RSPB and DOE setting up falcon breeder's

[Johnjo 0]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

 

Excellent post and thankfully at last the voice of reason and someone who is very perceptive, he has produced nothing new just the product of years of bitterness

Neils evidence was not the evidence that convicted Canning alone, he was tried in a court of law and Judged by a Jury

there is no conspiracy theory just a guilty man trying at all costs to get as he sees it in his eyes............even

I have said before I have given evidence in court against where he stuttered and stammered his way through cross examination of me

I was found to be telling the truth. I do not purport to be the holder of an LLB(hons)but I can assure you I am not a stupid man

Derek Canning has yet to answer my question I know the letter was produced, I was there.

He denies it, he is a liar, he confirms it he is also a liar because he produced at Judicial proceedings a letter which

was found to be false and then was found to be incredible

 

Derek

You are losing this battle but I am sure that you wil try to pursue Neil through other forums, I wish you well with your quest

but the truth has already been established and your questions answered

Edited March 27, 2008 by Johnjo

[Johnjo 0]

Can I just thank the moderators of this site and forum for their time in allowing this thread to run.

It is in the public interest to allow it to be voiced and seen.

 

Had this been the IFF or WFF, it would have been axed by the spineless moderators who dominate them said sites.

 

This way, we all see the truth of the matter.

 

I have been following this thread with interest..as I am sure have many others..I do not know either Derek Canning or Neil Hunter personally but via friends have heard of both..and I thought not to get involved but..some of the things said by annonymous others have in my opinion been cowardly and less than helpful..thrown fuel on the inferno..

 

Trying to look at it from both perspectives..on the face of it there are two people who are both obviously very hurt and very angry because of what they allege the other has done to them..

 

The nature of the allegations initially made by Derek and the subsequent very strong refutation by Neil..which is in total contradiction to what Derek has said would suggest that obviously one of the two is being dishonest..these are irreconcilable differences (of opinion or fact)..two people saying quite the opposite..

 

Derek Canning appears to be trying hard to produce his evidence and lets hope it comes sooner rather than later..if there is any to produce.. Niel Hunter is saying Derek has no credible evidence..Until this unfolds and the full facts are known and established beyond doubt.. let us bystanders try to be more objective about the whole thing and confine ourselves to asking sensible questions of either party..or otherwise not comment..

 

I would suggest that those who have done so already..refrain from making comments such as calling someone a liar or thief or other such libelous and nasty names...or at least if you feel you must resort to this type of claptrap in the hope that it will win a few supporters.. then at least have the bottle to make yourself known via your proper name..any coward can say things sitting at home anonymously behind a keyboard..but acts of this nature smack of fake courage and dishonesty in its zenith..

 

This is obviously a very highly emotive subject for both people concerned..Neil and Derek..both have said unpleasant things about each other which while they may not help reconcile the matter..I would say it is understandable in the circumstances..and at least both have had the integrity to sign and stand publicly behind their own names..I for one am pleased that the Hunting Life Forum had the guts to let the thread run its course..but the sooner this matter is ended the better for everyone..it is impossible on the face of it for any of us to make a judgement on the word or evidence of ether party as it now stands..and besides who are any of us to stand in moral judgement of others..

 

The possibility that Derek may be an egg thief is irrelevent here..as is where the cable tied falcon came from in the first place..forget that..it may be a catalyst in some ways but in other ways it seems to me to be obscuring the facts of this dispute..(if I have read things correctly)..it is what happened afterwards and the conflicting word of two people about the transaction of the falcon that is in dispute..the courts have dealt with the other bits..it is a fact that there are plenty of people wrongfully convicted of crimes every day..likewise..there are plenty of bent policemen in jail..thats also a fact..so the outcome of this could go either way..and so lets wait and see what further undisputable facts unfold..and then lets leave it there..

