Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Hacking your life ? The Law Society are experts. Memos & more proved information sharing, surveillance, hacking of Scots public goes right to the top

Douglas Mill 4Strong questions and a lack of custard pies in 2006 ensured Law Society Chief Executive fell on his information gathering memos. IN a favourable comparison to yesterday’s Westminster Culture Committee session in which hardly anything new was gained from the questioning of Rupert & James Murdoch & Rebekah Brooks on a what did they know and when did they know it theme regarding the News of the World “phone hacking” scandal, readers may wish to take note us Scots visited this same topic in 2006, where, albeit accidentally, the ‘dark art’ of information sharing & hacking into the lives of the public was revealed during questioning the Law Society of Scotland’s then Chief Executive, Douglas Mill by the now Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney.

Hacking for some seems to, suspiciously, focus only on hacking phones, yet as we all know, hacking into your own life can mean a lot more. Legislation such as the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, with our own Scottish version (RIPSA) has effectively promoted an uncontrolled culture of hacking throughout the UK so should we be surprised certain sections of the media felt left out and did their own hacking ? No.

Things like, hacking your medical records, hacking your financial details, hacking your mail, hacking your email, hacking into your home, hacking into your legal aid, hacking into your relationship with your own lawyer, hacking into your family life, and all done pretty much without so much as a whimper from anyone willing to stop it. We have seen it all before, yet nothing has ever been done until now. Did the same happen in Scotland ? Yes, although in the case of Scotland, you can be assured there will never be a Westminster style inquiry into it, ever.

As documents came to light at the Scottish Parliament in 2006 which touched on the subject of the legal profession hacking into the lives of clients, no one thought to ask the appearing Law Society officials exactly what methods they had used when intervening in the lives of members of the public to block their access to justice.

By today’s standards, not pursuing such a line of questioning when faced with documentary proof those before you had personally intervened in the lives of members of the public, gathered information which could not have been obtained in many cases, legally, had applied that information to blocking legal representation or interfering in court cases, or had knowledge that the Police had been used to thwart investigations, would in itself be suspicious. This is exactly what happened, and nothing more was said, nothing more was done.

Targeting clients : John Swinney asked stern questions of Law Society Chief Mill in 2006 which exposed lawyers using information to undermine members of the public. (Click image to view video)


John SwinneyCabinet Finance Chief John Swinney (then in opposition in 2006) knew how to ask some questions, yet he should be asking more. You can read more about the content of Mr Mill’s memos to the Law Society of Scotland President & the disgraced insurance firm Marsh, who were convicted of criminal offences in the United States, here : Law Society boss Mill lied to Swinney, Parliament as secret memos reveal policy of intervention & obstruction on claims, complaints. The memos between the Law Society & employees of an insurance firm portrayed an information sharing agenda on members of the public which existed in order to undermine any court actions or access to justice for those victimised by the legal profession. Clearly a degree of spying against members of the public was being practised by the Law Society and its insurers, and clearly the legal profession had undermined an earlier Scottish Parliamentary inquiry, yet no searching questions were asked.

In one of the memos, sent from Alistair Sim, the Director of Marsh UK to Mr Mill, Sim suggested collecting information on clients while in another memo, Mill refers to a proposed Scottish Parliament Justice Committee 1 inquiry into regulation of the legal profession in Scotland, which was held in 2002-2003 under the Convenership of the Christine Grahame MSP, who is again, coincidentally of course, the Convener of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee.

It was clear from the content of the memos Law Society officials & Marsh employees were involved in an attempt to undermine the 2003-2003 Justice Committee hearings and prevent anyone attending who might have exposed the hacking culture at the Law Society of Scotland and its insurers which was going on in the name of protecting the legal profession’s Master Policy, a massive multi million pound client compensation scheme. which oddly enough, hardly ever pays out.

During the 2002-2003 inquiry, not one single member of the public was allowed to testify before the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee after the Law Society of Scotland demanded members of the public be banned from speaking at Committee hearings. The 2002-2003 inquiry under Christine Grahame did not discuss the memos made available to John Swinney, and Ms Grahame’s team subsequently went onto conclude regulation of the legal profession should remain as it was, under the control of the Law Society of Scotland.

It took a second inquiry into regulation of solicitors, held in 2006 by the Scottish Parliament’s Justice 2 Committee, initially chaired by Annabel Goldie (who resigned due to a conflict of interest) subsequently replaced by David Davidson, which brought the Law Society’s meddling in cases & client’s lives to the fore.

During the 2006 enquiry,  members of the public were allowed to testify before the Justice 2 Committee and subsequent to Mr Swinney’s encounter with Douglas Mill over the secret memos, Mill was forced to resign, albeit only after video footage of the incident was posted to video sharing website You Tube. Yet amid all this, no searching questions were asked by MSPs as to exactly what methods the Law Society of Scotland and its insurers employed to intervene in the lives of members of the public.

