The Private prosecution

From Misconduct in Public Office
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice to authorities of mass murder in care homes by overprescription of Midazolam

APPLICATION FOR SUMMONS OR WARRANT FOR ARREST

FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE

(Criminal Procedure Rules, rule 7.2(6); section 1, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980)
This is an application by xxxxxxxxxxx for the court to issue a summons against the proposed defendants.


Applicant’s address:

Email address:

Phone:            N/A                                          Mobile:

Alleged offences


Misconduct in Public Office

Conspiracy to commit Misconduct in Public Office


Date(s) of alleged offence(s):


10th May 2024 onwards


Proposed defendants


Please see attached spreadsheet for contact details.


Jonathan Lord

Lucy Allan Health Committee

Paul Blomfield Health Committee

Steve Brine Health Committee

Paul Bristow Health Committee

Amy Callaghan Health Committee

Chris Green Health Committee

Dr Caroline Johnson MP Health Committee

Rachael Maskell MP Health Committee

James Morris Health Committee

Taiwo Owatemi MP Health Committee

Victoria Atkins

Andrew Stephenson

Helen Whately

Andrea Leadsom

Maria Caulfield

Victoria Prentis

Robert Courts

National Police Chiefs’ Council

Sarah Crewe

Jon Boutcher

Nick Dean

Darren Martland

Ian Dyson

Simon Chesterman

Richard Lewis

Shaun Sawyer

James Vaughan

Mike Barton

Dr Richard Lucas

Ben Julian Harrington

Rod Hansen

Stephen Watson

Julian Williams

Scott Chilton

Charlie Hall

Lee Freeman

Alan Pughsley

Andy Rhodes

Simon Cole

Paul Gibson

Andrew J Cooke

Sir Mark Rowley

S R Bailey

Carl Foulkes

Lisa Winward

Susan Dungworth

Craig Guildford

Simon Byrne

Association of Chief Constables

Lauren Poultney

Gareth Morgan

Steve Jupp

Tim De Meyer

Giles York

Jason Hogg

Martin Jelley

Richard Cooper

John Robins

Catherine Roper

Dr Andrew Dickman

Dr Amara Callistus Nwosu

Dr Barry J A Laird

Dr Catriona R Mayland

Dr Ashique Ahamed

Dr Sophie Harrison

Dr Donna Wakefield

Professor Mari Lloyd-Williams

Dr Jason Boland

(1)  Consent to prosecute

Do you need consent to prosecute?                                                                                              Yes    No



(2)  Previous application(s)

Have you applied before for the issue of a summons or warrant in respect of any of the allegations you are making?                                                                                                                                                     Yes    No





(3)  Other proceedings

Has any other prosecutor ever brought a criminal case against the proposed defendant in respect of any of the allegations you are making?                                                                                                 Yes    No

(4) Details of the alleged offence(s)

CrimPR 7.3 requires that an allegation of an offence in an application for the issue of a summons or warrant must contain

(a) a statement of the offence that

(i) describes the offence in ordinary language,


The offence is that from the 10th May 2024 onwards when they were put on notice, the accused by failing to investigate the correlation of approximately 20,000 to 30,000 excess deaths in the UK for several months in 2020, and the administration of Midazolam the accused:


Committed Misconduct in Public Office.

Conspiracy to Commit Misconduct in Public Office


(ii) identifies any legislation that creates it;


These offences are created by the Common Law against misconduct in public office and conspiracy thereof.


(b) such particulars of the conduct constituting the commission of the offence as to make clear what the prosecutor alleges against the defendant.


The accused being public officials, acting as Police chief officers, Members of the Parliamentary Health Committee, Government Ministers with responsibility for health, or senior employees of the NHS, wilfully neglected or breached their duty or misconducted themselves. The seriousness of the neglect or misconduct without any reasonable excuse or justification is sufficient to support a charge of misconduct in public office.

The accused failed to make any proper investigation upon being notified by email on 10th May 2024 of the correlation between the administration of Midazolam and excess deaths in the UK. The excess deaths coinciding with the administration of Midazolam varied between 20,000 and 30,000 deaths for several months in 2020.

(5)  Summary of the circumstances


The accused are all public officials, and individually and in conspiracy with each other, both contrary to the Common Law, have failed in their duty as holders of public office, to investigate allegation of mass murder. Allegations supported by strong prima facie general evidence, including statistical evidence and personal statements by family members and members of the medical profession.

The mass murder was of defenceless aged and infirm and vulnerable people, isolated in care homes and hospitals, drugged and suffocated and tortured to death by means of excess administration of Midazolam.


Evidence to be relied on:


Email putting the defendants on notice

Published statistical evidence

Published expert evidence

Published evidence to official enquiries

Published videos by expert

News reports

Official documents describing the administration of Midazolam and the incentive process for administering it and the likely consequences

Evidence from the United States where Midazolam has been administered as part of a means of execution

(6)  Application for warrant
(7)  Declaration.  See Criminal Procedure Rules r.7.2(6), (7). You may be asked to make this declaration on oath.

To the best of my knowledge, information and belief:

(a) the allegations contained in this application are substantially true,

(b) the evidence on which I rely will be available at the trial,

(c) the details that I have given in boxes (2) and (3) are true, and

(d) this application discloses all the information that is material to what the court must decide.

Signed


8th November 2024

Decision – this record must be kept by the court

I considered this application today [at] [without] a hearing.

[The applicant confirmed on oath or affirmation the declaration in box (7).]

[The applicant gave me additional information [the essence of which was:]][1]



[The proposed defendant gave me additional information [the essence of which was:]][2]



On the basis of the information contained in this application [as supplemented by the additional information described above]:

(a) I [am] [am not] satisfied that the requirements for the issue of a summons are met

[(b) I [am] [am not] satisfied that the additional requirements for the issue of a warrant are met][3]

and I [issue] [refuse to issue] a [summons] [warrant] accordingly.


My reasons are these: The court should give a brief indication of its conclusions.



                                                                                                                               








Signed: ………………………………………..…………………………………………………………...…

Name: ………………………………………..…………..…..… [Justice of the Peace]

                                                                                               [District Judge (Magistrates’ Court)]

                                                                                               [Justices’ Clerk / assistant clerk]

Date: ………………………….


[1] Include a brief summary of any information unless it is recorded elsewhere.

[2] Include a brief summary of any information unless it is recorded elsewhere.

[3] Complete only if the application includes an application for the issue of a warrant.