Mick Stott Explaining the Criminal Complaint Initiative and the Law Behind It
Next Saturday 20th of March, a representative of the UK Freedom Alliance is going to be filing a criminal complaint. This will be delivered to a central London police station on Saturday when many groups have stated their intention to gather in Central London. They will be there to protest the problems this country is in due to the draconian rules we have had to endure due to the unnecessary “lockdowns”, in which, most of our inalienable rights have been infringed upon. As I write this post the government are looking to introduce new unlawful statutes that will curtail further on our rights to Free Speech and our right to Assemble making us into an authoritarian police state.
In a series of posts, we are going to outline how you can join with the members of the UK Freedom Alliance, using the template I will publish online, to make your own complaint with us at a police station in London on the 20th of March 2021.
You personally do not have to go into the police station as we will be collecting all your envelopes at a point in Central London very close to the police station where we are going to be handing in the central complaint with 815 pages of evidence.
The more people we can get to do this on the day the better it will be for obvious reasons. The more people that hand in individual complaints the more likely they are going to take it seriously. By doing it this way, all of us can use the 815 pages of evidence we have gathered to add gravity to every single individual complaint. They can ignore the individual and lose things but if thousands are all connected to a central body of evidence the harder it is for them to do that.
I will now explain under which laws we are going to hold the government accountable.
The Law Behind Our Complaint
We will all be making the same criminal complaint to make it consistent because this makes it simpler to process, easier for them to file and easier to investigate for the police. We will all be making criminal complaint of Misfeasance and Misconduct in Public Office against the Government of the United Kingdom. Saying we believe that the government are responsible for wilfully and knowingly causing us all the loss, injury, harm that will be detailed in each individual complaint.
Misfeasance in Public Office
“A public official acting in contravention of their authority, resulting in loss, harm, injury, financial loss or damage to a third party. Knowingly and willingly act in a manner with the realisation that their actions are likely to cause harm, injury or loss”
THE ACTION BY THE GOVERNING BODY IS LEGAL AND WITHIN THE LAW, BUT IS DEEMED ILLEGAL IF IT IS PERFORMED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO CAUSE HARM OR LOSS OR INJURY TO ANOTHER.
Misconduct in Public Office
“A public officer acting as such wilfully neglects to perform his duties and/or wilfully misconducts himself, to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder, without reasonable excuse or justification”
BEHAVIOUR OR CIRCUMSTANCES CREATE AN OFFENCE THAT ARE DEEMED CRIMINAL, WITHOUT THE NEEED FOR A SPECIFIC OFFENCE.
1. The government reacted excessively to the pandemic in comparison with similar levels of death in previous years caused by influenza and extreme bad weather. Their response continues to be disproportionate to the risk to the general public and is out of proportion when data about COVID-19 is compared to other infectious diseases and their response.
2. The government knowingly used, and continues to use, testing protocols that are not fit for purpose, misrepresenting their effectiveness and their results and using those results to justify measures such as lockdowns
3. The government continues to use lockdowns as its primary method of attempting to control the spread of the virus, despite the World Health Organisation stating they do not recommend them. They failed to consider the knock-on effects of lockdown either before the first lockdown or afterwards while implementing further local and national lockdowns
4. The government, NHS and PHE have focused entirely on dealing with COVID-19 to the detriment of providing screening, diagnostics and treatment other conditions, leading to avoidable loss of life and loss of quality of life
5. The government repeatedly stated that the evidence on the effectiveness of masks and face coverings was weak and did not support their use by healthy members of the public – yet has mandated face coverings in most public spaces.
6. The government and their scientific advisers have misrepresented data and selectively used data to support their preferred political position, to deliberately scare or confuse the public
7. The government has ignored and continues to ignore advice, recommendations and cautions from the wider scientific and medical communities in favour of narrow view of SAGE members
8. The government is relying on the opinions of scientific advisers with significant conflicts of interest and have awarded huge contracts relating to the pandemic response to friends, political supporters, colleagues and associates without proper tender process or parliamentary oversight
9. The government continue to use measures that have been deemed unlawful in courts in other countries
Assertions Made and the Evidence Overview
Assertion 1 – The government knowingly used, and continues to use, testing protocols that are not fit for purpose, misrepresenting their effectiveness and their results and using those results to justify measures such as lockdowns.
