Kevin was and is a good friend of mine.
I visited him often in prison.
Now he wishes to put in the public domain information about the trial.
I asked Kevin to give a brief account of what happened the night he encountered a particular Iraqi Kurd. This is what he said :"I had been out with my friend and his partner. On leaving I was walking parallel with a chap who looked foreign and I asked him where he was from and he told me to "fuck off" and he pushed me.I pushed him back and then he hit me. I then grabbed him by the shoulders to stop him striking me again and we both tumbled to the floor.
I got up and walked away,went to the nearest telephone and called my wife to come and pick me up. When she arrived I got into the car and we drove off. At the traffic lights the door opened and a policeman put me under arrest for suspicion of assault.
The Iraqi Kurd was by his side, his shirt was still on his back and un-ripped and there were no injuries.
I was held overnight and charged with "racially aggravated Common Assault " the next day."
Kevin informs me that the company that he paid to give him the manuscripts from his trial nearly two years ago have misrepresented what happened. The company responsible for providing the manuscripts are :
Margaret Wort & Co, Edial Farm. Burntwood, Staffs.
Every Crown Court trial is recorded on tape, and there is provision for the accused to have a written transcript of the recording. Despite being told that the manuscripts would be available after six weeks, it took four and a half months for them to become available ! There may just be a suggestion of a fishy smell here bearing in mind what was related to me next.
The manuscripts bear no correspondence to the trial whatsoever. Kevin assures me they are a fallacy. The main flaw in the supposed trial accounts mention that the charge from “Racially Aggravated Common Assault” to “section 47 assault” (ABH) was at the instigation of the prosecution when it was in fact at the instigation of the judge. The upgrading of the charge occurred after the judge asserted that the Iraqi had a cut on his head and before the jury entered the courtroom AND THEREFORE BEFORE EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION. I have no criminal law knowledge. Kevin who has looked into this has said for a judge to upgrade a charge is highly irregular and from what he has researched, actually “illegal”
Kevin Hughes was tried by Judge McEvoy at Worcester Crown Court on 25/5/06 , was convicted of racially assaulting a (twice failed) Iraqi asylum seeker and sentenced to two and a half years in prison. (Isn't it strange that the Establishment can murder hundreds of thousands of Iraqis yet present one up as a "victim" when needed !)
The trial had many questionable features to it, including:
1/ No photographic or medical evidence entered with respect of Kevin’s alleged assault on the other party. In fact the Iraqi was completely unblemished even though accusing Kevin of punching him six or seven times in the face. Kevin is an extremely powerfully built man and could seriously injure someone if he was so minded. There were doctor’s notes for Kevin who had been punched in the head BUT NONE for the other party. How could Judge McEvoy make the assertion he did about the cut ? (Does Judge McEvoy belong to the same Masonic Lodge as Lord Hutton ? :-) )
2/ Questioning of Kevin’s political beliefs, including BNP membership, whether he was a councillor and his views on immigration – with the usual inference that said membership bestows a “thug” tag on such a person. THE TRIAL MANUSCRIPTS GIVEN TO KEVIN HUGHES DO NOT CONTAIN THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING !
3/ Other than the Iraqi and Kevin Hughes there were no witnesses. Many may find this very odd and for what its worth I'm told it's a breach of Magna Carta !
Kevin Hughes persecution at the hands of Judge McEvoy and no doubt his Masonic Establishment contacts who instructed him needs to be widely known. Political interference in trials is seen to a greater extent then the Establishment would like to admit. I don’t believe there is a separation of Judicial from the Executive and Legislative parts of government as the Establishment likes us to believe.
Kevin was a political prisoner.
He had been the Worcestershire organiser for the BNP, a superb activist, including canvassing all over England for the BNP. Instrumental in getting the first BNP councillor elected in Redditch, (the constituency of a JOKE of a Home Secretary Jacqui Smith – but they’re all puppets anyway, even when they seem plausible.) The Establishment had clearly removed what they thought was a political threat to the future Home Secretary's "territory".
Posted by Simon Smith