rough first draft: Aylesbury Magistrates Court (i.e. a public courtroom) Regina vs Colin Deryck Jarvis 26/4/13.

Synopsis

a) Me, Jason and Jon in the courthouse for 9:15

b) All meetings with my Solicitor concluded by 11:15

c) (i) At about 11:15 my Solicitor meets with me to tell me that the CPS are alleging that I have breached existing court bail conditions. The CPS citing the contents of a social media post that I had sent into the "www Cloud" that morning at 8:45 (before we left for court). Apparently somebody(s) - presumably and hypothetically - a big BNP Nick-racist-retard-twat-Griffin fan(s) and supporter(s) connected with the CPS's prosecution of me - had been desperately skulking, snivelling and scavenging, like a cornered mongrel dog through my social media  public websites from a secret location, and was upset (ahhh...) at reading a christian and surname contained therein and so went crying, pleading and bleating to the CPS '...bowt it!(sic). 

Please note: A christian name and surname that, along with the defendant's name and the names of the defence witnesses, will be a matter of public record, post 24 June 2013.

Why anybody connected with the CPS's criminal prosecution of me felt the need to seek out my social media public websites - on that morning I have no idea. But I do know that my Solicitor served on the CPS the names of the two witnesses for the defence - on that morning. 

Coincidence? Hmmm...

c) (ii) I said to my Solicitor that that CPS allegation is complete bollocks. That I have NOT breached the court bail conditions relating to the offence for which I am being tried today and for which exact bail conditions were served on me on 25 January 2013. All of which I have complied with to the letter. 

c) I said to my Solicitor that as of today 26/04/13 the christian and surname of the CPS's witness ***** *****, that is contained within my legitimate and appropriate social media post of that morning - which is the cause of the CPS's witness having kittens in his little bolt hole and causing him to squeak "...look, read v'at mate,  he can't do v'at Mr CPS sir..." - that that particular christian and surname, along with my own name and that of  my defence witnesses is, as a matter of fact, now a matter of public record available and accessible to any of the seven billion people on this planet who wish to search for the name of the CPS's witness ***** *****. 
...ahh, uhhh yeah he's sayin' ...v'is v'at and v'e uv'a bwout me...
(innit d****y b****y /...innit Uncle Tom Prick / ...innit dominic - bacon sandwich/us Italians stick together - martello distefano!)

d) (iii) Further discussion was had with my Solicitor, before he saying ...be ready to go in. I then spoke to Jason and Jon before being summoned into court No.3 at about 12:00 p.m.

e) On taking my seat next to my Solicitor I saw that there were members of the public in court - either neutral to or in support the CPS's case against me - observing the UK criminal justice system being administered in prosecuting me, the innocent British black man who is the defendant at Trial.
I myself went into court with my two witnesses - Mr J. Ivey and Mr J. Jennings - only and with no family members or friends, as members of the public in court.

2Bcontd...

17/5/13 

f) The case commenced with the Justices' Clerk verifying in law whether the case against me could be heard, as the allegations against me date from Feb. 2006 and span the period to Jan. 2013. There being a cut off period of six months beyond which the separation of the alleged criminal conduct cannot be considered connected, or a continuous act, or a course of conduct etc. 

Their Worships were informed by the Justices' Clerk that the case could be heard as the last allegation falls well within the six months cut off period - because - the CPS assert that their "six page" Witness statement (of the 3/12/12* - please note!) that was made to Thames Valley Police  by ***** *****, which is the CPS's evidence at Trial, contains allegations of harassment which cites the defendant's social media contents dated as recently as Dec. 2012.

g) The CPS then commences to present their opening argument to their Worships. The CPS basically outlined the allegations, the context of the allegations and what the CPS assert are the historic and contemporaneous background to the allegations of criminal harassment carried out against the Crown's witness. Including, the CPS presenting, briefly, the responses of the defendant when interviewed under caution by the investigating police officers on 10/01/13. The CPS's opening remarks to the Magistrates' Bench lasted approx. 10 min.

h) The CPS then indicated to their Worships that the Crown would like to put the CPS's evidence to, and to ask questions of the Crown's witness. The Magistrates then turned their attention to the defendant and my Solicitor. The Magistrate told me that the CPS had requested and had been granted special measures in relation to the circumstances under which the Crown's witness BT employee ***** ***** is prepared to give verbal evidence in person under oath in a public court. 

The Magistrate informed me and my Solicitor that the Crown's witness was only willing to give his "evidence" in a public court on behalf of himself and on behalf of the State's prosecuting authority if I - the defendant - were not able to look at him doing it. If I were prevented from looking at him giving his so-called "evidence". 

N.B. Talk about surreal, disturbing, bizarre and strange behaviour in the CPS's only witness demanding evidence-giving "special measures" in a public courtroom before being willing to give his "evidence" against a black man in a public court of law. A black man whom this same white BT workplace racist cretin had previously been keen and eager to refer to as - his "Kaffa" - i.e. He's me kaffa, yeah I've got me own kaffa now (sic) - in front of white BT customers and white BT employees.

[Fruit & veg anybody?...]

