Reprints

Barrass-Brough — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:37:40 +0000

Covering letter for solicitors, prepared Saturday 19 January 2008

Dear Sirs

I attach a document I put originally to Rose, Williams and Partners of 2 Waterloo Road Wolverhampton who declined to assist me. I am trying to find a solicitor who will help me in my response to a summons I have received from Solihull Magistrates (the date initially set – unless I plead Not Guilty as following advice on the pamphlet enclosed with the summons I shall – is 4 February 2008). If you would be willing to act for me I’d be pleased to hear from you.

Yours faithfully

Colin Barrass-Brough

¬¬¬

Document originally put to Rose, Williams and Partners (solicitors, of 2 Waterloo Road Wolverhampton) who declined to assist

Excerpt from diary morning of Wednesday 16 January 2008 – Colin Barrass-Brough

Indeed, having to go to a solicitor under these circumstances is an inconvenience, this perhaps explaining my reluctance to do so – until given this recent motivation – especially since no-one has ever been much help to me in the past in seeking to get the drugging stopped and all that might result in this context could be simply extra cost in presenting my case – a very unusual case to expect magistrates to accept, so that I may need to appeal – in court.

The main evidence I have that I was given drugs in June 2007 lies in the fact that I kept complaining to police that I had been, and they neither investigated the matter nor charged me with wasting police time. There should be CCTV evidence of my mode of driving in Solihull on the morning of Wednesday 6 June 2007 before I abandoned the vehicle. (I went to Solihull police station with the drugged milk, explained to them that there were drugs in the milk and when they declined to do anything to help me said I would drink more of the milk – under CCTV in the police station – and see what the result would be. I did so and then drove in an erratic way under CCTV round roads in Solihull local to the police station.) After leaving the vehicle I dropped the keys down a drain – including Dawn’s – to make recovery more difficult I hoped. My actions were with the deliberate intent of causing trouble in the hope that the matter of my being drugged without my foreknowledge or consent (over the years) might be investigated and the drugging thereafter stopped. We returned by train to Stourbridge and went to the police station (to report again that I had been drugged, and to describe what actions I had been led to take). The policeman who took us into a side-room and listened to my story (I can’t remember if he wrote any of it down) phoned up (presumably phoned Solihull) and said the vehicle had been towed and my punishment would be having to pay to get it back. I was surprised and asked if ordinarily in such circumstances the driver of the vehicle would not be charged with an offence. The policeman indicated there would be no other charge, which to me implies (although I cannot remember if he explicitly stated) that no ticket had been put on the vehicle.

At a later date we phoned Martini (the company who had towed the vehicle for the police) who told us what the charge would be to get it back. I was surprised at the rates and went to Stourbridge police station for advice (we had phoned Martini from a public payphone in Stourbridge). The rates evidently were correct, and the usual sequence would be the recoverers (Martini) would write to the keeper of the vehicle Recorded Delivery and if it was not fetched within seven days it would be sold and the recoverers’ costs deducted, the balance being sent to the keeper. Martini had written to me but not Recorded Delivery. I enquired at the police station in Stourbridge what happened if the vehicle was not collected by the keeper but the recoverers took no action to sell it. (This is what the situation then was – Martini had taken no steps to sell the vehicle – and this visit to Stourbridge police is described in my diary as follows.)

28/06/07 12:04 [Thursday]

Dawn has spoken to her sister on the phone as it seems we cannot get to Doncaster by the usual route today by train because of flooding. I got so far with looking into how to get there via York (which is the National Rail website advice) and have taken screenshots of the solution provided by the National Rail website which says leaving today sometime after 2 pm the only available service is tonight and takes (overnight) eleven hours. Dawn however has decided it might be best if we tried to retrieve the motor caravan. Even though I think it immoral to expect us to pay – and trouble – to retrieve it, because Dawn says her sister has offered to lend us several hundred pounds should need arise, I have accepted we might try to retrieve it. We have also paid two months Bassetlaw Council Tax – a more sensible suggestion from Dawn – and have agreed that if Bassetlaw demand the full year’s payment (or rather the remainder) we will take the furniture out of the park home and hope that legally we are not then obliged to pay the large amount.

I must say by retrieving the motor caravan before the end of the month we are letting those detaining it off the hook. If we continued to leave it with them they would sell it – according to a policeman at Stourbridge of whom I enquired – rather than crush it. What happens then to the excess (if any) of the proceeds over the detainers’ costs I do not know.

28/06/07 12:24

We are going to Stourbridge then to give notice to withdraw money from the building society (where we paid it in only a few days ago). Dawn is going to find out about and arrange the collection of the motor caravan, hopefully with minimum inconvenience to me although I have said I am willing to drive it home here. Dawn says her sister (and possibly other family members) wanted a motor caravan so selling it to them might be a way out. Dawn would object to the detainers profiting – as she would see it – and them selling the motor caravan at a knock-down price.

19:10. Anyway, I have the Amilo Pro [laptop computer] back now, and because I no longer trust Microsoft Updates I am reinstating it to its condition when bought and will turn off Updates. I have other things back which were stored in the motor caravan too, so even accepting £2000 (plus costs) it is not a total loss.

