Defence for a court

As I explained in the last blog, it is inevitable that I am going to be arrested for begging, so I have been keeping a diary since last Monday to record the number of Big Issues (a magazine sold by homeless people) that Declan and I buy and sell, the hours we stand on our pitches (vendors have their own registered pitches), and also when we are walked off the pitches by other street traders (vendors can be de-badged if they argue with street traders over pitches).

It is going to be very clear to a judge that Declan and I are completely innocent of any wrong doing. In fact, although it rained a lot last week, Declan and I stood in our pitches for hours, which would not win us a prize considering we sleep in our coats – for example, I stood on my pitch all Friday evening, well over two hours, despite only selling one Big Issue. I now have a cold but at least we were able to do without me having to beg. Incidentally, on Thursday evening I had two drunken homeless harassing me while I was on my pitch – I have a railing to one side – one of whom urinated less than a half a metre from where I stood.

Of course, it doesn’t mean we were given a red carpet: on Thursday, The London Paper once again took over Declan’s pitch, The Times having done so Monday. And because we never know when or for how long we will be moved out of our pitches (the Sun newspaper took over my pitch during lunch for over a month and a half), we can only buy a few magazines at a time so that we are left with some money for food whenever we can’t sell The Big Issue.

There is also now a Big Issue vendor who likes to work my pitch when I am not there and I suspect he may want to stir up some trouble: on Friday evening he didn’t leave when I arrived but lit a cigarette and provocatively smoked it close to me for a few minutes. I don’t need to be reminded that in mid-April we lost a shared weekday pitch in trendy Covent Garden (which paid for our weekly bus tickets) to a vendor who had made it very clear to us that he wanted the pitch for himself.

We got wind a few days ago that the rolling winter shelter projects are opening now (you sleep on the floor in a few different locations each week), and of course Declan and I would like to get a place on one of them. For a few weeks last winter, we attended the West London Churches Homeless Concern project – we actually spent 3 hours on buses on many occasions getting to various places – but had to pull out as result of threats and intimidation: for example, on 24 January one of the homeless crossed the hall to where Declan was sleeping and came down with considerable force on Declan’s crotch with a flat hand. It seems there is no such project running in East London (our area) this year either, the nearest that we know of being run out of Camden. That said, it is going to be almost impossible for Declan and I to put together £30 a week to buy the two bus tickets we would need to get around every night. In the past, most of our money came from the pitch in Convent Garden, which Declan worked on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and two pitches in Long Acre, also in Covent Garden, which we got most weekends. All of that is history now.

Aside from the obvious question as to why I am begging – I have my diary and also Declan’s urgent request to the European Court of Human Rights for expedition of his case against the UK, made on 8 September, as an answer – I also expect the judge to ask me why we don’t get a job, apply for benefits or find ourselves a hostel.

With regard to getting a job (Declan also deals with this in his application to the European Court), the answer couldn’t be simpler: you just can’t either find or look for a job while you are sleeping in a porch, in the elements. Sometimes we only get 3 or 4 hours sleep, I have been assaulted, not to mention the deterioration of our health arising from a nutritionally inadequate diet, poor clothing, and being unable to afford transport since July. And yes, I would be telling the judge that when the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) illegally terminated our benefits, I was studying computing in Central University Birmingham – I am no bum. Sadly, neither my Spanish degree in Psychology nor my diploma in Marketing is valid here in the UK.

As for why we don’t sign for jobseekers allowance, well the answer is plainly that we believe that the DWP will find another way to see that our benefits are again terminated. Otherwise, how would any reasonable person explain that, during the year we were on benefits, Declan had to apply to the High Court for leave to apply for an urgent judicial review after our benefits were suspended not once but twice (on 10 April and 24 August 2006, the latter is part of Declan’s application to the European Court)? That our benefits were eventually terminated because Declan didn’t sign on two days before he was due to do so? That when Declan informed not only the jobcentre but also the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions of their mistake, the decision was not changed, in breach of the law? That Declan was not provided with the explanation he was entitled to within a month for an automatic right to appeal to a social security appeal tribunal? Oh, and lastly, the DWP has never provided me with a National Insurance number, despite that a person is not entitled to benefits without one, which I obviously was, and, without Declan, I would have the same rights as an illegal refugee, instead of the full rights I should have, with Irish citizenship.

With regard to why we are not in shelter, well, we did find the West London Churches Homeless Concern and had to quit. We also tried the Missionaries of Charity – the only ones that do self-referral in London – and after spending money we didn’t have on phone calls, it turned out that one moment they had a place for me in one hostel and a place for Declan in another, but when Declan phoned back the women’s hostel, he was told there was no vacancy for me. Eventually we gave up. As for other hostels accessed by homeless, on 22 November 2006 the Dellow Centre recorded on my registration form that St Mungo’s, London’s largest homelessness organisation, had informed the centre that we couldn’t be referred to a hostel “due to not being on any benefits”.

So we are very much in a catch-22 situation: if we go on benefits we lose our European Court case, only to find ourselves back on the streets; and if we stay on the streets, well, we face either starvation or a criminal record for begging. Surely any reasonable person would come to the conclusion that we really don’t have much choice but to keep going on the streets, hoping that somebody in the European Court will take our case off the shelf for expedition. As I have already stated in this blog, the case of Papon v France was expedited by the Court under rule 41 of the Convention because of the advance age and ill-health of the applicant in prison: the case was lodged on 12 January 2001 and on 23 January the Court asked the respondent Government to submit information and comments about the applicant’s conditions and regime.

Today in the Sunday Telegraph there was a front page news item on former Prime Minister Tony Blair complaining that “he had been unable to follow the example of US politicians, such as President George W Bush, in being open about his faith because people in Britain regarded religion with suspicion”. His comments, of course, have been welcomed by the Archbishop of York, Rev John Sentamu, who said: "Mr Blair's comments highlight the need for greater recognition to be given to the role faith has played in shaping our country. Those secularists who would dismiss faith as nothing more than a private affair are profoundly mistaken in their understanding of faith." Declan and I very much wish that “faith” would be regarded as a private affair or we might end up like many homeless, pushing a trolley along and talking to ourselves after decades on the streets.

Anyway, for the record, this is the email that Declan sent on Thursday evening to the executive chairman of Rupert Murdoch’s London-based News International, which owns several newspapers, including The London Paper and The Times:

Subject: The London Paper

Dear Mr Hinton,

I refer further to my letter and enclosure to you of 31 July 2007, a copy of which I sent by fax and registered post to the Chairman & CEO of News Corporation, Mr Rupert Murdoch, and wish to confirm the takeover once again this afternoon of my Big Issue pitch outside McDonald's on Liverpool Street by The London Paper.

As I reconfirm in my email to you of 20 November about the takeover of the same pitch by The Times on 19 November, I am in receipt of a letter of 10 September from Dr John Bird, Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Big Issue, stating:

I have employed many people over the years to do jobs related to the running of The Big Issue. I have never employed them to do my job; likewise I do not do their job. Please bear this in mind when you are composing your letters. You do not need to address your letters to me, as it is not my job. I would only get involved if you were utterly and totally let down by those whose job it is in The Big Issue. I hope this assists in your deliberations in pursuit of your claims.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey
Big Issue badge no. 1163

cc  Mr Nick Hallett, Distribution Manager, The London Paper
      Mr Paul Joseph, Outreach Manager, The Big Issue

Arrest is inevitable

Yesterday morning at 7.00am I had to beg in Liverpool Street Station (see previous blog), so that Declan and I could buy a few Big Issue magazines – sold by homeless people throughout the UK. I wasn’t stopped by police (begging is illegal in England) and by 8.15am I had been given enough money to be able to afford several Big Issues. Nevertheless, I had to go back to the station early in the afternoon after neither Declan nor I sold anything during lunch – those who pass by our pitches are mostly city workers from the finance and banking industry.

In the evening Declan’s pitch was again taken over, this time by a street distributor of a free edition of The Times newspaper. A Times distributor also did his best to put me out of business when he began passing his papers almost beside me. At 6.30pm I left him by my pitch and again went to the train station to beg – after standing in my pitch, in the rain, for well over two hours, all I sold were two Big Issues.

It really is inevitable that I am going to be arrested, having been issued two tickets last week for begging. Declan and I are in fact resigned to it. We are already living in extreme poverty – I am actually lucky I didn’t fall ill last night sleeping in a wet coat – and it now only takes a rainy day or a street distributor to send me to the train station to beg. (As result of the problems last week with street distributors of London Lite and ShortList, over the weekend we didn’t have the money to buy food, nor the fare to take a bus to the West End where we might have availed of a soup run, resulting in both of us starving and feeling overall very weak.)

We also have little doubt that eventually I will have to do prison time, perhaps sooner than later. Still, I prefer being the one that is doing the begging because I believe Declan is better equipped to survive the street alone – although for how long it will prove possible for him to do so is anyone’s guess.

For the record, this is the email that Declan sent this afternoon to the executive chairman of Rupert Murdoch’s London-based News International, which owns several newspapers, including The Times:

Subject: The Times

Dear Mr Hinton,

I refer further to my letter and enclosure to you of 31 July 2007, a copy of which I sent by fax and registered post to the Chairman & CEO of News Corporation, Mr Rupert Murdoch, and wish to confirm the takeover yesterday afternoon of my Big Issue pitch outside McDonald's on Liverpool Street by The Times.

