In THE BLOOD

---

This Story is the first in a series of accounts according to the memoirs of Darren Thomas Bolger. There is only a need to reveal elements of the story for interest in collaboration with other commercial partners and no intent to cause anyone unnecessary embarrassment nor distress the information disclosed is fully supported by evidence and the meticulous research from the Author and his mother.

We will not bring this website down, just because you don't like the content as the content is true and as such, disclosable. Just because there are important names included in the story, it does not mean that there are negative issues with them, other than as described.

The main title or Headline Title - Operation Westminster was the Police Name to the Murder Case of the Bolger's and similarly to that of the sub-title, it befits the journey through the second part of the series, Tandem Connexa (Latin - Ultimately Connected) as the Author finds himself, managing, those in the City of London and Westminster.

Below is an overview of the first part of the non fiction trilogy, named In The Blood. The reason for the sub-title is that the Murder Case hinged upon blood and urine samples and the same phrase is associated to, ingrained in or fundamental to one's character.

The underlined text is linked to the evidence page. If you would like to access the evidence page, whether to complain or to see the level of detail retained here, then please write to us at Home Grown Entrepreneurs, 27 Old Gloucester Street WC1N 3AX.

A teaser of some of the Individuals and evidence included - In the Blood,

1. Mr. David Bright MBE led the case for Essex Police. He also led the Rettenden Murders (Essex Boys - Range Rover Murders)
2. The Defence team for the Murder case of the Bolger's (1998/9) - Paul Harris (Edward Fail Bradshaw & Waterson), Arlette Piercy and George Carter-Stephenson QC of counsel.
3. Defence solicitor for co-defendant Wicks - Paul Martin of Attridge & Co. Bermondsey (Now - Paul Martin is at - Paul Martin & Co. Solicitors. Romford)
4. Prosecution - Miss. Patricia Lynch QC of 18 Red Lion Court Chambers Chelmsford
5. A Senior FME  (Dr Margaret Stark) was Essex Police' key witness to the Bolger's Toxicology evidence which was key to the defence case. Dr Stark agreed with the defence case in her sworn statement. This statement was placed (buried) by Essex Police, into the unused material and not used by the defence team at trial nor in their appeal, post conviction.
6. Toxicologist, Professor Robert Alexander Forrest (Royal Hallamshire University) acted for the Defence. 
7. There were four other co-accused in the murder, one of which (Craig Wicks) was picked out a the identification parade. Neither of the Bolger brothers were picked out at their respective identification parades.
8. There was significant delay in taking the blood and urine samples on nine hours (blood) and thirty-six hours (urine). This was of course deliberate.
9. There was then a mislabelling of the blood and urine samples with the same references to the Bolger Brothers being that of Wicks and the other co-accused.
10. The Bolger Brothers were refused bail as they were arrested at the scene (both with no previous convictions). They had sureties of £250,000 from Mr. Hunt of Canning Town, but still refused bail, remaining on bail to trial.
11. Wicks was granted bail with sureties of £50,000, due to the Police accepting at a hearing, that he had no previous nor outstanding criminal activities. Certainly none that related to drugs and or violence.
12. Wicks is the brother-in-Law of Mr. John Edward Bonner who is the CEO of Piccadilly Whip Catering Ltd (Ice Cream Vans and Events etc.). John worked on the Ice Cream Vans and is known to refer to 'Top Drawer Villain's' Named Billy and Eddie Blundell (The Blundell's) as his Uncles.
13. The Blundell's were born in London, to a mother born of Gibraltar and English father, who was a Police Officer from the United Kingdom. 
14. The Blundell's consistently claim to have avoided eleven criminal prosecutions.
15. The Bolger's had a Freemasons Trial (According to Paul Harris) - HHJ Blofeld Chelmsford Crown Court 1998/9.
16. At the Bolger's trial; A Juror related to a barrister who shared a room with prosecution counsel sat on the Jury in this trial. The barrister was Mr David Holborn (of 18 Red Lion Court Chambers).
17. David Holborn was a Senior Essex Police Officer before becoming a barrister. His home named 'the chase' is the same name as that of Mr. Bright.