¬¬¬

Excerpt from a letter to my MP (written 16 January 2008) – Colin Barrass-Brough

In June 2007 I suffered … unwanted ingestion of drugs – in this instance almost certainly in milk bought at the Tesco Express in Bridge Street Cookley (near Kidderminster), although I had bought other drugged drinks at various places around that time – which led me on the night of 5/6 June to drive the motor caravan I then owned to Birmingham Airport and sit in it with my wife for a short while before setting off for home about 3 am. I began to feel unwell on the M42 and pulled onto the hard shoulder. This could have proved a problem later in the morning when the hard shoulder would be required to carry moving traffic. I believe it was my wife who advised me to phone for help (not knowing what to do herself, and in fear that my actions might be misconstrued and I be detained under the Mental Health Act as I had been in 2004 and 2005) and I phoned I think the police on 999. A motorway patrol arrived shortly and agreed with me that they would call the AA (of which I was a member).

We sat waiting for quite a while and becoming thirsty I drank from the bottle of milk – previously unopened – bought at the Tesco Express in Cookley. This contained drugs with a stimulant component and the consequence was that I became impatient and angry (especially as I continued to suffer similar drugging which meant that I could have no sort of normal life) and drove off before the AA arrived. I drove to Solihull police station – taking the first exit from the motorway – to complain about the drugged milk. Regrettably the lady on the desk at Solihull police station was unhelpful and after a time – two male officers then having arrived – I said if they did nothing to help I would drink the milk and they would be responsible for the consequences. I did drink some – observed by the police station CCTV – and then my anger re-arose to the extent that I went outside and drove off recklessly in the knowledge I should be caught on highway CCTV. I may in fact have done this twice or even three times, returning to the police station in-between.

They still offered no help so I determined to abandon the vehicle in an inconvenient place in an attempt to bring matters to a head and get the whole situation fully investigated. This has led to me today going to a solicitor … because I have received a summons from Solihull Magistrates for ‘unnecessary obstruction’ in leaving the motor caravan blocking access to the railway station car park in Solihull on the morning of Wednesday 6 June 2007.

¬¬¬

Statement of facts: Thursday 17 January 2008 – Colin Barrass-Brough

I have received a summons from Solihull Magistrates because I left our motor caravan parked inconveniently blocking the entrance to the railway station car park at Solihull in the early morning of Wednesday 6 June 2007. I was not responsible for my actions because I was under the influence of drugs in milk bought at the Tesco Express in Bridge Street Cookley (near Kidderminster). I am trying to recruit a solicitor to fight my case and thus far have had no success. The firm of Rose, Williams and Partners of 2 Waterloo Road Wolverhampton have declined my instructions for what in my view are improper reasons. I have an appointment to see Silks Solicitors of 48-52 Halesowen Road Netherton to invite them to take a reasonable course and give me assistance. I have written to my MP Ian Pearson (Dudley South) to ask him to give me reasonable help.

The origin of my difficulty lies in the period around 1980 when a man called Anthony Dew Armond employed as a psychiatrist in the NHS took unsatisfactory action with the result that I was detained under the Mental Health Act between November 1980 and February 1981. As a result of the medication he was responsible for prescribing I lost my job and have not been in employment since. He detained me further in March 1984 and August 1987. The detention from March 1984 lasted in fact until July 1986 although I was not actually held in hospital all that time. (My diary of Wednesday 9 May 1984 says: I was released from hospital on 17th April (just before Easter) and since 25th April I have been attending the Day Centre.) Armond used a method I have since read was illegal, of requiring me to sleep in the hospital one night every so often so that it could be said I was an in-patient when really I was not.

What this led to was my suffering more or less compulsory treatment with antischizophrenic drugs from the mid 1980s to 2004, drugs which made my life an empty waste by making my mind an empty waste. Since 2004 I have suffered from surreptitious and unwanted administration of drugs except in the period from late 2005 to the end of 2006 when once again I was under compulsion (literal compulsion initially, turning afterwards into effective compulsion due to the threat of a renewal of legally enforceable compulsion).

The most recent example of administration to me of unwanted drugs consisted of putting drinks on sale at Tesco Wolverhampton where I was known to shop. I bought these drinks on Wednesday 16 January 2008 before going to see the solicitor in Wolverhampton who decided not to help me, but luckily I did not consume them on the day.

For further details: www.colinbrough.co.uk

¬¬¬

01/02/08 03:17 [Friday]

There are things one is used to doing in modern British society – learnt in my own case mainly in childhood and adolescence – which because of flaws in procedures used to decide how forces greater than myself shall be used to make imposition on me it is unnaturally dangerous for me to do. A major example is food shopping. I am still acquiring experience how to minimise the risk to myself (the risk consists of buying foods and drinks which contain drugs which cause me hurt and which furthermore distort my decision-making with the possible result that I continue to shop – or otherwise obtain food and drink: say tapwater – in a way exposing me to increased risk). A necessity for life is water, and the only certain way to obtain undrugged water is to use water from a flowing river (or spring or similar) as it is inconceivable that such a quantity of drugs would be wasted (in being necessarily washed downstream) in getting me to take a smallish dosage. On the other hand costly procedures have been used to trick me into taking unsound drink – for example selling drugged drinks throughout New Street station in Birmingham (from what I can make out) one recent Saturday. It is difficult for me to estimate the cost of these procedures, and even if I could it would be more difficult to estimate the budget available: one’s first presumption would have been that perverting all drinks on sale at New Street station on one Saturday would not have been worthwhile for the perpetrators.

