Audio of Di Stefano on the case.

[Cambridgecutie]

Di Stefano's work for Van Hoogstraten.

"Nicholas van Hoogstraten was wrongly convicted on July 19, 2002 of manslaughter in the July 2, 1999 shooting death of business associate Mohammed Raja who alleged fraud against Hoogstraten. The jury acquitted Hoogstraten of murder, but convicted him of manslaughter, and he was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. On July 23, 2003 the U.K.'s Court of Appeal quashed Hoogstraten's conviction on the basis the trial judge had misdirected the jury as to what the prosecution had to prove before they could convict of the offence of manslaughter. The appeals court remanded the case for a retrial, and Hoogstraten was conditinoally released. In November 2003 the trial judge heard arguments related to a motion by Hoogstraten to dismiss his indictment. On December 2, 2003 the judge issued his ruling that the case could not proceed to trial because even accepting as true all the facts alleged by the Crown, the jury would not in law be entitled to conclude that Hoogstraten was guilty of manslaughter. The Crown's prosecutors appealed, and on December 8, 2003 the U.K.'s Criminal Court of Appeal ruled it didn't have jurisdiction to hear the appeal. On December 9, 2003 the indictment was dismissed."

https://forejustice.org/db/Hoogstraten--Nicholas-van--.html


Reading on both these cases (Palmer and Hoogstraten). Both these appeals took place before the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office was established. It wouldn't surprise me if the Judges involved bathed in a large chunk of the appellants ill gotten gains.

Where's the evidence GDS was involved?

[David1819]

Some insight into how Distefano ran his cases.


"10. Following his conviction the claimant dispensed with the services of the solicitors and counsel who had represented him at trial. The claimant decided to instruct Mr Di Stefano to advise and act for him. Mr Alan Newman QC, who is the claimant's counsel for the purpose of these judicial review proceedings only, has explained that the claimant's intentions are as follows. Mr Di Stefano will from now on be the claimant's principal legal adviser in relation to the current criminal proceedings. Mr Di Stefano will take instructions in relation to mitigation and will take any necessary steps to prepare for the plea in mitigation. Mr Di Stefano will then instruct Messrs Attridge, a firm of solicitors, to act as his London agents and as solicitors for the claimant in relation to the hearing at the Central Criminal Court on 2 October, when the claimant is due to be sentenced. Attridge in turn will instruct counsel to represent the claimant at that hearing and to make the plea in mitigation.


11. The claimant has it in mind to appeal against his conviction and, depending on how matters proceed on 2 October, he may wish to appeal against sentence. In relation to the proposed appeal the claimant again wishes Mr Di Stefano to act as his principal legal adviser. It is envisaged that in relation to the appeal Mr Di Stefano will instruct Attridge as his London agents, and that Attridge in turn will instruct counsel."

https://vlex.co.uk/vid/r-van-hoogstraten-v-792979429

[David1819]

In the case of R (Van Hoogstraten) v Governor of Belmarsh Prison. Mr Justice Jackson judgment states -

"28 Part 4: Is Mr Di Stefano a "Legal Adviser" as defined in the Prison Rules? 29. It is common ground that Mr Di Stefano is not a member of the English legal profession. He is neither a solicitor nor a barrister. The claimants evidence shows, and the defendant's evidence does not contradict, that Mr Di Stefano is an avocato who is qualified to practise, and does practise, at the Italian Bar."

He then cites EEC/EU treaties and thus determining GDS was "Qualified to practise"

It was later determined in at his fraud trial in 2013 that he never was qualified at the Italian Bar.

Michael turner KC parted ways with Jeremy in 2003. He told me that he made that decision on his own accord because he refused to work with Di Stefano after examining his legal background.

So, here we have Judge wrongly giving GDS the green light, while his peers ranked below him in the judiciary discover otherwise. Given the amount of wealth Van Hoogstraten had at the time, you cant help but wonder if corrupt solicitation was involved.

[Cambridgecutie]

In the case of R (Van Hoogstraten) v Governor of Belmarsh Prison. Mr Justice Jackson judgment states -

"28 Part 4: Is Mr Di Stefano a "Legal Adviser" as defined in the Prison Rules? 29. It is common ground that Mr Di Stefano is not a member of the English legal profession. He is neither a solicitor nor a barrister. The claimants evidence shows, and the defendant's evidence does not contradict, that Mr Di Stefano is an avocato who is qualified to practise, and does practise, at the Italian Bar."

