David Knifton QC is a fee-earning barrister.
Check out his profile on the Exchange Chambers website here https://www.exchangechambers.co.uk/people/david-knifton-qc/inquests/
Notice how David Knifton QC openly publishes the following;
He [David Knifton] has also been instructed at inquests by public bodies including health authorities and the police.
David Knifton is, therefore, a current, private, fee earning barrister, one of his fee-paying clients is the Police force.
In March 2020, our website (this website), UKCORRUPTPOLICE.COM, was challenged by Lancashire police. They took one of the editors to court for a civil trial suggesting that the website was causing ‘harassment’ to Lancashire police officers. Lancashire police did not bring criminal charges for Harassment even though they claimed it was the ‘most harassing thing ever against police’, they decided as criminal law enforcers, to go via the ‘civil route’, which has a much lower burden of proof.
David Knifton QC was acting as a ‘part-time Judge’ and was presided over this case.
So, David Knifton QC, was acting as a Judge in a UK Civil Court, one of the parties in the case was one of his fee-paying clients.
David Knifton QC, of course, found in favour of Lancashire police and now this website is gagged from publishing any articles about Lancashire police officers for any reason. A gagging order that is in breach of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act.
David Knifton QC was made aware of Lancashire police officers who had physically attacked and hospitalised the editor, yet the editor cannot name them.
David Knifton QC was made aware how Lancashire police paid the editor £35,000 in a legal settlement for malicious prosecution, yet, the editor cannot name the officers.
David Knifton QC was made aware of a police officer the divulged confidential information about a 13 year old child, the IOPC said this officer should face a misconduct hearing, yet, the editor cannot name him. the child was his own son!
David Knifton QC was made aware that the editor was sexually assaulted by a Lancashire police officer from Ormskirk, there is video evidence of this, yet, the editor cannot name the officer.
David Knifton QC was made aware of a female police officer that fabricated malicious rumours, rumours that she stated were FACT in a statement of truth, yet, on cross-examination, she said ‘someone told her‘ and when asked, she ‘forgot‘ who told her. This female officer cannot be named.
During the hearing, David Knifton QC actually questioned the editor in court over Freemasonry?
The freemasons were never related to the police claims and at no time during the hearing did the claimants (Lancashire police) raise it, yet David Knifton took particular exception to comments the editor had made online about the Freemasons and seemed especially aggravated by the editor’s views. Views that were published under the editors right of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act.
It would be interesting to discover if David Knifton QC is himself a Freemason?
David Knifton QC has been reported to the Judiciary, his Chambers and the Bar Association. The response from each on his conduct will be published where possible.