 

all the best

 

A very fair post. Just to add.Mr Canning was convicted by a jury of the offences.Not just one peregrine was involved but upwards of 20. Mysteriously the parent birds were stolen,from him, just before the raid on his premises. Mr Canning has failed in every attempt to overturn is conviction.He failed in his attempt to sue me civilly for the peregrine I purchased from him. The judge/magistrate in the civil case referred to Mr Canning as a compulsive liar and found in my favour. Mr Canning complained about me, not once, but twice, to my senior officers in the police ,stating I had committed perjury during his trial,even although I was not called to give evidence as my evidence had been accepted. It is impossible to committ perjury without giving evidence.

 

The truth has already been proved.I have nothing to prove,but 15 years on I get contacted to be told I am once again being attacked on a public forum by Derek Canning. It is the same questions that have been asked, and answered time and time again. The answers will not change.

I have answered the Mark Robb situation giving my reasons. That has nothing to do with anyone except me and Mark Robb. I will happily sort it all out with Mark Robb but he is so unreasonable and blinkered that will never happen.

 

All the questions that I have answered on this thread will no doubt be asked again.As far as I am concerned this thread has now run its course and I feel I am banging my head against a brick wall.

 

 

Regards,

Neil Hunter

Neil Hunter you have avoided answering the most fundamental and vital question; did

you tick the registration document to say the bird you received from me was a gift? The answer is yes or no. STOP using your brother and friends as a smoke screen and just answer the question yes or no nothing else really matters; yes or no Neil Hunter

 

 

LET USE SEE A COPY OF WHAT YOU SAID TO YOUR CASE OFFICER AS I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE PHONE CALL WAS MADE.

 

Derek

The judge believed it, if that was a contentious issue, why did you or your defence team not call Neil as a witness at your trial

and accept his evidence. If you had caled him as a witness he could have been questioned about it.

The reply would have been the same, you ticked the box and sent the same green pen to Neil.

 

I am not sure if a statemnt was ever obtained from Simon Liebert, I know what their policy is and if Simon Liebert

failed to note down the phone call I really feel that is an issue only he can answer, perhaps you should contact him.

Neil Hunter you need to explain this. Do not ask you brother to explain Roy Pitt’s email; you need to stand on you two feet. I am the only one supplying documented evidence so the least that you can do is reply personally and stop hiding behind your brother and friend so you do not incriminate yourself

 

Subject: RE: DEREK CANNING

Date: 27/03/2008 15:44:32 GMT Standard Time

From: roy.pitt@animalhealth.gsi.gov.uk

 

 

 

To: DEREKCANNING

 

CC: Chris.Cotterill@animalhealth.gsi.gov.uk, Barry.Ellis@animalhealth.gsi.gov.uk, john.hounslow@animalhealth.gsi.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from the Internet (Details)

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Canning

 

I refer to your further email below. I have spoken to both Lynn Garvey and Simon Liebert, neither of whom can recall any telephone conversations with Neil Hunter about a bird he obtained from you in 1993.

 

I can confirm that we would not advise anyone to make a false claim or declaration. If a keeper made us aware of a discrepancy, it is likely we would suggest they advise us, when they return the registration document, of any circumstances they did not consider reflected the true situation; we would then consider what action, if any, needed to be taken.

 

Roy Pitt

 

________________________________________

From: DEREK CANNING [mailto:DEREKCANNING]

Sent: 27 March 2008 12:32

To: Pitt, Roy (AH)

Subject: DEREK CANNING

 

Look at the letter from Hayley Wharmby who confirms on July 1998 13:50 she can find no recorded of Neil Hunter’s claimed phone call and I have a statement Lynn Garvey that confirms if there was any phone call by anyone complaining about irregularities with a registration document there would be a note made.

 

Now look at what Neil Hunter said about phoning the DOE to complain about me ticking the gift box and that none of the parent ring numbers were on the form and that he had bought a cable tied bird that I had no legally right to sell. In short, if Neil Hunter was telling the truth the DOE would have contacted me and I would have been reported for selling a cabled tied bird at that point in time.

 

 

I will now look for the Magistrate’s acquittal relation to the bird that I gave Neil Hunter.

