For the sake of balance, I produce in full my latest correspondence to Sir John Brigstocke – the Judicial Ombudsman, and also his reply.
…I am enclosing a copy of the Judgement by Judge Hand and I refer you to…. where it states “I will direct that the Employment Judge produces his notes of evidence of cross examination and re examination of Mr West.” I refer you also to the context in which this was ordered “…because he and his instructing solicitors have been rebuffed in their search for corroboration of what they consider to be important evidence …”
This point was central to my appeal and Judge Christensen deliberately obstructed our attempt to corroborate it. When she was ordered to produce the notes she went a step further and falsified the record. The notes she produced were not the original handwritten notes but a later fabrication which was entirely inaccurate and deliberately perverted the evidence given at the trial.
…..If you consider that Judge Tickle (the senior judge at the Bristol Employment Tribunal)first made a perverse judgement against me and was barred from sitting in judgement against me (by the Appeal Judge) because of his obvious prejudice against me and then in my second appeal, Judge Hand ruled on three (of my) points “another judge may not have made this judgement and I would not have made this judgement but it is not in my power to change it.” …. it adds up to abuse of power and perversion of justice. It is clear that there is no appetite for calling these judges to account and they know it. That is why they feel free to pervert the course of justice so blatantly. If this investigation is open and transparent then why have I not been shown the original handwitten notes as directed by the judge? What are you hiding?
…I have made serious allegations and if the judges are not called to account for their acts then I should be called to account for my allegations….
here is the reply
…..Judge Latham was satisfied that nothing untoward had been carried out in the preparation of the transcript as it derived entirely and accurately from the notes of evidence. It therefore remains my view that Judge Latham handled your complaint properly and correctly as there were no issues of judicial misconduct on the part of Employment Judge Christensen.
I have considered the additional concerns raised in your letter, but they do not relate to the handling of your complaint and are therefore outside my remit.
I understand your disappointment that your complaint has not been resolved…but I have nothing further to add…
Sir John Brigstocke KCB (approved by and signed in his absence)
You may draw your own conclusion. There is a clue in the title of this post.
see my reply to latest comment