Still, I feel sure that water from a flowing river will not contain drugs in any hurtful dosage, and my experience so far bears this out. As regards foods: there are some foods which – based on experience and on estimating the costs involved in getting drugs into food – have a greater likelihood of containing drugs. Eggs which I de-shell myself will not contain drugs. Bottled drinks – going back to drinks – are quite easily drugged, as also is bread and similar bakery items (such as cakes and pies). Even potatoes – for example – can be individually drugged but the cost of individually treating each potato (almost certainly) is such that it will not frequently be done (it is more likely if there is a stock of few potatoes or similar at home which can be got at by persons willing to introduce drugs; this applies also to bottled drinks).

To make onerous the drugging of drinks in our home (and I have incontrovertible evidence illicit entry has in the past been gained) it is good to have many separate containers (bottles say) and to secure them within many separate secure holders (such as safes) and to put in place means of detecting with certainty if access has been gained. Actually preventing access is difficult: in fact literally speaking it is impossible as forces greater than myself cannot be prevented from (say) breaking down the doors. Improprieties of that type (but not so extreme) have in the past been perpetrated, and I have learnt that to expect useful help even from sources one would initially have presumed were independent (such as the police or my MP Ian Pearson (Dudley South)) is a mistaken expectation.

The drugs which are most fearful – because debilitating me most from successfully countering future drugging – are those with sedative or quietening effects, notably antischizophrenic agents. Antischizophrenic drugs furthermore I find subjectively the most hurtful. But in recent months I have discovered that if I can evade continuously taking in such drugs, then in the recovery period after being under their influence I have increased vigour – often including anger – which can be helpful in thinking out and then implementing firm measures of avoidance for the future. Indeed, I believe the thinking out and writing of these remarks (and the decision what to do with them) follow in the aftermath of relatively mild drugging I suffered yesterday when in the afternoon we went to Stourbridge to the building society and gave thirty days’ notice to withdraw £500. Dawn phoned her sister who said she would give us £2000 for the ’van. Dawn phoned the people detaining the ’van and because I had doubts based on the fact that they were unsure of the charges – that is whether there would be an additional charge because it is a big vehicle – I went to Stourbridge police station for advice. The usual procedure is that seven days after we have been sent a letter recorded delivery informing us of the seizure of the vehicle it would be sold, and any excess raised over the costs of recovery and sale would be returned to the registered keeper. Dawn thought the best idea was to let her sister have the ’van and on phoning her she agreed to pay the costs of the recoverers (£369 paid on our debit card today), and our costs in recovering the vehicle (£9.40 rail fare to Solihull plus £5.00 taxi fare, but nothing for our time or the costs of the phonecalls including £1.60 extra lost due to a defective BT payphone in Stourbridge) as well as the cost of repairs (a side window was broken apparently by the police on retrieving the vehicle worried it seems that someone might be in difficulties within: one presumes on assessment they determined breaking open the rear door of the ’van would be more costly afterwards to repair). If we cannot evade a £30 fixed penalty ticket put on the ’van by the police (but not logged and hence denied by the officer I spoke to at Stourbridge police station the morning of the incident) – and one wonders why it is not £60 as the civilian lady assistant we spoke to again at Stourbridge police station, today, expected it would be – Dawn’s sister will pay that too.

Kingswinford

West Midlands

[Saturday] 1 March 2008

Solihull Magistrates
Solihull Magistrates’ Court
The Court House
Homer Road
Solihull
West Midlands
B91 3RD

Dear Sirs

Case number [omitted]

As the origin of this case was not of my own doing and derived from acts perpetrated improperly by an organisation sanctioned by higher echelons within the Government, acts which no person in this country should have had to suffer, I regret I am unwilling to attend Court given that it would be an unfair cost to me to get there and given that the stress to my wife would be unfair.

I regret not having been able to write to you earlier but recently I have again suffered debilitation from improperly administered antischizophrenic drugs, secreted this time in foods bought from Marks and Spencer in The Pavilions in Birmingham. I am sending this hoping it will arrive by Monday, but on the other hand as much mail from and to our address is delayed or lost I shall send a copy Recorded Delivery when the post offices shall have re-opened on Monday. I would have found it helpful to have been sent a reminder that this case is still unresolved.

Yours faithfully

Colin Barrass-Brough

Hello world!

Barrass-Brough — Wed, 21 May 2008 06:11:36 +0000

I thought I’d better change the automatic WordPress ‘first post’. For the present (being short of time) I must refer you to www.colinbrough.co.uk. (And I have a blogspot blog too.)

Barrass-Brough's Weblog

Reprints

Hello world!