court, asked for payment from solicitors in return for removing articles from the website. Similarly, in a another case last June, solicitor Scott Eason of Eason Law in the North East, brought a libel action against Mr Kordowski. Mr Eason said he launched his libel action because he felt so strongly about the allegations published and could not allow them to remain on the internet.

    Mr Kordowski had refused to take the allegations down without payment, Eason said, adding: 'As a matter of principle, I refused to pay Mr Kordowski any money and he left me with no option but to issue libel proceedings against him.' Subsequently Mr Kordowski removed the material from his website, sent Mr Eason a personal apology, and gave an undertaking not to re-publish the allegations.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Criminal in nature ? Law Society Chief Des Hudson off the hook over ‘criminal’ jibe against Solicitors from Hell website owner as judge dismisses case
  • SENIOR COP IN STINGING ATTACK ON 'MONEY-GRABBING' DEFENCE LAWYERS
    Serial criminals are the bread and butter of 'legal aid' lawyers milking the system on the back of their criminality. For every pound stolen by a wee ned another £1000 is stolen by his or her defence lawyer.Where does the legal aid money come from? Screwing men in family courts. Although governments suggest tax payers pick up the tab it is the grand theft of men's assets in secret family courts that fund their criminality.

    A senior police officer yesterday led a stinging attack on ‘money-grabbing’ defence lawyers – comparing them to robbers.

    Detective Inspector Bob Campany criticised solicitors who encouraged clients to say ‘no comment’ in a police interview – even when they wanted to give their account to police. He claimed the lawyers were keen for defendants to stand trial so they could pocket enormous fees. ‘Years ago, robbers would attend the Old Bailey wearing suits, and they still do, but too often now they masquerade as defence lawyers,’ he said.

    The officer has spent 30 years in the Metropolitan Police, and has been investigating murders since the early 1980s. He believes the scales of justice have tilted too far in favour of defendants.

    Mr Campany made the unusual attack without fear of censure from his superiors because he is about to retire at the end of the month. He said: ‘Quite often suspects make it clear they want to give their account in a police interview, but once they have spoken to their legal representatives they are almost without exception advised to make no comment. 'The legal advisers hide behind the caveat that they don’t want their clients to incriminate themselves, which roughly translated means they don’t want their client to tell the truth.

    ‘If they tell the truth, this negates their opportunity for a trial, stopping lawyers from earning a shed load of money. ‘There’s no reason not to give an account in police interview. Interviews are all video-taped anyway. If there is an aggressor in the interview room it is either the suspect or the lawyer or both.’ The detective made his remarks after the conviction at the Old Bailey of Stuart Crawford for killing a pensioner.

    Crawford, 45, claimed he acted in self-defence against Michael Ryan, 67, who suffered from acute arthritis. Mr Ryan had befriended Crawford and allowed him to stay at his flat in Sutton, South London. The court heard Crawford used extreme force against Mr Ryan – battering him at least 12 times with a blunt object – making self-defence highly improbable. He then wrapped Mr Ryan up in a carpet and hid his body behind a bookcase. In the days after the murder, in September 2008, Crawford took £7,250 from Mr Ryan’s accounts and fled to Thailand. He was finally extradited from the country in January.

    Crawford was given a life sentence with a minimum term of 26 years for the ‘callous’ murder. Mr Campany made no attack on Crawford’s lawyers, but questioned why the killer had been allowed to mount such a ‘ridiculous defence at public expense’. He said: ‘I’ve no doubt members of that jury felt insulted that they were asked to deliberate on Crawford’s ludicrous story.

    ‘This case highlights a significant weakness in our criminal justice system because courts have become so obsessive in their desire to ensure a defendant has a fair trial. ‘Nobody doubts that principle but the need to be fair to victims, their families, witnesses and the general public is being ignored.’

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • More legal aid scams here

  • NAMING CROOKS IS CRIMINAL? BUT ONLY IF IT'S A LAWYER
    Naming crooks is criminal ? Law Society of England & Wales Chief Des Hudson to face legal action from Solicitors From Hell owner over "criminal" jibe

    Law Society of England & Wales Chief Des Hudson is accused of branding owner of critical website “a criminal” for naming crooked lawyers. THE LIMITS of what the UK’s ‘control freak’ legal profession will stand or even allow in terms of public criticism have taken a new twist after information emerged on a Law Professor’s blog detailing a conversation in which Des Hudson the £400K-A-YEAR Chief Executive of the Law Society of England & Wales is alleged to have branded Mr Rick Kordowski “A CRIMINAL” for his SOLICITORS FROM HELL website’s consumer reviews of poor solicitors & criticisms of solicitors. In response, Mr Korwowski, the owner of the increasingly well known UK based website which names & shames crooked lawyers from all across the UK, has announced he is to sue Des Hudson for defamation, seeking “substantial damages”.