He then cites EEC/EU treaties and thus determining GDS was "Qualified to practise"

It was later determined in at his fraud trial in 2013 that he never was qualified at the Italian Bar.

Michael turner KC parted ways with Jeremy in 2003. He told me that he made that decision on his own accord because he refused to work with Di Stefano after examining his legal background.

So, here we have Judge wrongly giving GDS the green light, while his peers ranked below him in the judiciary discover otherwise. Given the amount of wealth Van Hoogstraten had at the time, you cant help but wonder if corrupt solicitation was involved.

Where?

Does 'prison rule 29' refer to prisoners' rights to a 'McKenzie Friend'?

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/pfd-guidance-mckenzie-friends.pdf

[Cambridgecutie]

Some insight into how Distefano ran his cases.


"10. Following his conviction the claimant dispensed with the services of the solicitors and counsel who had represented him at trial. The claimant decided to instruct Mr Di Stefano to advise and act for him. Mr Alan Newman QC, who is the claimant's counsel for the purpose of these judicial review proceedings only, has explained that the claimant's intentions are as follows. Mr Di Stefano will from now on be the claimant's principal legal adviser in relation to the current criminal proceedings. Mr Di Stefano will take instructions in relation to mitigation and will take any necessary steps to prepare for the plea in mitigation. Mr Di Stefano will then instruct Messrs Attridge, a firm of solicitors, to act as his London agents and as solicitors for the claimant in relation to the hearing at the Central Criminal Court on 2 October, when the claimant is due to be sentenced. Attridge in turn will instruct counsel to represent the claimant at that hearing and to make the plea in mitigation.


11. The claimant has it in mind to appeal against his conviction and, depending on how matters proceed on 2 October, he may wish to appeal against sentence. In relation to the proposed appeal the claimant again wishes Mr Di Stefano to act as his principal legal adviser. It is envisaged that in relation to the appeal Mr Di Stefano will instruct Attridge as his London agents, and that Attridge in turn will instruct counsel."

https://vlex.co.uk/vid/r-van-hoogstraten-v-792979429

But it was all by proxy.

GDS did not step foot inside a UK court in any sort of legal capacity. 

[ILB]

I would take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

He is financially successful.

Whether that been through illegitimate or legitimate reasons.

Whether or not a proceeds of crime act has been iniatied against him due to his fraud conviction. I'm unsure but imagine will have.

[Roch]

But it was all by proxy.

GDS did not step foot inside a UK court in any sort of legal capacity.

I bet if he asked you out for tea in Wisbech, you would go along.

[Curiosity]

I bet if he asked you out for tea in Wisbech, you would go along.

Only on condition he had a hair transplant and nose job well in advance.

[David1819]

I bet if he asked you out for tea in Wisbech, you would go along.

Both in the Dunning Kruger club, Both contribute very little to society. Both believe they are JBs knight in shining armour while effectively achieving nil for him. Both have no issues with employing deception and deny any wrongdoing when the mask slips.

A match made in heaven. 

[Cambridgecutie]

He is financially successful.

Whether that been through illegitimate or legitimate reasons.

Whether or not a proceeds of crime act has been iniatied against him due to his fraud conviction. I'm unsure but imagine will have.

Where's the evidence for any of the above?

[Cambridgecutie]

I bet if he asked you out for tea in Wisbech, you would go along.

He is about as far removed from my type as the Pope is from atheism.  Think Hugo Bachega and you're hitting the spot 

[ngb1066]

I bet if he asked you out for tea in Wisbech, you would go along.

Why Wisbech?  I only ask because I did my driving test there many years ago!

[Roch]

Why Wisbech?  I only ask because I did my driving test there many years ago!

It was featured on '24 hours in Police Custody'. It was portrayed as being an undesirable part of Cambridgeshire.

[Cambridgecutie]

Both in the Dunning Kruger club, Both contribute very little to society. Both believe they are JBs knight in shining armour while effectively achieving nil for him. Both have no issues with employing deception and deny any wrongdoing when the mask slips.

A match made in heaven. 

Says he whose greatest assists are AE wringing out SC's left to soak menstrual stained knickers into the silencer thus contaminating it.  And a 'forensic evidence breakthrough', made about 8 years ago, that never even made it past JB or his CT. 

[Roch]

He is about as far removed from my type as the Pope is from atheism.  Think Hugo Bachega and you're hitting the spot 

I thought you might find his intellect and notoriety magnetic.