Blog Posts - Page 5 of 7

Arade Dam Search 23rd May 2023

I am not convinced this search will reveal anything at all about what happened to Madeleine McCann. The area was searched in 2008 and again in 2014. It is a large area to cover with what appears to be a small contingent of Police Officers.

If any evidence is found here connected to Madeleine, then it begs the question, why have millions of pounds of British Tax payers money been made available to the Metropolitan Police for many years? What has that money been spent on?

I suspect there will be good cause to seek permission for a Judicial Review. The decision by the Home Office as to wether to provide further funding to the Met Police, in Madeleines case, is imminent.

Portugal The Algarve is the End Game.

I have always felt, that Madeleine McCann will be found within 30 miles of where she was last seen. Worldwide alleged sighting, in cases like this, simply throw investigators way off track, when the answer very simply, lays very close to where the individual was last seen.

Lady Lucan use to tell me, in her husband’s case, these alleged worldwide sightings were simply, ‘red herrings.’

£1.2 million pounds damages sought claim in progress 2023.

Social media reporting and comments, can be extremely damaging to a business, and an individual, especially if all the facts, are not known to those making such comments.

In 2009 I faced a prosecution under the animal welfare act, brought not by the RSPCA but by the vale of glamorgan council. This action was strangely taken after I had made two formal complaints against a council licensing officer, Amanda Ewington Gape.

I entered not guilty pleas to all summonses. Unfortunately I was then repeatedly poorly advised by my solicitor, Michael Morgan of Vale Solicitors, Llantwit Major, to change some of my pleas to guilty, and plea bargain on the others. Recovering from a breakdown, I eventually, very reluctantly had no option, but to take his professional advice.

Contemporaneous notes taken by the council vet, who was present at my home for the whole five hours, in which the same licensing officer (whom I had made the complaints against) searched my home, were never disclosed to me. The prosecution (the council) had a duty in criminal law to disclose these notes, they never did. Michael Morgan also never asked for these notes. I was not aware of this non compliance until sometime after my case had been concluded in the Magistrates court. I was then shown an email from solicitors representing the council employed vet, in which it states:

‘Mr Crosby has made repeated requests to see these notes. These notes must not be disclosed to Mr Crosby under any circumstances.’

I knew full well, what had been recorded in the contemporaneous notes, during the five hour search of my home, was completely different to what the council vet Mark Evans, then wrote in his report against me five weeks later. Had the council not had this veterinary report then the council would never have been able to prosecute me. I had always cared for all animals, under my control, to the highest of standards over the previous twenty odd years.

The incomplete reporting of this case, and the fact I subsequently felt left with no option, but to change some pleas to guilty, have ever since impacted upon my everyday businesses and personal life.

I was unaware until receiving written Barrister advice on 12th January 2023, that J A Hughes Solicitors, of Barry in the vale of glamorgan, (who were employed to deal with my appeal) had taken my appeal to the wrong court.

The Barristers Advice is very clear, the case should have been taken back to the Magistrate’s court, where an application to vacate the guilty pleas, should have been made, and a date for a trial would have been set down. There has never been a trial in my case.The failure of J A Hughes (now trading as quality Solicitors) to act within the law, is irreparable, and I will have to live with this conviction for the rest of my life.

There is now in process, a substantial claim against J A Hughes. Their professional indemnity insurers, have employed lawyers RPC of Bristol, who have until 30th June 2023, to either admit my claim, deny the claim, or settle my claim without making any admission of guilt. Should it prove necessary for me to issue a claim at the Kings bench, at the High Court, RPC have been advised, that my claim will be for a considerably higher amount.

This is a case, where the continued resurfacing, on social media about this case, and the loss of business I continue to suffer, where those commenting, do not understand, or do not wish to understand the facts, can now greatly enhance my chances, of a successful out come to my substantial claim.

There will soon be a YouTube video on my Channel, about this case called The Truth of The Lie.

