Tag Archives: Solicitors

Diary Blog, 22 August 2025, including news about the fanatical Jew-Zionist “Campaign Against Antisemitism” (“CAA”)

Morning music

Tweets seen

Those two fanatical Jew-Zionist organizations have largely-overlapping memberships, and work in concert.

I am unsure as to whether that tweet by one Fahad Ansari is true or not. I have been unable, at this time, to find any confirmation. Will clarify as and when.

Incidentally, the “CAA” tweet is itself mistaken, in that it describes Franck Magennis as “an officer of the court“. Magennis is, I now see (I think I was unaware of his existence until today or yesterday), a barrister: https://gardencourtchambers.co.uk/barrister/franck-magennis/.

Solicitors are, by statute, “officers of the court“; barristers are not. The distinction arises out of the historical background, going back hundreds of years, of the two main branches of the legal profession in England and Wales.

A few of my own experiences of “CAA” and “UKLFI” activity:

…and take a look at the case of Wilson v. Mendelsohn, Newbon (deceased) and Cantor (use the blog search box).

The now-washed-up self-promoting Jew-Zionist fanatic and solicitor, Mark Lewis, involved in James Wilson’s case, was and I think still is a prominent member or supporter of both the “CAA” and the “UKLFI”, at one time prominently featured on the website of the “CAA”.

Lewis is currently quite likely facing (not for the first time) both disciplinary action by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority (SRA), and legal action by at least one former client (on grounds that may include professional negligence and civil fraud).

Simon Myerson, barrister based at Leeds, and briefly a Recorder (p/t judge), whose vituperative behaviour on social media led to his effective dismissal from the Bench after a few months, and who (I believe) may face action from the Bar Standards Board, is involved in or supportive of both UKLFI and the CAA, and was a witness (whose sworn testimony was disbelieved and/or given no weight by the trial judge) in the James Wilson defamation case. Again, for more about that, see the search box on the blog.

Having now read a little about that barrister, Magennis, it seems that he is very far from my viewpoint, ideologically, but we have both been attacked by the Jew-Zionist orgs “CAA” and “UKLFI”. Sadly, in this complex world, my enemy’s enemy is not necessarily my friend…

More tweets

https://twitter.com/wissamshabat/status/1958770361899892877

Victim of yet another Israeli war crime.

According to the “CAA” and other Jew-Zionist orgs, anything up to 96% of UK-resident Jews support Israel in anything it does.

Anyone giving support to Israel is, thereby, to some extent complicit in its crimes.

As police fly-on-wall TV show voiceovers always say, “it’s all kicking off“…

Quite likely, and the Labour Party still has about 300,000 members (though dropping rapidly), so that might add up to 75,000 or more people, which would be fairly significant; however, the 28% figure refers to members, not voters.

The Labour Party membership, especially the activists who are or were the core of that party, were always far more radical than Labour voters . A small number of people, really.

I still think that Corbyn will struggle to achieve a national vote (assuming that his new party can even fight many seats) above 5%.

Most English white people will not vote for Corbyn, who actually seems to want more migrant-invaders to arrive (and to give them even more than they currently get by way of housing, food, pocket-money, services).

It may be that some young English/Welsh/Scottish voters, as well as some ethnic minority voters, may be attracted by an anti-Israel message, as well as by a pro-Welfare State, pro-NHS etc message, and a generally pro-multikulti orientation. Some but (in my opinion) not enough to win many seats. Corbyn seems to be in George Galloway territory, more or less.

I think that Corbyn and his candidates may be able to win in a few particular seats, including that of Corbyn himself, but I doubt that the number of seats won would be more than three or four, if that.

Only a minority, a small minority, of seats look like remaining Labour anyway; maybe 150. Corbyn’s “sales pitch” would be to a fraction of that minority of seats. As said, probably far fewer than a dozen; quite likely, well under half a dozen.

In fact, it is an open question as to whether even Zara Sultana, Corbyn’s deputy, will retain her seat (at Coventry South). As a Labour candidate, she got over 47% of the vote in 2024, but next time that vote will be split between her and the new Labour candidate. Also, the Conservative vote in 2024 was nearly 24%, and the Reform UK vote over 13%. If the Con vote collapses further, Reform might get a vote, on that basis alone, of 30%+.

In 2019, the Con candidate got 42.5% of the vote, Labour (Ms. Sultana) only slightly more (43.4%). Brexit Party got 3%.

In both 2019 and 2024, the Con Party put up the same candidate, an Englishwoman, I believe. She nearly won in 2019.

Add to those factors the disaffected 2024 Lab voters deciding to cast their lot for Reform in 2028 or 2029, and one could easily see Reform getting over 40% at Coventry South, with official Labour and Ms. Sultana sharing 30%-40% between them. Exit Ms. Sultana?…

Talking point

[National Socialist poster from the 1920s: Die Bonzen im Speck, das Volk im Dreck“; literally, “the Bonzos [fat cats or bigwigs] in bacon” [i.e. in clover], the people in the dirt“].

National Socialism, Communism, and other radical movements did not, and do not, come out of nowhere.

Incidentally, note the facial features of the “Bonzos” there.

Actually, thinking about it, does that not bear at least a certain passing resemblance to the UK in 2025?

Talking point

The reality of 1930s Germany. Very different from the usual (((propaganda))) seen in the “Western” msm…

More tweets seen

In fact, here I stand somewhere in the middle. As society is now, not in 1800, or 1900, or 1960, there is a problem with —usually quite mediocre, at best— people inheriting, in some cases, tens of millions, in some cases hundreds or even thousands of millions. We all know the more newsworthy names— McCartney, Beckham, Jagger etc, but there are many others not so prominent in the gossip columns or even the financial pages. Some have wealth far beyond that bestowed upon popular music people, footballers etc, and/or their offspring.