 

 

See Derek

 

The important word used in their reply is"likely" not saying it did not happen rather than, that should have happened

I cannot remember individual conversations from 15 years ago

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Mr Canning

 

Would you please clarify something for me as I feel I must be missing something here :

 

if the case which involved Mr Hunter and the disputed registration document was dropped against you then why are you trying to get revenge on Mr Hunter for the alleged change of story in this case - should you not be concentrating your efforts on building your case against those who actually allegedly framed you with the resultant jail term?

 

As I say, I may be missing something and would be grateful for clarification.

 

Thanks

 

ps I dont care who is right or wrong in this case and have no great interest in it.

No, not entirely, I am really after the truth and I have every right to have the truth and I want to the world to hear the truth. There is however, an element of revenge in the truth but even if there was not any element of revenge, I would not be acting any different. I understand that this is not your usual my harris hawk had caught a rabbit thread it is far more important and that is why so many people are reading the thread.

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

[Blake 2]

I have read from start to finish this thread so far and i have some questions for Derek Canning:

 

Are you admitting to have stolen peregrines from the wild ? because you dont appear to be defending yourself on this issue, only on the issue of whether you gifted the bird or sold it ?

 

If you wasn't stealing peregrines from the wild, can you explain how you bred so many birds and why you had 2 chicks wrapped in your coat on your car seat when parked near an eyrie, when stopped by police ??

 

I think,if you cant defend youself the thread should be closed, because it is basically a personal vendetta against an ex-policeman who by no fault of his own was instrumental in you getting nicked ??

 

Or is it me that is mentally ill and i'm totally missing something ?

 

 

Please Reply Steve

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

In relation to Mark’s bird.

 

No matter what Neil is stating or how he twists his story around at the end of the day these are the facts:

 

Did Neil take a gyr/peregrine from Mark?

YES

Did Mark tell Neil the price?

YES

Did Neil explain to Mark he was not happy about paying for this bird?

NO

Did Neil drive off with the falcon even though he was not happy with the price?

YES

Did Neil ever explain for Mark he did not wish to pay for the bird?

NO

Did Neil sell the bird?

YES

Did Neil give Mark the money for the bird after he sold it?

NO

Did Mark ever get any money for this falcon from Neil Hunter?

NO

 

So no matter what, Neil did take a falcon, he did agree on the price, he did not tell Mark that he was unhappy with the quoted price, he kept the bird when really he should have returned the bird if he was not happy. Neil has gone back on his word and that is why Mark and Sara called at Neil Very nice home with two very nice cars.

[Johnjo 0]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

 

Another case of you trying to Muddy the waters Derek please answer the question about the letter you produced Derek

 

The question is not going away

[Johnjo 0]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

In relation to Mark’s bird.

 

No matter what Neil is stating or how he twists his story around at the end of the day these are the facts:

 

Did Neil take a gyr/peregrine from Mark?

YES

Did Mark tell Neil the price?

YES

Did Neil explain to Mark he was not happy about paying for this bird?

NO

Did Neil drive off with the falcon even though he was not happy with the price?

YES

Did Neil ever explain for Mark he did not wish to pay for the bird?

NO

Did Neil sell the bird?

YES

Did Neil give Mark the money for the bird after he sold it?

NO

Did Mark ever get any money for this falcon from Neil Hunter?

NO

 

So no matter what, Neil did take a falcon, he did agree on the price, he did not tell Mark that he was unhappy with the quoted price, he kept the bird when really he should have returned the bird if he was not happy. Neil has gone back on his word and that is why Mark and Sara called at Neil Very nice home with two very nice cars.

 

Did Robb fulfill his part of the initial bargain which I witnessed-No

 

you were not there I was, you should know that heresay evidence is not admissable in court Derek, only in exceptional circumstances

Edited March 27, 2008 by Johnjo

[SPAR 2]

I have read from start to finish this thread so far and i have some questions for Derek Canning:

 

Are you admitting to have stolen peregrines from the wild ? because you dont appear to be defending yourself on this issue, only on the issue of whether you gifted the bird or sold it ?