I can also reconfirm in respect of my numerous complaints to you on this issue that I am in receipt of a letter of 10 September from Dr John Bird, Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Big Issue, stating:

I have employed many people over the years to do jobs related to the running of The Big Issue. I have never employed them to do my job; likewise I do not do their job. Please bear this in mind when you are composing your letters. You do not need to address your letters to me, as it is not my job. I would only get involved if you were utterly and totally let down by those whose job it is in The Big Issue. I hope this assists in your deliberations in pursuit of your claims.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey
BI badge no. 1163

cc  Trevor Jones, Circulation Manager, The Times
      Paul Joseph, Outreach Manager, The Big Issue

Extreme poverty

Yet another round of extreme poverty. Having been starved on Thursday (see previous blog on the latest takeover of my Big Issue pitch by the free ShortList magazine), on Friday morning I was forced to go back into Liverpool Street Station to beg so Declan and I could buy some food over the weekend, as no homeless centre opens around our area on Saturday or Sunday (except the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission, but we were barred on 18 June by the minister’s wife due to concerns about our safety).

On Wednesday morning, in the station, I was informed as two police officers were ticketing me for the second time in two days for begging – I have been begging in the train station since mid-September without difficulty, but then, of course, Declan didn’t have what is now a well-endorsed petition up on the internet to the UN for a declaration in respect of research cloning of embryos and stem cells – that the next time I am caught begging I will be arrested or given a fine of £80, which, if I don’t pay, will land me in prison. Anyway, I went back in carrying my own bags, having said good-bye to Declan and not knowing when I would meet him next.

As soon as a kind person is passing me some change, who comes from behind me but the (Polish, I think) policeman who on Tuesday gave me my first ticket, as his partner was calling me “scum of the earth”, and forcibly removed me from the station, which I am confident was improper behaviour. This time he doesn’t ticket, arrest or fine me. Instead, he menacingly informs me that he has already told me begging is illegal and that he doesn’t want me in the station and to get out of it.

So we didn’t have the money to buy food for the weekend, nor the fare to take a bus to the West End where we might avail of a soup run. It meant I had to take my chances and go and beg on Friday evening around the Liverpool Street area, where people like to drink outside a few pubs. There were police standing around the pubs, so I just roamed the streets looking for somebody sitting or standing about. I was of course carrying my bags, so that if I was arrested Declan would not be stuck with them, and had arranged a time to meet Declan outside McDonald’s on Liverpool Street.

The begging didn’t go well at all, and all we have had for food for the weekend has been less than £3: Declan wanted me to eat and I wanted him to eat, resulting in both of us starving and feeling overall very weak, which is in all probability what the agenda actually entails. It doesn’t help either that we are ill-equipped for the bitterly cold nights: the nun in charge of clothes in the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre told me the week before last that she has no winter clothes – you would be forgiven for thinking spring just arrived – and gave me a teddy bear pyjamas bottom and a small old cardigan.

As I was walking the street on Friday night, I took comfort in the thought that Declan and I are humbly following in the footsteps of Galileo. Where has all my willingness to leave the train station landed us? For the first time since we started selling the Big Issue back in December, we can’t even afford to buy a magazine (70p) to sell. When Declan goes to the Big Issue head office early tomorrow morning to register our pitches – in the past there were so many problems with the weekly registration of our pitches that for months now, and by arrangement, Declan has been supervising the registration himself – I will be in the train station begging until I can put together the money we need to buy Big Issues and lunch (all I am eating today is bread).

If the police throw me out of the station, I am going right back in. If I am forcibly removed, like on Tuesday, it will be without my cooperation. The only way I will stay out is if I am forced either because I am arrested or injured as police seek to remove me (one of my shoulders has been dislocated several times).

On 8 September Declan lodged his case against the UK, together with an urgent request for expedition, with the European Court of Human Rights. The last time Declan wrote to the Registrar was on 6 October, enclosing, among other things, his latest hospital discharge summary report of 4 October, this time from the Royal London Hospital where he was hospitalised for two days with a viral infection, and my police statement of 22 September, having been woken by a guy who repeatedly kicked me in the chest and shoulders while shouting “f*****g tramp” – all to no avail. (As I have already stated in this blog, the case of Papon v France was expedited by the Court under rule 41 of the Convention because of the advance age and ill-health of the applicant in prison: the case was lodged on 12 January 2001 and on 23 January the Court asked the respondent Government to submit information and comments about the applicant’s conditions and regime.)

Tomorrow I may be arrested

This morning my Big Issue pitch (from which I sell The Big Issue, a magazine sold by homeless throughout the UK) was taken over by a street distributor of the free ShortList magazine. When I informed this guy that he is standing in my pitch of one year – he was one of the two ShortList distributors that put me out of business last Thursday – he looks at me like he wants me to define the word "pitch". Eventually he moves away, but no more than a metre and a half, pinning me up against a railing, and yes, the whole road free for him to go. (As a Big Issue vendor, I have a registered pitch and cannot move freely.)

Unsurprisingly, I sold nothing. Declan also sold nothing and we were faced with the daunting choice of me going back into the train station to beg or starve for the day, albeit the meagre breakfast the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre provides Monday to Friday: a bowl of cereal and up to a maximum of three toast (for which you have to queue outside the front gate for anything up to 40 minutes). The train station was a bit tricky, since yesterday morning two police officers ticketed me for the second time in two days for begging. This time I wasn't called "scum of the earth", but was told that the next time I am caught begging, I will be arrested or given a fine of £80, which, if I refuse to pay, will land me in prison.

I am under no illusion whatsoever that this morning I avoided being arrested. So Declan and I are braced for another day of hunger, but tomorrow morning if we don't sell Big Issues – and it sure looks like we won't – I will have no choice but to go into the train station and beg because unfortunately there is no homeless centre open during the weekend and we have no money whatsoever to buy food. We could of course go to the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission for a breakfast for 50p, but we were barred by the minister’s wife on 18 June due to concerns about our safety. Last weekend we faced a similar situation but had enough for the bus and spent part of the weekend in the West End (where there can be a free food drop on the Strand on a Friday night 8.30-10.00pm, and at Lincoln's In Fields on a Saturday night 6.00-7.00pm).

The only reasonable explanation for the police executing a perfect U-turn at full speed (I have been begging in the train station since 11 September without difficulty), is clearly that Declan's petition to the UN in support of research cloning of embryos and stem cells could very well take us and NAC off the street.

Since in the UK police can detain somebody without charge for up to 28 days, I will be taking the opportunity to come out a size 0 and will begin a hunger strike: I am familiar with non-cooperation techniques. As for Declan, he tells me that the police are going to discover that on his own he is not such a soft target after all. If I have to beg tomorrow morning, by the way, I will have all my bags with me so Declan is not a sitting duck while I am in custody.

This is Declan's email this morning to the ShortList circulation director:

Subject: ShortList

Dear Mr Moreton,

Further to our telephone conversation this morning, I wish to reconfirm the takeover this morning of my wife's Big Issue pitch at The George Pub, Liverpool Street by a street distributor of ShortList.

I also reconfirm that I am in receipt of a letter of 10 September from Dr John Bird, Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Big Issue, stating:

I have employed many people over the years to do jobs related to the running of The Big Issue. I have never employed them to do my job; likewise I do not do their job. Please bear this in mind when you are composing your letters. You do not need to address your letters to me, as it is not my job. I would only get involved if you were utterly and totally let down by those whose job it is in The Big Issue. I hope this assists in your deliberations in pursuit of your claims.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey
BI badge no. 1163

cc  Mr Mike Soutar, CEO, ShortList Media (by registered post)
Mr Paul Joseph, Outreach Manager, The Big Issue (by email)

Police ticket me for begging and forcibly remove me from Liverpool Street Station

This morning at 7.30am, while I was begging in Liverpool Street Station (where we wash daily after the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission barred Declan and me on 18 June due to, er, concerns about our safety), I was stopped by two police officers just as I was about to be handed some money.

They took me aside to issue me a ticket – begging is illegal in England. And as the male officer is getting on with the business of writing down some of my details, like I am wearing a red T-shirt over a blue long-sleeved T-shirt, PC 136 was, well, insulting me – "scum of the earth" was one of the derogatory terms she used a few times to describe me. When I politely told her that I would be coming back to the station to beg because I had no choice on the matter, she menacingly told me not to talk back to a police officer or I would be arrested on the spot.

As soon as I presented the ticket to Declan, he headed off to Bishopsgate Police Station to find out how many times I would be ticketed before being subject to arrest and a mandatory court appearance. He was duly told that I was lucky I hadn’t been arrested and that I would be the next time. Declan informed this police officer that he had been run off his Big Issue pitch yesterday evening by a street distributor of the free London Lite (once again on record by email with The Big Issue, although since the founder and editor-in-chief wrote on 10 September telling Declan to more or less stop bothering him, things seem to have fallen on deaf ears) and that I was left with no choice – it was beg or starve. To this, the police officer told Declan that he would personally ensure that not only would I be arrested, but I would be given a "rough ride".