18. Prosecution witness at the Bolger's trial - Darren Sapstead was himself the only suspect in a murder on booze cruise in Tenerife (1996) and whilst known to Essex Police, this was not disclosed even though Mr. Sapstead gave prosecution evidence against the Bolger Brothers at trial. Mr. Sapstead was later acquitted in his murder case in 2013. 
19. George Carter-Stephenson QC had evidence to implicate Wicks to the Murder but was unable to use it. He has neither: explained what that evidence was nor why he was unable to use it.
20. David Bright OBE retired from Essex Police soon after the Bolger Case and included 'his version' of the Bolger case in his book - Catching Monsters (Chapter - Thrill Killers). His words (of proclaimed truth), supported by friends including (but not limited to - Nick Ross - Crimewatch) etc.
21. Prosecution witness Michelle Brand gave a sworn statement to the defence team (after the Bolger trial) claiming that the police pressured her to make a statement; wrote her statement for her, and asked her to sign it in consideration that her boyfriend would leave prison early and that she would receive a new home in a better area. 
22. Michelle also added in her sworn statement, that the words used by the Police at the Bolger's trial, 'They Guarded Their Prey Like an Animal' (referring to the alleged actions of the Bolger's) is untrue and therefore a lie. The defence team did nothing with this statement on appeal or otherwise.
23. Bright was then joined Metropolitan Police Commissioners' - Sir Ian Blair, Lord Stevens (and others) in the formation of the Registered Charity, CONVOY 2000. 
24. Lord Stevens was criticized over his involvement in the Paget Report. The Metropolitan Police Investigation into the death of Princess Diana of Wales.
25. Professor Robert Alexander Forrest (the same) was the expert witness - Toxicologist for the Met. Police in the Paget Report. There were allegations that there were sampling errors, i.e. mislabelling of samples by Professor Forrest whist taking samples in the Diana case.
26. Essex Prosecution refused the claim that there was a Helicopter Video Footage and went on to say in their letterhead, that they had firstly checked with the Officer in Charge. The Helicopter footage was later found along with the words on the front of the plastic case, 'Not For Evidential Purposes'. and signed by DS Graham CARTER (deceased) the OIC (Officer In Charge) in the Bolger case.
27. Darren obtained the Scenes of Crime Video. The Video showed evidence of a larger incident at the pub which was neither mentioned, evidenced nor presented to the jury. The area in which was where the co-accused were sitting.
28. The ONLY focus of the defence team were, 'events that occurred outside of the pub' even though the incident was witnessed to have begun INSIDE the pub. The SOCO video had been fabricated, the still photos did not correlate with that of those evidenced in the SOCO video. The statement from the officer taking the video claimed a different time it was taken in his statement, to that which was clearly visible on the bottom right hand corner of the actual video footage.
29. Unable to rely upon the evidence of Dr Margaret Start, the expert witness, for the  Prosecution was Professor Ian Hindmarch (Pharmacologist). 
30. Hindmarch claimed that the combined levels of drugs and alcohol required for the defence of Automatism to be successful, to a defence to murder, was far MORE than that presented in the resulting toxicology tests 1998/9.
31. In R v BUCK, Hindmarch gives report in his expert opinion supporting that the levels of combination of alcohol and similar drugs are relatively low and 1/10 of that of his evidence in R v Bolger. Peter BUCK (REM band member) was acquitted of violence 2002.
32. The Bolger's were introduced to Italian Giovanni di Stefano who had claimed to be an Italian Solicitor (Avvocato) and his company: Studio Legale Internazionale was subsequently paid £10,000 by Darren to have counsel consider grounds of appeal for his brother. 
33. Giovanni told Darren that he had 'instructed Mr. David Martin-Sperry of counsel to carry out the review on Appeal'.
34. Giovanni began to behave oddly and stopped acting, even after being paid, claiming that he believed that 'The Bolger's had been released' only five years into a 14 year recommended life sentence (99HMP).
