Jack Straw re James Shortt implications

Not open for further replies.
So as not to put too much distraction on the Shortt thread I am putting this up not for comment but as reference to those on the Shortt thread who might choose to read it.

In 2001 John Allen died at the Margate Hospice. As Chair of a Residents Assn he had taken up cudgels for many people with complaints about Kent Police.

One of these was on behalf of William True, and the True family, who lived as neighbours to the 6th Thanet Gun Range in Thanet.

In 2001 at the hospice John charged me with the duty to take forward his concerns about the paramilitary live fire training activity at the range and matters like off duty police firing at Bill True on his JCB.

John had been promised a change of police complaint law, by Home Secretary Jack Straw, to end the power of Chief constables to veto complaint and investigation against officers. But he was blanked at all levels on his complaints about the range. In fact, whilst at the early stages
of terminal lung cancer, in his 70s using a walking stick he was physically threatened by a Kent Police Inspector. John a WW2 veteran would not be intimidated. He died in some despair that he had fought (from age 14 in 1939 Merchant Navy) to rid Europe of a Gestapo only to see it raise its malignant form in Kent Police.

The facts are that Kent Police Authority in 1997, in response to my concerns (Firearms law enforcement, paramilitary training, Unlawful Drilling Act, Sabotage consistent with Stage 3 OIRA Garland Plan, arrests for paramilitary activity within Kent TA, possession of explosives) had called on Kent Chief constable for inquiry and report.

In December 1998 I applied to Jack Straw to compel the inquiry already called for by Kent Police Authority.

Perhaps the important points here are that it was not just me (an easily labelled anti authoritarian) calling for inquiry. Calls had been made by an HM Coroner and by the Police Authority. Kent Police were refusing to comply.

And what has happened now the James Shortt history has come out of the blue into our knowledge is that it exposes a can of worms. It exposes Kent Police lies. If Kent Police had really investigated range, paramilitary live fire training etc then how come James Shortt, ILETA and IBA were not subjected to inquiry ?

There has been some differences of emphasis. The threads on Shortt focus on what he did rather than the mechanisms at work by which he got away with it.

My view is that if the authorities (Tax, Police etc) could investigate Shortt in isolation they would be doing that.

In my view it is because there are implications to it.

This then is a copy so far of the draft letter I am preparing to send to Jack Straw Justice Minister.

I should add that one of John Allen's requested remedies (I wrote into his final prayer administered by Hospice Chaplain Rebnd Piper ex RN) was that General De Chasterlain investigate firearms certificate issues and range activity in Kent under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

In 2003 General De Chasterlain wrote to me that he had checked his terms of decommissioning reference. And he could not investigate members of the UK forces.

Gen De Chasterlain recorded concerns with the Northern Ireland Secretary.

The crux again was that if there is no Crown Authority for military training or deployment it is unlawful (7 years in prison) under the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819 which Straw is now rushing to repeal outside Northern Ireland.

If there was no Crown Authority I think, whether Police like it or not, Gen De Chasterlain would have powers under the GFA to investigate range activity and firearms certificate issues in Kent and other counties.

Shortt may be a walt. But he would be a walt who can set a precedent that more serious people might like to develop.

So here is the copy letter as prepared so far.


Jack Straw MP
Justice Minister
Former Home Secretary

Dear Mr Straw

(1) “Terrorist case” Testimony by self styled Expert Witness James SHORTT

(2) History of Armed Paramilitary Training and why no inquiries to check for Crown Authority under the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819

(3) Why you are seeking to repeal the Act whilst there are current complaints to police under its terms.

(4) The fact that following press expose’ of SHORTT this year, as a bogus former SAS man, a history of Kent Police lies are exposed. These include lies to you as Home Secretary which you chose to believe in 1999 when you refused to compel inquiry and report called for by Kent Police Authority

(5) Refusals of Chief constable, Magistrates, Royal Courts of Justice and Senior Law Lord to sign acknowledging receipt of mandatory report under the Common Law of Misprision of Treason.

This letter is written in Sections

The first section is a summary to remind you of your involvement when Home Secretary.

The second section is a seriatim response to a James SHORTT Curriculum Vitae.