Back in the train station after Declan returned, I was again met by the same two police officers. This time they didn’t waste a second and, each taking me by the arm, forcibly removed me from the station. When I politely asked if I was being arrested, the policewoman again reminded me that I am the scum of the earth, the policeman adding why would they arrest me, to be able to get warm and be given a hot cup of coffee and some food? I won’t be that lucky he told me, as I was pushed onto the wet street.

So why this sudden rush of activity by the police when I have been begging in the train station for so long now? Clearly one reason is to stop us from being able to survive day-to-day … So, despite attempts to consign Declan and me to the trash can, we are somehow still making it, although for how long is anybody’s guess.

For the record, this is Declan’s registered letter last Saturday to the project manager of Medecins du Monde UK’s Project: London, a copy of which he also sent by registered post to Prof Paul Hunt, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to the highest attainable standard of health:

Dear Ms Raymond

NHS Exemption Certificate

I was assured by a member of your medical team on 5 October 2007 that Medecins du Monde UK's Project: London would be applying on behalf of my wife and I for a National Health Service (NHS) exemption certificate for the each of us as rough sleepers, having had our entitlement to jobseeker's allowance ceased by Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus on 27 September 2006 (because I did not sign on two days before I was due to do so on 29 September 2006).

I enclose copy of my letter of 6 October 2007 (without enclosures) to the Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights, citing, among others, Medecins du Monde UK, in further reference to my urgent request for expedition of my case against the UK made on 8 September 2007 under Rule 41 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

I understand that a valid NHS exemption certificate would entitle my wife and I to the following free of charge: (1) NHS prescriptions, (2) NHS dental treatment, (3) sight tests, and (4) glasses and contact lenses.

I can confirm that neither my wife nor I is in receipt of any such certificate to date, and that we have both been in need of an exemption from charges to access healthcare since becoming rough sleepers on the streets of London on 3 November 2006.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

Enc

cc  Prof Paul Hunt, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to the highest attainable standard of health, University of Essex (by registered post – with enclosure herein referred to)

Good news and bad news

First the good news. Declan’s petition to the UN has been moved to another petition website because of useful features such as anti-spam filters and the facility to delete signatures. That was on 22 October and since then we have been very busy researching and emailing prominent scientists and academics who are pro human embryonic stem cell research. Signatures are coming slow and we are starting to wonder if our emails are being dumped straight into people’s spam boxes – Declan was informed not so long ago by more than one high profile scientist that his invitation to become an honorary associate of NAC was found in their spam box, and I too have found reply emails in our spam box.

The plan is that once we have a sufficient number of prominent signatories (including a few celebrities we have in mind), we will then present the petition to patient and scientific groups. If Declan and I were off the street by then, I would have a campaign and a website around the petition, very similar to Oxfam International’s campaign ‘Make Fair Trade’, which 20 million have signed to date.

Therapies using embryonic stem cells may one day provide important new strategies for the treatment for a host of currently untreatable disorders, and since even the healthiest can be struck with, say, Alzheimer's or Parkinson's, an accessible and energetic campaign could also attract tens of thousands of signatures – why not? And then a country may be less reluctant to ask the UN to consider an international declaration that would facilitate human embryonic stem cell research.

The bad news. The catalogue of harassment against us has intensified to such an extent that I have made a quantum leap to being a beggar first and Big Issue vendor second. All Friday evening, for example, out of necessity, I spent begging in the train station, the street and as usual outside the local supermarket – I carry my passport in case the police stop me, and my pay as you go mobile phone in case I have to send a text message to Declan informing him that I am in the police station.

Also, we have spent the last two Friday nights working throughout the night in a 24-hour internet café – as I stated in my last bog, Friday night appears to be the time of the week when I am at most risk (I sleep on the outside so that Declan can sleep with our well-tied bags): I was kicked in the chest and shoulders on a Friday; dragged out of the porch by the ankles and, a few hours later, kicked in the back on a Friday; and on an additional two Fridays we have had beer thrown all over us as we slept. You would be forgiven for thinking that our porch is situated in the West End rather than in the heart of London’s business district.

The problems with our Big Issue pitches (from which we sell The Big Issue magazine – a magazine sold by homeless throughout the UK) have actually escalated. Not only does Declan continue to be run off his pitch on Liverpool Street by, among others, The London Paper and London Lite, but now I have to contend with Shortlist, another free paper – on Thursday I had two Shortlist distributors, one on either side of me. Of course, I sold nothing. Since Declan received a letter of 10 September from John Bird, the founder and editor-in-chief of The Big Issue, more or less telling Declan to stop bothering him, all his emails to The Big Issue seem to have fallen on deaf ears. He emailed head office again last Monday over The London Paper and London Lite, to no effect.

Undeniably, selling the Big Issue is very much at an end and we are literary being left with nothing unless I am able to earn £5 or £6 a day begging – it is for this reason that I am going to put in a lot of hours this week asking for money until I get better at it (as I have stated before, begging is a recordable offence and can land you in court).

Although the active constituency of all believers in Britain is about eight per cent of the population, the Government appears to be intent that an organisation like NAC will never get off the ground – in a nutshell, NAC seeks to be a network platform for non-religious and secular voices. We, on the other hand, are intent that NAC will become a reality. If we get enough prominent signatures to get our petition going, I have no doubt it will be the beginning of the end of our time on the street.

In danger

On Friday 12 October, I narrowly avoided again being assaulted in the porch we sleep in at night. This time Declan woke to noise only to find a guy with one foot in the porch coming straight for me (I sleep on the outside so that Declan can sleep with our well-tied bags). Declan actually stopped the guy from stepping on me with an outstretched hand, shouting "What do you think you are doing?" To this day we still do not know if this guy had intended standing on me, probably breaking a few of my ribs. Then a few hours later Declan had to sit up again to another guy who also wanted to have a go at me. Oh I forgot, the next morning we woke up to an empty can of Red Bull, only to discover that someone had thrown the contents of it all over our sleeping bags and ground sheet.

Friday appears to be the day of the week when I am particularly at risk. The last time I was assaulted – a guy that didn't like "f****** tramps" repeatedly kicked me in the chest and shoulders – was on 21 September, er, a Friday. And on 4 May, oh another Friday, I was assaulted twice (a guy dragged me out of the porch by the ankles and a few hours later I was kicked in the back). And although not just directed at me, on 7 September (yet another Friday) somebody threw a glass of beer all over us as we slept.

So mindful that the next Friday (that is, yesterday) Declan might not wake up in time to prevent me ending up with something fractured, both he and I spent all week working non-stop on a petition to the United Nations in relation to human embryonic stem cell research. This petition was posted yesterday evening in one of these online petition sites and we will next be contacting prominent scientists and academics who might be interested in the petition's proposal, and perhaps put their name to it. (Last night in the porch was pretty quiet: with the exception of a guy who at 5.00am on the button – the time we get up Monday to Friday – passed by the porch roaring something at us, there was nothing else. Even the porch's floor, which I have to clean with water and paper every single night, was clean.)

On Thursday evening Declan's pitch – where he sells The Big Issue magazine – was taken over again by The London Paper, a free tabloid owned by News International of Rupert Murdoch's New York-based News Corporation. Under the Big Issue code of conduct a vendor can't argue with another street trader over pitches, so Declan had to leave. We didn't sell much last week and now find ourselves with 15 magazines which we bought but were unable to sell. Oh, well.

Declan phoned the Big Issue and also emailed the Big Issue outreach manager. There isn’t much more Declan can do, having been told by John Bird, the founder and editor-in-chief of The Big Issue, in a letter of 10 September, to more or less stop bothering him. This is his email on Thursday:

Subject: The London Paper

Dear Paul

Further to the graphic telephone message I left for you this evening with David (surname unknown), please find below copy of my email of even date to the Executive Chairman of News International, Mr Les Hinton, regarding the takeover again this afternoon of my Big Issue pitch by The London Paper.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey
Badge no. 1163

------------------

Dear Mr Hinton,

I refer further to my letter and enclosure to you of 31 July 2007, a copy of which I sent by fax and registered post to the Chairman & CEO of News Corporation, Mr Rupert Murdoch, and wish to confirm the takeover again this afternoon of my Big Issue pitch outside McDonald's on Liverpool Street by The London Paper.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey

cc  Mr Nick Hallett, Distribution Manager, The London Paper
     Mr Paul Joseph, Outreach Manager, The Big Issue

The main problem with selling so few magazines is that this weekend we can't for example put together a few pounds to buy food for Saturday and Sunday, never mind a cup of coffee. I wanted to spend a couple of hours begging on Friday afternoon – yes, I am afraid that on top of everything else, I also have to beg people for some change, which is illegal by the way – but we realised that it was more important to get the petition posted before going back to the porch for the night. Last night when we were walking to the porch we were both so hungry we decided to walk back to Sainsbury and buy a cheap packet of biscuits for 33p.

The subject-matter of the weather is currently on the verge of replacing the hunger though. According to the Met Office’s website, next week temperatures will be “below normal with overnight frosts”. Temperatures now don’t go above 12C or 13C, which would be fine if a person wears a jumper, a coat and a cap. Admittedly I do have an autumn coat, which was given to me by a customer who normally buys the Big Issue from me, but underneath all I have to wear are light long sleeve tops. When I asked the Sisters of Mercy nun who is in charge of clothes in the Dellow Centre (the only centre we can now attend for showers, coffee and a cereal breakfast since the minister’s wife of the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission barred us on 18 June due to concerns about our safety) for warm clothes on 8 October, she didn’t even give me a cap.

