James Colton FIGHTING BACK against false allegations & judicial corruption

Never in the field of English justice have so many been let down by so few!

HOME - My Kafka Trial  - Criminal Case Review Commission - Book Documents - Police Stitch-up - PACE ACT 1984 - The English Quislings


Falsely Accused-Know Your Rights -

Norwich Probation Service -

My Quisling Divorce Fiasco

The ex wife - Bat Out of Hell

Bar Standards Board

Pro - Life advocate

Email: jamescolton1943@gmail.com

Knuckle Dragging Primates of the English Justice System

My Quisling Divorce Fiasco

Intro Video

There was no evidence presented by the accusers supporting their allegations!

I mistakenly believed; any allegation must have some evidence in its support. Under English law, the allegations are the evidence. No evidence is required. The man must prove his innocence. So, when an allegation is made (i.e., Mr Joe Bloggs sexually fondled me between 2000 and 2005), the man must prove he didn't commit this alleged offence in the period given.

District judge Cooper presided over my divorce application. He later made many speculations regarding the allegations. 

  • The burden of proof is on the Wife. It is agreed between the parties that she has to prove the allegations, not beyond reasonable doubt, but on a balance of probabilities.

In law, PROVE does not equate to exculpatory evidence that establishes a fact. Prove means the mind accepts the testimony of the complainants as being reasonable.

District Judge Cooper believed the rantings of my wife and her two daughters. later I was able to challenge District Judge Cooper's reasoning with spectacular results.

How it all works

False allegations are made the defendant can only disprove those allegations with EVIDENCE. It’s a totally fucked up system. Is that true? Well not exactly.

I met one guy who was adamant about his innocence. He told me that because she (stepdaughter) was lying, so would he. Adding if he told the truth, all he could say was "it didn't happen". Off to Crown Court, he went. The jury acquitted him. So we have two liars standing in court telling lies. His lies were better than the stepdaughters.

Tricks of the trade!

Historical Sex Claims

"Will you walk into my parlour?" said a spider to a fly;
" 'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy.
The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I have many pretty things to shew when you are there."
"Oh no, no!" said the little fly, "to ask me is in vain,
For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again."

The orgiginal 1956 Sex Offences Act

1956 heading
56 sex offences act corroborated

The Quislings didn't like this corroborated defence.

So a handful of people changed it.

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 UK Public General Acts 1994 c. 33 Part III Corroboration Section 33

  • 33 Abolition of corroboration requirements under Sexual Offences Act 1956
  • (1) The following provisions of the [1956 c. 69.] Sexual Offences Act 1956 (which provide that a person shall not be convicted of the offence concerned on the evidence of one witness only unless the witness is corroborated) are hereby repealed—

This means any past law can be changed on just a whim by some nefarious person for the sole purpose of getting the result they want. This witch hunt still continues today.