Personally, I think it acceptable for people to inherit a modest amount, arguably up to £1M, but not £10M, certainly not £100M, £1BN or more.

This is a difficult and complex question once you get beyond simple cases. There are knotty questions of landed estates, trusts, tax avoidance offshore etc. A near-confiscatory tax regime is hard to enforce in anything approaching a free society. What I do not agree with is the out-of-hand dismissal seen in Matt Goodwin’s tweeted comment. The question or questions should be addressed.

There are, at present, only two serious contenders re. the next UK general election—Reform UK and Labour.

[“Several generations have perished”: a horrifying number of losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine revealed From a recent leak of military documents, it became known that the Armed Forces of Ukraine have lost more than 1.7 million people since the start of the full-scale conflict with Russia, writes MWM. The death rate of Ukrainian conscripts is very high, and in areas with intense combat, the life expectancy of servicemen sometimes amounts to only four hours. The Armed Forces of Ukraine suffered especially heavy losses during the invasion of the Kursk region, as they were encircled by Russian troops who attacked from several sides simultaneously. Against the backdrop of this news, more and more supporters of the regime in Kyiv are saying that Ukraine is on the verge of complete military defeat.]

Late music

[painting by Victor Ostrovsky]

Diary Blog, 10 December 2024, including thoughts about Russia’s strategic direction following the fall of Assad in Syria

[1930s Germany— girls of the Bund Deutscher Madel (BDM) ride in a forest]

Putin, Russia, Assad, Ukraine— where does Russia go from here?

I saw a piece by the veteran anti-Russian scribbler, Edward Lucas: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14175769/EDWARD-LUCAS-Putins-imperial-overstretch-Ukraine-means-hes-weak-protect-vital-ally-like-Assad-cornered-prove-dangerous.html.

I disagree with Lucas’s analysis which says that the fall of the Syrian government weakens Russia. It weakens Russia in the Middle East, yes— but in the big scheme of things, that makes no difference.

Back to basics. When Stalin was Soviet leader, the Soviet Union had a very small navy, and one which was mainly confined to seas around the Soviet coastline. For Stalin, the geopolitical reality was that the Soviet Union’s power rested on its huge land-based armed forces, and on its huge geographical size, as well as a large population.

With the coming of the atomic age, Stalin’s scientists and spies ensured that the Soviet Union acquired the weapons at first possessed by only the USA and then the UK. At that time, all Soviet atomic and nuclear weapons were land-based, i.e. launched from aircraft themselves based in the Soviet Union and, in a few cases, satellite states.

Khrushchev, in his memoirs, disparages the senior naval officers pushing for a global Soviet naval presence. After Khrushchev’s fall from power, his successors did the opposite, creating a massive navy, which included ships and submarines capable of launching missiles including, eventually, nuclear ones.

That post-1960s global-profile strategy included supporting various factions in Africa, Asia, Latin America; that included the Middle East. Superpower rivalry.

A clear cost-benefit analysis, however, shows that, in the present, post-Soviet era, Russia actually does not need bases in Syria or elsewhere. Its strength lies, as before, in its geographic size, its still-large population and, crucially, its strategic rocket forces. All of those still exist. Moreover, the Russian strategic rocket forces are, it seems, at least as powerful, and as awesome, as those of NATO (i.e. USA); perhaps more so.

If Russia is forced by events to take a smaller part in the events of the Middle East, then all to the good. It can concentrate its forces and attention on the key areas of Russia itself, Ukraine and other areas of the “near-abroad”, and on advancing its most important forces, the strategic rocket and other nuclear forces.

The main thing now is to defeat the Kiev regime, and to install in Ukraine, at least in Eastern Ukraine, along the Black Sea coast, and in Kiev, either direct Russian rule or a pro-Russia Ukrainian government. It may be thought expedient, and historically consonant, to allow an independent Ukrainian government in Western Ukraine, and based on Lvov.

In respect of Central and Western Europe, Russia merely needs to obtain a modus vivendi with those states by encouraging the election or other installation of governments not hostile to Russia. Such governments need not be “pro-Russian”, or under the control of Russia; they need only be independent of the USA and, of course, free from the Jew-Zionist influence now so pervasive throughout the West.

Putin and his supporters and/or successors should be focussing on their nuclear arsenal, together with active measures aimed at helping political parties and individuals in Western and Central Europe that want a civilized rapprochement with the Russian state and people.

Tweets seen

Naturally, I expected the Labour Friends of Israel government led by “Tel Aviv Keith” to be hopeless and rubbish, but not so obviously so and so quickly.

Talking point

“Tel Aviv Keith” Starmer, former bureaucrat-lawyer; Rachel Reeves, fake “economist” and one-time bank office bod; David Lammy, thick-as-two-short-planks “diversity hire”; Yvette Cooper, expenses cheat fraudster and “refugees welcome” hypocrite. The rest as well…

Do you really expect that lot to be anything other than rubbish?

Now it seems that Rachel Reeves, who could not even control her own personal (and interest-free) House of Commons credit card, is apparently going to “scrutinize every penny” of public spending. i.e. do spending cuts.

Ecce “democracy”— 14 years of misguided “austerity”, so the “Conservatives” are eventually voted out, and in are voted (at least by 4 out of every 20 eligible voters) fake “Labour”. First thing they do (apart from arrest protesters and online commentators)? Impose more spending cuts…

Oh well, “worse is better“, as Lenin said. Maybe there will be a “straw breaks camel’s back” moment. Starmer, Reeves etc will then, I hope, get what’s coming to them.

More tweets seen

That refers to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_and_Nick_Candy.

