A Civil Servant at the Northern Ireland Office has found me guilty of possession of explosives where the Courts and due process could not

This is despite the NIO acknowledging that ,  “Mr Walsh's convictions were, we believe, "reversed" within the meaning of section 133, by the decision of the Court of Appeal on 16 March 2010.”

If the 2002 Court removed my Convention right to a fair trial then, the NIO presumably reason, that it would make no difference if I am found guilty from a Government office instead of a courtroom.  If the NIO can determine my guilt in this way, then theoretically, it could intervene to determine guilt with any failed prosecution case and the required criminal standard of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ would be ineffectual. Read letter.

Background to the removal of my Convention right to a fair trial:

In January 2002 the Diplock Court found the Trial Judge, Petrie, to have been "unjustified" for his "main criticism" of my defense and thus  primary ground for convicting me. However the Diplock Court went on to  set precedent removing the right to a fair trial in NI when it concluded that,

“... if a defendant has been denied a fair trial it will almost be  inevitable that the conviction will be regarded unsafe, the present case in our view constitutes an exception to the general rule. ... the  conviction is to be regarded as safe, even if a breach of Article 6(1)  were held to have occurred in the present case.” R v Walsh (2002) NICA 1

On 16th March 2010 the Court of Appeal reversed my wrongful conviction, concluding that,

“We bear in mind that the appellant is a person of previous good  character. It is on that basis that we allow this appeal.”  R v Walsh  [2010] NICA 7

Unfortunately the 2010 Court did not disturb Carswell's exception rule of 2002 which has now survived judicial overview to become case law in  NI.  As the Court did not specifically  address the Carswell exception rule then the NIO has concluded that as I have no right to a fair trial then it makes no difference whether or  not I am declared guilty from a courtroom or from a Government office. I have attached the NIO letter which on one hand acknowledges that my  wrongful conviction was reveresed by the Appeal Court but declares that I am guilty anyway.

The 2010 Court’s failure was, I believe, an oversight because the 3rd Appeal Court did state that, “We bear in mind that the appellant is a person of previous good character. It is on that basis that we allow this appeal”  R v Walsh [2010] NICA 7.   I presume the NIO has been quick to seize upon the Court not ‘specifically’ rescinding Carswell’s rule.  Having successfully survived judicial oversight, Carswell’s ‘exception’ rule,  has now become established case law in NI,  and the NIO appears to be testing the water with my lawyer.  Read letter.

If the NIO wished to contest the Court’s reversal of my wrongful conviction then, in a democratic society, it should appeal the Court’s decision not arbitrarily determine guilt anyway.

The NIHRC have been made aware of the NIO’s  illegal method used to find me guilty but continue to endorse the removal of my right to a fair trial.  Monica McWilliams and the NIHRC have fully participated in the abuses of my human rights as hostile silent witnesses.
 

Seizing the opportunity I took one of the Prosecutor’s files at the close of my Appeal on 9th March 2010

See what incriminating evidence I now have!!
 

Making it up as they go along!

If Judges convict on the basis of what they want to hear instead of what is actually said in court; then how safe is any conviction in NI? Read more...