35. Mr. Sperry of counsel was also surprised to be told to stop by Giovanni, and claimed 'to be getting somewhere as a prescribed drug in the brother Brian was found in the sample of Jason.' He then added that he had been instructed pro bono.
36. Darren asked to collect the files of evidence on his brother Jason's case for appeal. He was asked to attend the offices of Paul Martin, of Paul Martin & Co. Solicitors in Romford Essex.
37. Darren arrived and collected 12 files containing what he thought was his brother's case papers. The files were referenced as GDS/number as thought to be reference to Giovanni di Stefano (GDS).
38. Once home, Darren went through the files and discovered that three of the files contained the evidence that at the time he has implicated to the Murder, Wicks was on bail for ABH and cocaine possession. How did he get bail for the Murder Charge?
39. This raised questions on the validity of Wicks (successful) BAIL application. A letter from Prosecution Counsel to the defence team was also included where she (Patricia Lynch QC) makes reference to 'Wicks is enjoying bail...'
40. It soon became clear that Paul Martin of Paul Martin & Co. Solicitors was the very same as that at Attridge & Co. and remained Wicks Legal representative throughout.
41. It transpired that Mr. di Stefano had joined in a commercial partnership with Paul Martin and continued to jointly carry out criminal cases together. One such case was the appeal of Darren Cullen, convicted of Murder in Basildon, whose legal team was, Giovanni di Stefano, Paul Martin and with David Martin-Sperry as counsel. The same David Holborn (re: Juror in Bolger Trail) acted for the Crown.
42. Mr. di Stefano claimed that Mr Martin had not told him of his previous and current (then) representations of Wicks (Bolger's co-defendant) and Martin claimed that he was not aware of the link between his client (Wicks) and the Bolger's, even though it was only five years previous.
43. Mr. Sperry was questioned by Darren as to who had instructed him as pre-direct access availability, Mr. Sperry either, (i) had to have been instructed by a non-solicitor (Giovanni) or (ii) instructed by Mr. Martin, known to be the co-defendant's trial solicitor. (Mr Sperry would not reveal who had instructed him and it took a further 18 years for this matter to be addressed (read on).
44. Raymond Shaw (Shaw Graham Kersch Solicitors) were instructed (2008) and paid £35,000+ to read the Bolger's case papers. Then have an expert report on the toxicology at the heart of the defence case.
45. Professor Atholl Johnston was formally instructed and visited in conference by Darren and Raymond Shaw. The issues were discussed and evidence supplied before Atholl explained that 'in his opinion, and as he had direct involvement as the expert witness for the Al-Fayed case, that, 'The Same circumstances of the issues with the mislabelling of samples are too similar in your brother's case as to that in the Al Fayed case (Diana Death). The fact that the same toxicologist (Professor Forrest) has managed both matters and therefore, whilst it is of no surprise, it is concerning.'
46. Professor Atholl Johnston gave a positive report for the appeal of Jason Bolger.
47. Darren had been infiltrated by the daughter of a West Midlands Police Detective, the daughter of the Admiral of the Fleet and Miss Havisham (sic) who was heavily involved with both the military, police and was intent to cause him to stop his review of his brother's case and generally disrupt his life.
48. It later transpired, and is in evidence, that: Miss Havisham was having covert conversations with Darren's father's new wife, for six years after, Darren and Miss Havisham's relationship had ended. Miss Havisham also admitted to Darren (in email) that she had, communicated and given statements to the Police on numerous occasions, across many years.
49. Suspicions had risen after Miss. Havisham relayed information to Darren which was contained within his brothers private papers and on the statement of Michelle Brand (re police pressure and incentives to sign their preferred statement on the murder). Miss. Havisham would not have known such content as it was kept secret by only six Bolger family members, Darren, his two brothers, parents and grandmother.
50. Issues were initiated to try to damage Darren's life when his ex-fiancé (Miss Havisham) created a scene to disrupt Darren's investigation of his brother's case. Darren and Miss Haviham split and entered the family courts for contact of their child.