1. A Freedom of Information Request to the Department of Health & Social Care regarding RT-PCR tests (2 pages)
2. A video clip of the inventor of the RT-PCR method stating it cannot tell if you are sick or not (1 page)
3. A video clip in which Dr Anthony Fauci explains that beyond a cycle threshold of 35, it is impossible to culture virus from the sample i.e. no active infection just viral debris (1 page)
4. NHS standard operating procedure for RT-PCR tests showing that cycle threshold of 40 is used (31 pages)
5. A video clip in which Boris Johnson admits the test only works 7% of the time (1 page)
6. A video clip in which Dominic Raab state PCR tests are not accurate (1 page)
7. An article by Dr Michael Yeadon ex Head of Research at Pfizer explaining the dangers of false positives when there is low prevalence of the virus (10 pages)
8. A study by Cohen Kessel & Milgroom on the dangers of over-reliance on positive PCR tests for diagnosis (11 pages)
9. The results of a mass testing programme in Wuhan after lockdown which shows asymptomatic positive results are not infectious (7 pages)
10. A government guide to the public about COVID-19 tests which mentions false negatives but fails to mention false positives (6 pages)
11. A British Medical Journal article showing that the new lateral flow tests for mass testing of people without symptoms are not fit for purpose (1 page)
12. The judgement of the Lisbon Court of Appeal stating that RT-PCR tests cannot be relied upon and forcing someone to isolate as a result of a positive test is false imprisonment. (24 pages)
13. Instructions for use of the RT-PCR test issued by the CDC – Page 39 clearly states that no quantified virus isolates were available when the test was developed in February 2020. Therefore the test cannot detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus, only strings of RNA/DNA that must be present in other viruses in order for them to have been available to create the assays for. The document has been revised several times yet no update to stay new assays have been developed once SARS-CoV-2 virus isolates were available. (59 pages)
14. A British Medical Journal article stating that the government’s Operation Moonshot testing proposals are scientifically unsound (2 pages)
15. A paper by Harvard & CDC scientists regarding the failing of RT-PCR as a “positive/negative” test and the importance of taking the cycle threshold into account. This is still not being done in the UK (8 pages)
16. A paper from another group of scientists once again showing that RT-PCR is a poor method for testing for infectivity. (2 pages)
17. An extensive review report “External peer review of the RTPCR test to detectSARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results” (34 pages)
18. A paper by British scientists on the impact of false positive and false negatives in the UK RT-PCR testing system (5 pages)
19. Public Health England briefing document – Understanding CT thresholds in RT-PCR tests. Mentions risks of non-specific detection being reported as positives, inability to determine active infection or viral DNA shedding (12 pages)
20. Report from University of Cambridge on mass testing of people without any symptoms. All “positive” results were negative when retested i.e. all “cases” were actually false positives. It is entirely possible (and known to be possible) that this is the case in the wider population. (2 pages)
21. NHS website information to the public on test results – no mention that a positive result could be a false positive, no process to arrange a retest to confirm. Given the current rate ofpositive results in the UK, all “cases” could be false positives. Again, known by the government and ignored. (4 pages)
Assertion 2 – The government reacted excessively to the pandemic in comparison with similar levels of death in previous years caused by influenza and extreme bad weather. Their response continues to be disproportionate to the risk to the general public and is out of proportion when data about COVID-19 is compared to other infectious diseases and their response.
