�

Dorent Lord Francis - starts indefinite Hunger Strike

On Wednesday the 11th September, Francis, currently detained in HMP Parkhurst, began a hunger strike and will continue to refuse food.

(1) To highlight his continuing unjust imprisonment.

(2) For the prison service to allow him to be moved to a prison near to his parents, whom he has not seen for 12 months, since his 'punishment move' from HMP Gartree to HMP Parkhurst. Both his parents are unable to travel to visit him due to age and illness.

�

(3) In protest at continuing racial/religious harassment and discrimination from prison guards.

Background to the Hunger Strike:

The original decision to move Francis from HMP Gartree to HMP Parkhurst was made on the basis that his behaviour at Gartree was 'such that his continued retention there has not been possible'. However circumstances have now changed, as the Prison Service has reviewed all the adjudications conducted against Francis while he was at Gartree, and has agreed that the vast majority of them should be quashed.

�

Background to wrongful imprisonment:

Dear Friends,

If for whatever reason the courts concluded that the appellant was wrongly convicted of the offence charged, or was left in doubt as to whether he was rightly convicted of the offence the it must be necessity to quash the conviction.

It could make no difference that the appellant might if duly indicted have been convicted of some other offence.

Well at least that is what the first caveat of the repeal proviso states, however it failed to state that if you are an individual who is innocent and trying to regain your liberty then this rule of law or any other which may assist you does apply unless you belong to the slime gang otherwise known as the Freemasons.

I was arrested in a shop in my home town of Birmingham for attempted deception, after being lured there by two police informers, I did not know they were police informers until shortly after my arrest.

The date of that arrest was the 29th November 1997. On arrival at the police station I was processed and placed in a cell to await the arrival of my solicitor, before interview however whilst in the cell I was visited by two CID's who arrested me for an allegation of wounding with intent.

During the course of my interview I gave that police a detailed account of my movements for the date and time of the alleged offence of wounding, that date being the 14Th November 1997.

Despite the fact I told the police that I was in a completely different area, at the Birmingham Irish Boxing Club, based in Kitts Green and not in the Balsall Heath area carrying out any form of attack as the complainant claimed, the police paid no attention to anything I had to say.

The only thing the police seemed to interested in was a confession, after all once you are arrested you must confess, regardless of whether you have committed any offence or not, your priority should be to save the police having to do any work.

The fact that the police do not like to work is reflected in the fact that at the conclusion of my interview I was charged with malicious wounding with intent.

The police did nothing to verify my alibi but even more amazingly the police had no form of evidence to support the complainant's allegation, neither did they have medical evidence.

Despite the fact that in accordance with P.A.C.E. my alibi should have been first verified and the police should have carried out an investigation into the complainant's allegation in order to ascertain the validity of the complaint.

I was attending court for two months on a serious charge of wounding, which carries a life sentence with nothing but the complainant's word to substanciate, his claims.

The solicitor I had seemed to be working more for the police than myself, hence him allowing me to be charged and attending court in such bizarre circumstances.

On the 26th January 1998 almost two months after being charged, I stood out-side Birmingham Magistrates Court waiting for my solicitor to arrive for yet another court hearing. When my solicitor arrived I had strong words with him out-side court about the bizarre manner in which I was charged and having to attend court on the basis of no evidence.

The solicitor reluctantly went into court and made an application for the matter to be discharged. The application was successful and that was the end of the matter or at least that is what I thought.

The police prosecution were not happy at that fact the matter was discharged and so on the 19th November 1998 when I attended court for an old style committal in relation to a charge of handling I was denied legal representation. I left the dock and refused to take any part in the proceedings.

Moments after I returned to my cell a slip of paper was pushed under my door on which it stated I had been committed to stand trial for the handling matter and also for the section 18 charge of wounding which had previously been discharged and to date while serving a life sentence for the offence have never been recharged.