51. It was later confirmed that Darren's ex-partner Mrs. Michell Louise Colbran (nee King) was the daughter of a Senior West Midlands Police officer and was brought to the family court by Miss. Havisham, when they hade never previously met, nor knew of each other to try to stop Darren from his pursuit of justice and have him concentrate on the family case. Fortunately the presiding judge saw through it, but never the less interesting and intended to cause Darren maximum damage by keeping him concentrated on family matters rather than matters of criminal appeal.
52. Darren was getting closer and closer to uncover the corruption and external intent to stop his evidence coming into the public domain. The Establishment had been rocked off its axis and the information was being continually fed back to those intent in stopping justice coming into light.
53. Counsel for Miss. Havisham tried to damage the inevitable relationship between Darren and his child by mentioning to the presiding judge that Darren's brother had 'just' been released and as such, there was a potential risk to the child.
54. Only six close Bolger family members knew of the release and one other, who was the new wife of Darren's father, named: Carole Bolger (nee Warren - deceased) married in 2004. 
55. Upon a short review of the knowledge of the brother's release, it became apparent that Carole was in covert conversations with Miss. Havisham for over six years since Darren and Miss Havisham had split. Covert meaning that, neither Darren, his father were aware of the covert conversations. 
56. Darren's Mother, was Carol Bolger (nee Johnson).
57. Carole Bolger (Carol/e - nee Warren) was introduced to Darren's father by a neighbour. Carole soon took to disrupting the Bolger family when demanding that Darren's father remove himself from his children and even, stop visiting his elderly, disabled mother, ever since their meeting and subsequent marriage. 
58. Darren then dated (extremely briefly) Miss Jennifer Robinson (barrister at Doughty Street Chambers) whilst she was acting along with Jeffrey Robertson QC in the support of the Anwar Ibrahim case. With too much already taking place, this positive relationship did not even get going, which was a real shame)
59. Darren founded Justice on Appeal to uncover other miscarriages of justice in his brother's case and that of others. Justice on Appeal also gave key witness evidence that assisted with the change of law in Joint Enterprise.
60. Justice on Appeal was contacted by both, criminals and even then police to review the criminal cases against them. 
61. Julian Panayiotou founder of the Independent Police Support Group (ISPG) contacted Justice on Appeal with allegations of injustice in the Police once he had given evidence upon an alleged paedophile ring in Southern England.
62. Gloria Morrison, Janet Cunliffe and Karen Horlock all representatives of JENGbA (Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association) also contacted Justice on Appeal to have JA's Law students investigate numerous cases, including (but not limited to, R v A & Ors (Horlock) and R v Cunliffe & Ors etc.)
63. Paul Cleeland a convicted gangland boss who had served 27 years in CAT-A prison asked to meet and for his appeal to be reviewed by Justice on Appeal after he lost faith in his barrister, a notable Queens Counsel at Doughty Street Chambers.
64. Les Balkwell contacted Justice on Appeal and asked that his case would be reviewed. Instead of a review, as JA did not review potential prosecution cases, JA was handed evidence (held by Mr. Balkwell) of a covert operation on the same pub as that in which Darren's brother's were convicted.
65. The covert operation was named 'Operation Port Wing' and mentioned the names of those referred to above (and others) managing the importation of drugs and arms along with the assistance of the Met Police Officers, HMRC and relative of 'Brian' whose relations are with Customs and Excise and the other, a senior police dog trainer.
66. The covert evidence on Operation Port Wing was said (by Les) to have been posted through his door by the (then) boyfriend of Les's second cousin, named: Miss. Gina Marden (Journalist of Basildon Echo and Thurrock Recorder etc.). The boyfriend was a serving Essex Police Detective at the time - he gave the covert information to Les.
