|
|
Below is an extract from an affidavit sworn by Shirley Carr on May 12 1994. Her full affidavit containing substantial material perjury sworn on that date should eventually be published on these pages.
Carr swears below, "
The situation was eventually resolved when Mr & Mrs Green had the property connected to the main drainage system in February, 1986." This evidence shown herein has been produced to judges and policemen who chose to ignore it. On February 8 1988 Carr became the applicant for drainage proposals to Green's property No. 16 The Lyons long before she was to purchase it. In fact she paid out to the local authority more than two thousand pounds for them to carry out that work in February 1988. Would you pay out that sort of cash when the property subject of that work was not yours? Further, it was not clear until the local authority had carried out their excavations whether or not it was possible to connect the frontage of No. 16 onto the main public sewers. That work was carried out more than some six months before Carr and another former man she lived with, Mr T. McCabe, purchased No 16 on August 26 1988. At this time in February 1988 a string of three statutory declarations commenced to be sworn for use in lodging a caution against first registration on the alleyway land that was subject of case NE401650 where Carr was the plaintiff. At the time those Statutory Declarations were sworn and used in the application to HM Land Registry, the Green's were clearly then going to sell their property No. 16 to Carr. Why then would they want to go the expence of having those statutory declarations sworn when they were not to be the beneficiaries of them? One of those statutory declarations contained gross material perjury sworn by solicitor Paul Graney of Newbottle Street, Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne-Wear. That perjury came to light following a letter that was sent to me by solicitor Alison Stott. She had provided copies of three statutory declarations to me. One had been sworn by solicitor John Paul Graney. When I replied to her letter providing evidence that the statutory declaration sworn by solicitor Paul Graney contained very material perjury she quickly let the matter drop. The duty of a solicitor, as an Officer of the Courts, was to report that matter to the relevant authorities. She did not do that. Recorder John H Fryer-Spedding was also provided with the Statutory Declaration of solicitor John Paul Graney along with the evidence to show that perjury had been used in it. He too ignored it and claimed it was the normal type of statutory declaration used to place a caution against the first registration of land at HM Land Registry? The documents showing evidence of that perjury will eventually be published within these pages. In the conveyance of No. 16 the Green's did not convey any alleged interest in the alleyway land to Carr. The vendors of the Green's property No 16 did not convey any interest to them in the alleyway land either. There are more facts surrounding this matter which I hope to detail later in greater depth.I will detail paragraph 4) of criminal Carr's affidavit copied below later. Note she swears. " I was not aware of the possible existence of party walls or alleged rear drainage problems." However in another affidavit to be published here she agrees that she saw a notice that had been posted detailing the fact that the property No. 16 had no drains. Any solicitor would have advised her that most properties have party walls.
Would you, six months before you were to buy a property, pay out more than two thousand pounds to see if it was going to be possible for its frontage to be connected to the public sewers without first carrying out enquiries about the rear drainage facilities, or as the case was rather the lack of them, on that same property? Carr and her then residential partner Mr Thomas McCabe, had also been told by my wife and I in January 1988 that the rear of No. 16 was without drainage facilities. It appears that she tries again to deceive even more by swearing that she had only been told that the property was only without means of sewerage disposal. Carr clearly had to try to exclude the fact that she knew the rear of No. 16 was without drains, because it was very material to proving my case against her under Durham County Court case DH400950.
Note: Would you as a prospective purchaser of property such as No. 16 The Lyons, not become extremely cautious in your dealings with the vendor when you had already learned that they were concealing the fact that their property was without any drainage facilities when they placed the property up for sale? Carr has agreed in an affidavit that she was aware that the propery No. 16. was without drains before she purchased it. That was the true situation existing in early 1988. A situation which a number of judges, including recorder John H Fryer-Spedding were made aware of but clearly ignored it.
Go to first page of evidence of perjury.