So my feet are usually cold, and so are my ears (I found a scarf a few days ago) and when I stand in my Big Issue pitch, especially between 7.30am and 9.10am, I totally understand the meaning of the expression “cold to the bone”. At night I am also cold and would be colder if Declan hadn’t found me a very big plastic sheet, which I use to wrap around my sleeping bag once I am inside it – I have to punch holes in it to try and stop my sleeping bag from getting damp, defeating the purpose, I suppose. If we ever get off the streets, and it won’t be thanks to the helping hands of those organisations whose purpose it is to help homeless people with whatever they need, Declan and I intend working for NAC 24/7, if only to avoid being put back on the streets.

Declan still recuperating

Declan is now getting over his “viral infection”. Gone are the sweats and the shivers and the fever, the only remaining symptom is the headache. When last Friday we returned to the Royal London Hospital (where he was hospitalised from 2-4 October but only treated with Paracetamol tablets and a fan one afternoon to reduce his temperature), he was told he had been discharged and that if he had problems he should go to the hospital’s Walk-In Centre. And what of Declan’s temperature of 39.1C, which had been taken by me with one of the hospital’s own 3M Tempa Dot Single Use Clinical Thermometers? Well, they are apparently quite unreliable things.

So a combination of Paracetamol and the Ibuprofen and Codeine Declan obtained on Friday afternoon from Médecins du Monde (Doctors of the World), as well as almost total inactivity during the weekend, has more or less done the trick – at 9.00am on Saturday, when we were waiting for the Idea Store Whitechapel library to open, Declan’s face was colourless and big drops of sweat dripped from everywhere, really.

I was a bit worried early this morning because we were on our respective pitches at Liverpool Street Station selling The Big Issue and it was raining – Declan got sick after rain got through the bottom of his runners and wet his socks – but no, it looks like the infection is nearly over. It wouldn’t be thanks to the clothes that the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre gave me yesterday though. First, on Friday morning I was told by the nun in charge of clothes to come back on Monday, and on Monday she handed me an almost empty bag (I haven’t asked her for anything since 11 April and of course I don’t have to dig deep in my memory to remember why). I suspect I am wasting my time having another bash at asking for more clothes – so things on that front are a bit tricky. But perhaps not tricky enough: last night the alarm of the porch we sleep in at night flashed a blue light all night.

On Saturday, Declan wrote to the Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights in further reference to his application of 8 September and with particular regard to his urgent request for expedition of the same date:

Application no. 22541/07
Heavey v. the United Kingdom

                                RULE 41-URGENT

Dear Sir/Madam

In further reference to my urgent request for expedition under Rule 41 of the European Convention on Human Rights made on 8 September 2007 (with particular regard to the reasons cited for the necessity of expedition), I enclose for the attention of the Court copy of Discharge Summary Report of 4 October 2007 from the Royal London Hospital certifying that I was admitted on 2 October with a viral infection.

I also enclose copy of prescription of 5 October 2007 from Medecins du Monde UK for Ibuprofen 400mg for 4 weeks and Codeine Phosphate 30mg for 1 week.

I also re-enclose copy of my letter and enclosures of 22 September 2007 to Chief Superintendent Ken Stewart of Bishopsgate Police Station regarding my (illegal) begging and severe assault on my wife.

I beg to again point out that under the heading “Necessity of expedition”, the aforementioned urgent request for expedition of 8 September states the following:

An urgent expedition is necessary in this instance because of the violations of the applicant's human rights already existing and are likely to be even greater. The right that will be violated is the right to private and family life by the threat to the applicant of being severely assaulted, becoming seriously ill and/or being reduced to begging. This would constitute a threat of irreparable and serious harm. Being reduced to begging is a threat that is imminent given that the applicant’s savings have already been exhausted.

Yours faithfully

Declan Heavey

Mario Capecchi and Oliver Smithies of the United States and Sir Martin Evans of Britain won the Nobel Medicine Prize yesterday for their research with stem cells. Their discoveries on embryonic stem cells developed a technology called gene targeting in mice that can inactive genes, providing information on their roles in various diseases. They can change any gene, disabling or enabling it. The manipulations are carried out in embryonic stem cells, then it's reintroduced to the mouse, where it's incorporated by the germ cells – sperm and eggs – so that the desired change is reliably passed on to a new generation of mice. Evans is widely credited with the discovery of embryonic stem cells.

In relation to NAC’s campaign for embryonic stem cell research, I am still doing my research but getting quite close to figuring out the campaign’s first take action. Declan and I are particularly taken by the work and accomplishments of Italian Luca Coscioni, who, before dying of amiotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in 2006 at the age of 39, had received the support of 96 Nobel Laureates in his appeal in support of freedom of scientific research. Portuguese Nobel Laureate in Literature, José Saramago, wrote to Coscioni:

Perhaps the support of a mere writer like me might be rather out of place in the list of renowned scientists who, by means of their names and their prestige, have put a seal on the statements made by Luca Coscioni in his letter of 20 March, so clear and moving. In any case, you are welcome to use my name. So that the light of reason and of human respect may illuminate the gloomy spirits of those who still believe, and will always believe, that they are the masters of our destiny. We had been waiting a long time for the day to dawn, we were tired of waiting, but suddenly the courage of a man struck dumb by a terrible disease gave us new strength. Thank you for this.

Declan admitted to hospital with a viral infection

Declan spent Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday in the Royal London Hospital. The name is quite flashy but the hospital is a bit run down – their lift is the slowest thing I think I’ve ever been in: the second day when Declan was moved by a worker to a ward on the top floor, not only did we have to wait for 5 minutes but on the third floor everybody in the lift (including one patient on a drip and another with no legs) was told to come out because a patient just out of theatre had to be transported back to his ward.

The Royal London Hospital is on Whitechapel Road, just a few metres from the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission – where we were barred by the minister’s wife on 18 June due to concerns about our safety: not even a complaint by Declan to the Charity Commission has brought about a re-admittance – and near the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre, the only place left for us to go: this morning Declan and I had no choice but to ask the nun in charge of clothes for some warm clothing, which I was told to collect on Monday.

Declan was admitted from the Accident & Emergency Department at about 11.30am on Tuesday because of high fever – total lack of energy, sweaty, body aches and chill. The discharge report states Declan has a “viral infection”. I say has because his temperature was back up this afternoon to such an extent that he had to get a hefty prescription for Ibuprofen and Codeine from Médecins du Monde (Doctors of the World) – an international humanitarian aid organisation that recruits medical and non-medical volunteers, who provide healthcare for vulnerable populations around the world, and happened to be in the Dellow Centre this morning for referrals to their centre in Bethnal Green.

Perhaps I should add that the treatment Declan received from the Royal London Hospital comprised of Paracetamol painkillers and a fan on Wednesday afternoon to bring down his temperature. (And where did I sleep while Declan was in hospital? Well, I was allowed to sleep on a chair beside Declan’s bed because the hospital residence for the next of kin of patients was full up.)

It was while Declan was lying on the hospital bed that I came up with our campaign for embryonic stem cell research for private funding. After doing research on the internet, I believe it will be totally unique … but more about that in the next blog.

Oh, and just for the record, at the moment Declan’s temperature is 39.1C, as high as it was when he was admitted on Tuesday morning (I have a few of these single-use clinical thermometers). He is absolutely dripping in sweat and going back into the hospital now to see what they have to say about it.

We don’t have to be reminded that the Department for Work and Pensions (Declan’s whole application to the European Court of Human Rights is against this particular department) and the Department of Health (of which the Royal London Hospital is a part), share the same solicitor’s office.

Thirteenth visit by the police

Last night at 8.20pm we had yet another visit from the Bishopsgate City of London police at the porch we sleep in at night. I suppose that after being visited so many times (we’ve been sleeping in this particular porch since being made rough sleepers on 3 November 2006), we have a knack for it and can take their questioning this way and that way – well, Declan does most of the talking. In the past, we have been questioned twice by two police officers on horses, by a police officer that was mainly concerned about our welfare, by female police officers, etc.

This time, however, it was quite close to Samuel L Jackson’s S.W.A.T. squad (without a Colin Farrell): five police officers came out of a big police van that had just parked across the road and made their way straight for us. Anyway, Declan was drilled with the usual questions, except this time they wanted to know why didn’t we want to return to Ireland. Declan’s answer was that we are European citizens and waiting for relief from the European Court of Human Rights. British police have a bit of a reputation for being institutionally racist – the one that suggested we leave the UK was from the Middle East though – so we are not taking it personally.

You have to be caught begging to be arrested which is why Declan had no trouble informing them that, as a result of The Big Issue not sorting out the problems we are having on our pitches, we are being forced to beg for money (it seems The Sun tabloid newspaper has completely taken over my pitch after 11.00am, which means I can only step in to sell the Big Issue to passers-by between 7.30am and 9.15am – I say 9.15am because after 9.10am the morning rush hour dies and things don’t pick up again until well past midday). Declan did tell them that twice we have had £350 for the deposit The Big Issue requested of Declan to find us a place to live.