67. Darren reviewed the three DVD's which contained the Operation Port Wing Case (in its entirety) including statements, transcribed undercover conversations and a copy of the Essex Police 'KNOK (sic) List'
68. There were many unbelievable conversations and disclosures being made when reading the transcribed conversations. One particularly interesting conversation, was by a male who was well known to those under investigation, coercing with the Police and claimed to have been 'charged eleven times and walked away every time' and therefore has walked from nine criminal prosecutions. Something that resonated with Darren and something that a 'Top Drawer Villain' might say.
69. Les told Darren that he was being assisted by Bernhard O'Mahoney (Author - Essex Boys) in the fight for justice for his deceased son, Lee Balkwell and had organised Les's website to be built and managed by a website builder based in Wales.
70. Darren was asked to consider helping Les and discussed this as they drove to Wales to meet with the website builder. Upon their arrival, the website builder went on the run and was did not return home that day. Bernhard was also, unable to be contacted.
71. Darren retained the straight line and had fought his way through all of the dramas and was in the family court with Miss Havisham for a final hearing, He had the support of CAFCASS and positive commitment to his child for shared contact. 
72. Darren initiated two limited companies, Cut Above The Rest Ltd and Abode West Ltd and entered in contract with Magnet Ltd/Group ("Magnet").
73. Magnet head office approved the agreement and delivered a lorry load to GO Interiors Ltd after invitation to purchase most commonly used materials at reasonable rates from Mr. Paul Copper, a salesman at Magnet Fulham Branch.
74. After the initial load was delivered, Magnet stopped any further trade and Darren was advised by counsel and Forensic Accountant that Magnet were n Breach of Contract. This was thought to be yet, another attempt to stop Darren from funding his brother's appeal against conviction. The alternative reason, and more likely, is that Magnet had entered into a contract to sell Darren's two companies, KNAUF Plasterboard at Manufacturing prices.
75. Darren was in communication with the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) whilst submitting appeals for his brother. Upon submitting the evidence on the issues of the mislabelling of blood samples, the hidden helicopter video, fabricated SOCO Video and then the Juror issues and he was then arrested on five counts of Harassment by the CCRC and asked to attend interview in West Midlands Police.
76. Darren saw through the spurious allegations, which resulted in 'No Further Action' (NFA) which infuriated the CCRC who then wrote to 18 Red Lion Court Chambers to for-warn them of the issues of the Juror and give over information on the Bolger's lawyer (Steve Bird of Birds Solicitors) to assist them.
77. Darren required additional funding to support of Justice on Appeal and initiated a building and construction company, Building Matters London Ltd. He worked with a Independent Interior Designer named Janet Eavenson who owned Leonard Provence Interiors (now at London to Laguna based in California). 
78. Miss. Havisham knew of how Darren would market his company as she had formed a limited company reliant upon Darren's data abilities and marketing strategy.
79. Building Matters London' first client was Mrs. Meeta Gunn (wife of Alistair Gunn). Then Omar Haddo and a Russian named Elvina (daughter of an Oligarch).
80. Darren's company engaged the services of Ms. Janet Eavenson who advised Darren's clients and created their Designs as an Interior Designer.
81. All three clients gave positive review in which gave confidence to the following clients, Mr. Tom Kark QC, Mr. Scott Jamieson, Mrs Keri Jamieson (nee Wilkinson), Mr. Jeremy Poyntz, Mr and Mrs. Bruce & Laurie Mitchell, Mr. and Mrs Lu, Mrs Bushra Nasir and Mr. Craig and his wife, Miss. Chantel Van Den Elshout.
82. Kark and Jamieson's created issues after they had frustrated, then repudiated their relative contracts. They both visited a barrister, Mr. Edward Bennion-Pedley (sic) who's advice was not disclosed. But is believed to be (and later asserted to be) that they would either lose a civil case or find that Darren's company did not have the funds to pay any losses if losing a civil case/s. 
83. The legal advice to Darren was that it was both Kark and the Jamieson's who were in breach of contract.
