The Prime Minister

10 Downing Street

London.

21^st September 2002

Dear Mr Prime Minister

I have previously written to you on the matters of judicial and other crime that has been used against me at both the Durham and Newcastle County Courts under case numbers DH400950, DH400898 and NE401650. Your office has passed on these matters to the Home Office. The Home Office has written to me that they cannot act on the matter of judicial crime. In fact they have not acted on any of the crime that I reported to you.

I have also been in correspondence with Member of Parliament Mr Fraser Kemp since 1997 regarding the matters that I have previously reported in my correspondence to you. I have provided Mr Kemp MP with a large amount of evidence and facts regarding the use of crime used against me some of which is mentioned below. I understand from him that he has passed those facts and evidence of the crime used against me to the Home Office, the Parliamentary Commissioner, the Lord Chancellors Department and the Attorney General. Letters have been received by Mr Kemp from these authorities regarding the crime that I have mentioned here. All four authorities have denied any responsibility to act on the matters of the crime Mr Kemp has apparently detailed to them.

Durham Constabulary have told me that they have investigated the crime in these matters. Despite them having alleged that the investigation took place, there is no evidence that Durham Constabulary had carried out any investigation as had been alleged by them. Detective Inspector Gibson of Durham Constabulary alleged that their investigation had been carried out only with facts and evidence that I had published on my Internet web site. There had been no requirement to interview me at the time of their alleged investigation into those facts and evidence as facts show. Then contrary to the previous matter, Durham Constabulary have written to tell me that they will not carry out an investigation into the crime that was used against me in the above cases stemming from the Durham County Court. Inspector Gibson of Durham Constabulary told me that when a judge lies it is a judicial decision and is therefore protected. Common sense and the rules of justice suggest that a judge who lies is not protected by law or the police. Would you agree with my latter statement?

Northumbria Police have also been provided by me with a large amount of evidence to support my allegations of crime used against me at the above courts. At a meeting with three of their senior police officers they agreed to carry out investigations into crime used against me by the above courts and additional crime used against me at Houghton-le-Spring Magistrates Court and others. Acting Detective Inspector Coxon of Northumbria Police had been appointed to investigate my allegations of crime in the matters that I have mentioned above. I had an interview with him where I detailed some of the crime used against me. Facts show that Northumbria Police have not investigated any of the evidence and allegations that I had made to them. The three senior Northumbria police officers said that some of the crime I detailed to them should be investigated by Durham Constabulary. Durham Constabulary would not carry out that investigation. My attempts to have the matter resolved by the Police Complaints Authority have also failed. That authority has ignored my letters to them regarding these matters.

I refer to Mr Fraser Kemp MP and the evidence and facts of crime used against me that I have supplied to him. Despite the above named authorities having denied any responsibility to act on the crime used against me supplied along with evidence of it to Mr Kemp MP, he has written to me that he is not permitted to raise questions in the House of Commons regarding these matters.. I find the latter statement by Mr Kemp as impossible to accept given the fact that as a Member of Parliament he is the representative in Parliament of his constituents which includes me. It is now shown via my correspondence with Mr Kemp that none of the above authorities will act on the crime reported to them, and all have denied any responsibility to act on these matters, this clearly is also a constitutional issue. This was another issue that I raised with Mr Kemp MP in my request that he also raise this matter in the House of Commons. Despite this fact, he has written that he is not permitted to raise questions in the House of Commons. What are your comments on this matter?

Under the European Human Rights Convention, British citizens have a right of access to an independent and impartial tribunal or authority established by law in the resolution of their rights. Amongst the numerous questions that I have raised in my correspondence with Mr Kemp MP, which he has not answered, is where I can find such independent and impartial tribunals as required under the European Human Rights Convention to resolve the matters that I detailed to him, the police and previously to you? Are you aware of any such independent tribunals or authorities where the matters that I have reported to you can be referred to for the resolution of my rights?

The crime that has been used against me is varied and substantial, and some of it is confirmed in the matter of the approved transcript of judgement of former recorder John H Fryer-Spedding in cases DH400950, DH400898 and NE401650. Mr Fryer- Spedding first of al, hel falsely alleged in October 1996 that the three above court actions had been subject of a consolidation order. He tried the cases as a single action. On the 1^st of June 1994 it was ordered in the Durham County Court that the cases were not to be subject of consolidation. That order was still in force at the time the actions went before recorder John H Fryer-Spedding. I had prepared my two cases and one of defense under the order made on June 1^st 1994. In the event my case preparation notes to be used before the recorder became useless. As a further example of the many such examples which perverted the course of justice, recorder John Fryer-Spedding claimed that my right of way across the garden of the adjoining property to mine came to an end because it had not been reserved in the conveyance of that property when it was sold. It was alleged that the recorder had Chancery experience. Section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925 states that all rights easements, privileges etc. etc. existing at the time of a sale of property are deemed to be conveyed with that property. These rights etc, along with affidavits in the recorders possession verified that these existed at the time of the conveyance of the property. I find it inconceivable that the recorder was unaware of Section 62 of the Law of Property act 1925. It is the most commonly used Law by solicitors in the conveyance of property.

Also included as available evidence of the perversion of the course of justice of which I have been subject, and a huge amount more of such evidence is available, is the approved transcript of judgement of recorder John H Fryer-Spedding in the above cases that he heard in October of 1996. The recorder agreed in it that it was his intention to deprive me of my rights. He did exactly that in a huge number of other ways and that was assisted by others that have been named to the police forces that I have mentioned above. Are you in agreement that a judge can lawfully deprive anyone of their rights? My very lengthy reply to the approved transcript of judgement of recorder John H Fryer-Spedding sworn in my affidavit was delivered by me to the Durham County Court earlier this year along with my claim for damages resulting from the use of crime used against me there in the above cases. The manager of the Durham County Court apparently took no action on it and did not acknowledge to me his receipt of that documentation. I referred the matter to him again several weeks ago.

The manager of the Durham County Court wrote to me several weeks ago that he had referred the matters that I had detailed to him to the Court Service. There has been no reply or acknowledgment to the latter received by me from them. The manager of the Durham County Court has also failed to answer the questions that I have placed in my correspondence to with him over the past few weeks regarding the crime used against me at his court.

The facts I have given above do not relate or refer to all of the crime that has been used against me.

As Prime Minister, I require your urgent attention and replies to the matters that I have detailed to you in this letter.

Yours sincerely.

Mr Maurice Kellett

16A The Lyons

Hetton-le-Hole

Tyne-Wear DH5 0HT.