In a High Court ruling this week, Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) lost a judicial review attempting to force the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to prosecute a pro-Palestinian leader, Nazim Ali, for a speech given by Ali after the Grenfell Tower fire. Possibly a determining factor in the outcome of my appeal next month, the full ruling can be read here.
Ben Weich in this week’s edition of the Jewish Chronicle confirms the gist of my previous post: police have received yet another vexatious complaint from the usual suspects and are therefore obliged to fulfil their duty and investigate my heretical comments regards Claude Lanzmann’s Shoah. On and on it goes…
Today, I would like to comment on the atrocious double standards being applied by the English court system when it comes to so-called ‘hate crime’. I will return to foreign justice systems in a future article, specifically dealing with the current plights of Ursula Haverbeck and the Schaefer siblings in Germany (not forgetting Horst Mahler and Gerhard Ittner), as well as that of Canadian free speech advocate, Arthur Topham.
Following news yesterday of the death of French Jewish filmmaker Claude Lanzmann, aged 92, I received notification via my inbox that a French small ads website (similar to GumTree) was in trouble for hosting an ad for a shower head purportedly coming from Auschwitz. The ad was removed: apparently someone felt grossly offended and complained. But what if the shower head was real? We know there were showers at Auschwitz – we saw them in Schindler’s List. Surely some ‘Holocaust’ museum would pay a hefty sum for such a rare object which could then artfully be put on display, i.e. ‘Gas vent intended for distribution of Zyklon B disguised as a shower head, never used as a gas vent’?
Over the past few days, seven opinion pieces have been published by lamestream media. With the possible exception of Spiked’s Fraser Myers, all are penned by Jews, with two written by Gideon Falter, chairman of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), the man who originally brought the private criminal prosecution against me which led to last week’s guilty verdict for causing offence by uploading songs to my Tell Me More Lies blog and to YouTube.
My YouTube channel is now no longer available in the UK – presumably the same applies in other European ‘free, democratic’ states. I’m told that a well-meaning message appears when trying to access my videos: ‘This channel is no longer available, you can unsubscribe here’.
Ah well. I guess I should consider myself lucky that my channel does at least still exist everywhere else – unlike Richie Allen’s.
My critics are certainly spending vast amounts of time, energy and money trying to silence me.
But not all of them!
Above: the famous Schwarzbadturm, Nordpier mit Sonnenrad
By Robert Henderson
[AC: Many thanks to Robert for this account of last week’s Trial Part 1. Robert is no stranger to the negative effects of the UK’s speech laws. For more information, check out his blogs in the links below.]
The trial of Alison Chabloz day 1 – 10 1 2018
Presiding: District Judge John Zani sitting without a jury
Karen Robinson – Prosecuting counsel
Adrian Davies – Defence counsel
Witnesses for the Prosecution
Gideon Falter, chairman of the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA)
Stephen Silverman Director of Investigations and Enforcement CAA
As far as I am aware, I am the only artist in modern British history to have been jailed for the heinous crime of composing and singing satirical songs which I uploaded to the Internet.
In four weeks time, my trial will take place in London and the three songs concerned will be screened in court. Two clips will show songs from my appearance at The London Forum in September 2016 in front of an audience of roughly 100 people who, considering the standing ovation I received at the end, clearly enjoyed my performance. The third clip is of a song which contains the word SATIRE in the title, which leads me to the point of this blog post.
By and large, the general public accepts the given narrative of WW2. The victors get to write history, thereafter ensuring that their version of events is reinforced by way of education, media and, in particular, the funding of onside lawmakers who will eventually be persuaded to bring about legislation that will effectively silence dissenting views. Here in the UK, my court case proceedings show that we are teetering on the brink of a ‘Holocaust’ denial law, as it were, being ushered in through the back door. Nevertheless, if I am found guilty in January, the appeal process will be used, if necessary to the highest level. A brief update of Monday’s hearing can be found here.
Firstly, a huge thank you to the 25 brave souls who turned up at yesterday’s hearing in support. Thanks also to those of you who weren’t able to be there but sent messages and donations.
It was a great boost to see familiar, friendly faces in the public gallery vastly outnumbering the opposition. Indeed, as proceedings began, we were informed of a request made by Crown key witnesses, CAA’s Gideon Falter and Stephen Silverman. Both men had originally intended to be present in the public gallery yet neither turned up. Instead, CAA minion, Anthony Orkin, was again in attendance with just a couple of others, including the man seen on the far left of the photo below:
Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Antisemitism along with representatives of other Jewish organisations including Shomrim held a meeting last week in London with Labour’s Hardyal Dhindsa, Derbyshire Police and Crime Commissioner, to discuss hate crime.