Well, political parties need funding. That Nick Candy person certainly has money, and knows others with money. Still, his interest in UK politics has been anything but narrow, to date:

“...The Times in March 2021…named Nick as the leader of fundraising for Shaun Bailey’s London mayoral campaign.[78] In June 2020, The Guardian also reported that Candy had donated £100,000 to the Conservative Party in March 2020.[79] In February 2024, Nick was reported by the The Independent to have expressed support for Keir Starmer‘s Labour Party.[80]

[Wikipedia].

Controlled opposition, of course. Both main System parties are fading (finally) in public estimation, so to prevent something social-national emerging, up pops Reform UK— pro-Israel, pro-Jewish lobby, anti-Welfare State, not (very) “racist” etc…

Still, the Overton Window is moving.

Same goes for “Ukraine” (the brutal and shambolic Kiev regime).

[“but I voted Labour to keep the British welfare state functioning, to improve the NHS, and to get this country running properly again, not to waste money on militant Arabs, or to throw money and arms at the Jewish regime in Ukraine!“]

Jew-Zionist barrister (a “KC”, no less) who, apparently, has never heard of diplomatic immunity. Unless it is some kind of joke the humour of which escapes me.

My case grinds on. Here’s a thing though: this is Mark Lewis, he’s a solicitor at Patron Law.

One of the most important rules about the conduct of solicitors is that they must not mislead or attempt to mislead the court. I now have clear evidence that suggests Lewis attempted to mislead the court. It is a serious allegation. The sort of allegation that, if true, should end Lewis’ career. The big question is: how are Lewis and his firm going to respond? @MLewisLawyer @Patron_Law.”

[James Wilson].

Actually Wilson is wrong in one respect. That is not “Mark Lewis Lawyer”, as his Twitter account used to be called; that is Lewis as he was about 12 years ago. He is now physically and mentally in a very poor condition, can scarcely walk, and his faculties are not what they may have been a decade or more ago.

Lewis and his fellow Zionist Jews in at least two pro-Israel organizations have been making false and malicious accusations against me for a decade now. I have responded with the truth, on Twitter (until “they” had me expelled in 2018), and on the blog (since late 2016).

See also:

The above video clip shows Lewis and his wife, Mandy Blumenthal, after their attempted political stunt (and scam) at the Edinburgh Fringe, in August 2024, failed risibly.

As for the latest information said to be in the hands of James Wilson ending Lewis’s career, that career is already effectively at an end. Many would say that (such as it was) it ended a long time ago.

When Lewis was fined and censured by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in 2018, his own Counsel asked the panel to be lenient in terms of fining him because his sole assets were his clothes, a private pension worth £70 a week, and a mobility scooter! Even his car, at the time (before his domicile changed from the UK to Israel), was provided to him free of charge by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), under its Motability scheme.

Actually, Lewis’s Counsel may have (I presume, inadvertently) misled that Tribunal, inasmuch as Lewis had, or so he once claimed, a flat in Eilat, Israel.

Lewis and the pack of Zionist Jews connected with him (eg those in the so-called “Campaign Against Antisemitism” or “CAA”) have never sued me for anything I have written about them. They have preferred to make malicious and false complaints about me to the police etc.

Having said that, it is true that my present impecuniosity would make me a pretty poor target for any civil suit; I have even fewer assets than Lewis, if you include his flat in Israel which he seems to have concealed from the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

Even if they were to sue me and even if they were to succeed at trial (and they have not done so at any time in the past 12 years), their victory would be very very expensive for them. Hundreds of thousands of pounds expensive.

My allegation is not that Lewis’ clients are vexatious, but that the evidence I have suggests he cannot be trusted not to attempt to mislead the court. If I am right, what does this mean for all the other cases in which Lewis has acted? What if there have been other attempts to mislead the court?

Lewis has misled the Court and his own clients several, perhaps numerous, times, but so far has got away with it, at least to the extent of not having been struck off the solicitors’ roll. Part of his immunity from punishment has been the protective shield around him, consisting of other Jews, in the Press and other msm, not reporting negative things about Lewis, and indeed puffing him to a ridiculous extent, especially years ago.

More tweets seen

Idiots like that Narinder Kaur woman (of whom I think I had not previously heard) are actually paid to spout garbage on “British” TV. Know-nothings, emoting and gushing anti-white and/or racemixing propaganda.

Useless and unwanted parasites, at best.

Talking point

Late tweets seen

The tactics of a police state, which is exactly what the dictatorship of the Jew Zelensky is.

Needless to say (again), few if any in Ukraine “volunteer” to be killed on the Kiev regime’s crumbling front lines. Few even comply with the draft. They have to be abducted, and intimidated by threats of prison or death.

History moves on.

Late music

[Victor Ostrovsky, Rendezvous]

Self-Publicizing Supposed “Top Lawyer” Mark Lewis: Full Transcript of Disciplinary Hearing Judgment Now Released by Tribunal

Full transcript of the judgment in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal hearing

http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/sites/default/files-sdt/11856.2018.Lewis_.pdf

Background

Regular readers of this blog will have noticed that I have recently blogged several times (see Previous Blog Posts on Mark Lewis, below) about one-time supposed “top lawyer” Mark Lewis (supposed to be such at least by an uncritical Zionist-influenced msm). The Jew-Zionist solicitor has now emigrated to Israel. His years of self-publicizing and abusive behaviour have finally resulted in his being brought to justice: he has been found guilty on charges brought by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority (though the sentence was far too lenient). No matter. He has finally been brought into a measure of well-merited disgrace; at least some —a very small percentage of— his abusive activity has been recognized officially and he has been, so to speak, branded or tattooed accordingly.