Earlier this year the Sun exposed a cabinet security blunder involving bogus former SAS man James SHORTT (Report copy attached 1)


In the light of the press expose’ Kent Chief constable initially directed a response to be made by Chief Supt HOGBEN. This was to answer my concerns that SHORTT had established his long career by using Deal Royal Marines Barracks Gym as a training base for “Close Quarter Battle” courses 1976 to 82 under the guise of a sports jujutsu course. From this activity arose the International Bodyguards Association in its current form (said to have existed before as a creation of a French Major Lucien OTT) and the International Law Enforcement Training Agency (or Assn). (Kent Police HQ letter copy 2)

Both IBA and ILETA have a long history of running live fire training courses (Including at ranges in Kent) which in my opinion amount to paramilitary training which would be an offence unless conducted with Crown Authority (Unlawful Drilling Act 1819).

There are implications to the expose’ of James Shortt. The use of Kent firearms ranges. This exposes the lies told to you as Home Secretary by Kent Police in 1999 that inquiries into firearms, range safety and paramilitary offences in Kent and inquiries into Deal Barracks security history had been examined and did not merit inquiry. This was the lie you in time conveyed to Shadow Home Secretary Ann WIDDECOMBE MP.


I sent Chief Supt HOGBEN a suggested witness list and matters requiring investigation. Immediately consequent on seeing the domino effect which would flow from inquiry into SHORTT Kent Police dropped inquiry. (letter copy 3)


As you can see, from the copy letter 3, I am anxious to identify the armed support officer of Kent Police who has boasted of bouncing bullets off a JCB digger bucket at the 6th Thanet Gun Range 1995. You can see that it would be a simple matter of interviewing his colleague armed support officer Pc Peter WALMSLEY. Kent Chief constable is still refusing to pursue this simple path to identifying a paramilitary minded armed support officer in his own force.


As you can see, from the copy letter 3, I want the matter of Uzi sub machine guns and as yet unidentified Middle Eastern trainees investigated. I want the expert Army witness to be visited by police and his statement taken in evidence. He has contacted police many times trying to make crime complaint and proffer his evidence (Both as a witness of fact and as an expert).


You can see from this Kent Police HQ letter of 2007 that they repeated the same lie (as you believed when Home Secretary) to their Police Authority. And that as soon as the scope of the inquiry I wanted conducted by Mr HOGBEN was notified in 2009 Kent Police dropped all inquiry like a hot potato. (letters copy 4)


The fact is Kent Police have not investigated firearms offences, range safety offences and paramilitary live fire training offences at 6th Thanet Gun Range. They lied to you in 1999 when you were Home Secretary. It is not true that they investigated and found further inquiry was not merited.

The truth is they mounted a cover up to protect their own officers involved at 6th Thanet Range. My view is that you found belief of their lie an easy way to avoid raising questions about Kent Police conduct of the so called independent Kent Police inquiry into the Stephen Lawrence case.

In my view if you had acted properly, as Home Secretary, and compelled the inquiry already called for by Kent Police Authority then it would have been inevitable that Kent Police investigate gun running suspects including Clifford Norris (father of one of the media tried suspects in the Stephen Lawrence case). It would have been inevitable that Kent Police would have been compelled to investigate IRA supportive groups of the right and the left wing.

I refer there to the League of Saint George and the Socialist Worker Party with which Doreen Lawrence was allegedly associated and alleged animosity felt by BNP towards IRA supportive groups. To such an extent BNP allegedly expelled members in the Deal area in the 1980s for participating in armed paramilitary training with an IRA supportive right wing rival group.

Perhaps animosity existed between so called “Loyalist” far right and all IRA supportive groups ? And maybe the motive for the conflict, resulting in Stephen Lawrence’s death in an area he chose to visit for whatever purpose, had nothing to do with colour or race at all ?

How can we know the full truth since you refused to compel the inquiry which would have provided the truth ? And no one should forget that, largely due to the exploitation of the Stephen Lawrence tragedy, justice was denied and that is an affront to us all.

Stephen Lawrence was denied justice. For what ? To promote a myth of institutionalized racism to bogus reality to make a political name for yourself ? All you have achieved is to create bogus ethnic classifications and tensions which would not otherwise have existed.


I attach a copy of the frontispiece to the report I sent you in 1999 (copy 6) and a copy of the Final Prayer I drew up for John ALLEN at the hospice 2001. (copy 7) Please note that I have not had to take one backward step from what I wrote in 1999 and 2001 but since then I have gained more information all tending to reinforce the reports I had made. There is now evidence of association linking matters paramilitary in TA 1987 to the Deal Barracks security issues and bombing 1988/89 and to sabotage consistent with Stage 3 OIRA Garland Plan 1981 et seq.