1. The UK Government website shows that COVID-19 was downgraded from a High Consequence Infectious Disease on 19th March 2020. Why did we need to lockdown if it was no longer considered an emergency? (7 pages)
2. An article from the BBC website showing that there were around 50,100 excess winter deaths in England and Wales in 2017-18. Where were the social distancing, masks and lockdowns then? (2 pages)
3. An article from the Daily Mail showing that more than 64,000 people died in January 2018 (11 pages)
4. A spreadsheet from the NHS to 25th November 2020 showing that just 1,723 otherwise healthy people have died of COVID-19. Also that the vast majority of deaths occurred in people over 60 with pre-existing medical conditions. (1 page)
5. ONS spreadsheet showing Annual Death Rates in England and Wales (2 pages)
6. A spreadsheet using ONS and NHS data to show the real risks of an otherwise healthy person dying from COVID-19 in 2020. (1 page)
7. World Health Organisation Key Facts on Tuberculosis – 1.5 million deaths every year – no lockdowns. (6 pages)
8. A video of Dr Roger Hodkinson speaking to Edmonton Council in Canada regarding excessive response to COVID-19 (1 page)
9. A video of Dr Ron Daniels, West Midlands NHS speaking about few COVID patients in hospitals (1 page)
10. Notes from an interview with an anonymous whistleblower – a Doctor working in an NHS hospital (1 page)
11. Article from the Spectator comparing response to COVID-19 in Sweden – similar cases and deaths rates but no economic impact and no knock-on effect on treatment of other illnesses (7 pages)
12. A graph showing that current hospital occupancy levels are lower than the same period in 2019 i.e. NHS no busier than normal (1 page)
13. Article from the British Medical Journal showing that the government attributed to 2017/18 excess deaths to influenza when this was not the case and that the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee have been complaining about low flu vaccine uptake. Scaremongering? (2 page)
14. The UK Government Coronavirus Dashboard showing Cases and Deaths – no need for 2nd lockdown or tiers. (1 page)
15. World Health Organisation data on Influenza in the UK for 2018, 2019 and 2020. Where has this year’s flu season gone? Or is flu being misdiagnosed as COVID-19? Shiny Object Syndrome? (4 pages)
16. World Health Organisation data on global influenza for 2020. Why hasn’t the 2020/21 flu season started yet? (1 page)
Assertion 3 – The government continues to use lockdowns as its primary method of attempting to control the spread of the virus, despite the World Health Organisation stating they do not recommend them. They failed to consider the knock-on effects of lockdown either before the first lockdown or afterwards while implementing further local and national lockdowns
1. A video of Dr David Nabarro, World Health Organisation COVID-19 Special Envoy stating that lockdowns must not be used as ongoing primary method of disease control due to their impact on mental health, other health and the economy (1 page)
2. Minutes from the SAGE meeting of 23rd March 2020 showing that despite the subject of the impact of lockdowns being raised, no action was set for anyone to consider this. (5 pages)
3. An article from the Daily Mail showing the impact of the first national and subsequent local lockdowns on health and healthcare. (17 pages)
4. An article from the Daily Mail where a practicing GP expresses concern at continued use of lockdowns and tiers and shows how her patients have been affected. (4 pages)
5. An article from the Daily Mail showing that the Government now have research available to them on the impact of lockdowns but have refused to release it. Damning evidence? (19 pages)
6. A paper written by a group of international scientists showing that lockdowns and other government interventions have had little or no impact on the mortality rate of the virus. (8 pages)
7. Public Health England research on mental health and well being impacts of the lockdowns which was clearly ignored by government as they imposed and continue to impose further lockdowns. (8 pages)
8. An article from the Daily Mail in which a leading restauranteur says that the hospitality industry has been permanently decimated by lockdowns (7 pages)
Assertion 4 – The government, NHS and PHE have focused entirely on dealing with COVID-19 to the detriment of providing screening, diagnostics and treatment other conditions, leading to avoidable loss of life and loss of quality of life
1. An article from the Daily Mail outlining an official estimate that 75,000 people could die as a result of not receiving timely diagnosis or treatment due to the focus on COVID-19 (13 pages)
2. Report from the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine – Interpreting Excess Mortality in England (9 pages)
3. An article from the Evening Express showing a 40% drop in cancer diagnoses during the first few months of lockdown. (3 pages)
4. A report from the British Medical Association on the hidden impact of COVID-19 on patient care. (8 pages)
5. A report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies on the disruptions to health and social care of older people due to the government response to COVID-19 (22 pages)
6. An article from the Telegraph in which doctors warn that shutting down the NHS in a second wave would result in thousands of deaths. (2 pages)
7. Article from the Telegraph reporting that 1 in every 6 people in the UK will be on a waiting list for NHS treatment due to the shutdown of NHS to all but COVID-19 treatment. (8 pages)
Assertion 5 – The government repeatedly stated that the evidence on the effectiveness of masks and face coverings was weak and did not support their use by healthy members of the public – yet has mandated face coverings in most public spaces.