He will almost certainly not now practise law again. In England and Wales, a solicitor engaged in UK-centred work has to be either a partner or other member of a firm of solicitors (or the legal department of a company, government office etc), or must be approved and properly regulated as a sole practitioner. Lewis is neither, and has already stated that he will not be seeking Admission to the Bar of Israel. There are also other factors here.

In my opinion, the story spun by Lewis and promoted (and/or not challenged) by his friends in the UK Jewish Zionist lobby including those in the Press and on TV, is largely a construct. I don’t just mean about his abusive social media presence, but his “back-story” in general.

Lewis was brought up in Manchester. A recent documentary about him (covering his medical treatment in Israel etc) interviewed some old woman one-time neighbour who had helped him much when he was young. She said that Lewis’s father had abused him as a child, physically. Was that when he himself became an obstreperous bullying lout?

Later, Lewis attended what was then Middlesex Polytechnic, rather than Oxford, Cambridge, any London university college or even the University of Manchester. The reason is unclear. Maybe he was not so good academically, maybe he had other reasons; as a fair judge, I do not discount that possibility: I myself was offered places at Oxford, Reading and University College London, but chose, for several reasons too collateral to waste space on here, to attend a less-prestigious university (Westminster). In England, these things are sometimes given undue weight. For example, the highly “successful” billionaire, Lord Ashcroft, attended what was at the time called, apparently, Mid-Essex Technical College.

Lewis commenced articles as a solicitor in 1988 but little seems to be known about his first 13 years as a solicitor (certainly I myself know nothing of it). Lewis eventually joined a firm of solicitors in Manchester as a partner, in 2001, at the age of 35. The events between then and his leaving that firm in acrimonious circumstances are opaque but it is not disputed that by or about 2009 he was either divorced or separated from his first wife, and had left that Manchester firm. He gave a newspaper interview in 2011 in which he seemed to be saying that he had had a near nervous breakdown, during which time he had a “punk” hairstyle, dressed in like manner and (if I recall aright) had a ring through either his nose or his ear. He also drove an open-top sports car. At the age of about 44…He himself has said that his earnings in or about 2009 were only about £9,000. The Disciplinary Tribunal heard that in fact he had spent nearly a year unemployed.

“Lewis was having a crisis. “I’ve got peroxide blond hair, an earring and am wearing skinny jeans to the office because I don’t give a f**k. Everything has gone wrong. Apart from losing the house and everything else, I’ve also got MS. It’s horrendous. I could have claimed benefits, but I chose not to.” [Evening Standard interview, 2011]

Lewis added, in that same interview:

“I was devastated,” he says. “I’d been turned down for so many jobs, I’m thinking to myself, I can’t go on any more, you can only get so many knockbacks. I’m giving in and going to my flat in Israel and retire in Eilat.”

Lewis joined the small London law firm, Taylor Hampton, which over the years has had mixed reviews. Even so, Lewis was only taken on as a “consultant”, i.e. a kind of semi-freelancer working on commission. This firm handled most of the briefly-notorious “phonehacking” cases. Lewis got a retainer of £6,000 gross per month. Later, he (as before) fell out with his employer and ended up years later suing them for, as he grandly told the Press, “a seven-figure sum”, but had to settle for virtually nothing in the end. The senior partner of the firm testified, diplomatically, that he “was unsure what work Mark Lewis had been doing” on the occasions when he actually attended the office!

There is a pattern here: Lewis talking big, swaggering around in showy but cheapish clothes (such as his infamous £149 Zara orange short overcoat…), telling the Press all about what huge work he is doing, what a legal star he is etc, as in a 2013 interview with an online legal site called, perhaps not so accurately, “Superlawyers”!

“I keep getting offers for my story, which is amusing,” Lewis says. “Hollywood has started talking. I guess we will soon find out who does the story. It is rather funny to see discussions as to which actor will play me in a film.” [Superlawyers interview, 2013]

So uncritical were the interviewers that their article started with:

Don’t be surprised if a film is soon made about Mark Lewis, a media law, libel and privacy lawyer with Taylor Hampton Solicitors in London. Think All the President’s Men, except, instead of a newspaper uncovering the dirty tricks of politicians and lawyers, you’d have a lawyer helping uncover the dirty tricks of certain newspapers. Instead of the president of the United States resigning (along with collateral damage), you’d have the largest circulation newspaper in the country folding (along with collateral damage).

The interviewers were perhaps unaware that the “superlawyer” being interviewed by them lived at the time in one room (a London “bedsit”)!

Another leitmotif of “Mark Lewis Lawyer” (his one-time Twitter handle), along with big self-promoting talk, is a deflated balloon at the end. So

  • Lewis was going to sue and did sue Taylor Hampton for £1M-£2M, but ended up with little more than a kick in the rear;
  • likewise, he posed as the great libel specialist: members of the public are probably unaware that defamation is not, in actuality, a very difficult area of law intellectually (and judging purely from those of his cases I myself read about, such as the elementary “Jack Monroe”/Katie Hopkins matter, the law was straightforward and the facts simple);
  • he made up a lot of nonsense when he married Z-list one-time “celebrity” Caroline Feraday (most famous perhaps for having been sacked from her BBC Radio London job via a text message!); Lewis was, they both told their tame “journalists”, going to service his American clients from their new Hollywood home, while she had been cast in an American TV sitcom, and was also writing a book in which “several studios” were interested. Why do people make up such lies? And did Lewis actually have any American clients? Possible but doubtful. A New York Times profile mentioned three possible cases with a New York nexus. As he soon discovered, he was not permitted to offer legal services in California, being unqualified in any US state. He seems not even to have known that! Or was it all just a farrago of lies and nonsense? (the marriage soon collapsed, within about a year: I am speculating, but wondered whether the pair had not in fact unconsciously or semi-consciously conned each other, the one posing as the great celebrity lawyer and the other as the famous celebrity radio and TV presenter…);
  • as a partner at the well-known medium-sized London law firm, Seddons (from 2015), on a retainer of £10,000 a month (gross), he —as at his previous firms— stopped going to the office, in this case in April 2018, apparently following a traffic accident (I myself am rather shocked that someone in his physical and mental condition was even allowed to drive a car);
  • oh, and there of course never was a Hollywood film about Lewis and/or phonehacking. In fact, tweet threads from 2013-2014 between Lewis and American lawyers revealed not only that they suspected that he was trying to get work in California while unqualified, but that they had never previously heard of him! Phonehacking was a purely UK obsession (now superseded by technology, of course).