    The incident came to light after the Law Society Chief Executive took part in a joint interview with well known Law Professor John Flood of the University of Westminster on BBC Radio FOUR’s consumer programme “You and Yours” which discussed the Solicitors From Hell website and its policy of naming & shaming lawyers who fail their clients by allowing consumers to write their own reviews of how they were treated by their solicitors. The interview with Des Hudson & John Flood can be heard in full HERE.

    After the interview had taken place, Professor Flood wrote on his web blog in an article dated 22 July 2011 : “As I came out of the BBC yesterday with Des Hudson, the chief executive of the Law Society, he said Rick Kordowski was a criminal. I reminded Des that the police didn't think so. He wasn't happy.” The battle by Mr Kordowski to keep the Solicitors From Hell website inline in the face of a coordinated campaign by the legal profession in England & Wales who appear to be out to personally ruin him for his website’s publication of criticisms the legal profession and allowing consumers to write their own views of their poor experiences in the legal world, can be read in more detail on the Solicitors From Hell website HERE and in yesterday’s Independent on Sunday newspaper HERE

    Rick Kordowski, writing on his website revealed the Law Society have also demanded he surrender the domain name “Solicitors From Hell”. He wrote : “During negotiations, I offered to re-engineer my website to The Law Society’s specifications and parameters at my expense. The Law Society rejected this offer and further added: "A pre-requisite will be that the site in its current form – with all its content/postings – is taken down forthwith. You will also need to surrender the domain name [......] If not then there is no point pursuing discussions further and the matter is best left for the High Court. And then sent me a letter of claim insisting that I shut down this site and promise not to do it again. " Mr Kordowski added : “Tyranny at work, springs to mind! Why should The Law Society stifle public criticism of allegedly shoddy lawyers? Are the public too stupid even to have the right to criticise, as The Law Society seem to be suggesting?”

    Professor John Flood, Professor of Law an Sociology at the University of Westminster. Speaking to Diary of Injustice today, Professor Flood commented on the Law Society of England & Wales battle against Solicitors From Hell. He said : “What I can say is that the Law Society should be thinking about the clients who feel so aggrieved that they are compelled to write to SfH. That to pursue Rick Kordowski is to shoot the messenger rather than deal with the substantive issues in the complaints.” He continued : “Lawyers must realise there is a new culture present, one that is less adversarial, one that is focussed on resolution, as the Legal Ombudsman is trying to show. I'm not sure the Law Society has fully grasped this.” Last week, I reported the legal profession’s battle against Rick Kordowski & Solicitors From Hell, here : English, Scots Law Societies ‘team up’ in legal moves against “Solicitors from Hell” in bid to stop Legal Ombudsman ‘Naming & Shaming’ crooked lawyers after an investigation in Scotland turned up discussions at the Law Society of Scotland who were keen to support moves to kill off Solicitors From Hell in a joint attempt with the Law Society of England & Wales to ‘scare off’ the Legal Ombudsman’s intentions to identify poorly performing solicitors & law firms in published complaints decisions & investigations.

    Crucially, consumer group Which? & the Legal Services Consumer Panel (LSCP) both said the court action against Solicitors From Hell would probably not be going ahead if the Legal Ombudsman had already begun naming & shaming law firms who fail their clients. The Legal Ombudsman has held a consultation on naming & shaming solicitors & law firms but has yet to make a decision on going ahead with the policy, which is supported by consumer groups, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) & the UK Government which I reported on in an earlier, article, HERE. Consumer group Which? gave their comments on the LeO’s plans to identify crooked lawyers in England & Wales. A spokesperson for Which? said : “Which? strongly supports the principle of the LeO publishing complaints data under a strict and published policy , including in some circumstances the name of the law firm concerned. We set out our position in our response to the LeO consultation (page 51: opening up regulatory data)) pointing out that it is the expectation of Government that complaints handling bodies are as transparent as possible.” Asked for their comment on allegations the legal action against Solicitors from Hell was part of a plan by the Law Society of England & Wales to prevent the Legal Ombudsman from naming & shaming ‘crooked lawyers’, the Which? spokesperson said : “The action being taken against Solicitors from Hell by the Law Society is partly due, in our view, to the fact that LeO does not yet publish complaints data. We consider it far more sensible that complaints data is published under a clear policy framework by an ombudsman scheme. Given this, we would find it regretful if any legal action were to be brought against the LeO by the legal profession in England & Wales if "naming & shaming" is to be adopted by the LeO as a future policy.”

