If an internet search is made with my name, a newspaper article sometimes appears.
I am referring to an article written by a reporter present at a Crown court hearing.
I wish to address it by mentioning that I identify with Joseph in the Bible.
I refer to Joseph of the book of Genesis who was rejected by his brothers for a time and, was hidden in prison.
But, he was not in prison for something wrong he had done, but for a faulty system of justice which meant he was nevertheless in prison.
Exactly the same happened to me.
As I said, there is a newspaper article online from a reporter who attended my last sentence hearing in court. They did not attend the trial. No mention is made of the appeal request stated in the hearing (the solicitor involved never filed it and their licence to do Criminal cases was removed from them a few weeks later). Once you are out of time your right of appeal disappears.
There is no recourse to remove the online article after a time, unless you can fund taking the paper to court. I did manage to provide proof of facts that made them alter their article, but it remains incomplete with no mention of an appeal.
So, this article in place with so few aware of how broken and faulty is the English Justice system, and without being asked myself my side of things, in a world where the Accuser (Satan) is believed so often, the Lord not being asked the truth, being hidden like Joseph is part of the current outcome.
Further comment added 16th April 2023.
The above is limited and does not fully reflect my whole experience of miscarriage of justice. I have limited it to what should have reasonably been included also in the article by the reporter present. But, if their qualification to be a reporter following some education and training is real, then at least they should have known that there are 2 sides to every story and, is it not journalism 101 to ask the "other side" to "comment"?
They did not.
Had they had their mind and ear tuned to the greater story available, not only would their ears have pricked up on hearing about the appeal and made them want to know why that had not happened, but also the Judges final comment: (not verbatim, but the gist) "I have taken into account your letters." That would have been worth investigating.
I had provided the judge with a letter to him and a copy of my letter to the Magistrates to rectify their mistake - in English law, there is no time limit on Magistrates to rectify their mistake/s and quash/overturn their own conviction decision - and the letter contained the mistakes: the errors in the carriage of justice up to that point.
The reporter would have had access to those had I been asked my side of the story.
I provided the publisher of the article with those letters and other materials that proved the appeal request I had made in time. The manager still felt no obligation to pull the article from being online and instead, with this information here in view, the article remains there as a testimony to the shoddy and cheap reporting involved.
For the full story of my miscarriages of justice