 

If you wasn't stealing peregrines from the wild, can you explain how you bred so many birds and why you had 2 chicks wrapped in your coat on your car seat when parked near an eyrie, when stopped by police ??

 

I think,if you cant defend youself the thread should be closed, because it is basically a personal vendetta against an ex-policeman who by no fault of his own was instrumental in you getting nicked ??

 

Or is it me that is mentally ill and i'm totally missing something ?

 

 

Please Reply Steve

 

was this your case Derek

 

Main

sampling

data

 

6-Jul-93 Case revolved around 12 1992 and 12 1993 peregrine

offspring, 20 of which were DNA profiled. No parents

available for DNA testing (claimed to have been stolen)

but results showed that claimed sibling groups contained

unrelated birds and that at least 5 female parents, rather

than the claimed two, were needed to produce the 20

offspring tested. A further four untraced offspring were

all believed of wild origin.

 

May-95 COTES 18 months

imprisoment

 

POLICE (RSPB)

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

In relation to Mark’s bird.

 

No matter what Neil is stating or how he twists his story around at the end of the day these are the facts:

 

Did Neil take a gyr/peregrine from Mark?

YES

Did Mark tell Neil the price?

YES

Did Neil explain to Mark he was not happy about paying for this bird?

NO

Did Neil drive off with the falcon even though he was not happy with the price?

YES

Did Neil ever explain for Mark he did not wish to pay for the bird?

NO

Did Neil sell the bird?

YES

Did Neil give Mark the money for the bird after he sold it?

NO

Did Mark ever get any money for this falcon from Neil Hunter?

NO

 

So no matter what, Neil did take a falcon, he did agree on the price, he did not tell Mark that he was unhappy with the quoted price, he kept the bird when really he should have returned the bird if he was not happy. Neil has gone back on his word and that is why Mark and Sara called at Neil Very nice home with two very nice cars.

aitken_1.bmp

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

In relation to Mark’s bird.

 

No matter what Neil is stating or how he twists his story around at the end of the day these are the facts:

 

Did Neil take a gyr/peregrine from Mark?

YES

Did Mark tell Neil the price?

YES

Did Neil explain to Mark he was not happy about paying for this bird?

NO

Did Neil drive off with the falcon even though he was not happy with the price?

YES

Did Neil ever explain for Mark he did not wish to pay for the bird?

NO

Did Neil sell the bird?

YES

Did Neil give Mark the money for the bird after he sold it?

NO

Did Mark ever get any money for this falcon from Neil Hunter?

NO

 

So no matter what, Neil did take a falcon, he did agree on the price, he did not tell Mark that he was unhappy with the quoted price, he kept the bird when really he should have returned the bird if he was not happy. Neil has gone back on his word and that is why Mark and Sara called at Neil Very nice home with two very nice cars.

REFERENCE; PC 95/309 CANNING / IN NEED OF JUSTICE.

 

I HAVE NOW OBTAINED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT REGISTRATION DOCUMENTS THAT AFFIRM I DID NOT SELL THE PEREGRINE FALCONS IN QUESTION.

 

The above was one of the major aspects of my defense that Aitken did not follow, which went against my instructions.

 

Even now Aitken refuses to answer my questions. He has claimed he is immune from suits. It would easy for Aitken just to answer my questions, but he has chose to avoid my questions. This is because he knows he is at fault.

 

Given the fact that you have not help me to secure answers to my questions in relation to Aitken’s Professional misconduct in my defense I have been forced to take legal against to try to secure answers and ultimately justice. To this end could you please furnish me with any case history in relation to barristers being sued. Time is important, therefore I would appreciate if you could expedite the process of imparting the aforesaid information.

 

I have been led to believe from a local judge that there has been recent cases of barristers being sued for not following their clients instructions.

 

The questions below are the questions that I need answering.