As readers will now be well aware, the creation of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has done nothing to clean up the corruption in the world of regulation of the legal profession, in fact, probably worsening it. My previous coverage of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, itself branded a “Front Company for the Law Society of Scotland”, can be found here : Scottish Legal Complaints Commission : The story so far

Readers can find out more for themselves in my previous coverage of just how the Law Society of Scotland and agents acting for its Master Policy insurers hack into the lives of clients, here : Spies, Lies, Hacking & Facebook : Law Society Master Policy snooped on ‘difficult clients’ to undermine damages claims, complaints about lawyers & here : Suicides, ill health, financial ruin : Will SLCC's latest Master Policy report deliver solution to Law Society 'pro-crooked lawyer' insurance scheme ?

421Who headed the hacking ? Law Society’s now former Chief Executive Douglas Mill & Philip Yelland, head of Client Relations. Regular readers will be well aware I was significantly targeted by both Douglas Mill who personally blocked my legal aid, and the Law Society of Scotland’s Director of Regulation, Philip Yelland, who personally intervened with my solicitor at the time and ordered him not to take my instructions. Correspondence which revealed the actions of Mill & Yelland against me, can be viewed HERE & HERE. I can assure you all, these people and agents working for their “Master Policy” made my family life and my access to justice, a living hell. Almost, a death sentence, all in the name of protecting crooked Borders solicitor Andrew Penman of Stormonth Darling Solicitors, Kelso. The Andrew Penman scandal was heavily reported in the Scotsman newspaper during the 1990s.

Indeed, I have not forgotten that during the time of the Scotsman’s coverage, disruptive relationships between the legal & accounting profession who were intent on preventing further media reporting on Mr Penman, and, officers of Lothian & Borders Police came to the fore in several incidents, one of which involved the compromising of a costly & lengthy CID surveillance operation. Details of this scandal may well soon be appearing in a newspaper near you.

In my experience investigating & reporting on the legal profession for five years, and campaigning for legal reforms since the 1990s, information sharing, hacking, operating a policy to undermine critics by any means necessary, including the use of surveillance, and relationships involving the Police, goes right to the very top of any organisation which is very much involved in undermining the public good for its own ends.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hmm very good points there Peter.

Mr Swinney must have realised exactly what their methods were or was it one of these conversations like between John Yates & No10 where Yates said he wanted to talk about hacking and No10 said they didnt want to know about it!

This all really shows us how crooked and rotten this country has become really shameful and its time ordinary people did something about it.

Anonymous said...

Considering the amount of spying going on inside the UK this does not surprise me one bit that lawyers and cops are behind most of it.

Anonymous said...

Well you see these are the differences between a little pretence state legislature and a national parliament.Quality of politicians fail to impress north of the border on issues like this and do not fool yourself thinking Swinney may have asked more questions of Rupert Murdoch than already answered.

I liked the video though.Very informative to stay away from any Scottish solicitor relying on their granny for a reference.

Anonymous said...

Fair enough I understand what you are getting at.Poor you and all the others.

Fancy turning the tables?

Anonymous said...

I agree.Mill needs some pie.

Anonymous said...

John Swinney is no fool as you well know Peter.However I agree the SNP are too close to the Law Society and need to break away.

Hopefully the new intake of msps will decide these ned lawyers at Drumsheugh Gdns are not worth the papers they cajole into supporting them.

Anonymous said...

CROOKS!

Anonymous said...

Going into a lawyers office is like opening the cover of a sewer.Stay out of it!

Anonymous said...

Another case of one law for the lawyers is it?

Anonymous said...

I read that stuff you wrote about Mill & Yelland writing your case off.

They must hate your guts to do something like that.Very nasty very personal.I could say more..

Anonymous said...

Your contention RIPA promoted a culture of hacking fits in with much I've read about the law and how it is applied.

However if Blair had included the media we would have had none of this hacking scandal now because it would all have been legal and above board!

Anonymous said...

You are not too far from the truth Mr Cherbi
I know someone in Glasgow who provided the mobile numbers of people to a lawyer named in one of those legal aid stories and the rumour was he was protecting a crook friend who ripped off his clients so maybe they were hacked will post more info when I get it

Anonymous said...

In one of the memos, sent from Alistair Sim, the Director of Marsh UK to Mr Mill, Sim suggested collecting information on clients while in another memo, Mill refers to a proposed Scottish Parliament Justice Committee 1 inquiry into regulation of the legal profession in Scotland, which was held in 2002-2003 under the Convenership of the Christine Grahame MSP, who is again, coincidentally of course, the Convener of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee.