I don’t know which is worse: to be hungry or cold. I am quite used now to going to sleep quite hungry and, although it is not something I welcome with open arms, it has given me a sharp edge which I appreciate: I wrote the draft of Declan’s application of 8 September to the European Court and the urgent request for expedition that went with it – as early as 5.00am and sometimes until 11.00pm – and now I am going full-on to see what NAC could do in embryonic stem cell research, for private funding. So I am very much hoping that the cold won’t work against me. There is another reason why I am cold though. On 11 April I was forced to ask the nun in charge of clothes in the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre for a pair of jeans and really I am not looking forward to asking her again for clothes, this time for the winter. The Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission didn’t give me much either and it’s of course rather unsurprising that on 18 June we were barred from its premises, albeit because the minister’s wife was concerned about our safety.

Back to embryonic stem cell research, there was an article yesterday in The Guardian stating that according to the new head of the Medical Research Council, the UK is in danger of losing its leading position in stem cell research if the next US president relaxes federal restrictions on funding imposed by President Bush. Apparently Bush's policy on embryonic stem cell research looks unlikely to survive long after his political demise because the leading Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were both involved in trying to steer a bill liberalising stem cell research through the senate this year and Republican candidates John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani are both in favour – although in Mr Giuliani's case with reservations. One of the principal arguments of those who oppose the research is that life begins at conception, and, in effect, any embryonic cell is sacred.

The science is very complex, but the bottom line is that embryonic stem cells are what is called "pluripotent" – in that they can potentially be tweaked to form any cell structure in the human body from lung tissue to epidermal tissue or heart muscles. Adult stem cells can (mostly) only reproduce their existing form.

In Australia, the legislation – the Research Involving Human Embryos and Prohibition of Human Cloning Amendment Bill – is due to be debated within weeks, with the sitting beginning on October 9. Meanwhile, the Australian Christian Lobby – trenchantly opposed to the Bill – has directly lobbied all but a handful of state MPs.

In July 2006, the European Union agreed to allow funding for human embryonic stem cell experiments after member states compromised on the way the research is financed – Germany, which had led opposition, agreed to the compromise after a five-and-a-half hour debate while Poland, Austria, Slovakia, Lithuania and Malta maintained their rejection but lacked the votes to block it. The compromise will prevent scientists using EU cash to extract stem cells from human embryos, although they will be able to work on new embryonic cells from national and other sources.

On 22 December 2006 the Secretary General of the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community (COMECE) stated: “We continue to insist that the EU should concentrate its joint research efforts on research areas which do not violate deeply held convictions about the inviolability of human life. We are at a loss to understand why the European institutions insisted on allowing EU-funding for very contentious research involving the instrumentalisation of human embryos. We recall our fundamental ethical and anthropological concern regarding the pursuit of such research.”

Perhaps the final word, though, belongs to Michael O'Neill, a 21-year-old Business and Health Science student at the Queensland University of Technology suffering from cystic fibrosis, who says that those who oppose this new frontier of research "don't understand what's involved, they are not the ones sitting here in this hospital bed".

Full-time begging

Since last week my pitch has been taken over after 11.00am by a vendor of the tabloid The Sun – The Sun is owned by News International of Rupert Murdoch’s New York-based News Corporation. This distributor can plant himself, and his big patio umbrella, anywhere along the road to sell his paper but no, he is very particular about transacting his business from my spot (as a vendor of The Big Issue, I have a registered pitch in my name and can’t go anywhere I please like this lucky vendor). Declan’s pitch was also taken over by another of Murdoch’s newspapers, the free The London Paper on 30 July. The next day Declan complained to the editor-in-chief of The London Paper and sent a copy of this letter to the chief executive of News International and to Murdoch himself, having been told by the Big Issue outreach manager to phone The London Paper and/or the agency that recruits its distributors.

The issue of us not being able to stand in on our pitches to make some money selling The Big Issue – to be able to more or less survive this autumn and winter – has also been raised in Declan’s urgent application to the European Court of Human Rights of 8 September under the heading “Background of request”:

The applicant and his wife have been surviving on the streets of London by selling The Big Issue magazine, which is sold on the streets by homeless people. Frequently of late the applicant and his wife have had to walk off their pitches in order to avoid confrontation with other street traders. The applicant has lodged complaints with The Big Issue in respect of the intrusion onto his and/or his wife’s pitch of other Big Issue vendors and distributors of, inter alia, London Lite, The London Paper, City AM and Sport (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 30 August 2007 to the founder and editor-in-chief of The Big Issue in Supporting Documents, pp. 79-87).

As I have already written in this blog, the case of Papon v France was expedited by the Court under rule 41 of the Convention because of the advance age and ill-health of the applicant in prison: the case was lodged on 12 January 2001 and on 23 January the Court asked the respondent Government to submit information and comments about the applicant’s conditions and regime. (Nazi collaborator Maurice Papon was a Prefet de Police under General de Gaulle until 1968, and a Budget Minister to President Valery Giscard d'Estaing in the 1970s. But in 1981 his war crimes caught up with him when hundreds of documents were found by accident in the recesses of a town hall. He was convicted in April 1998 for having signed orders for the deportation of 1,690 Jews between 1942 and 1944 – most went on to concentration camps such as Auschwitz and all but a handful died. The Court ruled that French courts failed to give fair treatment to Papon after his 1998 conviction, and he was awarded 29,192 euros in legal costs.)

The European Court must feel that Declan’s case is not as pressing as Papon’s had been. Or maybe it is paragraph 3 of his application to the Court, which declares: “In September 2003 the applicant and his wife moved from Dublin to Birmingham, England, where they were self-employed until July 2005. They attempted to set up an international secular humanist organisation called NAC (Network of those Abused by Church), for which the applicant’s wife developed a website at www.nac1.bravehost.com. While self-employed, they covered their expenses with savings of £44,000, the remnants of the applicant’s late father’s will.” Hasn’t a 2006 survey conducted by the University of Minnesota concluded that "Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in ‘sharing their vision of American society’”? Researchers go on: “Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry."

Back to my pitch. Declan sent yet another email on 17 September to the chairman of News International, Les Hinton, to absolutely no effect. There isn’t much more we can do, having been told by John Bird, the founder and editor-in-chief of The Big Issue, in a letter of 10 September, to more or less stop bothering him:

Dear Mr Heavey

I have employed many people over the years to do jobs related to the running of the Big Issue. I have never employed them to do my job; likewise I do not do their job.

Please bear this in mind when you are composing your letters. You do not need to address your letters to me, as it is not my job. I would only get involved if you were utterly and totally let down by those whose job it is in the Big Issue.

I hope this assist in your deliberations in pursuit of your claims.

Yours sincerely,

John Bird
The Big Issue
Founder and Editor-In-Chief

It will come to a stage when both our pitches at Liverpool Street Station will be completely taken over and I will have no option but to beg full time. (Begging is a recordable offence, and the courts may issue community sentences for those convicted a fourth time for begging. This may include community penalties for drug, alcohol and mental health treatment. Throughout the UK authorities have resorted to Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs), public order offences and civil injunctions as a means of dealing with begging.) Apparently there are plenty of homeless that have been selling The Big Issue for years – but that privilege doesn’t seem to apply to us.

Anyway, this morning when we were in Liverpool Street Station, getting ready to go to our pitches, a police officer came along and stood beside us as he eyed the floor below – where we beg. I think in fact the City of London police may now be considering having Declan hauled before the courts, so from now on it will be me the one doing the begging for the both of us. I may as well because it is now too cold to stand out on my pitch: between 7.30am and 8.30am this morning I sold no Big Issues at all and was the only one wearing a simple long sleeve shirt. I am, of course, looking at a prison cell pending a court hearing (as threatened on 13 September), but other than jump into the Thames I don’t see what else we can do.

In the October issue of Geographical, the official magazine of the Royal Geographical Society, there is a small article on a July 2006 report authored by Professor John Guillebaud, a leading authority on family planning and co-chairman of the Optimum Population Trust. The Youthquake report says that humanity is outstripping the biological capacity of the Earth by a quarter each year, and cites climate change and food shortages as consequences of a high global population and rising consumption levels. It claims that by 2050, when the world’s population is projected to reach 9.2 billion, humans will be using the biocapacity of two Earths. (The Trust suggests that governments – both in the UK and worldwide – should introduce a voluntary two-child limit, pointing to Iran, which halved its birth rate to 2.6 births per women between 1988 and 1996, as an example.) Prof Guillebaud’s concerns have been echoed by Professor Chris Rapley, director of the British Science Museum and former director of the British Antarctic Survey, who has said that solving the Earth's environmental problems means addressing the size of its human population. Writing for the BBC News website, he says population is the "Cinderella" issue of the environmental movement. "Unless and until this changes," he writes, "summits such as [the December 2005 Montreal Summit on the control of carbon emissions "Beyond Kyoto"] in Montreal which address only part of the problem will be limited to at best very modest success, with the welfare and quality of life of future generations the ineluctable casualty."