84. Kark then wrote to the Police along with Keri Jamieson (founder of Kerikit handbags and accessories) receiving a reply from the Police that this was a 'civil matter'.
85. Unable to interest the Police, Tom Kark QC (A Criminal Prosecution Barrister) instructed Darren's company clients to join him in a Criminal Prosecution and along with the assistance of Janet Eavenson, rounded up all of Darren's clients to bring a criminal case of fraud against him. 
86. Darren was arrested and later convicted with three of seven counts of Fraud. His defence was collusion of his clients and this was set out in his Police Interview and in his sworn statement to the Hammersmith Police.
87. The police had no interest in investigating this defence and it later transpired that 2,000 emails were brought to Darren's trial (late) upon cross examination of Mrs. Bushra revealed that collusion had occurred. This was Darren's defence and ignored and failed to be investigated by the Met Police.
88. The 2,000 emails not only proved that there was collusion between the complainants, but, an intent by the police to withhold evidence and attempt to bury it in the unused material.
89. The 2,000 emails evidenced that the police were continually in conversation with all complainants and the Prosecutor, Miss. Jane Osbourne of 2 Hare Court Chambers when counsel made reference to 'legitimate trading of Darren's company, making legitimate payments for works and concerns that this financial information would damage the Crown's case'.
90. Once with this evidence, Darren asked his barrister, Mr. Adam Budworth of 2 Bedford Row Chambers to read these emails to the jury. Mr. Budworth refused to bring this key evidence to the Jury. Had the Jury read this evidence and that of the collusion, the defence of Darren would have been proven and he would not have been convicted.
91. After a 17-week Trial, the Trial Judge, Recorder Katherine Moore (Norwich CC) asked for the Jurors to retire and then asked the Court Clerk, Mr. Jim Webster to remove the Indictments from all of the Jurors Files and Replace the Indictment with a New Indictment. The New Indictment had rearranged the order of the Indictment, i.e. Count 1 - Kark, Count 2 - Jamieson etc. to Count 1 - Mitchell, Count 2 Craig etc.
92. Recorder Moore also demanded that the document 'timeline - continuity document' which accompanied the Original Indictment was also removed, and referred to this document as 'an important document'.
93. Recorder Moore immediately began her summing up of the 17-week trial which had over 15 witnesses and made reference to the Counts as they appeared in evidence which did not correlate with the New Indictment at all.
94. By also removing the 'timeline - continuity document' which accompanied the original indictment, the Jury had no means of understand the order, timeline, nor correlate the evidence nor could they have. The fact remains that there were handwritten notes of the Jurors on their 'removed documents' and not returned to recover these notes.
95. Whilst defence counsel made no issue of it. It is believed that the act of removing the Original Indictment to swap it with a newly ordered one was intentional to confuse the jury and secure a conviction.
96. Andy Lumb of Essex Police Professional Standards and Detective Inspector Angela Crook of Essex Police visited Darren whilst he was in HMP Ford (2012) after complaint of Corruption by Darren and to recover the covert material of the undercover operation Port Wing. Essex Police; DS 285 Sarah Weeks contacted Darren's Mother in writing and arranged the visit.
97. Darren handed the A4 Lever Arch File 'timeline file' (only) he had been handed (by Les Balkwell) to Essex Police but retained the whole undercover case papers in a secure and private box. It will be of no surprise to hear that Darren and his two brothers served every day of their convictions and were constantly tracked thereafter, upon release. No chance of overcoming any prosecutions, but the Bolger's aren't 'Top Drawer Villains' are they! Or other words to describe this!
98. Once released, Darren was invited to meet with Senior HMRC investigators in Waterloo. One codenamed (Simon) and his senior (real name Steve - as Simon had slipped up when attempting to call him by his pseudonym) as HMRC wanted to receive the papers that Alan Hunt had handed to Darren whilst in HMP Blunderston.
99. Darren handed HMRC a copy of the papers from Alan Hunt, absent of the court case trial notes.

Something of a machine-gun run-through of 23 years of (well, what would you call it?)

Darren has created three manuscripts under the same name as the Essex Police name for his brother's case, 'Operation Westminster'.

1. The First Book 'In The Blood' takes the reader through the initial years post his brother's conviction and then through his own.
2. The Second Book in the non fiction series, 'Tandem Connexa' takes the reader through Darren's creation of The Home Club and the continued issues to stop him from living a normal life and in particular, earing the funds to deliver a book on his story. The book is a roller-coaster ride which concludes in part, with the evidence that Miss Havisham has been making numerous statements to the police to have Darren convicted and Mr David Martin-Sperry's embarrassed position as he moved from Charter Chambers when asked to reveal who had instructed him. The book touches on information that sets the tone for the final book.
3. The Third and final book in the Operation Westminster Series,  'The Two Bulls', evidences the full and open history of the individuals and organisations who have acted together to stop Darren and his family from obtaining Justice.

Note

The CCRC have refused all appeals containing the key evidence (as relevant to the criminal cases relating to the Bolger family as above) and instead, had Darren Bolger Arrested for spurious allegations of harassment, which were given a No Further Action by West Midlands Police. Mr. John Wagstaff (Legal Advisor at the CCRC), and others have persistently complained to West Midlands Police to have Darren charged and convicted of harassment which was again refused.

The CCRC also wrote to Red Lion Court Chambers regarding Bolger's appeal ground (In Re Pinochet) was refused. The CCRC were being very helpful to Red Lion Court Chambers and gave the details of Bolger's solicitor to communicate directly with on the matter. The Solicitor was Mr. Steve Bird - Managing Director and Solicitor at Birds Solicitors.

When making a Subject Access Request to the CCRC, Darren received copies of the Holmes Database, and the tracking of Darren before, during & after his time in prison.

This website is owned by Home Grown Entrepreneurs Ltd, 27 Old Gloucester St. WC1N 3AX

All content is by copyright to a seasoned researcher and genealogist and supplied to Home Grown Entrepreneurs Ltd for the purposes of presenting a story in readiness for books, TV, documentary and Film. All complaints are to be directed to Home Grown Entrepreneurs who accepts liability for all of the content within this website and content.

The supporting evidence has been meticulously collated for approximately 25 years.

Home Grown Entrepreneurs Ltd has checked and verified the information within this website and has significant evidence in support of its contents. Evidence that includes, written, emails, documents, contracts, photo, video and otherwise evidence in support.

Any challenges to the content of this website is to take a particular process save as to costs and damages in the millions of pounds. Whist you have advanced notice of this, you will be well advised to re/consider any proposed action and injunction to stop, remove, take-down and or otherwise interfere with the business of Home Grown Entrepreneurs Ltd. 

Process of Complaint

1. Set out (in detail) then content that you wish to challenge and what you say is 'untrue', in writing to Mr. John Smith, Home Grown Entrepreneurs, 27 Old Gloucester Street London WC1N 3AX.
2. Set out any proposed corrections of your referred content for our consideration as full removal will NOT occur in any event.
3. Attach a sworn statement from the complainant (not the representative and or solicitor) as a 'statement of fact' stating that the contents are 'untrue'. All statements MUST include CPR footer (re perjury act).
4. Place security for costs, £1million (in cash or by ATE) into the courts prior to any legal challenge or pre/action and do not take any action prior to a reply from Mr. Smith. If no reply, then there will be no reconsideration of the content complained of.
5. Once the above occurs, Home Grown Entrepreneurs will openly publish the 'evidence' in support of the complaint on this platform, in our associate brochure, magazine and all associate social media and all contacts within The Haurun Club' global media contacts.
6. If taking steps to stop and or remove this website and all and or any associated content, whether via the courts and in any event, then the minimum damages sought by Home Grown Entrepreneurs Ltd is £1million (per complainant).
7. Any joint action will also result in damages of £1million per complainant and 50% Interest per month pro rata calculated from the date of the initial letter of each individual or combined complainant.

You will note the detail in which the content of this website is formed and make no mistake that this is only the tip of the iceberg insofar as evidencing the content.

It would only be a fool who would challenge what they know is true,- to make a false claim in a sworn statement to the same as is must surely be abundantly clear that the facts herein, are supported by evidence. Any such challenge has no chance of success, which would effectively; embarrass, bankrupt and potentially face a claim of perjury.

Do take care!