It was clear from the content of the memos Law Society officials & Marsh employees were involved in an attempt to undermine the 2003-2003 Justice Committee hearings and prevent anyone attending who might have exposed the hacking culture at the Law Society of Scotland and its insurers which was going on in the name of protecting the legal profession’s Master Policy, a massive multi million pound client compensation scheme. which oddly enough, hardly ever pays out.

Sounds like the Law Society working its ass off to stop any investigation going on into their treachery - just like a certain media group doing the same right?

Anonymous said...

One thing I am sure of Peter no msp ever will ask the Law Society how far they went into someone's life to ruin them.

Anonymous said...

Indeed, I have not forgotten that during the time of the Scotsman’s coverage, disruptive relationships between the legal & accounting profession who were intent on preventing further media reporting on Mr Penman, and, officers of Lothian & Borders Police came to the fore in several incidents, one of which involved the compromising of a costly & lengthy CID surveillance operation. Details of this scandal may well soon be appearing in a newspaper near you.

???

Anonymous said...

No doubt members of the Law Society of Scotland and its lackys elsewhere are rubbing their greasy little hands in glee at the proposect of Christine Grahame MSP as Convener of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee.

Result? - No Change.

Anonymous said...

Clearly you are a threat to the Law Society hence this treatment of you by their top dogs.Even though it has obviously been a very painful experience for you Peter their actions put your credibility way up there and its good to see you using this to help others.
Keep up the good work and best wishes.

Anonymous said...

There are I think 129 msps in the Scottish Parliament 69 of them are SNP and Mr Salmond chooses one to convene the Justice Committee who has already been there before?

Given what you have written I think we know where this so-called Justice Committee is going..

Anonymous said...

I think John McGovern, a former Council member of the Law Society and President of the Glasgow Bar Association, correctly described its modus operandi when he claimed the Society has "a fundamental dishonesty at its core".

As you previously reported at;
http://petercherbi.blogspot.com/search?q=mike+dailly

Anonymous said...

While the letter submitted to the Herald on March 14th 2011 may have been prompted entirely by self interest - lawyer's self interest -the last two paragraphs simply confrim what your reports have consistently demonstrated;

"This is the text of the letter calling for a formal end to the role of the Law Society in its present form. It has been signed by 165 practitioners.

We, the undersigned Scottish solicitors, write to express our complete lack of confidence in the Law Society of Scotland's ability to adequately represent the interests of the profession.

The Society have recently negotiated fundamental changes to the Legal Aid system which are contrary to members' interests; lacking in commercial sense and equity; and which discriminate against those who practise in the Glasgow courts. These changes, which are likely to give rise to a flood of ECHR challenges as a result of their adverse impact on access to justice, were negotiated without full consultation. It beggars belief that a representative body would act in this manner, especially when that body is governed by lawyers.

We believe such problems arise from the Society's dual role as representative body and regulator. The conflict of interest which arises from this can be seen in the operation by the Society of a policy whereby it refuses to publicly criticise or question the actions of the Scottish Legal Aid Board, even where the interests of its members demand such an approach. This situation is exacerbated by the undemocratic structures of the Society, which operate to suppress any dissent or criticism of its role. It was this approach which has led to the recent resignation of several high profile Council members.

The Law Society of Scotland's demonstrable failure to properly represent the interests of all of its members cannot be allowed to continue. It statutory role as both representative body and regulator is not fit for purpose and satisfies no one except, perhaps, its current office bearers. Solicitors in the rest of the United Kingdom are no longer organised in this way and the profession in Scotland should no longer have to tolerate this situation.

Accordingly, we hereby call for the Law Society of Scotland's compulsory representative role to be brought to an end and for a new representative body to be formed."

Anonymous said...

I think you hit the nail right on the head as always.

There will be a lot going on in the background we never get to find out and with all the revelations in the News of the World case so far it is not difficult to imagine the Law Society and their Master Policy have the same links to corrupt Police or others eager for a backhander to do the dirty on someone trying to claim damages.

It may be an odd coincidence but one of my colleagues knows of a Police officer who bragged about buying a flat in Leith for a third of its real value with the help of a solicitor who sits on a Law Society committee..worth checking out?

Anonymous said...

Oh well then clearly there can be no doubt.This is corruption at the highest level just as bad as the hacking journos.Who can we trust to investigate it?Certainly none of the judges or anyone connected even remotely with the Scottish legal system.

Anonymous said...

Yes please I'd like to hear about the bent cop who got a property knocked down by what sounds like a crooked lawyer and a crooked property deal

Who did they steal it from?the usual some poor old dead soul with no family left?

Get investigating Peter and get it up in big headlines

Anonymous said...

Well the Law Society and SLCC have plenty friends in the Police so its no surprise there is a lot of hacking going on.Same for the insurers - they like to employ ex Police or even serving to get their info no matter what and there is lots of money changing hands just like down south.

Anonymous said...

So basically the justice committee for this session will be a pile of crap (although it looks like its been a pile of crap since 1999 anyway)