Litigant VI — Part 2

Judge's Word vs The Record

Capsule Statement

 My Relationship With the Legal System After Judicial Harm

I will never feel safe in a courtroom again.

I will never trust the legal system again.

This is not a dramatic statement — it is the direct result of what I lived through.

Even winning my case did not restore trust — it proved that a courtroom outcome can favour you on paper while still leaving you unsafe, unheard, and unprotected.

That is the level of damage the judge in my case caused and instilled in me.

My distrust is not theoretical.

It is rooted in:

• A judge who breached CPR safeguards
• Sealed evidence being opened without explanation.
• The exclusion of critical documents.
• Collapse of fairness and neutrality.
• the system’s refusal to investigate or correct the breach.

This traumatic experience permanently altered my perception of the legal system.

It taught me that a courtroom is not a safe space for everyone — especially for those who are vulnerable, unrepresented, or already harmed.

But my lack of trust will not deter me.

I will continue to highlight the flaws, contradictions, and structural harms within the system, because silence only protects the architecture that failed me and fails others.

My distrust is not a barrier.

It is a boundary.

And it is the truth.

My distrust is not a weakness — it is the consequence of judicial harm inflicted by a system that has repeatedly shown it protects itself before it protects the people it serves.

The Civil Procedure Rules

What Should Have Protected the Trial — and What Went Wrong

The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) are the rulebook for civil court cases in England and Wales. Introduced in 1999 after the Woolf Reforms, they were designed to make the system fairer, faster, and more transparent. The CPR governs everything from how a claim begins to how evidence is handled and how judgments are enforced.

The CPR is meant to protect Litigants in Person by ensuring:

• Proportionality — Time and cost must match the seriousness of the case.
• Fairness — Both sides must be treated equally.
• Transparency — Evidence must be managed properly.
• Early settlement — Part 36 offers carry real cost consequences.
• Judicial neutrality — Judges must manage cases without favour.

Key CPR Parts Relevant to This Trial

Part 1 — The Overriding Objective

The court must deal with cases justly and proportionately, including equal treatment and proper evidence handling.

Part 6 — Service of Documents

Ensures all parties receive documents properly and on time.

Part 26 — Case Management

Judges control the flow of the case — but must do so fairly and transparently.

Part 36 — Settlement Offers

If a party refuses a reasonable offer and loses, they face cost penalties.

This only works if the offers are preserved and handled correctly.

Part 44 — Costs

Costs must be assessed fairly, transparently, and with proper evidence.

What Should Have Happened Under the CPR

Sealed documents — especially those containing Part 36 offers and Statements of Costs — must:

• Remain sealed until the correct stage of the trial
• Not be opened early.
• Be excluded without scrutiny.
• Not be dismissed without explanation.

The CPR requires:

• Chain of custody
• Transparency
• Judicial neutrality
• Proper testing of any allegation of tampering
• Fair treatment of both parties

What Actually Happened in This Trial

• The Judge said: “I have read all relevant material.”
• He then produced the sealed envelope — already torn open.
• He declared it “tampered” without:
• Identifying who opened it.
• Explaining when it was opened and by whom.
• Testing the allegation
• Allowing the evidence inside to be considered

He excluded:

• All Part 36 offers
• All costs evidence
• All sealed financial documentation

This removed:

• Cost consequences
• Settlement consequences
• Proportionality
• Fairness
• Transparency

The Forensic Contradiction

If the Judge had read all relevant material, then who broke the seal?

The CPR requires sealed evidence to remain sealed.

The CPR requires tampering to be investigated.

The CPR requires neutrality.

None of this happened.

Why This Matters

When sealed evidence is opened early:

• Part 36 collapses.
• Costs consequences collapse.
• Fairness collapses.
• Judicial neutrality becomes questionable.
• The trial becomes structurally unsafe.

This is not speculation.

It is a contradiction between:

• What the CPR requires.
• And what occurred in the courtroom.

The Real Question

Why Were the Safeguards Not Followed?

This capsule does not allege motive.

It documents the breach.

The record shows only this:

• The Judge handled sealed evidence that should not have been opened.
• The opening was unexplained.
• The exclusion was immediate.
• The exclusion of all evidence benefited only the Defendant.
• The CPR protections that should have applied were dismantled.
• the fairness the CPR is designed to guarantee was not delivered.

The unanswered question is not why the Judge acted as he did.

The unanswered question is why the safeguards designed to prevent this were not followed.

When judicial conduct departs from the CPR without explanation, the breach itself becomes the evidence.

Structural Insulation

Why the Judge Could Act Without Fear of Challenge

The CPR sets out how a fair trial should work.

But the CPR sits inside a justice system where judges are protected by layers of structural insulation that most Litigants in Person never see until it is too late.

A Judge does not need:

• A political shield
• A government policy
• A secret connection
• Or a hidden agenda

Because the judicial oversight system itself makes their decisions almost impossible to challenge.

Judicial Decisions Cannot Be Investigated — Only Behaviour Can

The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) cannot examine:

• rulings
• evidence handling
• case management
• fairness
• CPR breaches
• sealed‑document tampering

It can only investigate:

• Shouting
• Swearing
• Discrimination
• Inappropriate behaviour

Everything else — including the sealed‑envelope breach — is untouchable.

So Judges knows:

• No one can challenge their decision.
• No one can question their reasoning.
• No one can force them to explain.
• No one can investigate the breach.

This is not arrogance.

This is architecture.

Closing Paragraph for LiP VI — Part 2.

This is not just about Litigants in Person.

It is about a justice system that behaves as if it is above the law.

When judges can breach CPR safeguards without consequence, when solicitors can dismiss harm without scrutiny, and when oversight bodies deflect every attempt at redress — the danger is not procedural. It is constitutional.

The Woolf Reforms promised fairness, speed, and transparency.

But if those protections can be dismantled at will, then the system is not failing.

It is protecting itself.

And when protection is denied to the innocent, the harmed, and the unrepresented, the risk is not isolated.

It is systemic.

It is not just Litigants in Person who are vulnerable.

It is everyone.

This is where LiP VI ends — not with resolution, but with revelation.

A courtroom victory that offered no protection.

A judgment that never reached the public record.

A system that bent its own rules, breached its own safeguards, and walked away untouched.

The contradiction is no longer procedural.

It is constitutional.

When a judge can breach CPR safeguards without consequence.

When sealed evidence can be opened and discarded

When expert findings can be dismissed without scrutiny

When a CCJ can be blocked from the public register.

When oversight bodies refuse to act;

The danger is not to one claimant — it is to everyone.

The Woolf Reforms promised fairness, speed, and transparency.

But a system that can dismantle its own protections at will is not reformed.

It is insulated.

And when insulation becomes architecture

Justice becomes performance.

Protection becomes selective.

Accountability becomes optional.

LiP VI does not close the record.

It exposes the foundation.

What comes next is not a continuation.

It is escalation.

Because once the system shows you how it protects itself,

The question is no longer what happened.

The question is:

How far does the insulation go?

And who else has been silenced beneath it?

LiP VII will answer that.

But not today.

Today, the record stands exactly where it needs to

Open, undeniable, and impossible to unsee.