A further leitmotif of the Mark Lewis case, along with how credulous the msm is or was about Lewis (often calling him “renowned libel lawyer”, “foremost media lawyer” etc), has been how ready they were and still are not to print anything detrimental about him, such as reporting the recent Tribunal verdict…Guilty…

The Disciplinary Tribunal Judgment

The judgment can be read in full via the link I have provided. I have examined some of the evidence, and in at least some detail, in my previous blog posts about Lewis.

Lewis told the Tribunal that he now —in the Judgment’s summary– “had no assets…owned no house…owned no car, just his clothes and a mobility scooter which he valued at about £1,200.” Also:

He had no job. His employment was terminated by Seddons [in] September 2018.

Note that last: not “he resigned”, but “his employment was terminated by” [his employers]…

I suspect that Seddons are relieved to be shot of him. “Never went to the office after April 2018…unable to write because hand paralyzed” (because of MS) etc…all that and also violently abusive while medicated (or while not medicated, as I myself discovered around 2013!). Not exactly a welcome addition to any law firm, I should have thought. [#WashedUp…]

The Judgment continues:

The Respondent [Lewis] received a Mobility Car in lieu of Disability Living Allowance.”

He appears to have given up his contemptuous dismissal of State benefits, on display in that narcissistic 2011 interview…yes, you cannot judge others until you have walked a bit in their moccasins…

Lewis’s own Counsel asked the Tribunal to take into account the fact that “[Lewis] was someone with no means at all”…

Another point made in the Judgment is that the £10,000 costs awarded against Lewis will in all likelihood not be collected, because in hardship cases like his, the Authority does not press for them. In any case, the Judgment sums could never be collected from him now that he is in Israel permanently (supposedly). I believe that I read somewhere that the monies (over £13,000) collected on Lewis’s behalf by (mainly) Jew wellwishers on crowdfunding sites will be refunded. Possibly. Or maybe the donated monies will keep him and Mandy Gargoyle in hummus and pitta bread for a while.

Previous Blog Posts on Mark Lewis

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/19/the-latest-revelations-about-zionist-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/13/more-details-about-mark-lewis-lawyer-and-his-abusive-social-media-presence/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

Notes

http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/sites/default/files-sdt/11856.2018.Lewis_.pdf

http://www.lordashcroft.com/about/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ashcroft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglia_Ruskin_University

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Ashcroft_International_Business_School

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/mark-lewis-my-ms-consultant-told-me-not-to-do-anything-stressful-so-i-went-after-murdochs-phone-6370688.html

https://www.timesofisrael.com/uks-foremost-libel-lawyer-sets-his-sights-on-israels-enemies/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/europe-is-finished-leading-lawyer-says-as-he-leaves-uk-for-israel/

https://www.superlawyers.com/london/article/one-rogue-solicitor/2320f264-f989-4888-9cbb-bd3d43703ba9.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00m3x6b

https://www.bcllegal.com/the-brief/a-day-in-the-life-of/a-day-in-the-life-of-mark-lewis-media-law-libel-privacy-reputation-management-confidentiality-and-intellectual-property-solicitor-at-taylor-hampton

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2184723/RICHARD-KAY-DJ-Caroline-Feradays-brief-encounter.html

http://www.richard-designs.com/magazine/as-seen-in/caroline-feraday-ties-the-knot

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2257251/Axed-radio-presenter-Caroline-Feraday-hits-BBC-dropping-text-months-Danny-Bakers-infamous-air-tirade.html

I wonder if this report (below) was true? If so, someone made a pretty silly decision back in 2002 …but that was about a decade before she made an even sillier one (getting involved with “top lawyer” Lewis)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/oct/31/broadcasting.bbc2

170217-lewis-die-e1533384703639

Even Jews are (again) tweeting against Lewis

https://twitter.com/gabrielquotes/status/1075714461745455105

[For those who are unaware, Gideon Falter is, or wants to be considered as, a leading UK-based Jew-Zionist. He has given “disputed” testimony in a number of civil and criminal matters.

Falter has not been convicted of anything (as far as I know)].

In fact, since it became known that Lewis was abusive to a Jew (rather than non-Jews only…) his support from Jews generally has largely dried up. Et tu, Brute?

Link below: Lewis tried to get money this way too! Maybe the company below would like to redesignate him now as a Great Israeli Speaker, now that he is an Israeli citizen (though he was almost incoherent the last time I saw a clip of him making a statement…)

https://www.greatbritishspeakers.co.uk/mark-lewis-media-lawyer-leveson-inquiry-speaker

Update, 21 December 2018

https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/exclusive-judge-in-mark-lewis-case-compared-israel-to-nazis/

The Jewish lobby has managed to turn up one member of the SDT panel who was not a complete doormat for Israel, and the whole cabal is now screaming and screeching about how Lewis was unfairly judged and how the Tribunal should “reconsider” its verdict etc. The behaviour of these screeching creatures is itself likely to create “anti-Semitism”!

