John Paterson, best known for uttering a seemingly endless stream of threats of violence and death toward this blog and anybody he thinks might be associated with it, will be attending the Royal Courts of Justice at 10:30 this morning to face an application for committal for contempt of court.
In a video posted yesterday, Paterson’s friend Andy Devine provided further details. He read aloud three emails which had been sent to Paterson. (We can’t link the video, as Devine goes on a rant about a protected witness at one point in it.)
Here are the emails, as read by Devine:
HM Attorney General v John Paterson, listing details
Dear Mr Paterson,
Please see below the listing details for tomorrow’s hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, which I am sending you as a courtesy.
Divisional Court, Court 16, before Lord Justice Males and Mr Justice William Davis, Thursday the 13th of June, 2019 at half past 10.
Lawyer, Defence Security and General Public Law Team
Defence and Security Division, Legal Department
(Note that we transcribed Mr Cook’s identifying information as it was read by Devine…who is, shall we say, not the most fluent of readers. We apologise for any error.)
The second and third emails appear to have been sent last week:
Dear Mr Paterson,
Further to the below, please find attached the second part of the hearing bundle. I would be grateful if you could confirm receipt of both emails.
Dear Mr Paterson,
Please find attached to this email the following documents which have been filed in court:
1. The index to the bundle for the hearing next Thursday, 13 June.
2. The first part of the bundle. I will email you shortly with the second part of the bundle, which I have divided into two because of the size of the file.
3. My client’s skeleton argument on which counsel for the Attorney General will rely at the hearing. It is included at the start of the bundle, but I have attached it separately for ease of reference.
4. A schedule of costs, setting out the costs incurred to my client to date, and which my client will seek to recover.
As you have not confirmed your address…
[At this point, Devine interjects, ‘Since he’s got no fixed abode’]
…I am unable to post a hard copy for the attached to you. However, if you provide an address by next Tuesday morning, 11 June, I will endeavour to arrange delivery. Otherwise I [have] copies printed for you, which I shall bring with me on the day of the hearing.
Lastly, I understand that you have intent to attend the hearing next Thursday. I would like to take the opportunity to repeat the penal notice which was included on the claim form when these proceedings were initially commenced.
It states, ‘The Court has power to send you to prison, to fine you, and to seize your assets if it finds any of the allegations made against you are true, and amount to a contempt of court. You must attend court‘.
It is in your own interest to do so. You should bring with you any witnesses…
At this point, Devine makes an arm gesture and yells, “Kaching!” as though this represents some sort of victory.
He says, “You must bring with you, John Paterson, all your witnesses….So. Edward Ellis, God bless you my son, you’ve got your day in court. Let’s see, shall we? That’s just one of his witnesses, by the way. And since Edward has not been able to go and speak in any of these courts, I’m sure Edward Ellis is going to have a hell of a lot to speak”.
Ah, so will “Equity lawyer” Edward Ellis, who has been barred from representing anybody in court, attempt to circumvent that ban by appearing as a witness instead? We’ll find out shortly!
Back to the letter:
…any witnesses and documents which you think will help you put your side of the case.
If you consider the allegations are not true, you must tell the court why. If it is established that they are true, you must tell the court of any good reasons why they do not amount to a contempt of court, or, if they do, why you should not be punished.
If you need advice, you should go at once to your solicitor, or go to the Citizens Advice Bureau or similar organisation.
Once again Devine interjects with a bit of free-associating: “And we all know what a solicitor is, don’t we? When you’re soliciting, what are you doing? Are you a prostitute? Because that’s what they are. Because if it was a lawyer, that would also mean that they’re a liar”.
Erm…right. Whatever you say.
The second email will follow shortly.
We’ll be keeping an eye on Paterson’s case, and will publish any results as soon as they become available.