I started a post on Jason Packer and Steven George many months ago. That post has been bogged down as my investigations uncovered linked crimes over Hampshire. My illness cfs/me intervened, which makes it more difficult to join the dots and so that article has been very delayed. To partially make up for this I now publish this account from Steven George, which details the harassment and actions taken by powerful people against whistleblowers.
THE WHOLE HYPOCRISY IN NINE YARDS OR LESS. BY STEVEN GEORGE.
(THREE GROSS MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE.)
When someone is on the sex offenders register, the general public think they are safer because of it. Juries believe the same in general also, and consider that their verdicts are fair, based on the facts. There is a big but here, what if the Jury were given entirely false information? If everything they were seeing a lie?
In the cases I am going to describe, that is exactly the point.
On January 18th 2014 , Mr Jason Packer, shared through a file sharing system, a report by Nigel Pascoe, a QC, his findings on the events, surrounding the then MP Mike Hancock for Portsmouth South, the texts and conversations with a vulnerable female who went to Mike Hancock for help.
In the report, which Mr Pascoe did not want kept secret, he says that he considers the events to have happened, and suggests the complaint by “Annie”, was correct.
On February 11th, 2014 Police raided the home of Mr Packer, and arriving at 6.56 a.m. they went up stairs,and at approx 6.58 a.m. turned the computer on, and inserted a USB stick.
On a search and seizure, like this, to turn on and use the computer to be taken, is totally against accepted protocol.
Mr Packer was raided by, DC 3899 Hibberd, DS 2694 Mears, PC 2195 Dunlop, PC 21582 Langford, and PC 20698 Lonergan.
It is DS Mears who is thought to have used the computer at this time. Whichever Police Officer it was, they opened files and remarked on finding the Pascoe Report online prior to turning it off, they were seen doing this by Mr Packer himself.
Mike Hancock has while a Councillor, and as an MP, historically used Police to intimidate, others.
On April 5th 2014 Mike Hancock phoned Mr Packer’s own home, that he shared with Steven George, and on the phone described his arrest, and the type of files he was to be charged with, to Mr George, up to 5 months before any charges were in place.
A subtle fact noticed by Mr George, that Mike Hancock also called Mr Packer, “POCKER OR PUCKER,” in the same manner Police did at the door earlier, on February 11th 2014!
When Mr Packer was in custody on February 11th 2014, he was given the opportunity to see, Solicitors. The Solicitors who were assigned to him, were Saulet and Ashworth, these were Mike Hancock”s own Solicitors, and they had therefore a massive conflict of interest.
This system allows for Solicitors to withdraw, and for the defendant to find another representative, as in this case in question, they should not have represented him, but not only did they do so, but they turned up on simple bail returns, when Mr Packer was bailed without charge, a service they are not normally paid for, using the legal aid system, it is to my mind, interesting that they did turn up, only when said bail change etc, would one expect any Solicitor to turn up, normally.
In his first interview they were of no help at all, and later, when Mr Packer was charged in August 2014, they sat in silence, telling him he was going to prison, and he may be attacked there, before his filmed interview.
Their advice “Just Talk”!! Of course they wanted the Pascoe Report kept out of public view, at all costs for Mike Hancock, and had no interest in helping the man who put it online!
This same interview was used in Court as part of his trial on August 24th, 2015. It should not have been, as it now constituted an illegal interview really. Saulet and Ashworth later, defending Mr Hancock ,found the Pascoe Report meant in that trial, Mike Hancock was forced to apologise, and he ended up stepping down as a Councillor. Then Mr George stood against him in local elections in 2014, and Mr Packer stood against Mike Hancock”s wife. It is thought that these actions angered Mike Hancock even more, especially when he was finally forced to stop being an MP.
The trial itself was a complete farce, in Mr Packer”s case.
To begin with, prior to the trial Mr Packer had found out, who Saulet and Ashworth were, so he got new Solicitors, BINDMANS in London.
The Barrister assigned to him, a female, began by going to the prosecution, and trying to broker a deal , for a 5 year sentence, despite Mr Packer not giving permission for her to do this, and when he intended to plead NOT guilty!
He had to change his Solicitors again, so he got Hodge Jones and Allen.
They got an image review done which looked at the calibre of the 18 charges. This is when he became aware, that he was being charged with a legal Horror film, and adults described as children!
He also was denied the right to see and discuss the files he was charged with, as with any other defendant, he did not see any of them, until his trial.
So he was working blind. The new Barrister might not have been there at all, for all the good he actually did, Phillip Romans.
First of all they showed the horror film, to the Jury. Called “The Serbian Film”, it was made in 2010, released in 2011 and though banned in Brazil, the ban was lifted 2012, and was screened, it has never been the subject of a ban in the UK, it is NOT a crime to own all of it, or part of it, it is rated NC-17, and is available from Amazon to buy in its full uncut version.
It is no worse than many other horror movies of today, such as the “SAW” franchise,The “Halloween” horror selections and many others.
I would add now that Mr Packer did not download any of the files he was charged with, more on that point in a moment.
The Serbian Film was described to the Jury as a Specialist Snuff Movie, no proof of that has ever been offered, from 2015 until 2017, nor could it be, in the light of what it actually is anyway!
It was accepted as a snuff movie, by Phillip Romans the Barrister, who did very little throughout the whole trial, he even later simply did not bother to turn up for sentencing hearing twice. The prosecution ensured that the image review, which said what it actually was, was never seen by the Jury, throughout the trial. Indeed the Jury saw not one piece of defence material throughout the entire trial.
The Judge , Recorder Frank Abbott, an expert in search and seizure procedures, simply allowed these total lies to remain, before the Jury. The clip shown, even had SCREENER COPY, printed on the lower part of the clip, which means this same clip, had been sent to censors for certification!
Of the 18 charges, only three to four images were as described, all of the others were legal pornography, “Adults” described to the Jury as children.
The law states a person must be 18 years or over to be legally on pornography sites, these females were fully developed, and on sites which declared they were of age, there was no evidence offered by the prosecution , which established actual age, indeed a passport check on one file, known as “Cammies First Time”, had been done, proving all were 18 years or over, but even this file was presented to the jury as a child.
During the trial, when “John Harrison,” Police expert, gave his evidence, it was revealed that the computer was not in operation before June 1st 2013, yet all the files Mr Packer was charged with, were apparently downloaded, through this specific Windows 7. 6.1 computer Shareaza file sharing programme, beginning in 2010, and ending in 2012!
I would add that during questioning by Mr Meredith,of the prosecution, it became clear that Mr Packer could not have therefore done any of it, but the trial continued, and the obvious, ignored, until the Jury found him guilty, on all but one count, which was a second horror film, a Zombie movie this time, as yet unknown, it lies on file.
On a sentencing hearing, on November 2nd, a document, which detailed the horror film, and four other files, of adults and their history, places on the web etc, the document was given to the Court, before November 2nd, and to Mr Meredith, on November 2nd, and to a journalist reporting Mr Packer”s case. Steven George gave a copy of the document, to the Journalist, and Mr George was duly charged with distribution, of One Image of a Child.
This document was given with other evidence showing that Mr Packer was innocent, this was of course ignored.
At his trial also, two Police Officers were sent to the Shoreham Air Crash, they were not therefore cross examined, and a DC Gunner who aged the images as being all children, was off sick, and also did not appear to give her evidence to the Jury.
If one puts together all the legal errors, which we believe not be errors at all, but quite deliberate evasions, and false representation by Police and the CPS, one is left with the belief, that a gross, and deliberate miscarriage of justice has deliberately been perpetrated, against Mr Packer.
From the end of September , Mr Packer repeatedly asked for his transcript of the trial.
Judge Hethrington wrote a letter, in November 2015 saying that he could not have his transcript unless he paid for it himself, it was over £2k, he was on benefits, and then gave a series of rules, such as he must collect himself from the court, or have it in prison.
It took until 2017 until he finally got it, two years out of time for an appeal.
Indeed, the Courts said that Mr Packer, had in July 2016, been given his transcript, in a letter to Flick Drummond, the MP, we asked to help us get the transcript.
This prompted it finally being sent, to Mr Packer’s home in 2017.
All of this we believe was done entirely , to cover up what had been done.
Mr Packer spent six months in prison and was then released.
Now we come to what happened,a second miscarriage of justice began, as a direct result of the first.
An attempt to return Mr Packer to prison. He was released on June 20th 2016. After finally being sent to prison, on December 21st, 2015, by Judge Frank Abbott, who at the hearing once more described the legal horror movie, as a crime.
Mr Packer was also placed on the Sex Offenders Register for ten years.
In September 2015, Mr Packer researched the files on the document handed to the court. He did so in full view of Police, on a monitored computer he bought, in March 2014 to replace his old one taken in February 2014.
PSI Matthew Lawn a MAPPA Officer, meant to help Sex Offenders, in the Community etc, visited Mr Packer at home on the 26th September, and saw the research, and a copy of the legal DVD, THE SERBIAN FILM, at a later point in October, which Mr Packer purchased after his conviction, it took two days to arrive from Amazon.
Matthew Lawn commented that the horror film was not a crime, and that the files identified on the document, afore mentioned were adults and legal.
Matthew Lawn however, waited from after his release from prison , until the same day Mr George returned bail, when he charged Mr George with One Count of distribution of a child, on August 30th 2016. He then arrested Mr Packer, and attempted to get him remanded, the next day, for images in the cache, created in 2015, having taken also the computer, on November 18th 2015, that Mr Packer bought in March 2014.This was not successful.
In 2017 two years later, Mr Packer was on trial for three images from the created cache, and
One image from the document, which was “Cammies First Time” , a known adult and legal, once more described as a child, to the Jury!
During this trial, Matthew Lawn pretended he had not seen the computer until October 8th, 2015, said it was the first time he had met Mr Packer then, and despite e mails to Solicitors describing his comment on the legality of the files in question, on the document, and letters to CPS written at the end of September 2015, he described the computer as a new one, and lied about the earlier visits.
When after 7 hours the Jury found him guilty of three images from the cache he had neither seen nor clicked on, (apparently now if the computer has it, it is a crime anyway, which seems to me to be ridiculous, as no one can be held accountable for everyone else”s films and comments. Only now one is!) The CPS did not re-present the one adult, they called a child, anyway, which surprised the defence Barrister.
On sentencing Mr Packer got 18 months suspended for two years.
In this trial, Matthew Lawn described, yet again, the horror movie charges and all the other false charges to the Jury, in his first conviction, but Mr Packer was limited to this new case, due to legal aid rules for his Barrister, so he could be represented.
Once more the law worked entirely for the prosecution, who could bring up the first case as if he were guilty, to the Jury, who as a result, judged him by that first case, not knowing or understanding the reality of it, and found him guilty, on this second case.
In May, 2017, Steven George was not allowed to bring in evidence to show that the one image, was likely to be an adult, and was forced to plead guilty, all of the evidence about the files, and this one image, were deemed by QC Parker, acting as Judge in his case, as not admissable, so without representation, Mr George was forced to plead guilty, as he felt unable to fight his case without fresh legal advice.
His McKenzie friend was not allowed .
Now he is on the Sex Offenders register for One year, although he did get, a conditional discharge, and it was agreed there was no sexual motivation, in handing the document , to the journalist.
So, out of entirely false allegations, done to silence a whistleblower it seems, from putting a report on line, came three convictions, of two people. Both Mr Packer, and Mr George, believe that the files were actually placed on the computer by the USB stick, in the first place, by Police,on February 11th 2014, and the dates changed, of the upload from the USB stick, which is very simple to do.
One must note it is also thought the USB stick, is likely to be a training stick, used by Police, for recruits, to understand the difficulty of finding files which , are, or are not legal, and the manner in which they appear online. One file in particular had almost every word, one might search for, when seeking illegal material in its title alone. No self respecting criminal would thus leave such an entitled file on their computer, unless they wished to get into trouble!
Its title saying things like “Under age,pre teen,kiddie porn,barely legal, “on just one line, the titles were many, on this one file.
The first thing would have been a name change, for a genuine offender.
It is therefore, with all the evidence we now have, which also supports a nine minutes of computer use, in the transcript, during the search on February 11th 2014, an overwhelming case for Mr Packer and Mr George to finally be exonerated.