Perhaps the fact that Derbyshire Constabulary last week finally returned my laptop is one of the reasons why Falter and Silverman failed to turn up? Who knows? But in light of the CPS barrister’s announcement, both were highly conspicuous by their absence.
The Crown also requested that my barrister, Adrian Davies, be the first to present submissions in relation to the complex legal arguments surrounding my case. As already explained, the charges (now five) which I face concern sending or causing to be sent a grossly offensive message under the Communications Act. I won’t go into much detail here. Suffice it to say that I was brilliantly defended by Mr Davies.
After hearing both sets of submissions, Judge Zani informed the court that he would give a decision in writing after studying the points of law discussed. He also scheduled yet another preliminary hearing on November 20th when his decision will be made public. The judge also made it clear that, at this current stage of events, he would still be inclined to keep the January 10th trial date.
Judge Zani explained that the reason for still wishing a trial to go ahead would be to hear my case not only on points of law (whether sharing a URL constitutes an offence under the Act) but also on facts, namely, the content of my songs. I, for one, shall look forward to the Crown’s star witness coming to the defence of Irene Zisblatt, Elie Wiesel, Otto Frank and the already-debunked war propaganda lies of Jews being turned into bars of soap, etc., etc.
It is quite strange to consider that in the case of Judge Zani agreeing with the Defence submission and therefore ruling that I would not have committed any offence under the Act, I may nevertheless still be sent to trial. However, the judge’s decision in this matter, quite rightly, is meant to avoid further eventual hearings pending appeals. If the judge agrees with the Crown’s submission concerning points of law, then I can and will appeal.
Judge Zani then went on to discuss bail conditions. The Crown – no doubt under pressure from the usual suspects – unsuccessfully tried to impose tighter address restrictions. Mr Davies also announced our intent to sue for abuse of process following my arrest and detention earlier this month.
My arrest and subsequent charge for yet another of my songs was the result of a witness statement made by former Zionist Federation co-vice chair, Jonathan Hoffman, who – as we saw last July – has already attempted to prejudice my case on more than one occasion. As a result of Mr Hoffman’s interference, the Crown announced yesterday that he would not make a credible witness. Key evidence relating to the new charge is now solely confined to a similar statement made by Stephen Silverman aka Bedlam Jones. On this matter, I shall leave readers to make up their own minds.
For some real discussion of my case and seeing as the Mainstream is failing in its task to inform the British public of this highly newsworthy event, I shall again be a guest on tonight’s edition of Radio Aryan’s Daily Traditionalist with Matthew Heimbach and Florian Geyer. The show starts at 5 pm BST and, hopefully, the audio quality this time will enable listeners to better hear my story. Big thanks to Sven Longshanks for organising this.
Another important case concerning our Cause begins next Monday October 30th, 1.30 pm at the same magistrates court in London for Jez Turner‘s preliminary hearing. The more people who turn out in support the better. Wear a pair of sunglasses and eventually a hat if you are afraid of photographers.
This morning, 10 am, I received notification from my solicitor that I am no longer required to attend tomorrow’s hearing at Westminster Magistrates Court.
Apologies for any inconvenience to those of you who may be travelling to London specially for the occasion.
A brief explanation is in order.
During the last hearing in July, District Judge Zani set two dates, October 4th and 25th. The latter was originally intended for legal argument. Tomorrow’s hearing was intended to clarify counsels’ position regards the prosecution expert witness statement relating to whether or not sharing a hyperlink constitutes sending an offensive message under the 2003 Communications Act.
In court, I was told by the judge that although I was not obliged to attend on the 4th, I was welcome to do so if I so wished.
However, shortly after July’s hearing, I received a hard copy summons by post to my address for the hearing of October 4th. As I have not yet been asked to enter a plea concerning the new charges brought against me by the Crown, my assumption was that I had been summonsed for this purpose. Last week, my solicitor confirmed that I would be required to attend.
Now, a day before the scheduled hearing, the judge has declared that I am no longer required to attend.
As I am already in London, I shall nevertheless be at the rendez-vous point tomorrow morning to meet anyone who made the effort to come and support me.
The coffee is on me!
Next hearing will be October 25th (possible trial that day or to be scheduled at a later date depending on the outcome of legal arguments).
Thank you for your ongoing support which is truly appreciated.
Kind regards to all,