    Legal Services Consumer PanelSpeaking on the LeO’s plans to publish complaints data & the identities of law firms who perform poorly for clients, Elisabeth Davies, Chair of the Legal Services Consumer Panel (LSCP), said : “Research shows that UK consumers are now leaving well over 100 million comments online every year about their experience with businesses across the economy. Lawyers cannot escape this welcome emergence of consumer power, but instead should seek and then use such feedback to improve the service they offer. She continued : “The courts will decide the fate of the Solicitors From Hell website. However, such websites fill a vacuum that exists because official complaints data about lawyers is not publically available to help consumers identify good quality lawyers. The Panel will continue to push the Legal Ombudsman to name those law firms who regularly provide poor service.”

    CRIMINALISING CRITICS : Law Society of Scotland official told journalist : “Anyone who criticises the legal profession must be a criminal and should be treated like a criminal”. The sentiments apparently expressed by Mr Hudson who attempts to criminalise Mr Kordowski and critics of the legal profession are startlingly similar to opinions expressed in Scotland by the most senior officials at the Law Society of Scotland, individual solicitors, law firms and the Legal Defence Union, who have all attempted to close down critical websites naming & shaming crooked lawyers who are still working and whose clients are unaware of their poor records as solicitors. In one of several examples of over-the-top attacks on critics of the legal profession, notes taken by a journalist working for a Scottish newspaper revealed a senior Law Society of Scotland figure made a variety of bitter, hate-fuelled remarks against critics, in one, expressing : “Anyone who criticises the legal profession must be a criminal and should be treated like a criminal”.

    Leslie Cumming, former Law Society Chief Accountant – His assault was used by Law Society of Scotland officials in attempts to censor, imprison critics of legal profession in Scotland. In another example, involving the attack on former Law Society Chief Accountant Leslie Cumming, senior Law Society figures including Douglas Mill blamed websites including “Diary of Injustice” (which was only two weeks old at the time) for the attack on Mr Cumming, with Scotland on Sunday reporting in an article dated 29 January 2006 : “Senior figures in the Law Society have made it known they feel some of the websites criticising lawyers are tantamount to incitement to violence.” An insider who had knowledge of the Scotland on Sunday story and how it was developing confessed the direct comments from Law Society officials “were too strong to put into the final version which appeared in the newspaper”. A journalist who was privately briefed by senior Law Society officials including former Chief Executive Douglas Mill who was forced to resign after a well known episode at the Scottish Parliament, described some comments from Law Society officials which are confirmed in notes, as “highly defamatory”. He went onto say “I felt I was being set up to write a piece implicating critics of lawyers in the attack.” Further reports in the media linked the attack on Leslie Cumming to crooked lawyers within the Law Society itself who feared Mr Cumming’s department ‘were onto them’, however the hunt for the attacker was scaled down after several years had passed without an arrest.

    Later, journalists working on the case discovered spurious statements were provided to Lothian & Borders Police by Law Society officials who were eager to blame outspoken critics of the legal profession in Scotland. The rumour was the Law Society of Scotland wanted the Police to silence those who exposed ‘crooked lawyers’. Evidence of these comments & statements have recently been provided to those who were targeted by the Law Society in this way, and journalists looking further into the case have reported a relative of Mr Cumming was a serving officer in Lothian & Borders Police. Several Scottish newspapers reported earlier this year an individual has since been arrested for the attack on Mr Cumming however no further reporting on the case can be made at this time due to contempt of court laws. The accused is due to face a trial in October 2011.

