Christy Walsh Hunger Strike: Day 25

Christy Walsh on Day 25 of his hunger strike with a copy of an email he sent this morning to Stormont First Minister Peter Robinson and his deputy, Martin McGuinness.

Dear Messrs Robinson and McGuinness

Today marks my 25th day on Hunger-strike and still neither of you have responded to reasonable requests.

I have attached copy of 2 documents which detail in summary the arguments my lawyers and I agreed would be raised at the Hearing on 31st May 2012.  As you may observe both documents were stamped by the court as having been received on 16th February 2012.   The Hearing was staged as a complete ambush.  Mr Winters has said that he too had been ambushed by Ms Quinlivan, QC. He explained that he could not do anything because it was just too late as the Hearing had already started. 

Document 1
Document 2

Over in England lawyers can be held accountable for cheating or misleading their clients, unlike in quaint wee Norn Iron.  For instance, in a case that I can relate with, a man (RM) was supplied with false court documents by his lawyer in order to mislead him into believing that he was being legally represented. 
Mr Justice Hamblen (Judgment Here) who heard the case did not use complex or obscure law to decide the case but instead relied upon a well known fiction writer's book as his best tool to explain what was done, I quote:

2. As with A.P. Herbert’s “Uncommon Law”, this case involves the false document literary technique – the creation of a sense of authenticity through the invention of documents which appear to be factual
4. From the end of October 2010 until December 2013 he conducted fictitious litigation for RM. That litigation involved fictitious hearings before the Commercial Court and the Court of Appeal; purported judgments of those courts; purported sealed court orders; a purported hearing transcript; purported skeleton arguments; purported correspondence with court officials and the Claimant’s solicitors, Norton Rose; the fictitious instruction and engagement of various counsel, and telephone conferences involving the impersonation of his senior partner and of leading counsel. None of this reflected reality.

141. However, by definition this case is “out of the ordinary”. Indeed it is at the extreme limits of what is “out of the ordinary”. It is a case which raises serious concerns about ... RM’s own solicitor, a man who has been shown to be dishonest, was acting against his interests. It is axiomatic that justice must be both done and seen to be done.

As my case proves, misconduct similar to the above, might not actually be legal but it is tolerated, if not, actively endorsed by both the NI Courts and Power Sharing Executive.  

I am sure that others reading these letters have already realized that if none of what I said about David Ford, Gary McCrudden, Karen Quinlivan, or Tony McGleenan were true they would have all ganged up on me to squash me like a bug.  But, they know that I have all the evidence that I say I have. 

The Northern Ireland Act gives both the First and deputy First Ministers authority over what David Ford has done.

Maybe what is more astonishing than any of the above, is this, a former IRA Chief of Staff is actively criminalizing a nationalist from west Belfast to cover-up serious Crown prosecutorial misconduct, and, I presume, he does not respond to me because he does not speak to 'terrorists'.

I hope that there are former members of the IRA reading this and observing your conduct Mr McGuinness because I doubt they would condone it.  I can say that because I used to live with them 24/7 in the H-Blocks and I know many of them were men of integrity.

Yours sincerely
Christy Walsh

1 comment:

  1. Thank you Anthony again for all your efforts on my behalf.

    I would also just like to point out that the Judges remarks in the quote above is directed at a solicitor I used it because the same principal applies to barristers for whom I intended the comparison.