You would reckon that for once the pro-family organisations, which continue to place obstacles in the way of women who want to control their fertility, would shout up since you don’t have to be a brain surgeon to know that the issue of population management must be addressed to deal with the Earth's environmental problems. But no, they are as anti-vocal as ever. The Geographical states that the Youthquake report has come under fire from the World Congress of Families and a few minutes spent in Google lets you see that the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children and Comment on Reproductive Ethics are also doing their best to brush it off. If NAC was up and running it would have a meaningful interview with the author, postcasts, and would try to find scientists that concur with his view; and, of course, I am of the opinion that a photograph speaks a 1000 words, so I would have plenty of them to make the point of the importance of voluntary family planning … NAC would give these Christian organisations a good run around – to be honest, giving these Christian organisations and the Vatican a good run around has been my first and last thought every single day for the last eleven months.

Declan’s last two postings in the JREF Forum

Declan has posted two new postings in the JREF Forum. The one yesterday is in answer to why Declan doesn’t get a job and the second, well, it is really a general statement about what NAC’s mission is. (There was actually a comment in relation to the assault on me yesterday to the effect that it was strange that the attack continued while Declan's arm was on me – Declan wouldn’t know how to respond to that.)

Anyway, these are the two postings:

                         (1)  Why don’t you get a job?

Lola was severely assaulted last night – it has just been put in the NAC blog. Her statement was taken by the police this morning, a copy of which I have sent off to the European Court of Human Rights in my case against the UK (with particular regard to the reasons cited for the necessity of expedition), which is summarised as follows:

1. This application concerns a serious violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life arising from the refusal of his local jobcentre to accept his wife’s proposed jobseeker’s agreement for referral to an adjudication officer in accordance with section 9(6)(a) of the Jobseekers Act 1995. As a result of the refusal, the applicant’s and his wife’s entitlement to JSA was twice suspended and then ceased, and they are currently sleeping rough on the streets of London. The applicant invokes Articles 8 and 13.
2. The applicant submits that the interference with his rights under Article 8 was not prescribed by law, that it did not pursue any of the legitimate aims in Article 8(2), and that the interference was not necessary in a democratic society. He also submits that there was no effective remedy available in respect of the interference, in violation of Article 13.

[we have not requested permission to publish the question asked]

The issue of gainful employment has been addressed in my application of 8 September to the Court under the heading “Sleeping rough in London”, paras 22-31:

22. Since 3 November 2006 the applicant and his wife have been sleeping rough in the porch of an office building in the heart of London’s business district. On 22 November 2006, the Dellow Centre recorded on the applicant’s wife’s registration form that St Mungo’s, London’s largest homelessness organisation, had informed the Centre that neither the applicant nor his wife could be referred to a hostel “due to not being on any benefits”. The last ten months have been physically, mentally and emotionally draining for the applicant and his wife. Throughout this time, they have had to cope with a severe and unnecessary strain upon their lives.
23. On 18 November 2006 a stocky man in his thirties sat on the right hand side of the applicant’s wife’s face while she was sleeping. On 4 May 2007 the applicant’s wife was asleep in her sleeping bag when a passer-by grabbed her hard by the ankles, dragged her in an arc down the two marble steps of the porch and, having turned her a full 180 degrees, dragged her a further three or so metres down the pavement before releasing her and walking off. Later that night, with her back to the street and her head inside her sleeping bag, she was kicked in the back by a passer-by with the sole of his shoe. The first of these two assaults left the applicant’s wife with severe bruising on her left thigh and forearm that lasted two weeks, as well as with a sore left wrist and little finger. On 1 July 2007 the applicant was woken by a well-dressed passer-by that lent over his wife and hit him in the thigh. On 27 July a passer-by threw two unopened plastic bottles of mustard at an unused door the applicant uses to prop his pillow rest against, each one narrowly missing the applicant’s head on its fall. On 26 August a passer-by threw a metal Metropolitan Police A-board (for traffic redirection) onto the steps of the porch, the handle end of which hit the applicant’s wife on the back while she was sleeping. On 7 September a passer-by threw a glass of beer over the applicant and his wife while they were sleeping.
24. On 26 and 28 February 2007 the alarm on the wall of the porch they sleep in sounded and flashed all night. Frequently the applicant and his wife have to endure the sounding and/or flashing alarm (most recently on 13 August), people going in and out of the office building through the porch door at all hours of the night (most recently on 6 September) and noisy and intrusive passers-by (most recently on 7 September). There are some nights the applicant and his wife only get a few hours sleep.
25. On 17 February 2007 the applicant was punched twice in the face in an unprovoked attack by a homeless man in the canteen of the Whitechapel Mission (Crime Reference No. 4204886/07). On 21 May the applicant applied under the Data Protection Act 1998, as advised by the Metropolitan Police Service, for a copy of the witness statement that the Metropolitan Police took from him at Bethnal Green Police Station on 27 April 2007 in respect of the assault, but the statement was never provided to him (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 25 July 2007 to the European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services in Supporting Documents, pp. 27-43). On 18 June the applicant’s wife was assaulted by a homeless woman in the canteen of the Whitechapel Mission (Crime Reference No. 4217341/07). Later that morning the manager of the Mission barred the applicant and his wife due to concerns about their safety. On 19 June the applicant lodged a complaint with the Charity Commission in respect of the bar (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 17 August 2007 to the President of the European Commission in Supporting Documents, pp. 64-78).
26. According to the website “Whitechapel Mission” (whitechapel.org.uk), the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission is “often the only place open weekends, Bank Holidays, Christmas and Easter” and “the only place to obtain a cooked breakfast in the City or the East End”. The barring of the applicant and his wife from the Whitechapel Mission has had a very detrimental and disruptive impact on their lives, not least because they have been reduced to washing in public toilets.
27. On 18 December 2006 the applicant was admitted to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital for interstitial pneumonia. In the Discharge Summary Report dated 20 December 2006 (see Supporting Documents, p. 26), the applicant’s doctor, Dr M Feher, recorded that the applicant was admitted feeling feverish with cough, shortness of breath, and a chest pain that was worse on breathing, worse on inspiration. Dr Feher also noted that the applicant had not been eating due to lack of finance and had an episode of loss of consciousness, witnessed by his wife. Since then, the applicant’s physical health has deteriorated significantly. He has lost a lot of weight, and on 2 August 2007 attended the Accident & Emergency department at the Royal London Hospital. The Certificate of Attendance (see Supporting Documents, p. 52) records that he attended with an upper respiratory tract infection, for which he was prescribed a course of antibiotics to follow for five days (to prevent the infection travelling to the lung tissue to cause pneumonia).
28. The applicant and his wife have been surviving on the streets of London by selling The Big Issue magazine, which is sold on the streets by homeless people. Frequently of late the applicant and his wife have had to walk off their pitches in order to avoid confrontation with other street traders. The applicant has lodged complaints with The Big Issue in respect of the intrusion onto his and/or his wife’s pitch of other Big Issue vendors and distributors of, inter alia, London Lite, The London Paper, City AM and Sport (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 30 August 2007 to the founder and editor-in-chief of The Big Issue in Supporting Documents, pp. 79-87).
29. Since 20 July 2007 and as a consequence of not being able to sell enough Big Issues, the applicant and his wife have been unable to afford transport (for the last seven weeks they have been walking everywhere with all their belongings), clothes or other basic necessities, and have been eating very poorly. On 6 August the applicant had to withdraw £200 from his Yorkshire Building Society account (see Supporting Documents, p. 53), the last of the money he and his wife had been saving to put down a deposit on a flat. (The Big Issue had told the applicant that if he had £350 for a deposit they would be able to find him and his wife somewhere to live.) The applicant and his wife are extremely concerned that they will be further reduced to begging – a criminal offence in England.
30. On 1 September 2007 the applicant made a statement to the City of London Police at Bishopsgate Police Station following the arrest of a beggar for the racist and discriminative abuse of the applicant while he was selling The Big Issue the day previous, and a subsequent threat to kill (see copy of the applicant’s witness statement of 1 September 2007, with attachment, in Supporting Documents, pp. 88-94).
31. The applicant submits that neither he nor his wife have been able to obtain any kind of gainful employment as a result of their particular circumstances. The City of London Police has visited them at the porch they sleep in on twelve occasions to date. On 10 August they were each issued a stop and search ticket stating that the reason for the stop was “welfare”, and that the outcome was “satisfactory”.

Such is our case to the Court. Hopefully, the UK government will have to reply. Thank you everyone.

                                  (2)  NAC mission

I regret that it has not been possible to answer so many important questions in one place.

My wife and I are deeply concerned with the resurgence of Protestant and Catholic right-wing groups, and their alliance with political-ideological movements to block public policies that are at variance with religious doctrine. Together with the Vatican, these fundamentalist forces are thwarting intellectual and social progress through their unflinching and tenacious commitment to dogma.

It is because of it that NAC (Network of those Abused by Church) champions public policies that are based on secular principles, not religious doctrine; works for the separation church and state; and calls for the scientific, rational examination of religion to protect future generations from the ignorance so often fostered by religion hiding behind doctrinal smoke screens.

NAC has been set up to bring together organisations, groups and individuals from across the globe who advocate liberal reforms strongly rejected by the Vatican and the Christian Right, with a view to supporting them and promoting their views. We achieve this mission by:

1.  Committing to campaigns and initiatives that attract, welcome and support advocates.

2.  Producing action alerts which can help advocates who need the public to send emails or faxes to decision-makers on critical issues.

3.  Bringing together the latest news and views from advocates.

4.  Issuing a newsletter, "NacNet". Sent monthly to email subscribers, it will highlight the campaigns and projects of NAC and advocates.

