 | Subj: URGENT ATTENTION OF DAVID BLACK DEPUTY BUSINESS EDITOR
Date: 13/01/2005 13:49:42 GMT Standard Time
To: enquiries@scotsman.com, editorial@gallowaygazette.com,
c.coyle@bigissuescotland.com, akelly@dcthomson.co.uk,
edit.scot@bigissue.com, mail@sundaypost.com, sue.reid@dailymail.co.uk,
centre@hemedia.co.uk, times@eveningtimes.co.uk(evening times),
letters_TS@scotsman.com, courier@dcthomson.co.uk(Dundee Courier),
stletters@telegraph.co.uk (Daily Telegraph),
express.letters@express.co.uk(express on sunday),
letters@guardian.co.uk (guardian),
lancet.editorial@elsevier.co.uk(lancet),
letters@mailonsunday.co.uk(mail on sunday),
letters@observer.co.uk(observer), editor@mediaguardian.co.uk,
express.letters@express.co.uk(sunday express),
stnews@telegraph.co.uk(sunday telegraph),
letters@the-times.co.uk(times), wrightstuff@channel5.co.uk(Wright
Stuff), news@meridiantv.com(meridian tv),
news@channel4.com(news@channel4.com), news@five.tv, news@sky.com,
scotlandtoday@smg.plc.uk, newsonline@bbc.co.uk(BBC News),
frontline.scotland@bbc.co.uk(frontline Scotland)., panorama@bbc.co.uk,
radiotimes@bbc.co.uk, pm@bbc.co.uk, today@bbc.co.uk,
feedback@bbc.co.uk, jazeera@aljazeera.net
International Mens Organisation and Fathers Fighting Injustice
Press release
>From the Legal Profession Inquiry Group
TO
DAVID BLACK
DEPUTY BUSINESS EDITOR
SCOTSMAN
Your two articles in todays Scotsman are UTTER BOLLOCKS.
You continually allow the top criminal in Scotland Douglas Mill(as
Chief Exec of the Law Society of Scotland) to comment on very serious
matters of law ,despite the vast fraud being carried out by the Law
Society of Scotland and its membership with Douglas Mill as the head
crook conspiring with Marsh International (check Spitzer writ against
Marsh on their NOW internationally corrupt policies)to defraud Scottish
people.
The Scotsman and David Black seem to be the new mouthpiece of the Law
Society of Scotland by only using the crooks in the Law Society ,not
the VICTIMS of their crimes, to comment on self regulation .We provide
you with a recent Herald article which shows clear criminality by the
very person the Scotsman think fit to comment on what type of law
Scottish people should get ,coming from the head of the legal mafia
running Scotland , who THINKS he has the RIGHT and authority to
continue to uphold a system of vast Scottish civil law FRAUD ,as
exposed in the legal profession inquiry .
Something the Scotsman did nothing to EXPOSE.
Mills days are numbered!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You allowing him such a prominent platform shows how in debt the
Scotsman is to this legal GODFATHER
Yours in disgust
The Legal Profession Inquiry Group
======================
http://www.theherald.co.uk/business/31118.html
Ombudsman supports Law Society over complaint against Mill
PAUL ROGERSON January 10 2005
THE Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman has backed the Law Society's
decision not to follow up a complaint against its chief executive,
Douglas Mill, lodged in the aftermath of a Herald article last October.
Aberdeen man David Emslie, a long-standing critic of the legal
profession, wrote to Mill in October to lodge a complaint of
professional misconduct against him personally. Emslie's letter
followed the disclosure of evidence suggesting the governing body for
Scotland's solicitors wanted to consult a multinational insurance firm
to discuss an individual compensation claim brought by a member of the
public - contradicting what MSPs were told at a public inquiry.
An internal memo revealed that senior figures at the Law Society sought
a "summit meeting" about the claim with Marsh UK, broker of its
so-called "master" insurance policy - which provides insurance for
all compensation claims against Scottish solicitors arising from
negligence, fraud or dishonesty.
In Marsh's submission to Parliament's Justice 1 Committee in 2001,
Alistair Sim, a Marsh executive, stated: "The society is not involved
in the handling or resolution of individual claims." The memo, sent the
previous month, was written by Mill to Martin McAllister, the then
president. The document discusses complaints against solicitors brought
by Stewart and Susan Mackenzie, from Pitlochry. The memo discusses not
only the merit of the complaints, but the character of the Mackenzies.
Mill told McAllister: "I have discussed the matter with Alistair Sim
and I think a holding letter is ideal ... there is a saga here." He
added: "The Mackenzies, I would say, are different from some of our
other complainers in as much as they have several valid claims, they
have been let down by a series of solicitors, but they are unreasonable
in their expectations of quantum etc. Rather than trivialise matters I
would recommend that the four of us i.e., you, me, David Preston
(vice-president) and Alistair Sim ... have a summit meeting on the
up-to-date position looking at both the complaints and claims aspects.
"There is no doubt Mr Mackenzie is (an) intelligent and well-organised
individual (sic) who could, unlike some of the other thorns in our
flesh, come over very well at (an) investigation." The full text of the
memo only became public last year following intervention from former
SNP leader John Swinney, the Mackenzies' MSP. He claimed to The Herald
that it "flatly contradicts the arms-length relationship between the
society and its insurers, which is often cited as a means of suggesting
the law society is powerless to affect the decisions of its insurers."
In his complaint to - and about - Douglas Mill, lodged on October
28 last year, Emslie accused the society chief of "blatantly conspiring
with the professional insurance body against the public interest".
A case manager in the society's client relations office was assigned to
the complaint, as is routine. She wrote to Emslie on November 11,
highlighting the fact that because Mill had not acted as Emslie's
solicitor, the society could only look at a complaint of professional
misconduct. But she added that for this to be validly investigated, she
had to see if Emslie "had an interest" in making the complaint. Her
conclusion was that he did not, because he was not "directly affected
by something the solicitor has done or said".
Her conclusion was supported by a law society "sift panel", which
consists of a solicitor and a non-solicitor.
Emslie then passed the matter to the ombudsman, Linda Costelloe Baker.
In her written ruling on the matter, delivered to Emslie just before
Christmas, the ombudsman decided that the society had acted reasonably.
She said: "The legislation that governs the way the law society handles
complaints says that the complainant must have an interest to make a
complaint. There is no formal definition of what that means, but the
society has adopted my interpretation, which is that the complainant
should have been directly affected by something that the solicitor has
done or said. While Mr Emslie has made complaints about solicitors, he
has not been directly affected by Mr Mill, who takes no direct part in
the process an who, in any event, is acting for the law society, not as
an individual." She added: "Having seen a copy (of the memo), it is not
about him (Emslie), he is not named as being a thorn in the law
society's flesh, and while it might be stretching my role somewhat, I
suspect he was not included even by inference as "thorn". He has not,
therefore, been directly affected by the contents of that memo."
======================
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/business.cfm?id=42862005
Thu 13 Jan 2005
Will we lose legal independence?
DAVID BLACK DEPUTY BUSINESS EDITOR
===========
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/business.cfm?id=43272005
Thu 13 Jan 2005
Scots split over legal reforms
DAVID BLACK DEPUTY BUSINESS EDITOR
|
|