    Given I know what kind of pressure, tricks, threats, and indeed connections the legal profession will be using against “Solicitors From Hell”, may I extend my best wishes and support to Rick Kordowski for his exemplary effort in bringing the issue & discussion of criticism of the legal profession into the mainstream media and for the continued existence of “Solicitors From Hell” and the consumers right to exactly document for themselves their experiences, whether good or bad, at the hands of the legal profession throughout the entire UK. At least in England & Wales, the debate is live, while here in Scotland, there are no moves to name & shame crooked lawyers where all discussion of it appears to be censored by the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • 'The Law Society is worse than a pit full of vipers'
  • Greedy lawyers blamed as 'cash for crash' scams boom
  • Scottish law society chief scarred for life after vicious and frenzied knife attack
  • More on Leslie Cumming case here
  • SOLICITORS FROM HELL LAUNCHES £1m DEFAMATION CLAIM AGAINST LAW SOCIETY CEO
    LAWYERS TRYING TO CONTROL THE INTERNET JUST AS THEY CONTROL THE COMPLIANT MEDIA

    The fight between the Law Society and Solicitors from Hell website owner Rick Kordowski has taken a further twist with Kordowski launching a defamation claim against Law Society chief executive Des Hudson.

    It comes as the Law Society today confirmed that it will launch a group action against Kordowski on behalf of 150,000 solicitors based in England and Wales for defamation, harassment and breach of the Data Protection Act (16 August 2011). Kordowski is yet to defeat a single libel action brought against him by a firm but says he is committed to fighting through the courts to preserve his site. The website gives consumers the opportunity to name and shame lawyers who they allege have provided poor service. The Law Society first mooted action against the site in May (11 May 2011) after High Court judge Mr Justice Henrique said that both the Law Society and Bar Council should investigate defamation complaints about the website (18 April 2011).

    Brett Wilson named partner Iain Wilson has instructed Matrix Chambers’ Hugh Tomlinson QC to pursue the case for the Law Society. Tomlinson achieved fame earlier this year when he represented several high-profile celebrities, including footballer Ryan Giggs, in their efforts to bring injunctions against the tabloid press (6 June 2011). Meanwhile, Kordowski is claiming £1m in damages from Hudson after he allegedly labelled him a “criminal” when speaking to John Flood of the University of Westminster at BBC studios. Kordowski, who will represent himself in the action, said: “It’s hypocritical of the Law Society to be encouraging defamation claims against me whilst at the same time ignoring the publication of an indefensible slander by the chief executive.

    “The Law Society is currently threatening to sue me on behalf of itself and all 150,000 solicitors in England and Wales. That is no justification for allowing its chief executive to defame me.” A Law Society spokesperson said: “Rick Kordowski has confirmed to us that he does intend to issue proceedings against Desmond Hudson for slander. Liability is completely denied and if proceedings are issued we’ll apply to strike them out.”

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • CROOKED LAWYERS BEHIND CAR INSURANCE SCAMS VIDEO
    LAW SOCIETIES TEAM UP AGAINST 'SOLICITORS FROM HELL' WEBSITE
    English, Scots Law Societies ‘team up’ in legal moves against “Solicitors from Hell” in bid to stop Legal Ombudsman ‘Naming & Shaming’ crooked lawyers

    England & Wales’ Legal Ombudsman may be REAL TARGET of lawyers legal action against naming & shaming website. LEGAL ACTION by English solicitors & the Law Society of England & Wales against SOLICITORS FROM HELL, the English based website which names & shames ‘crooked lawyers’ from all over the UK may, according to senior legal figures in Scotland, have an ulterior motive of attempting to ‘scare off’ the English law complaints regulator, the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) from its stated wish to identify solicitors & law firms in complaints decisions & statistics which are expected to be published in the not too distant future by the LeO after it’s plans received the support of consumers & Government in a long running consultation.

    Legal action against Solicitors from Hell is being used by Law Society to prevent LeO’s official naming & shaming of crooked lawyers. The claim was made by a senior insider at the Law Society of Scotland, who, according to information provided to Diary of Injustice, are alleged to be secretly supporting legal moves by the Law Society of England & Wales to remove the Solicitors from Hell website from the internet, out of fear the trend to name & shame crooked lawyers MAY SPREAD TO SCOTLAND if consumers in England & Wales establish access to names & identities of solicitors & law firms via the LeO’s plans, which are supported by many consumer groups, the OFT and the UK Government. Information seen but not in the possession of Diary of Injustice appears to establish multiple bodies representing the legal profession in different parts of the UK including Scotland have discussed and now appear to have agreed to ‘team up’ to use the law “and any other means possible” to censor forms of online criticism of the legal profession & public debate forums started up by aggrieved clients of crooked lawyers who feel or whose experiences show members of the public cannot get a fair hearing of their complaints against the legal profession.

