After reading this article, please vote in the poll below
It has been alleged that QC David Knifton breached the judicial code of conduct for failing to declare a conflict of interest when acting in his part-time role as a judge.
David Knifton is a current and full-time, private and fee-earning barrister at Exchange Chambers.
Knifton is an experienced barrister and works on cases of significant value, and generally only accepts cases with a value in excess of £1 million.
David Knifton is also a ‘part-time judge (a recorder), however, it is stressed that David Knifton is still a full-time, private fee-earning barrister who makes significant sums of money by representing his clients.
David Knifton, by his own admission on his ‘Exchange Chambers public profile’, confirmed he has acted on a private fee-earning basis, his clients being the police, no doubt Knifton received a vast sum of money for his services.
It is known how David Knifton adopts an extremely personal relationship with his clients as noted in one of his cases;
“Knifton pointed out that the case had emphasised the importance of spending time getting to know and understanding the needs of a client and their family in order to ensure that the proposals for compensation were properly supported by evidence”
It can only be assumed that Knifton adopts the same level of personal contact with all clients, this would include, the police!
In 2019, Lancashire police brought a claim against me, this was heard in the Liverpool County Court in March 2020. QC David Knifton happened to be the judge who presided over this case, sitting alone.
Not surprising, after the 3-day hearing, in which QC David Knifon was extremely ‘selective’ with evidence that the defence could present (evidence that would be devastating to the police). Knifton also made remarks apparently affirming his allegiance to the Freemasons before he gave a damning judgement against me, ordering me to pay £30,000 to cover the legal costs for Lancashire police. At no time during the unlawful pursuit of a claim was a cost schedule even mentioned.
The point of this article is that QC ‘devious’ David Knifton failed to declare a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest that potentially puts QC David Knifton firmly in bed with the police, and a conflict that raises serious concerns over the case in question.
To put this into context;
The police (‘the claimants’) brought a claim against me, the claim was confirmed to have been brought unlawfully (without notice).
QC David Knifton, (the judge) has ‘benefited financially’ from the claimants while acting on a private basis for them in a position that he still holds.
QC David Knifton failed to declare this glaring conflict of interest between himself (the judge) and the claimants in the case.
A complaint was raised to the JCIO (Judicial Conduct Investigations Office). The complaint fundamentally suggested that QC David Knifton had failed to declare a conflict of interest.
It was said in the complaint
…he clearly publishes his personal public profile that he is still a fee earning barrister and undertakes work, FOR THE POLICE. How can this possibly be seen as a fair and impartial judge in such a case?
going on the say,
…It is inconceivable how this ‘part-time judge’ who takes payment from the Police on a private fee-paying basis can be seen as fair & unbiased, acting as a judge when one party is the Police, David Knifton’s paying clients!
The JCIO said that the complaint was dismissed, quoting 21(b) of the Judicial Conduct (link updated 31/3/2021)
on the following grounds;
the complaint referred to a ‘judicial decision or judicial case management”
and that the “complaint raises no question of misconduct“
However, further on in the complaint outcome, the JCIO said;
“Please note that part-time or fee paid judges can continue to practice law, providing there are no conflicts of interest.” (my emphasis)
I see this as a clear conflict of interest when the judge has acted for the claimants in a hearing on a private fee-earning basis.
The JCIO incorrectly interpreted the complaint and failed to identify the conflict of interest raised within the complaint.
I responded to the JCIO notifying them of their error, they just ignored my comment so I took this to the Legal Ombudsman.
The Legal Ombudsman has responded, however, their response was flawed, so much so they have agreed to review it. I will refrain from publishing anything from the Legal Ombudsman until this review has taken place.
Ironically, this lying officer gave evidence in the hearing conducted by QC David Knifton. Knifton was well aware of the lie this officer was accused of and still allowed live evidence.
Please use the poll
[forminator_poll id=”6087″]
Any Further outcome of the complaints !.?
Try the Bar Standards Board .
Just noted you stated NW is 70 …he’s 65 years old born July 1965 .
Tilting at legal windmills is fun, but a sport for the wealthy, as the rules of the game are ever-changing, and serve only to protect the windmill. They will find a way to crush you, I fear, because you will be seen as a threat to attack.
In other words, their law stinks, gets stinkier with each passing year, as the quality of personnel at all levels drops evermore abysmally lower – so why wallow in their cesspit?
