Empowerment Monday
10
By now Mr. Grant had also received a reply to his complaint from Buckingham Palace, written on behalf of the Queen. It is clear from that letter that the Queen could not intervene directly. However, she instructed that Mr. Grant’s letter of complaint be sent direct to the former Head of the Judiciary, Lord Irvine. The letter from Buckingham Palace also confirmed Lord Irvine’s awareness of his case. Lord Irvine’s failure to act on the issues raised in his complaint allowed the corruption to spread out of control and because he was the Head of the Judiciary Mr. Grant was denied the right to be heard by an impartial, independent Tribunal, the basic principles of fairness. In September 1998 Mr Grant reissued his writ, this time there were four Defendants, Bindman & Partners for reasons already given, the Solicitors Indemnity Fund, the Hospital responsible for subjecting him to mental torture and the Hospital responsible for deliberately over prescribing him antidepressants. Alan Toulson, or his firm, went back to his brother to have Mr. Grant’s writ struck out, again unlawfully. In an effort to break him once and for all, RPC also alleged that Mr. Grant had breached their unlawful injunction. In February 1999 Mr. Justice Toulson conducted a hearing, in Mr. Grant’s absence, without legal representation and without his knowledge, prosecuted by his brother or his brother’s law firm. At the conclusion of that unlawful hearing, Justice Toulson ordered that Mr Grant should go to Prison and serve 6 months for Contempt of Court
14 month old Prince Anthony Grant who died of Dehydation after being left unattended with no fluids whilst in care of Kings College Hospital NHS Trust Sometime in April 1999 Mr. Grant was presented before Mr. Justice Buckley. He ordered that if he agreed to see the Prison Medics he would consider releasing him, but he was afraid and untrusting of his order. Mr. Grant did not then, nor currently, have a mental problem. He had not committed any crime or been convicted for any crime. According to the Judge, his imprisonment was for contempt of Court and did not see or understand what his stage of mind had to do with wanting his release from unlawful imprisonment.