1. A video compilation of all the comments by the Health Secretary, Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientist about masks not being scientifically proven to have any effect. (1 page)
2. Photographic evidence that the kind of disposable masks on sale offer no protection from COVID-19 (1 page)
3. A response to a British Medical Journal article highlighting the side effects of wearing a mask. (3 pages)
4. An international study of outpatients at a clinic comparing key data between those who had and did not have a positive COVID-19 test. Page 4 of the report shows little difference between positive and negative results among those who reported always wearing a face covering. (7 pages)
5. Results of a Danish study showing that mask wearing did not significantly reduce infection rates (20 pages)
6. Gao Yang Chen Study showing that 455 close contacts of an asymptomatic COVID-19 carrier did not become ill. Therefore no need for masks to be worn – asymptomatic people don’t spread the virus and symptomatic ones should be self-isolating. (6 pages)
7. A British Medical Journal published study comparing rates of respiratory disease infection in healthcare workers wearing medical masks and cloth face coverings. It shows face coverings led to higher infection rates and that cloth masks had 97% particle penetration i.e. they did nothing. (10 pages)
Assertion 6 – The government and their scientific advisers have misrepresented data and selectively used data to support their preferred political position, to deliberately scare or confuse the public.
1. Article from the Daily Mail showing that the average age of patients dying from COVID-19 is 82.4 years (5 pages)
2. MacroTrends data showing the average life expectancy in the UK is 81.40 years. (1 page)
3. A chart showing the over-exaggerated forecast presented by the government, chief medical officer and chief science officer used to justify a second lockdown and the actual figures in the run up to that lockdown (1 page)
4. A Daily Mail article reporting that the charts used in briefings to justify lockdowns were wrong and misrepresented the real situation. Also that when they were corrected, the government didn’t admit the error or present the correct charts to the public. (6 pages)
5. A statement from the Office for Statistical Regulation regarding the lack of transparency in the data used for government briefings (2 pages)
6. A Daily Mail article in which the Chief Medical Officer admits to misleading the public regarding rising cases. (1 page)
7. An article from The Spectator reviewing Michael Gove’s essay on the government response to the pandemic – clear evidence of misrepresenting the facts for political reasons (8 pages)
8. The government coronavirus dashboard data on cases for the week commencing 2nd November 2020 – for comparison to page 14 of the next evidence item (1 page)
9. Statutory Notification of Infectious Diseases in England and Wales for week commencing 2nd November 2020. COVID-19 is a notifiable disease and is shown in table 2 on page 14 of the report (16 pages)
10. Announcement from Public Health England that from 8th October 2020 they would be combining the COVID-19 weekly report into the one for Influenza and Pneumonia. Why would they do this if COVID-19 was starting a second wave that needed to be addressed? (1 page)
11. Overview of results of extensive research by Mark Oakford of 2.4 million public sector workers (i.e. people who have continued working and are in close contact with many people on a daily basis so should be the worst affected by the spread of the virus) (1 page)
12. A video of Mark Oakford explaining his research process and findings. (1 page)
13. NERVTAG paper from April 2020 confirming PCR positive does not equal infectious and that isolation should be 7 days from symptom onset in most situations. So why are positive test results still be represented to the public as meaning people are ill and why are they forced to self isolate for 14 days? (2 pages)
14. Report from the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine on SAGE using out of date information when preparing their forecasts leading to massive over-estimation of deaths which was used to justify lockdowns (4 pages)
15. Daily Mail article – SAGE used Wikipedia to gather information to justify the first lockdown. The documentary mentioned was screened on BBC Two. (9 pages)
16. A chart showing the death rate per 1000 of the population over the last 30 years. 2020 is an average year so why all these measures? (1 page)
17. Daily Mail article showing how facts have been withheld and misrepresented to make the population more fearful and therefore more likely to accept lockdowns etc (14 page)
Assertion 7 – The government has ignored and continues to ignore advice, recommendations and cautions from the wider scientific and medical communities in favour of narrow view of SAGE members.