5.  Producing a forum where members can discuss issues, make announcements or share views.

Thank you everyone.

I am severely assaulted while sleeping

Last night I was “severely assaulted” – well, that is how the police officer that took my statement described it. He also said it was quite a disgusting assault because I was a woman and I was asleep. Basically I was the victim of a hate crime and a threat to kill (Crime Reference No. CR/007884/07). It is not the first time I have been attacked in the porch though. On 4 May I was assaulted twice: at 11.30pm, while sleeping, some guy dragged me out of the porch by the ankles and at 3.45am I was kicked in the back. Most recently on 7 September some guy threw a glass of beer all over us as we slept (I actually woke up because I felt my face wet).

This guy that assaulted me had two friends with him, although they did not participate in the assault nor did they pull him off me. Declan sleeps on the inside protecting all our belongings, which include all our documents, and was concerned the friends wanted him to stand out. There is CCTV all around the area – it’s the business district after all – so it shouldn’t be difficult to pick up the assault in question. This is the statement which was written this morning by the police officer on my behalf (I was given a copy):

STATEMENT OF MARIA DOLORES HEAVEY

I am the above named person. I have been a resident in the UK for about four years. Since 3 November 2006 I have been sleeping in the porch next door to Pret A Manger on …, London. At about 05.00 this morning the 22 September 2007 I was asleep in the porch with my husband Declan Jude Heavey. I was facing towards the street in a sleeping bag and hood which concealed my face.

I was woken by the sound of shouting which I ignored. There was then a period of silence for about two seconds. I then felt a heavy blow to my upper left arm which felt like a kick. This was followed immediately by a similar blow, both of these blows felt like kicks and were delivered with some force. I then heard a male voice shout “FUCKING TRAMPS”. Declan then shouted “THIS IS A WOMAN”. I then felt Declan put his arm on me. I then removed my hood from my sleeping bag and unzipped it slightly. This was in order to see my attacker. After I had removed my hood from my sleeping bag my attacker stamped on my upper arms and chest a further 5 times. The blows were delivered with a great deal of force.

I looked up and observed my attacker and two people standing with him. I would describe my attacker as a white male aged about 25 of slim build and about six feet tall. He had an angular face with high cheekbones. He had short, light brown hair, he was clean shaven. He was wearing a thin materialed top but I do not know what colour. He was wearing light coloured jeans which were loosely fitting. He was wearing trainers but I don’t remember the colour. He had an English accent.

My attacker then stopped stamping on me and shouted “I WILL FUCKING KILL YOU” before walking away in the direction of … before turning right towards ... About eight minutes later one of the attacker’s friends who had been watching the incident came back from the same direction and passed by and said “sorry”. He walked past me and turned back at Pret A Manger, walked past me again and said “sorry”. I would describe this man as white in his mid twenties of medium build about 5’8 inches tall wearing a long sleeved, stripped blue and white top with no buttons. I do not believe this was a football top. He was wearing blue jeans and light coloured trainers. He had light brown hair. He then walked away in the direction of … and turned right towards ... About three minutes later the second witness came back from the same direction. He walked past me twice on the same side of the street as me. He looked in my direction but did not say anything. I could describe this person as a white man, probably about 27 or 28 of a heavy build but not fat. He had light brown hair about collar length at the back. He was clean shaven. He was wearing a light pink shirt, short sleeved, buttoned all the way down with a collar.

He then walked off in the direction of … before turning right in the direction of ... I observed him cross the street and turn left. I could see him through the windows of ... I had observed all three men for a period in total of about 30 seconds. I observed my attacker in total for a period of about 4 seconds. Throughout the attack there was no natural light. However, the street was illuminated with street lamps.

I would recognise all three individuals again. None of the three men smelt of intoxicating liquor and my attacker’s speech was not slurred. I feel the attack was premeditated because my attacker was careful not to kick me in the head. The blows were deliberate and aimed at my upper body.

This incident has left me upset and very angry as I feel my personal space has been violated. Although at this stage I have no bruises I feel this is due only to the fact that I had on at the time 5 layers of thin clothing and was in a sleeping bag. I have been a victim of crime before but this incident has left me upset and angry because it was completely unprovoked. Should it prove necessary I am willing to attend court.

Signature: Maria Heavey
Signature witnesses: PC Stuart Thomas (409C)

Declan has also written to the Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights. As I have already stated in this blog, if Declan’s urgent request for expedition of 8 September to the Court is granted (Declan’s main application of 8 September can be read here), it is not beyond the realms of possibility that things could be resolved in just a few months. The case of Papon v France was expedited by the Court under rule 41 of the Convention because of the advance age and ill-health of the applicant in prison: the case was lodged on 12 January 2001 and on 23 January the Court asked the respondent Government to submit information and comments about the applicant’s conditions and regime. I hope the European Court doesn’t respond to Declan’s application while I am lying in a hospital bed with broken ribs. This is the letter he sent:

Application no. 22541/07
Heavey v. the United Kingdom

                                RULE 41-URGENT

Dear Sir/Madam

In further reference to my urgent request for expedition under Rule 41 of the European Convention on Human Rights made on 8 September 2007 (with particular regard to the reasons cited for the necessity of expedition), I enclose for the attention of the Court copy of my letter and enclosures of today’s date to Chief Superintendent Ken Stewart of Bishopsgate Police Station regarding my (illegal) begging and severe assault on my wife.

I beg to again point out that under the heading “Necessity of expedition”, the aforementioned urgent request for expedition states the following:

An urgent expedition is necessary in this instance because of the violations of the applicant's human rights already existing and are likely to be even greater. The right that will be violated is the right to private and family life by the threat to the applicant of being severely assaulted, becoming seriously ill and/or being reduced to begging. This would constitute a threat of irreparable and serious harm. Being reduced to begging is a threat that is imminent given that the applicant’s savings have already been exhausted.

Yours faithfully

Declan Heavey

Enc

Issues raised in the JREF Forum

Declan has posted a letter introducing ourselves and NAC to different non-religious forums (for example, the Richard Dawkins Forum) in an attempt to get us and NAC off the ground – we are still begging (illegally) of course, which is quite humiliating to say the least. Some important questions have been raised in the James Randi Educational Foundation Forum which Declan dutifully answered, and I think that he did a very good job considering that we don’t have much free time or the luxury of logging onto the internet at the drop of a hat. (In relation to the JREF Forum, we are in the Forum Community under the title “Network of those Abused by Church (James Randi, Honorary Associate)”; we have had over 1000 hits since last Sunday, so it must be a lively thread.) Below are Declan’s answers to the following questions (paraphrased, as they appear in many places in different ways):

(1) Is NAC a registered charity?
(2) Has not Declan a psychiatric history?
(3) Why don’t you 'sign on' for Jobseeker’s Allowance again?

                      (1)  Is NAC a registered charity?

Thank you everyone. Five points which I hope will answer some of the many questions raised in this thread so far, and in particular by the posting above [we have not requested permission to publish]: (1) Each trustee of NAC has agreed to the listing of their name pending the receipt of paperwork for signing because NAC has yet to be registered as a company. (2) All honorary associates of NAC have agreed to the listing of their name in that capacity. Those who did not reply to their invitation are not included, nor are those who declined the invitation. (3) Each trustee and honorary associate of NAC has been notified by email of 17 or 18 September that I have entered forums to seek publicity and donations that can enable my wife and I to survive the next couple of months trying to get NAC off the ground. (4) Each trustee and honorary associate of NAC has been assured on 17 or 18 September that any donation is made through PayPal and will be revealed to the trustees of NAC by regular update. (5) In my application of 8 September 2007 to the European Court of Human Rights (which can be found here: http://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.com/2007/09/application-to-european-court-of-human.html), I state the following in paragraph 3:

The applicant, Declan Heavey, a former teacher, was born in Dublin in 1960 and has been sleeping rough in London with his wife since 3 November 2006. His wife, a former psychologist and an Irish citizen, was born in Madrid in 1965. They were married in July 1993, and have no children. In September 2003 the applicant and his wife moved from Dublin to Birmingham, England, where they were self-employed until July 2005. They attempted to set up an international secular humanist organisation called NAC (Network of those Abused by Church), for which the applicant's wife developed a website at www.nac1.bravehost.com. While self-employed, they covered their expenses with savings of £44,000, the remnants of the applicant's late father's will.

I know there are many other important questions that have been raised, particularly in relation to my own background (ie, my complaint against the Hospitaller Order of St John of God - the source of NAC). I hope to address as many of these questions as I can tomorrow. Thank you again everyone. Please bear with me.

                 (2)  Has not Declan a psychiatric history?

As I stated yesterday, I know there are many important questions that have been raised, particularly in relation to my own background (ie, my complaint against the Hospitaller Order of St John of God – the source of NAC). For example: [we have not requested permission to publish].

A wardship inquiry into my soundness of mind was heard in the High Court of Ireland before Mr Justice Geoghegan (now a judge of the Supreme Court) and a jury on 26 February 1997 and following three days, and which I successfully defended in person. Dr Carol Coulter of The Irish Times subsequently wrote the following on 6 March 1997 in an opinion article for the newspaper titled “Wards of court lose rights and liberties: The ward of court process was uniquely opened to public scrutiny this week when a man successfully fought off attempts to have him made a ward”:

On Tuesday, Mr Declan Heavey convinced a High Court jury that he is not “of unsound mind” and unable to manage his person and his affairs. The vote was nine to three. He had successfully fought off an effort to have him made a ward of court.