    The Law Society of Scotland is worried naming & shaming of crooked lawyers will damage lawyers businesses & political influence. In one of multiple references to the legal action taking place in the English courts against the “Solicitors from Hell” website, an official at the Law Society of Scotland states his fears that if consumers in England & Wales gain access to the identities of solicitors and the terms of complaints made against them, it will only be a matter of time before consumer organisations call for the same policy to be established in Scotland a duty which would fall to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC). Another official spoke of concerns that if names of poorly performing solicitors were made publicly available in Scotland it would weaken the legal profession's image, influence in public life and damage the profession’s business model. However, another official at the Law Society of Scotland discounts the fear the SLCC will ever name solicitors who are subject to complaints in Scotland, pointing to multiple Court of Session appeals against the SLCC taken out by solicitors & even the Law Society of Scotland itself which have left the SLCC “timid”. He went onto brand the SLCC as “weak” and “easily controlled”, claiming as long as the current format of regulation of complaints against solicitors exists in Scotland, “there is no danger of naming & shaming taking place in the Scottish legal services market”.

    The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, asked for its input, refused to comment on whether it would ever identify crooked lawyers & law firms in Scotland, however a former insider who left the hapless law complaints quango branded the SLCC “an ongoing train wreck”, saying : ”The SLCC has no credibility as a regulator and is not worthy of any public trust.” Today, a Scottish solicitor branded the Law Society of England & Wales legal action against “Solicitors from Hell” as “daft”, claiming “The coverage caused by the English Law Society’s hammer & tongs approach to online consumer criticism of the legal profession will backfire spectacularly”

    He went onto say : “At some point the legal profession whether in Scotland or in England is going to have to accept clients of legal services have the same right as anyone else to speak about how good or bad their solicitor did the work and how much it cost. The same kind of information is available online for just about every other sector of business and even public services. For solicitors to use the courts to suppress this kind of information looks more like censorship and will do nothing to bring back business to law firms.” Easily led : SLCC tamed, Scottish Govt will apparently block any moves to name & shame crooked lawyers in Scotland. In further references to the debate on the possibility of naming & shaming crooked lawyers in Scotland, another insider at the Law Society of Scotland claimed the Scottish Government had already indicated it would not give the SLCC any new powers to identify solicitors & law firms in complaints investigations, citing all information gathered by the SLCC in the course of its duties was considered to be confidential under the Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007. The Law Society insider appeared to indicate he had been given guarantees from the Scottish Government no amendments to the LPLA Act would be implemented unless the Law Society of Scotland specifically agreed to their terms. The Scottish Government did not reply to enquiries.

    During discussions in Scotland of the Law Society of England & Wales case against Solicitors from hell, one Law Society official revealed he had been informed elements of the legal profession in England & Wales had sought Counsel’s opinion “as a standby” on possible legal action against the Legal Ombudsman in a bid to prevent the LeO going ahead with its plans to identify solicitors & law firms who are subject of complaints investigations or determinations made by the LeO. A legal insider confirmed the discussions, claiming both the Law Societies of Scotland, and England & Wales were hoping any successful legal action against the Solicitors From Hell website would scare off the Legal Ombudsman from publishing names of solicitors & law firms connected to complaints.

    The possibility of an ECHR challenge by English solicitors against the LeO over naming & shaming, follows a similar ECHR legal threat against the LPLA Act (Scotland) 2007, issued by one time Law Society of Scotland Chief Executive Douglas Mill who gained a legal opinion from LibDem Peer Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC in 2006 it was against the human rights of a lawyer to have anyone other than a lawyer regulate complaints against lawyers. Douglas Mill, former Chief Executive Law Society of Scotland. Mill’s legal challenge against the LPLA Bill & the Labour/LibDem Scottish Executive & Scottish Parliament was widely reported in the media but did not proceed to court. However, certain changes were made to the LPLA Bill as it passed Holyrood vote in December 2006, which weakened it’s impact on regulation of the legal profession in Scotland. In January 2008, Douglas Mill was forced to announce his registration from the Law Society of Scotland after video footage of a confrontation with the now Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney over claims Mill & others had interfered in claims to the Master Policy, was posted to video sharing website You Tube in late December 2007.

