QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE KEITH
MR JUSTICE GLOBE
|HER MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY GENERAL||Claimant|
|- v -|
Wordwave International Ltd (a Merrill Communications Company)
190 Fleet Street, London EC4
Telephone No: 020 7421 4040
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
appeared on behalf of the Claimant
Mr A Waldman (instructed by Bindmans LLP, London WC1X 8HB)
appeared on behalf of the Defendant
Crown Copyright ©
Wednesday 23 January 2013
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE:
"Should you repeat this behaviour and continue to film court proceedings, you will be committing a contempt of court and criminal offence".
The letter continued that this might result in proceedings being taken against him.
"And this slimy individual here, this dirty, slimy, stinking, bloody whore, I can speak the truth, I can speak to this bloody whore and denounce her for what she is."
This type of abuse continued for some time and he was eventually arrested and taken into custody. Judge Rose indicated that he would deal with the contempt on the following day, and made arrangements for the defendant to be represented.
"I'm not going to take part in any trial in a kangaroo court, in a Star Chamber. I will not dignify it with my attendance. If you wish to continue with this grotesque kangaroo court trial, you will do so without me. I will go back down the cells and stay there if you send me to die in prison, and be proud to do so."
Accordingly, the hearing proceeded in his absence. The judge found contempt in relation to the deliberate recording, both audio and visual, of the proceedings of the court, which was prohibited, and that the defendant had lied when challenged about the purpose of the device, because he knew perfectly well that he was not permitted to record the proceedings. The second finding of contempt was, of course, directed to the use of deeply distressing and insulting language to a female member of the court staff. The sentence imposed was three months' imprisonment in relation to each of the two contempts, to be served consecutively, less one day.
"But for men like Norman Scarth, he, his parents or his grandparents would have died in the gas chambers."
Shortly afterwards he attempted to pass leaflets and was alleged to have used appalling language to the effect that, for example: "The Gestapo should have finished you off"; that sixty years ago he had fought in a war to save the likes of them and it was not for the likes of him in the war, all Jews would have died in the gas chamber. He took photographs of those leaving the synagogue, which many of those present found offensive and distressing. These events gave rise to the second charge which was due to be heard on 2 February 2012.
"(a) to use in court, or bring into court for use, any tape-recorder or other instrument for recording sound, except with the leave of the court;
(b) to publish a recording of legal proceedings made by means of any such instrument, or any recording derived directly or indirectly from it, by playing it in the hearing of the public or any section of the public, or to dispose of it or any recording so derived, with a view to such publication;
(c) to use any such recording in contravention of any conditions of leave granted under paragraph (a)."
So there is a discretion in the court, subject to whatever conditions the court thinks appropriate, to allow for the use in court of a tape-recorder. As far as we are aware, the defendant has never made any such application.
"Norman Scarth, facing the .... quislings in a kangaroo court."
The footage shows clearly the inside of the court room where the hearing involving the defendant took place. Among other observations, the defendant challenged the jurisdiction of the court as a kangaroo court, referred to it as a "star chamber", told the district judge that he was a "usurper .... not a magistrate, but a crooked lawyer". He challenged the jurisdiction of the court and then repeated that the magistrate was not entitled to continue with the hearing. He was not a magistrate. Indeed, it appeared from the "You Tube" entry itself that the defendant had adjusted the camera because his fingers were visible and the inside of his clothing could be seen. The hearing continued in much the same way. The defendant said that "this is a total farce .... a kangaroo court". When told to calm down, he told the judge to "get stuffed", he would not stand up before a quisling. He ended this part of the hearing with:
"You're a crook and I hope I live long enough to see you strung up from the lampposts."
He was then heard to say:
"I can't hear a word you're saying. Why do you mumble? Because you're ashamed of your words, I can understand that."
It is unnecessary to narrate any more. The entire footage lasts for over thirteen minutes. It ends with the removal of the defendant from the court. He directed some insults to the police officers, referring to them as "Gestapo thugs". The footage ends with a blank screen and with the following words:
"Norman Scarth will be appearing at Manchester Magistrates' Court Thursday 23rd February 2012. All support would be appreciated."
".... should detailed medical evidence be filed which shows proceedings are, or are likely to have a significant impact on your client's health, whether mental or physical; or if your client provided a written undertaking not to repeat his contemptuous behaviour, the Solicitor General would, of course, reconsider the public interest in continuing the proceedings."
That was an entirely reasonable response to a letter from the solicitors then acting for the defendant, inviting the Solicitor General to reconsider whether the proceedings should proceed. There was no filing of any medical evidence. There still is none. There was no undertaking of any kind forthcoming that this contemptuous behaviour would not be repeated. That, in truth, is why the case has gone ahead.
".... I take the equally unusual step of writing to you, in the hope that you may put before Lord Judge certain facts WHICH HE WILL NOT OTHERWISE BE ALLOWED TO HEAR."
He says that he will not attend the hearing because he had "fled to Ireland to escape the persecution" which had been increasingly inflicted on him during the last seventeen years. He was "in fear of more than imprisonment" if he dared to set foot in Britain again. He was "in fear of [his] life". He addressed the issue of possible imprisonment:
"In truth, neither the Attorney-General's team nor Judge Rose's team want me in prison at all, but in a Stalinist 'Mental Hospital', so that my attempts to expose the rotten apples in the Judiciary can be dismissed as the ramblings of a lunatic."
The papers are accompanied with a photograph of one of the dreadful convoys, and the defendant indicates how he had "done [his] bit" in those arctic convoys. We were also supplied with photographs showing bruising and inflammation resulting from "a brutal kicking of an old age pensioner" (the defendant).
"For all that I have written these last months, the situation can be summed up in 63 words.
'The Law' in Britain (The police and the Courts), deliberately deny me the protection of the law, and deliberately block me from seeking a remedy in the courts for crimes and other wrongs committed against me.
That being so, and it IS fact, then that same 'Law' CANNOT be used to punish me.
Indeed, both Police and Courts have themselves committed serious crimes against me, and do so with impunity."
MR PENNY: My Lord, in the circumstances I have no application.
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE: Very well. Thank you, Mr Penny, and thank you, Mr Waldman.