Court room "special measures" that are ordinarily put in place for a child under 17. Or for a victim of a sexual offence. Or for a person with communication difficulties. Or for a vulnerable or intimidated person. Or for a person with significant impairment of intelligence and social functioning. Or for a person who suffers from a mental disorder - as defined by the Mental Health Act 1983. 

And now, apparently, those same "special measures" are also permitted to be put in place for the likes of a six foot something, 48 y/o white  "substantive C1 grade BT IT Gold User team leader supervisor" current white BT employee of 20+ years employment because that white person ...would need a screen or something put in place to keep me from having to face - a black man - again.(sic) This from the same white BT employee  who had previously considered himself and his white BT colleagues - BUT ESPECIALLY HIMSELF - to be a law unto himself / themselves inside a white employer's workplace environment c.2001 to 2012, and a law unto himself / themselves inside a white trade union's workplace environment. c.2001 to 2012.

["Special measures"! Mmmm, yeeeeeeessss! What very strange behaviour, what extremely bizarre behaviour, and what so so very very pathetic and humiliating behaviour indeed! One cannot help but ponder: My my my, how far, how so very far the - once mighty - seem to have fallen!] (more on this later)

i) However, I was ordered to leave the court and go into another room and to close the door behind me. I did this. Some moments later I was called back into court and took my seat next to my Solicitor, my view of the witness box and it's occupant was now blocked by a screen partition. 

j) Their Worships, the Justices' Clerk, the court Usher, the CPS prosecutor and my Solicitor all had sight of the CPS's witness who occupied the witness box. 

k) The court then heard the Crown's witness swear an oath on the Holy Bible to tell the truth  (perjury is a criminal offence for which you can be prosecuted - don't forget!) after which the CPS prosecutor asked (approx. ten) questions of the Crown's witness for 25 minutes maximum. Following which the court adjourned for lunch until 13:45. 

l) The actual "content" and "substance" of the "evidence" given by the Crown's witness in public court in response to being questioned by the Crown prosecutor will be described in detail later within this post.

m) The court reconvened at 14:00 and I was again ordered to remove myself from the court whilst the Crown's witness re-entered the witness box hidden behind a sight blocking partition. After which I was called back into court and took my seat next to my legal representative, keenly anticipating my Solicitor's hostile cross examination of the Crown's witness in relation to the seven consecutive years of criminal harassment he alleges, within his 6 page 03/12/12 witness statement - has been the course of conduct conducted against him - ***** ***** - by that Solicitor's client, Colin Jarvis.   

 Okay so far? Goodie good. 

2Bcontd...

20/05/13

n) My Solicitor said to the Crown's witness that he would like to refer the witness to the contents of the witness statement that he had made to TVP. I then heard the CPS's witness reply: Wot statement y'u on about?

o) When I heard the CPS's witness, BT employee ***** *****, reply to my Solicitor an

went of in my mind and I smiled ruefully at my Solicitor. A disbelieving, rueful smile. 
Alarm bell because the Crown prosecutor had, it appeared, been questioning the Crown's witness on the incorrect witness statement and he had, obviously, been giving evidence under oath on that same, incorrect, witness statement.  A disbelieving and rueful smile because of the obviously disrespectful and off handed manner with which the CPS's witness had responded to my Solicitor's perfectly innocuous first question, asked simply in order to establish a fact. 
I wrote: I don't think he likes you! on my notepad for my Solicitor to read:

p) My Solicitor then asked the CPS's witness exactly which evidential statement he had been giving evidence on and answering questions on when he was questioned by the Crown prosecutor prior to the court adjourning for lunch. The CPS's witness was unable to provide my Solicitor with a comprehensible or a satisfactory answer.

q) I then just sat back and watched a courtroom farce play out.

r) It was quickly established by the legal experts in court that the CPS and their star witness were using a 2 page Thames Valley Police Witness Statement that was made to ATVP by the Crown's witness on 26/2/13. Whereas as a matter of law and of fact - the CPS had brought me before a court of law in order to prosecute me on the so-called "evidence" contained within a 6 page TVP witness statement that was made to ATVP by the Crown's witness on 3/12/12.

s) After some minutes of discussion between the Justices' Clerk, the CPS prosecutor, the Magistrates Bench and my Solicitor in respect of the CPS's and their witness's cock up in relation to the incorrect witness statement used at Trial, I was, again asked to leave the court and lock myself in an adjacent room until the Crown's witness had removed himself from the court. On retaking my place the legal experts continued their discussion in an attempt to try and fix a broken Trial. The court was then adjourned in order for me to instruct my Solicitor and to speak to the defence witnesses. The court then reconvened some 20 mins. later.  

t) It was agreed, by the legal experts in court, that the Trial had been mucked and could not proceed further, given the CPS's and their witness's lack of due diligence in prosecuting the case. The case was thus adjourned part-heard. The case was to be started again and heard afresh on 25 June at Milton Keynes Magistrates Court. 
Trying, and failing, to keep the smile off of my face I wrote: You could not make this up! on my notepad for my Solicitor to read.

u) The Magistrates then formally informed the defendant of their decision then adjourned the case. I spoke to my Solicitor, then me and the defence witnesses left the courthouse talking about the justice system, talking about the CPS, talking about wheels coming off things and talking about court room "special measures" and the possibility of us acquiring Google x-ray specs... 

2Bcontd...