Involved in this case are:

Licensing Officer Amanda Ewington Gape (whom I had registered two formal complaints against, and who then illegally obtained a warrant to enter my home, and executed it).

www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk

Mark Evans Valley Vets Cardiff (the vale of glamorgan council vet). www.valleyvets.net

Michael Morgan of Vale Solicitors, Llantwit Major. (Mr Morgan was the solicitor who failed to request disclosure of ‘contemporaneous notes’ taken by both Amanda Ewington Gape, and Mark Evans). This resulted in Mr Morgan advising me on numerous occasions to change some of my pleas to guilty. www.valesolicitors.com

J A Hughes solicitors of Barry (now called Quality Solicitors). They were employed to represent me in my appeal against conviction. According to Barristers advice dated 12th January 2023, J A Hughes should have taken my case back to the Magistrates court, made application to vacate my pleas, and a trial date would then have been set. Most importantly the reason for referral back to the Magistrate’s court, in my case, was because clearly, my guilty pleas were ‘equivocal.’ www.qualitysolicitors.com

RPC Solicitors. Have been instructed by the Professional Indemnity Insurers acting for J A Hughes (Quality solicitors). www.rpc.co.uk

Metropolitan Police (March 2023) Request to Home Office for further funding – Re: Madeleine McCann case.

Numerous requests for such funding, have been made for many years. Total funding of this case to date, is around £13 Million pounds.

Never has such a large amount of funding of tax payers money, ever been available to any other missing person.

In 2019 I considered that it was time then, to seek permission in the Administration Court, at the High Court, to launch a Judicial Review. Unfortunately I could not find a lawyer to take on this enormous challenge, a case which holds unprecedented public interest.

Now in 2023 we hear, a further request for yet more funding, was recently made to the Home Office.

I wrote to the Home Office on the 14th May 2023, as a matter of courtesy, not by any requirement of compliance of pre court protocol, just as a matter of courtesy. I informed them that when they provide further funding to the Metropolitan Police in Madeleine McCanns case, I will be seeking permission from the Court, to be allowed to bring a Judicial Review.

The application will be made on the following two points of Law. That the decision to provide further funding, was ‘irrational’ and there was ‘Procedural Impropriety.’

Did he lie to the High Court?

Mark Evans of Valley Vets Cardiff, based in Gabalfa, worked for the Vale of Glamorgan Council. It was his evidence which caused me, to eventually change my pleas to guilty, in the case pursued against me in 2009. My change of plea, was done on the advice of my former Llantwit Major solicitor.

Now this YouTube video posses the question, did Mark Evans lie in the evidence he gave against me? The statement Mark Evans gave against me in 2011 to the High Court, was never challenged as there was never a Court hearing to do so. The case I attempted to bring against Mark Evans in the High court, was dismissed, as it was ruled Mark Evans owed me ‘no duty of care’ and that he was working for the Vale of Glamorgan council. His duty of care was to the Vale Council.

Had the opportunity been given to me, the question to Mark Evans would have been, if it was his professional opinion, that when he turned up at my home, on the 4th July 2008, that he honestly found an animal in ‘chronic pain and discomfort,’ why nine hours later had he not treated with any pain relief or any medication at all?

I have made repeated attempts to the RCVS Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, asking them to examine the statement Mark Evans gave against me, and they have flatly refused to. Why?

New documents now revealed in this YouTube video, supported by a statement from an Independent vet, now reveal a more sinister aspect to the case prosecuted against me.

Is this Ben Needham?

At the present time, as far as I am aware, there is no actual evidence, to confirm that Ben Needham, is alive or dead.

In 2003 with the consent of Ben’s Mother, Kerry, I set up the very first website featuring Ben’s case. I was very surprised that until I volunteered to help, there was no website up about Ben. It became routine that people would send me many emails and photographs and reported possible sightings, of a person who they believed could be missing Ben Needham. Many of these could be instantly discounted, but one or two stood out.