    In stark comparison to the lack of debate of naming & shaming ‘crooked lawyers’ in Scots consumer circles and the refusals from the Scottish Government & SLCC to publish detailed complaints statistics & investigations identifying crooked lawyers & law firms in Scotland, the plans by the Legal Ombudsman to identify solicitors & law firms in complaints determinations have gained significant support of many consumer organisations and even the Government, as I reported in an earlier article, here : Legal Ombudsman moving to name & shame crooked lawyers in England & Wales, crooked Scottish solicitors records to remain protected by secrecy for now Consumer group Which? were asked for their comments on the LeO’s plans to identify crooked lawyers in England & Wales. A spokesperson for Which? said : “Which? strongly supports the principle of the LeO publishing complaints data under a strict and published policy , including in some circumstances the name of the law firm concerned. We set out our position in our response to the LeO consultation (page 51: opening up regulatory data)) pointing out that it is the expectation of Government that complaints handling bodies are as transparent as possible.”

    Asked for their comment on allegations the legal action against Solicitors from Hell was part of a plan by the Law Society of England & Wales to prevent the Legal Ombudsman from naming & shaming ‘crooked lawyers’, the Which? spokesperson said : “The action being taken against Solicitors from Hell by the Law Society is partly due, in our view, to the fact that LeO does not yet publish complaints data. We consider it far more sensible that complaints data is published under a clear policy framework by an ombudsman scheme. Given this, we would find it regretful if any legal action were to be brought against the LeO by the legal profession in England & Wales if "naming & shaming" is to be adopted by the LeO as a future policy.” Legal Services Consumer PanelSpeaking on the LeO’s plans to publish complaints data & the identities of law firms who perform poorly for clients, Elisabeth Davies, Chair of the Legal Services Consumer Panel (LSCP), said : “Research shows that UK consumers are now leaving well over 100 million comments online every year about their experience with businesses across the economy. Lawyers cannot escape this welcome emergence of consumer power, but instead should seek and then use such feedback to improve the service they offer.

    She continued : “The courts will decide the fate of the Solicitors From Hell website. However, such websites fill a vacuum that exists because official complaints data about lawyers is not publically available to help consumers identify good quality lawyers. The Panel will continue to push the Legal Ombudsman to name those law firms who regularly provide poor service.” Asked whether the Legal Services Consumer Panel was concerned the current crop of court cases & action against “Solicitors from Hell” was designed to scare off the Legal Ombudsman from publishing complaints information identifying solicitors & law firms, a spokesperson for the LSCP said : “The Legal Services Act gives the OLC powers to name lawyers so it is difficult to see the grounds for legal action. It is also official Government policy for ombudsman to open up complaint data to consumers, including in legal services - see p34 of this link “

    The Law Society of England & Wales were asked for their input & comment, however no response was received. Clearly naming & shaming is good for consumers in England & Wales, and therefore should be just as good for consumers of legal services in Scotland. CONTACT YOUR MSP TODAY to support the introduction of naming & shaming of crooked law firms & solicitors in Scotland so all consumers can be protected from the rogue elements of Scotland’s legal services market.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • LAWYERS BEHIND MURDOCH MAFIA'S PHONE HACKING SCANDAL
    harbottle lewis WHERE THERE IS A STINK OF CRIMINAL CORRUPTION THERE WILL BE LAWYERS IN THE BACKGROUND

    The City law firm blamed by the Murdochs for providing incorrect legal advice over the phone-hacking scandal today hit back in an explosive letter to the Commons select committee.

    Harbottle and Lewis accused News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch of providing "inaccurate and misleading" evidence to MPs. It claims News International, owned by News Corp, never asked it to investigate whether crimes were committed at the News of the World. The firm claims it was only instructed to determine whether a small number of emails showed that Clive Goodman hacked phones with "the full knowledge and support" of senior journalists. In a stinging criticism of the Murdochs' evidence last month, Harbottle and Lewis said it found it "hard to credit" James Murdoch's claim that NI "rested on" their advice when deciding former royal editor Goodman was a "rogue reporter".

    The firm claimed News International's view of its role was "self-serving" and that Rupert Murdoch's claim to MPs on July 19 that it was hired "to find out what the hell was going on" was "inaccurate and misleading". "There was absolutely no question of the firm being asked to provide NI with a clean bill of health which it could deploy years later in wholly different contexts for wholly different purposes," it wrote. "The firm was not being asked to provide some sort of 'good conduct certificate' which NI could show to parliament."

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • How far can legal professional privilege go?