It is necessary to remind you of two events of 1998. The Good Friday Agreement, which fails to include poisons and sabotage as terrorist weapon systems even though planned by IRA, for declaration and decommissioning. Secondly the first of three backup power failures at Dounreay/HMS Vulcan with the resultant serious nuclear leak which triggered the four billion pound decommissioning exercise.

The facts are that your government entered the GFA and accepted Soviet weapons grade material to UK for Dounreay processing. Both decisions were taken whilst your government failed to address reports of unreliability and sabotage of vital backup power installations consistent with Stage 3 of the IRA Garland terrorist strategy.

Significantly your government took the decisions even after what should have been the salutary lessons of the IRA attempt to attack mains electricity distribution in 1996. Yet two more reasons, I suggest, you were happy for Kent Police to lie to you in 1999 so you could refuse to compel the inquiry called for by Kent Police Authority (Into firearms offences, unlawful drilling, sabotage and the Deal Barracks bombing)

It is my view that you knew you had been lied to by Kent Police and yet you still passed that lie on to Miss Widdecombe MP.


It is necessary to remind you of the further circumstances in 1999 in which you refused to compel the inquiry called for by Kent Police Authority. Supt Maggie HUNTER RUC was directed by Sir Ronnie FLANAGAN to phone the Home Office to expedite response to clarify the situation with regard to Kent Chief constable David PHILLIPS deployment on the Rosemary NELSON murder inquiry. A deployment whilst he was refusing to report to his own Police Authority on matters like sabotage and an IRA bombing of a barracks.

You will know that Mr PHILLIPS, shortly after Supt HUNTER’s call to your office, left the Rosemary NELSON case. Very suddenly. You will, therefore, have no difficulty acknowledging that Robert AYLING’s role as official investigator now for the Rosemary NELSON Judicial Inquiry is against the principle that justice must be seen to be done.
AYLING was the Kent Assistant Chief constable on the Stephen LAWRENCE inquiry already mentioned.

AYLING’s Chief constable PHILLIPS (an alleged High Court perjurer) deployed on the Rosemary NELSON case during the crucial initial weeks.

It is not appropriate that a former Kent Chief constable (AYLING) be investigator for the Rosemary NELSON Judicial Inquiry.

For example the British Irish Rights Watch submission to the inquiry raises their concerns, in the Rosemary NELSON murder circumstances, about links between Loyalist Paramilitaries and right wing groups in England. The sort of right wing group which Kent Police Authority wanted investigated but you refused to compel the investigation.


I ask, therefore, that you weigh all the foregoing implications when you examine the James SHORTT CV and arguments following.

SHORTT’s history exposes Kent Police lies about Deal Barracks historical security inquiries and about firearms, armed paramilitary training and range investigations.

I have since 1999 provided Kent Police with evidence of association between the persons featuring in the Sabotage and the Deal Barracks security and bombing cases.

The Kent Police lies have a domino effect. Many lies all lies. Their lies are reflected in the lies about Reliance Security in the Admiralty Board of Inquiry Report to Govt on the 1989 bombing of Deal Royal Marines Barracks.

Let us re-examine Kent Chief constable response to the expose’ this year of James SHORTT as a bogus former SAS man. Initially he thought the Force could respond in isolation about SHORTT. But as soon as the domino effect, of conducting inquiries, was realized by them they dropped inquiry.

I applied to the Royal Courts of Justice for Judicial Review and also to make a Common Law report obligatory by Misprision of Treason.

The RCJ tried three times to return my case file in a plain package. Then they lost it until after the three month limitation expired.

I wrote to Senior Law Lord Phillips as Monarch in Parliament (Ultimate report mandatory by Misprision of Treason). I was sent my file back. I returned it and this time Lord Phillips did not return it but directed a secretary to write that it would be inappropriate that he sign to acknowledge its receipt.

Then, to my horror, I find that Lord Chancellor is no longer a Crown Office central to separation of powers. No there is now a totalitarian Law Czar a certain Mr Jack Straw MP. I have no choice but to write to you about your own history as Home Secretary.

Dealing Seriatim With James SHORTT CV (Copy enclosed)
Locked until I merge threads as I'm not having 6 live threads on Castleshort on the firum.
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads