TRANFORMING JUSTICE: ADVOCATING FOR RADICAL POLICE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM
The ruthless manner in which Joseph Maxwell Spencer was convicted and imprisoned based on subjective opinions raises the unsettling question of how many more individuals like him are currently suffering within the system. The public’s interest demands a 21st-century societal model that prioritises a system of impartial law umpires and police arbitrators, rather than operating law enforcers and police prosecutions. We campaign towards a transformed Justice system in the 21st century model that upholds fairness, accountability, and the principles of true justice for all, rather than opinionated and discretionary rule of justice.
Whilst we are respecting the position of the CCRC in reviewing this man’s case for appeal and it is not safe to report on the minutes of the case at this stage, but there are certain affair developing from his appeal against his SHPO – Sexual Harm Prevention Order. It would be a tragedy and loss of talent to our society if we sit back and allow Joseph Spencer to be convicted a second time round on another made-up offence against him and sent to prison. This Campaign is necessary, and it concerns us all.
We Campaign that: In cases where an alleged police tampering with material evidence has been made to support an opinion, all parties in the case, the Defence and the Police should be prevented from having any direct or indirect contact with Witnesses that the Defence rely. And the Court should play an active role in summoning Witnesses to court directly to answer the judge’s question in open court to the satisfaction of the calling party.
We Campaign that: Since the CPS and the Police have the power to summon Witnesses to attend court to give evidence in open court, there should no longer be a judge’s discretion to prevent the other party from requiring Witnesses that the Police or the CPS rely from being ordered to attend court and give evidence in open court, to the satisfaction of the calling-party.
We campaign that: The conviction of Joseph Spencer is unsafe and it should be quashed. He was prosecuted and convicted on the Opinion-Evidence of two former school teachers to his partner, who are not family members. Both himself and his partner claimed that there had been material evidence of a ‘crying and distress‘ element superimposed on their self-made 50-Shades Halloween 29-seconds video selfie that was not KNOWN TO EXIST to them on the prosecution case before the trial.
WE Campaign that: The SHPO (Sexual Harm Prevention Order) imposed upon the ordinary life of Joseph Spencer to be revoked. This is not an offence of rape; this is not an offence of grooming; neither is this an offence involving breach of trust; nor an offence where victim allegation or complaint is coming directly from his partner that was made to be the supposed-victim in this case; or an offence in which parental consent to marry in accordance with the law is not present between Joseph and his partner. How, and in what form, is Joseph Maxwell Spencer posing this sexual harm behaviour risk to anyone. We should remind ourselves, this is a man with no previous criminal conviction of any sort, and a man who sacrificed his life not in pursuit of money but an exemplary conduct as a charity worker in our society.
‘We Campaign that: Evidence of Opinion that prevents witnesses from attending court to be cross-examined at trial should be abolished. The ruthless manner in which Joseph Maxwell Spencer was convicted in court based on opinion evidence with no victim allegation has raised a public interest element. It means that, with Opinion-Evidence that is already prescribed inadmissible under the opinion-rule at common law, made admissible in judicial rulings in Spencer’s case, a mass of innocent people have been getting convicted in our court rooms covertly and secretly on a daily basis. People are now getting convicted in court with no known victim allegation and the opinion evidence of ‘police say so’ used to raise offence charges is all that is needed to secure a conviction. In other similar cases, hearsay evidence of opinion is routinely been made as a special category of evidence by the police and the CPS, in which falsification of evidence to support the opinion made have been systematically directed to dictate rationality and fairness of trial adjudication.
A secondary determination of our Campaign would be the abolition of the organisation of Police Force in their operation as law enforcers in antagonistic power against society, and to be replaced with an organisation of law arbitrators that would operates as law umpires in harmony with society.
This is all we asked on Campaign to recover the lives of people in Joseph Spencer’s position; those whose lives have been affected negatively in their encounter with the police system, from the unfavourable terms of life on the System. Joseph Spencer should have his life back, so he could continue to deliver to us his inventions.
If the lives of those who invented electricity, vehicle, mobile phones, computer, and more, had been decimated by the System based on the opinion of others, human society would still probably be living without their inventions. If we remain silent and observe them as they continue to falsify evidence and convicting people with no previous conviction or caution for related offences based on subjective opinion evidence with no known victim allegation, where will it end? Or, more importantly, at what point should we anticipate them to establish a limit to their abuse of prosecuting power and tyranny?