I am wondering what the “claque” wants. After all, Lewis was not struck off the roll (as he surely would have been, decades ago…), nor even suspended. The fine was small and covered by crowdfunding. As for the costs (also crowdfunded), they will not be pressed anyway.

So what this clamour is for is to make some kind of Jewish Zionist propaganda point. Lewis will still be unemployed and unemployable even if the SDT verdict and sentence is overturned (it will not be). Lewis will still be perambulating along the Corniche (or whatever it is called) in Tel Aviv, whether on his mobility scooter or pushed in his wheelchair, whatever transpires re. any appeal.

Lewis has no reputation left, surely, not in the London legal community. I cannot see any law firm actually wanting to employ him. His best bet is for one of the Jew Zionist billionaires in the UK (or Monte?) to stake him to the tune of a hundred grand or so. Perhaps he will strike lucky that way… Come to think of it, if his fellow Zionists (“standing with Israel” from North London armchairs and Twitter accounts) value Lewis so much, they can all send him a fiver a month. Surely he has 100 admirers? Oh…

Lewis has the right of appeal (to the Administrative Court), and 21 days from 13 December (when the Judgment was published) in which to lodge an appeal. So until 3 January 2019. I doubt that he will appeal, though. It would surely be pointless (even were he to win) and might result only in another multi-day “trial” with a similar result.

http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/constitutions-and-procedures/appeals

Update, 22 December 2018

Jewish Zionist extremist Jonathan Hoffman (of “Sussex Friends of Israel”) has now set up a petition to the effect that the verdict and sentence in the Mark Lewis case should be declared “null and void”.

https://www.change.org/p/edward-nally-justice-for-mark

So far (at time of writing), only 224 persons have signed the petition supporting Lewis. That’s about 1 out of every 300,000 people in the UK, or to put it another way, 1 out of about every 1,200 Jews in the UK.

Hoffman seems to imagine that all that is required to void the proceedings and result of them is for the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal to make a declaration! The couple of dozen other Jew-Zionists (several of them lawyers!) who have tweeted similarly appear to be under the same delusion.

In reality, the Tribunal panel member objected to was only one of three, and was not even the Chairman of the panel. If Lewis thinks that the verdict or sentence should be set aside, he need only lodge notice of appeal by 3 January 2019. No doubt the Administrative Court will do exactly as he and/or his extremist “claque” and clique of supporters would wish (ha ha!— I am of course being heavily ironic or satirical, and quite possibly sarcastic…).

Again, I fail to see what even Lewis himself would gain from either any successful appeal (highly unlikely though such success would be) or from some unilateral act of hara-kiri by the Tribunal.

Lewis was not struck off the solicitors’ roll by the SDT; he was not even suspended. His £10,000 costs penalty, which the Tribunal implied would almost certainly not even be collected by the SRA (by reason of his impecuniosity), has been crowdfunded, as has his fine of £2,500. The SDT finding and sentence does not stop Lewis from working as a solicitor, if (a big if!) he can get any law firm to employ him, or alternatively if he complies with the necessary regulations to practise as a sole practitioner.

In reality, Lewis was leaving the UK for Israel anyway. One can see why (and it is not because he and his ghastly partner/carer are in the slightest afraid of British “anti-Semitism”): Lewis has a progressive/degenerative medical condition, MS, which has worsened in the past few years. He is unable to walk properly and has either to use a mobility scooter, or to be pushed in a wheelchair, or (until he left for Israel) to drive himself in the car supplied to him (thanks to the “antisemitic” British taxpayer…) by Motability in lieu of Disability Living Allowance.

Lewis had not attended his place of work (at Seddons, the London law firm) since March 2018, by reason of his medical condition, which was made worse by some kind of traffic accident. He became unable to write. When Seddons heard of the complaints against Lewis to the SRA (or when the upcoming Tribunal hearing was publicized), Seddons terminated Lewis’s employment, in September 2018, on 6 months’ notice, though presenting it at the time as if the reason, or sole reason, for the termination was that Lewis was emigrating permanently to Israel.

While of course I do not know the details of Lewis’s billing performance etc at Seddons, he was on a pay package of £10,000 a month (gross), presumably (educated guess) with the possibility of a bonus or percentage if he exceeded that amount of billed work over a period. In Tribunal, it was said by Lewis’s Counsel that his assets as of November 2018 were just his clothes, his mobility scooter and a pension which was worth £70 a week or less. That, and his £10,000 a month pay, payable only until March 2019.

Reading between the lines, one can see that, while Lewis’s assiduous courting of the “occupied” UK mass media brought Seddons publicity (a mixed blessing, I should have thought!), Lewis obviously was not bringing in or doing much billed work. In short, he was not worth his salt even before he stopped actual work (or even attending his office) in March 2018. Seddons seem to have treated Lewis rather well, inasmuch as they carried him totally for six months before terminating his contract. To be frank, I was astonished to read, in 2015, that a well-known firm such as Seddons had taken Lewis on. I expect that they lived to regret it.

To return to the main point, Lewis had already decided to leave the UK for Israel. He knew (probably years in advance, as I did when Jew-Zionists made malicious complaint against me to the Bar Standards Board, an analogous situation) that he was going to be “put on trial” at Tribunal and that Seddons would probably not keep him on, so he (again, educated guess and I may be mistaken) kept it quiet from Seddons as long as he could, to keep getting the £10,000 a month (after tax, assuming that he paid it, so about £7,000 a month net).

Lewis now has little future as a lawyer, but that has really nothing to do with the verdict of the Tribunal. Lewis never denied posting the violent and crazed messages wherewith he was charged. Indeed, he justified himself in respect of the non-Jew victims, though he was willing to crawl a bit to the father of the 18-y-o Jew victim.

In other words, Lewis’s behaviour was exposed at Tribunal, and even were he to appeal and to win any appeal (unlikely anyway), any potential employers or clients will be aware of what he wrote; also aware that Lewis has been and presumably still is sometimes non compos mentis by reason of either his medical condition, or its effects on the brain, or the medication used in respect of that. I would not want a lawyer like that; few would.

Lewis has also stated that he will not be making application to join the Bar of Israel.

I can only assume that Lewis will be living off a number of income sources while living in Israel:

  • his partner/carer is apparently a buy-to-let parasite in the UK and/or has other business interests; she has stated that she will be buying property in Israel;
  • Lewis will still be able to get some UK Disability Living Allowance (paid for by all those “antisemitic” British taxpayers…) in Israel, indefinitely. Yes, only up to maybe £100 a week or so, but hey!…;
  • I have no idea what disability benefits Israel offers, but I suppose that there are some;
  • Lewis has a £70 a week private pension;
  • Israel offers considerable “Aliyah” (emigration/immigration) benefits (see Notes, below), which, by the way, include a one-way free flight to Israel, financial help, housing benefit etc;
  • I would not be surprised to discover that his Jewish Zionist supporters in the UK will be covertly remitting him some charity monies informally; indeed, it is not beyond the possible that some wealthy Jews will remit him larger sums, who knows?

This individual, Lewis, is the Jew Zionist who, having conspired behind the scenes against me for years (since 2013, if not before that),

  • was one of the Jews covertly behind the malicious complaint about me to the Bar Standards Board by “UK Lawyers for Israel” (where he is or was a leading member);
  • was involved in the malicious complaint against me by the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” (where he is still an “Honorary Patron”, oddly described as Dr. Mark Lewis, maybe because he was given an honorary degree by Middlesex Poly/Uni a few years ago) to Essex Police; and
  • repeatedly tweeted about me that I was or am “a sad unemployable git” and “failure as barrister, failure as human being”!

Now look who’s talking! An incoherent, washed-up, foul-mouthed, disgraced, twice-divorced Jew Zionist, living in Israel on benefits, charity and off his “partner/carer”, and incapable of doing anything except tweeting and being pushed around in a wheelchair.

Notes

http://www.jewishagency.org/aliyah-benefits/program/8231

https://www.gov.uk/claim-benefits-abroad/where-you-can-claim-benefits

https://antisemitism.uk/about/patrons/

Update, 13 January 2019

Hoffman’s absurd online petition to the SRA demanding (ignorantly) that the SDT or SRA “overturn” the verdict in the Lewis case has now effectively come to its end, with 411 signatories. 411 out of about 250,000+ Jews in the UK (and about 65,000,000 non-Jews).

Update, 7 March 2019

More about the “Mark Lewis Lawyer” whom his Jew-Zionist cronies on Twitter etc always refer to as “top lawyer”, “top defamation specialist” and such nonsense; “Mark Lewis Lawyer”, such a “top lawyer” that his income is now zero and his sole assets are his cheap clothes and a mobility scooter! Sacked by his last three (or four) employers. Oh, and here is another dissatisfied former client…

https://twitter.com/RealNatalieRowe/status/1103432273272160256

Update, 23 October 2019

Seems that Lewis’s ex-wife, Caroline Feraday, has also fallen on hard times, living in a “Nowheresville” in California with her young daughter (Caroline Feraday is now a single mother). She says that she is unable to raise a mere $10,000 [£7,700], despite having some kind of (“office bod”?) job, and so has turned to GoFundMe. Strange. She was featured, in the past (in newspapers), a decade ago though, as having property of considerable value both in the UK and Brazil (in Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro) as well as (since 2013) in California.

Surprisingly, she has, and within only one day (at time of writing), managed to raise nearly $2,000 of the $10,000 for which she asks.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/legal-fees-dealing-with-stalkerharassment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agoura_Hills,_California

Update, 23 February 2020

Following the publication of the above article and updates, Lewis arranged to be a “partner” (a flexible term) at a small, mainly if not wholly Jewish law firm based in mews somewhere in or near Notting Hill, in West London. He seems to spend most of his time at his flat in Eilat, Israel (though at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal in 2018, Lewis’s Counsel told those judging him that Lewis had no property…).

Lewis was retained by two notorious Jew-Zionists (an actress and a daytime TV game show presenter) to hunt down and sue ~70 Labour Party members alleged to have tweeted libellous matter. So far, no case has actually come to court, as far as I know.

Lewis also, with others (I understand from an account read that there were three law firms and also six barristers on the winning side, if I understood correctly), was recently instructed in an employment case in the High Court at London, and where the claimant was awarded substantial damages, with about a million pounds of legal costs awarded or (as I think) agreed. So presumably he will get a good cut of that.

marklewislawyer

[above: Lewis interviewed recently in London by an Internet (YouTube) “TV station”]

ds5

The Latest Revelations About Zionist “Top Lawyer”, Mark Lewis

Many will have read my previous blog posts about “Mark Lewis Lawyer”

download

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/13/more-details-about-mark-lewis-lawyer-and-his-abusive-social-media-presence/

and

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/

and

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

The Law Society Gazette has now published more news about Lewis and his “trial” in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal etc.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/mark-lewis-judgment-reveals-sdt-considered-reprimand/5068711.article

Lewis only had to pay a third of the fine considered by the SDT panel because:

“In its full decision published this week the SDT said it eventually came to the conclusion that a reprimand would not be a strong enough punishment and that a fine would be the most appropriate outcome. However, it reduced the fine from an initial estimate of £7,500 to £2,500 on account of Lewis’s financial struggles.”

The disciplinary panel judging and sentencing Lewis considered that:

“In mitigation, the tribunal accepted Lewis’ submission that he had limited means. He did not own his own house and [his] monthly expenses exceeded his liabilities.”