1. An open letter from the World Doctors Alliance calling for a more measured and risk specific response to the virus that is less harmful to the wider population in health, freedom and economic terms (19 pages)
2. A letter from Belgian doctors to their government also pointing out the incorrect response and the harm it is causing. (14 pages)
3. An analysis of studies of RT-PCR results and the ability to culture live virus from samples. They conclude that only transmission of live virus can cause infection yet government continue to treat all positive test results as infectious people without considering either false positives or the cycle threshold of each individual test. (40 pages)
4. The Great Barrington Declaration – an open letter from the scientific and medical communities calling for an end to lockdowns and a more sensible, less harmful way of managing the situation. To date signed by 12, 873 scientists, 38,809 medical practitioners and 698,021 concerned citizens. (updated from figures shown in document which were as at 24/11/20) (5 pages)
5. A video of Dr Brian Tyson talking about success in using hydroxychloroquine and zinc to treat over 1700 patients with quick recovery and no fatalities. Yet this protocol is still not routinely used in the NHS despite them claiming risks of overwhelm. Using this treatment would reduce fatalities and time in hospital thereby “saving lives” and “protecting the NHS” (1 page)
6. A video of Dr Graham Hutchinson in which he raises 3 key points. a) pathogenicity of the virus is now much lower b) recipients of this year’s influenza vaccine are MORE likely to suffer from other respiratory diseases – yet the UK government is vigorously encouraging flu vaccine uptake. c) studies show masks don’t prevent transmission of influenza, so where has influenza gone this year? Misdiagnosis! (1 page)
7. An article from RT.com regarding YouTube removing a video of Dr Mike Yeadon in which he points out all the flaws in the scientific thinking and process used by the government to determine their pandemic response. (2 pages)
Assertion 8 – The government is relying on the opinions of scientific advisers with significant conflicts of interest and have awarded huge contracts relating to the pandemic response to friends, political supporters, colleagues and associates without proper tender process or parliamentary oversight.
1. An article from the British Medical Journal on the politicisation of COVID-19, corruption and suppression of science (2 pages)
2. An article from the British Medical Journal regarding legal action being taken against the government for unlawfully awarding contracts for antibody testing kits. (1 page)
3. An article from the Daily Mail revealing that Sir John Bell, one of the top advisers to the
government on COVID-19 had shares in the company that sold the government millions of
pointless antibody tests (7 pages)
4. A report from the National Audi Office regarding an investigation into government procurement during the (48 pages)
5. An article by Peter Geoghegan about Cronyism and Clientelism highlighting the way many contracts for PPE etc were awarded to friends rather than actual PPE suppliers. (8 pages)
6. A report from the National Audit Office regarding the procurement of PPE during the pandemic response. (71 pages)
7. An article from Metro showing that Sir Patrick Vallance holds a significant shareholding in GlaxoSmithKline, a pharmaceutical company involved in vaccine development. (4 pages)
8. An article from the London Evening Standard relating to the above, in which Matt Hancock says that he was not aware of the shareholding until it was revealed by the newspapers. Why did he not know and why did Vallance not reveal this conflict of interest? Has the whole pandemic response been steered towards creating a demand for a vaccine product that would net shareholders millions? (5 pages)
9. A British Medical Journal article revealing the conflicts of interest among SAGE members and key appointments made by the government for the pandemic response (3 pages)
Assertion 9 – The government has used and continues to use techniques and measures that have been deemed unlawful in courts in other countries and/or that have had concerns raised that they are unethical.
1. A video from Dr Reiner Fullmach announcing the commencement of international legal proceedings against various governments for their actions in response to the pandemic (1 page)
2. The original Portuguese findings of the Lisbon Court of Appeal – English version is in Assertion 1 – Testing (26 pages)
3. An open letter from the Chief Constable of the New South Wales police expressing concern regarding the use and actions of the police to enforce lockdown and other measures (7 pages)
4. An article about the “Police for Freedom” movement in Spain where police officers have realised that the pandemic response is excessive and they cannot support continuing to enforce it (4 pages)