I was denied legal representation on the 19th November 1998 in order that the magistrate could unlawfully commit the section 18 matter to the crown court. Thereafter the police conspired with each solicitor I engaged and did their level best to sink me further. The court realising that I was intelligent enough not to be baffled by their proceedings refused me legal representation.

I took no part in what was clearly an unlawful trial and was tried and convicted in my absence.

On the 30th September 1999 two after the unlawful trail I was moved from Birmingham Crown Court to Nottingham Crown Court and given a life sentence.

I have now been in prison for almost four years and all that CCRC and appeal courts can do is assist each other in covering up this travesty of justice.

There are too many of us in prison because of police corruption and we will stay in prison along with many more that are due to come, unless we unite in a joint effort to bring to the attention of the public exactly what is going on in their fine government departments.

When I consider the fact that I am sat here wearing my own clothes instead of prison clothes simply because a group of Irishmen were prepared to die in order to make this possible.

I have had the experience of writing to a few inmates who claim to have been incarcerated through a miscarriage of Justice in a bid to set up a united front, however they wrote back to say that they were awaiting a response from the CCRC and did not want to jeopardise their chances. It really highlights how weak and selfish a lot of people are while claiming to have been done an injustice.

Like true soldiers they are only concerned with their own welfare, goodness forbid we were to be engaged in physical warfare with those sort.

As you will have deduced by now I am very out spoken with no time for weak, selfish people but if like me you have courage and want not only to make an impact but rock and change the system,

please write to me,

Dorent Lord Francis,

Soldier to the Cause

D.L. Francis, EC 4968

HMP Parkhurst, Newport, Isle of Wight, PO30 5NX

===================================

Michael O'Brien Challenges Unfair Compensation Scheme

"The way the Home Office treats victims of Miscarriages of Justice in relation to compensation claims is nothing short of contempt."

Michael O'Brien, one of the "Cardiff Newsagent Three" , who spent 11 years in prison for a murder he did not commit, has launched a High Court challenge to the government's compensation scheme for victims of miscarriages of justice.

During his years in prison, not only was Mr O'Brien branded a murderer, but he was also divorced from his wife and missed out on his only son's childhood. His father and baby daughter died whilst he was in custody and he had to attend the funerals handcuffed to prison officers.

Unfair Scheme

The government's compensation scheme does not explain exactly how each award has been decided and refuses to make its decisions public. By speaking to other victims of miscarriages of justice, including the Birmingham Six, Mr O'Brien has learned that different rules are applied in different cases for no apparent reason.

Inadequate Compensation

Mr O'Brien has been awarded just �125,000 for the "consequences of imprisonment" which includes not only the loss of 11 years of liberty but also the damage to his reputation, loss of his family relationships and his difficult experiences in prison. In the longest false imprisonment case to come before the UK courts, the Court of Appeal awarded a man �25,000 for 42 days false imprisonment for non-payment of a fine. Mr O'Brien's award is woefully inadequate and does not reflect what he has been through. He has refused to accept it.

Charge for board and lodging in prison

A deduction of �37,000 has been made from Mr O'Brien's separate award for lost earnings which is intended to cover the everyday living expenses he would have spent on rent, food, etc had he not been imprisoned. But paying rent would have given him a home and instead he had only a prison cell and prison food. This deduction amounts to a charge for his "board and lodging" in prison. This not only adds insult to injury but is forbidden under UK law. In effect, those who have been wrongly convicted are being treated more harshly than prisoners who are guilty and have been properly convicted by the courts.

Michael O'Brien's case is waiting to be looked at by a High Court Judge and the Assessor appointed by the government has submitted that he is standing by his Decision.

Mr O'Brien said " The way the Home Office treats victims of Miscarriages of Justice in relation to compensation claims is nothing short of contempt."

Mr O'Brien's solicitor, Nogah Ofer, said " the compensation scheme has always been shrouded in secrecy and there does not appear to be an established formula for working out how much compensation should be awarded. It is time we had transparency with clear rules applied consistently to all applicants"

For more details contact:��Michael O'Brien, c/o MOJUK