However, before his case even came to court Mr Heavey accomplished the unusual feat of having it heard before a jury. Uniquely, he also succeeded in convincing the President of the High Court, Mr Justice Costello, that there was no good reason for it to be heard in camera, and that it could be open to the public and the media. For the first time, the workings of the law on wardship of court were open to public scrutiny.

She concludes as follows:

Being made a ward of court severely limits a person’s liberty. It is clear that the question of Mr Heavey being made a ward of court would never have arisen if he had not challenged his father’s will.

The fact that this all arose out of a disputed will raises the question that this law, with its serious consequences for the individual concerned, is open to being used in family disputes in such circumstances.

My complaint against the Hospitaller Order of St John of God – the source of NAC – was initially presented in a letter of 5 December 1997 by Mr Brian Garrett of Elliott Duffy Garrett Solicitors to the Order’s (then) Provincial of All Ireland, Fr Fintan Brennan-Whitmore (a scan of this letter can be seen in my personal website www.nac1.bravehost.com/declanwebsite/vatican/garrett.html), which states:

We are acting for Mr Declan Jude Heavey who currently lives at 26 Ardaluin Heights, Newscastle, County Down, and our client has consulted us in relation to treatment which he received at St John of God Hospital, Stillorgan, where he was improperly diagnosed as suffering from a manic depressive illness and was for extensive periods treated intensively with various medications which were inappropriate and injurious to our client’s health. You will be aware that our client’s treatment was at all material times under the direction of Dr Patrick Tubridy (Consultant Psychiatrist).

We have, incidentally, been given a full history of the events and issues before the courts in Dublin which culminated in the determination of the High Court jury in March of this year that our client was not “of unsound mind” and was not unable to manage his person and affairs. This finding was contrary to the diagnosis of our client by the Hospital professional staff and at odds with the treatment which our client had been given and indeed the approach to our client while in the Hospital or undergoing treatment prescribed by the Hospital professional staff.

As for the specific reason why my wife and I find ourselves homeless, the following is taken from my urgent request of 8 September 2007 to the European Court of Human Rights for the expedition of my case against the UK under the heading “Background of request” (the full request can found at: http://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.com/2007/09/urgent-request-for-expedition-under.html):

In July 2005 the applicant and his wife were awarded Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) at their local Jobcentre Plus (JCP), Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus. On 14 August 2006 the applicant’s wife attended an advisory interview at the JCP Office to review her Jobseeker’s Agreement (JSAg) for the second time. On this occasion, however, the JCP threatened to suspend her JSA unless she extended the nature of the employment for which she would be available to include permanent work, and refused to accept her proposed JSAg for temporary work only for referral to an adjudication officer in accordance with section 9(6)(a) of the Jobseekers Act 1995. As a consequence of the refusal, the applicant’s and his wife’s entitlement to JSA was twice suspended and then ceased on 27 September 2006 because the applicant failed to 'sign on' two days before he was due to do so on 29 September. In a series of letters, the applicant notified the JCP and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions of the mistake, but no action was taken. (All the applicant received was a letter from JCP of 5 October 2006 acknowledging receipt of, inter alia, letters from him dated 29 and 30 September.)

Since 3 November 2006 the applicant and his wife have been sleeping rough in the porch of an office building in the heart of London’s business district. On 22 November, the Dellow Centre recorded on the applicant’s wife’s registration form that St Mungo’s, London’s largest homelessness organisation, had informed the centre that neither the applicant nor his wife could be referred to a hostel “due to not being on any benefits”.

Thank you everyone. I really am very sorry that it is not possible to answer more important questions at one sitting. My wife and I get up at 5.00am every morning, wash in public toilets in the local train station and, as result of all the problems selling the Big Issue magazine (which is sold on the streets by homeless people), have to beg – a criminal activity in England, for which we have already been threatened with arrest and custody pending a court hearing the next time either one of us is caught (more about this hapless situation can be found at http://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.com/2007/09/we-are-illegal-beggars.html).

   (3)  Why don’t you 'sign on' for Jobseeker’s Allowance again?

This question cuts to the heart of my case against the UK in the European Court of Human Rights. From my application of 8 September 2007 (the full application can be seen at http://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.com/2007/09/application-to-european-court-of-human.html), paras 70-73:

* JCP stands for my (then) local Jobcentre Plus, Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus

   70.    The applicant also submits that he did everything that could reasonably be expected of him to exhaust domestic remedies in respect of the JCP’s ceasing of his and his wife’s entitlement to JSA on 27 September 2006. The Court has found that according to the “generally recognised rules of international law” there may be special circumstances that absolve an applicant from the obligation to exhaust the domestic remedies at his disposal (see Van Oosterwijck v Belgium, judgment of 6 November 1980, Series A, No. 40, pp. 18-19, paras. 36-40). The rule is also applicable where an administrative practice consisting of a repetition of acts incompatible with the Convention and official tolerance by the State authorities has been shown to exist, and is of such a nature as to make proceedings futile or ineffective (see Ireland v the United Kingdom, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A, No. 25, p. 64, para. 159, and the report of the Commission in the same case, Series B, No. 23-I, pp. 394-97).
   71.    The applicant submits that a consideration by the Court of the following factors would lead to the conclusion of the existence of special circumstances which dispensed the applicant from the obligation to appeal to a social security appeal tribunal in respect of the ceasing of the applicant’s and his wife’s entitlement to JSA on 27 September 2006:
   (1)    On 30 September 2006 the applicant wrote to the manager of JCP advising of the Jobcentre's mistake in ceasing his and his wife's entitlement to benefit on 27 September because he did not sign his declaration, when both he and his wife were not due to sign on until 29 September, and sent a copy of this letter by registered post to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Subject to regulation 27(1) of the Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996, entitlement to JSA shall not cease if the claimant shows, before the end of the fifth working day after the day on which he failed to provide a signed declaration, that he had a good cause for the failure. Nonetheless, no action was taken to rectify the mistake made by the JCP.
   (2)    The JCP further failed to provide the applicant with an explanation as to why it would not change its decision of 27 September, an explanation that the applicant was entitled to within one month of the date of the decision letter for an automatic right to appeal to a social security appeal tribunal. By registered letter dated 4 October 2006 the applicant complained to the Secretary of State, but no action was taken. (All the applicant received was a letter from the JCP of 5 October acknowledging receipt of, inter alia, letters from the applicant dated 29 and 30 September.)
   (3)    Following Mr Justice Collins’s refusal (on the papers) of leave to apply for judicial review, the application was renewed on 17 October 2006, and a copy sent by registered post to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. By registered letter dated 20 October 2006 the applicant again complained to the Secretary of State, but no action was taken.
   (4)    By letter dated 31 October 2006 the Administrative Court Office advised the applicant that his permission application had been listed for oral hearing on 11 December 2006 in the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Having been denied an explanation as to why the JCP would not change its decision of 27 September, and thereby deprived of his automatic right to appeal to a social security appeal tribunal, the applicant submits that he and his wife were left with no choice but to go homeless in London [as opposed to Birmingham], where the pursuance of his claim through the national courts was accessible, capable of providing redress in respect of the complaint and offered reasonable prospects of success.
    (5)    The applicant wishes to emphasise that having had their entitlement to JSA ceased on 27 September, neither he nor his wife was entitled to a hardship payment (JSA at a reduced rate) or a Social Fund loan (unable to repay).
   72.    In respect of the JCP’s decision letter of 27 September, Mr Justice Walker said the following in his judgment:

The defendant went on to formulate a letter sent on 27th September. That letter gave a reason for terminating payment. Mr Heavey says the reason was plainly wrong. It seems almost certain that Mr Heavey is correct. Indeed, there is a letter from the Department which says that in the letter of 27th September the reference to him having failed to sign on was a mistake. The Department says that there is another good reason for terminating payment. (Transcript, para. 31)

   73.    The applicant submits that the Department of Work and Pensions never informed him that terminating payment because he failed to sign on was a mistake but that there was another good reason for so doing. In fact, it would appear from Mr Justice Walker’s statement in paragraph 72 above that the JCP did not even inform the High Court as to what other reason existed for terminating payment. (By letters dated 18 April and 3 May 2007 the applicant requested of the Administrative Court Office a copy of the letter in which the Department says that the reference to him having failed to sign on was a mistake, but by letter dated 15 May 2007 (see Supporting Documents, p. 25) the Office advised that the court file does not contain the letter asked for.) This point, it is submitted, goes to the very heart of this case: the consistent pattern of actions taken over a relatively long period of time by the JCP and which were aimed at preventing the applicant’s wife’s proposed JSAg from being referred to an adjudication officer in accordance with section 9(6)(a) of the Jobseekers Act 1995. The applicant also submits that there was no remedy that would have been effective in changing the general situation, of which the applicant complained, and it is therefore irrelevant that in this case the applicant did not appeal to a social security appeal tribunal.

Thank you all. I am extremely grateful to everyone for the speed this forum is going. Please accept my apologies if you feel that I am not keeping up.