 

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE ANSWERED.

I AM TAKING JOHN AITKEN TO COURT TO HAVE THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

 

JOHN AITKEN

 

Given the fact that it was your fault that I did not receive a fair trial I would ask you to show me the most basic respect by answering the following questions. If you cannot then I will be forced to take out a witness summons on you

A public forum is the perfact place to inform the public of the truth, it is no different than a news paper. I will notice how many new people are appearing to try and close this thread. The truth hurts only liars in this case.

[crow wing 0]

I would suggest that those who have done so already..refrain from making comments such as calling someone a liar or thief or other such libelous and nasty names...or at least if you feel you must resort to this type of claptrap in the hope that it will win a few supporters.. then at least have the bottle to make yourself known via your proper name..any coward can say things sitting at home anonymously behind a keyboard..

 

all the best

who are you hiding behind the name CROW WING?

 

I aint hiding behind any name mate..I dont need to...seeing as no one ever puts there name on here I used crow wing as a name for the forum...crow wings being a family of game cocks that we owned and bred for years..

 

I think that you have perhaps misread my post..it was directed at those who have acted anonnymously in an insulting manner toward either party in this dispute..if that applies to you and the hat fits then wear it mate..I cannot remember this being so in any of the comments I have made..however..my name is Frank Duffy and I live in East Durham...so ok..who are you ??

[Johnjo 0]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

In relation to Mark’s bird.

 

No matter what Neil is stating or how he twists his story around at the end of the day these are the facts:

 

Did Neil take a gyr/peregrine from Mark?

YES

Did Mark tell Neil the price?

YES

Did Neil explain to Mark he was not happy about paying for this bird?

NO

Did Neil drive off with the falcon even though he was not happy with the price?

YES

Did Neil ever explain for Mark he did not wish to pay for the bird?

NO

Did Neil sell the bird?

YES

Did Neil give Mark the money for the bird after he sold it?

NO

Did Mark ever get any money for this falcon from Neil Hunter?

NO

 

So no matter what, Neil did take a falcon, he did agree on the price, he did not tell Mark that he was unhappy with the quoted price, he kept the bird when really he should have returned the bird if he was not happy. Neil has gone back on his word and that is why Mark and Sara called at Neil Very nice home with two very nice cars.

REFERENCE; PC 95/309 CANNING / IN NEED OF JUSTICE.

 

I HAVE NOW OBTAINED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT REGISTRATION DOCUMENTS THAT AFFIRM I DID NOT SELL THE PEREGRINE FALCONS IN QUESTION.

 

The above was one of the major aspects of my defense that Aitken did not follow, which went against my instructions.

 

Even now Aitken refuses to answer my questions. He has claimed he is immune from suits. It would easy for Aitken just to answer my questions, but he has chose to avoid my questions. This is because he knows he is at fault.

 

Given the fact that you have not help me to secure answers to my questions in relation to Aitken’s Professional misconduct in my defense I have been forced to take legal against to try to secure answers and ultimately justice. To this end could you please furnish me with any case history in relation to barristers being sued. Time is important, therefore I would appreciate if you could expedite the process of imparting the aforesaid information.

 

I have been led to believe from a local judge that there has been recent cases of barristers being sued for not following their clients instructions.

 

The questions below are the questions that I need answering.

 

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE ANSWERED.

I AM TAKING JOHN AITKEN TO COURT TO HAVE THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

 

JOHN AITKEN

 

Given the fact that it was your fault that I did not receive a fair trial I would ask you to show me the most basic respect by answering the following questions. If you cannot then I will be forced to take out a witness summons on you

A public forum is the perfact place to inform the public of the truth, it is no different than a news paper. I will notice how many new people are appearing to try and close this thread. The truth hurts only liars in this case.