Dump their laws down the lavatory where they belong, and instead of trying to interpret the uninterpretable, just remember SIX WORDS.
What you put out, comes back.
The Law of Karma.
Write about Karma.
Talk about Karma, particularly to paramilitary goons and poor quality lawyers.
We are here to get ‘burnt’ by the system. Once upon a time, real or imagined, there was a belief the English Justice meant something, and was a ‘noble thing’. Those days are long dead, deliberately so, because the system wanted an efficient meat-grinder to shovel an ever-increasing workload through. Put simply, there are not the courts, or the staff, available to deal with any more than a tiny number of hotly contested trials. So they have hundreds of different ways to grind people down, and ‘burn’ them. This, of course, leaves most people enraged, which damages society, causing huge costs, employing more paramilitary goons and poor quality lawyers in a merry-go-round of tyranny.
A silly game. Barrister Andrew Chubb QC read something I wrote on Karma, which Devon & Cornwall Police saw as evidence for a concocted prosecution for a serious criminal prosecution of myself based on the secret blackmail of my father to weaken my ability to expose serious criminal offences committed by a council planning chief, reversing by deceit a planning committee decision 16 to nil in my favour. Such nice people – all upholding the honour of English Law. My father was the trigger police needed to create the offence, and sadly, he was easy to manipulate and explout.
Needless to say, defending myself, the 3 senior councillors supporting my allegations were barred from giving evidence, so I was prevented from giving the jury some good witnesses, and the real background. When I made progress, putting a wedge in the door, the first trial was halted. At the second trial, I was found guilty, with the barrister using my father against me, ruining my relationship with him until his death. We never spoke again. Had I been aware of the blackmail, the jury would have instantly understood the context, and conviction would have been very unlikely.
So I know what rage is, as I have worn the T-shirt, even successfully privately prosecuting a council solicitor when I respected English Law enough to teach myself some of it. How many people do you know who have convicted a solicitor under the Public Order Act?
Some 9 or 10 years after the trial, someone passed me a copy of The Times, recommending an article inside. Right on the front cover was a photograph of JUDGE Andrew Chubb QC, and the report was of his SECOND Inquest, due to Chubb covering himself in petrol, and striking a match, 45 minutes after his Catholic wife refused him a divorce so that he could marry a younger woman. Chubb was a signally unusual suicide.
So Karma took 8 years to rebalance things, and I instantly understood the justice of him being his own judge, jury, and executioner. All I was, was The Messenger. I accepted his verdict on himself, for it wiped the slate clean between him and I.
When you have bad government, bad laws, and vile police using corrupt and odious courts with injustice as a general rule, there is no-one in government or law who will help you – the system has utter contempt for all we are, and hates us enough to act as it does – for they are loveless. No-one is going to magically sweep clean the Augean Stables, because the task is simply too big.
So if everything to do with government is useless as far as justice is concerned, what CAN we do? Well, actually, a lot. It is said there is only One Mind in the Universe, which means that everything is linked. Humanity is beginning to perceive how many levels of life are linked, so seeing EVERYTHING as linked is a logical progression. We can use our minds by voting with our minds on all the issues that matter to us. We think we have to ‘go’ something to ‘do’ something, but actually we are where we are all the time, and our thoughts go everywhere.
Events are created by some mechanism, and who is to say that any individual’s thoughts and words are without power to add to change?
All I know is, I wrote on Karma, Chubb read it, Chubb ‘burnt’ me, and a few years later, burnt himself. As a high percentage of those in the council also lost their careers in the same timespan, I see a clear pattern, not coincidences. I have taught this technique to others, with similar results.
You have nothing to lose by trying it.
All you need do, is live by SIX WORDS – what you put out, comes back. If you attack others, you will be attacked.
How simple is that?
Best wishes, Zen ____ zen4men@hotmail.com
Let’s all stand together and get him out of he’s office and doing any more law work it wrong and not right I think he should be paying 30.000 pound and be put into prison for he’s actions this make me mad just to think wot and how he way about this to make more money on the side wot a wrong-on
I believe the above article is a good interesting read and holds some merits in its grounds for appeal as it’s a clear case of conflict of interest as police were, and still are putting food on this man’s table ( layman’s terms) so it’s inconceivable that he will show the police some favour! It’s impossible for him to be trusted to be impartial and unbiased in any case he covers as a judge against the police. It has all the hallmarks of a police state judiciary system.