A lot has happened in recent years, but recently I have been reviewing material sent to me over the years. One of the most significant photographs, is the one featured here. It has never been published before. A copy of this photograph was handed to Kos Police when I again met with them in September 2020. I think it is a very interesting photograph, which has a great resemblance with jaw bone structure, shape of head, styling of hair – when compared with artists impressions created in recent years.

Another reason for my interest in this photograph is the location where it was taken – Turkey. As I stood in the tiny harbour of Kos, looking across the water you can clearly see the white houses, on the coast of Turkey.

What do you think? Do you think this could be Ben?

Reasons why Konstantinos ‘Dino’ Barkas was unlikely to be responsible for Ben Needhams Accidental death.

My new informant (September 2020) tells me that Dino was not present when Ben disappeared.
If Dino was responsible, why having just accidentally killed Ben, (and such a person would be in an absolute state of shock) would that person then walk up to the Farmhouse gate, and remove Ben’s toy cars from the ground? Such a move is not only not comprehendible, but the family say they were sitting the other side of the Farmhouse gate in the kitchen eating their lunch.
If Dino was responsible, he would have been the one to have removed Ben’s wet shorts, which were hanging on a tree branch, again directly outside the Farmhouse gate.
According to South Yorkshire Police, the JCB Dino was operating on the day Ben was last seen, was sold by Dino eighteen years after the disappearance. Why would Dino keep hold of this JCB for so long if it would implicate him in Ben’s death?

The distance we are talking about, to get a prospective on this, Dino would have been twelve feet away from family members, sitting inside the Farmhouse. All that separated Dino and family members, was an open door.

Did the JCB Digger driver Konstantinos ‘Dino’ Barkas really Accidentally kill Ben Needham?

Ben Needham Announcement – 30^th October 2020.

As a Private Investigator who has worked voluntarily on this case since 2003, I have recently returned from a further visit to Greece. Whilst there an informant, unexpectedly gave me interesting information. If verified this would alter the whole direction of this case.

South Yorkshire Police concluded in 2016, it was their professional opinion, that Ben Needham most likely died in an accident, with a mechanical JCB digger, which was operating in the area on the day Ben went missing. Although the driver of the digger, Konstantinos ‘Dino’ Barkas was working near the Farmhouse in Iraklise, where Ben was left to play, the informant has told me, that Dino was actually away from the property, around lunchtime, when it is said Ben disappeared. It was only when he returned to the Farmhouse after lunch, to recommence work, that he became aware that Ben had gone missing. This could be the most significant development in this case to date, if this information checks out.

Madeleine McCann STOP the endless public funding.

The Metropolitan Police have recently (April 2019) applied to The Home Office for yet more public funding in this case.

Madeleine disappeared 12 years ago. To date the British public have donated almost 12 million pounds in the search.

I believe the time has now come for a High Court Judge to consider a request for a Judicial Review. A Judicial Review will seek to ask if it is appropriate for any further PUBLIC funds to be given to the search for Madeleine.

I have instructed a Bristol based solicitor www.watkinssolicitors.co.uk but I need to raise £2,500 for them to commence legal action. If you would like to see a Judge consider a request for a Judicial Review, please support me by pledging a small sum as little as £10. See the following link to support me. We have limited time to raise this small amount of money. The clock is ticking. Please SHARE this post to anyone you think is interested in this case, Thank you.

www.crowdjustice.com/case/madeleine-mccann/

House of Lords appeal ruling

The following House of Lords ruling, likely to be pivotal, in having the case prosecuted against me in 2008 vacated.

“Fairness ordinarily requires that any material held by the prosecution which weakens its case or strengthens that of the defendant, if not relied on as part of its formal case against the defendant, should be disclosed to the defence. Bitter experience has shown that miscarriages of justice may occur where such material is withheld from disclosure. The golden rule is that full disclosure of such material should be made.” (R v H [2004] UKHL 3; [2004] 2 Cr. App. R. 10, House of Lords).

The Vale of Glamorgan Council with held veterinary ‘contemporaneous notes’ knowing full well they were in direct breach of the above House of Lords ruling on disclosure.

«‹ 4 5 6 7 ›