 

How are you getting on with that Derek, shame everybody wrong but you. Show me a copy of the instruction you gave your Solicitor

 

Also there does not appear to be a date on this correspondence

 

Thanks Derek you are painting a fuller picture of yourself now and I am sure people will be able to make their own mind up

as to your credibility

Edited March 27, 2008 by Johnjo

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

There is no such thing as 'justice via a forum'..and nor should there be!! Forums have no right to make decisions in legal matters and the hobby of 'trial by forum' is one that I don't subscribe to.

I do have some knowledge of 'stalking' though...and I personally think that's what we're dealing with here.

I take no side in this matter and know none of the parties involved...but there must surely come a point when the constancy of one man's attempt to pursue another man, across as many forums as possible in a veangeful attempt to malign him, becomes a matter of great concern to those who allow it to happen.

An earlier comment was made to the effect that weak moderation meant this issue only briefly glimpsed the light of day on other forums. I believe it to have been a strength to deny centre stage to anyone who seeks to publicly debate an issue that has been decided by the courts..and can only be reconsidered on the submission of new evidence.

 

 

...Rene.

Hello I Kennelre was wondering when you would turn up. You were the one that stopped my threads on the other Forum.

In relation to Mark’s bird.

 

No matter what Neil is stating or how he twists his story around at the end of the day these are the facts:

 

Did Neil take a gyr/peregrine from Mark?

YES

Did Mark tell Neil the price?

YES

Did Neil explain to Mark he was not happy about paying for this bird?

NO

Did Neil drive off with the falcon even though he was not happy with the price?

YES

Did Neil ever explain for Mark he did not wish to pay for the bird?

NO

Did Neil sell the bird?

YES

Did Neil give Mark the money for the bird after he sold it?

NO

Did Mark ever get any money for this falcon from Neil Hunter?

NO

 

So no matter what, Neil did take a falcon, he did agree on the price, he did not tell Mark that he was unhappy with the quoted price, he kept the bird when really he should have returned the bird if he was not happy. Neil has gone back on his word and that is why Mark and Sara called at Neil Very nice home with two very nice cars.

REFERENCE; PC 95/309 CANNING / IN NEED OF JUSTICE.

 

I HAVE NOW OBTAINED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT REGISTRATION DOCUMENTS THAT AFFIRM I DID NOT SELL THE PEREGRINE FALCONS IN QUESTION.

 

The above was one of the major aspects of my defense that Aitken did not follow, which went against my instructions.

 

Even now Aitken refuses to answer my questions. He has claimed he is immune from suits. It would easy for Aitken just to answer my questions, but he has chose to avoid my questions. This is because he knows he is at fault.

 

Given the fact that you have not help me to secure answers to my questions in relation to Aitken’s Professional misconduct in my defense I have been forced to take legal against to try to secure answers and ultimately justice. To this end could you please furnish me with any case history in relation to barristers being sued. Time is important, therefore I would appreciate if you could expedite the process of imparting the aforesaid information.

 

I have been led to believe from a local judge that there has been recent cases of barristers being sued for not following their clients instructions.

 

The questions below are the questions that I need answering.

 

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE ANSWERED.

I AM TAKING JOHN AITKEN TO COURT TO HAVE THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

 

JOHN AITKEN

 

Given the fact that it was your fault that I did not receive a fair trial I would ask you to show me the most basic respect by answering the following questions. If you cannot then I will be forced to take out a witness summons on you

A public forum is the perfact place to inform the public of the truth, it is no different than a news paper. I will notice how many new people are appearing to try and close this thread. The truth hurts only liars in this case.

Kennelre what do you think of Hunter saying that I have sex with my mother on the open forum, that I am a peregrine thief, Mark is a thief and so on? STOP JUST TAKING HIS SIDE AS YOU DID ON THE OTHER FORUM.

[SPAR 2]

Kennelre what do you think of Hunter saying that I have sex with my mother on the open forum, that I am a peregrine thief, Mark is a thief and so on? STOP JUST TAKING HIS SIDE AS YOU DID ON THE OTHER FORUM.

 

You leave my little friend alone Mr Canning Im sure she can stick up for herself but dont use her as an excuse to change the subject.