[“…expenses exceeded his liabilities”? The Law Society Gazette either needs a (literate) sub-editor or one with better hearing, unless the SDT panel themselves do not speak English properly! No matter. Illiteracy is par for the course in online newspapers…]

The Law Society Gazette says that the SDT panel added that:

 “Although his former firm Seddons is paying him £10,000 per month before tax this was due to end in March [2019].”

What’s this? The “top lawyer”, “top libel and reputation specialist” etc has “financial struggles”? When for most of the past decade he has been tweeting and telling newspapers all about what a big success he is, with his classic cars and international client-base?

Either Lewis is not quite the “top lawyer” and huge success he has been claiming to be for the past 7+ years, or he was “economical with the truth” at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal. One way or another he has been telling what the Cockneys call “porkies”! That’s not very kosher!

So the “top lawyer”, with his supposed millions from the “phonehacking” racket and well-publicized libel cases etc, does not own his own house? (in London, that is— he does have or had an apartment in Israel, according to a newspaper article several years ago).

Still, the fact that the SDT thinks that someone getting (after tax) pay of about £7,000 a month is “financially struggling” says more about London law firms than about Lewis, arguende! (that pay is in fact considerably less, in real terms, i.e. taking inflation into account, than I was once paid, when active as an offshore lawyer many many years ago).

So much for the “top lawyer” who now seems to be (to use one of Lewis’s insults to me) just “an unemployable git”!

The way Lewis managed to bamboozle the UK msm and so the poor duped UK public into believing that he was —or even still is— a “top lawyer” etc reminds me rather of the front once put up by another Jewish Zionist, the not so late and certainly unlamented “Robert Maxwell”, who has now also “relocated” to Israel, though he is not quite in a position to enjoy it. Maxwell never fooled me (even when I was in my late teens, in the mid-1970s); neither did Lewis.

19 December 2018: A few more thoughts

I just realized that the “British” Press, which for years has been publishing Lewis’s self-publicizing bull and pronouncements on legal issues as if he were a cross between Lord Denning and Oliver Wendell Holmes (with a dose of George Carman), has not seen fit to report on the supposed “top lawyer” being found guilty of online abuse; neither, therefore, has the (Jewish-Zionist-owned or strongly influenced) UK msm reported the fact that Lewis was let off lightly because he

  • was under the influence of prescription drugs (or so he testified to the Disciplinary Tribunal: strange that his unprovoked online abuse aimed at me —see previous blog posts— started years before he was on any experimental trial in respect of his MS condition and therefore before he was on the drugs used by his advocates in Tribunal to mitigate his bad behaviour);
  • “is of limited means” and “is struggling financially”.

Only the specifically Jewish “community” Press (eg the Jewish Chronicle) and the legal profession’s newspapers etc reported the outcome of Lewis’s “trial”. Quite a contrast with what happened to me in 2016 (anyone interested should just Google “Ian Millard barrister”…)! 

“They” certainly look after their own…

And a further thought yet…

If Lewis is “struggling financially” and has no real property in the UK, it must (?) be presumed that he never did get the £1 Million or more damages he claimed from his former firm (he was a “consultant” there), Taylor Hampton.

Lewis claimed the money in respect (mainly, it seems) of various “phonehacking” cases prior to his departure (supposedly to live in Los Angeles) in 2013 (see previous blog posts about that particular piece of Lewis BS…).

Either Lewis failed in his case against Taylor Hampton solicitors, or he settled for a very very great deal less than the “seven figure sum” he briefed about at the time to the tame UK Press…

The managing partner of Taylor Hampton solicitors was reported by the legal press as having testified that he “was unsure what work Lewis actually did” while engaged (on what seems to have been a generous retainer) by the firm, which countersued Lewis in that case (which seems to have settled at the last minute on a non-disclosure basis).

More Lewis BS, in other words…thank God we seem to have seen the end of him.

Barristers, Solicitors and Fees (and a few other things that irritate me)

Background

As some of my readers will know, I was from 1991 to 2008 a working barrister (sometimes in practice in England, sometimes employed by international law firms); I was also nominally a barrister, but neither practising nor employed, from 2008-2016. In 2016, I was disbarred by reason of a malicious Jew-Zionist complaint against me by a pro-Israel lobby group known as “UK Lawyers for Israel” (see the Notes at the foot of this blog post).

232323232fp93232)uqcshlukaxroqdfv975(=ot)3;8 =73(=33(=XROQDF)26 (8;953824;ot1lsi

[photo: me as newly-minted pupil-barrister in or about 1992, aged however about 35]

As matters now stand, I have no personal interest in the Bar or the legal professions (the Bar, the solicitors’ profession etc); I do have a general socio-political interest, however, as well as a liking –perhaps excessive– for walking down Memory Lane (my natal chart has Saturn in Scorpio, for those with interest in such things).

I was impelled to write today having seen the Twitter output of someone calling himself “Abused Lawyer”:

https://twitter.com/AbusedLawyer

Thoughts

I start from the premise that a society of any complexity requires law, a legal system, legal rights and duties etc. By way of example, as long ago as the Babylonian Empire (c.600 BC), there existed laws dealing with the ongoing liability of builders to purchasers of houses (English law only caught up with this in, I think, the 1970s). At any rate, any complex society requires correspondingly-detailed laws.

Legal complexity is a sign of a complex society, just as the existence of “celebrity chefs” and “celebrity” sportsmen (etc) is a sign of a decadent society (as in the latter days of the Roman Empire: discuss).

Laws alone, however, are only the start. In order to have effect, laws need pillars of support: (equitable) enforcement, at the very least. Stalin’s Russia had laws on paper, but was very arbitrary and unjust in enforcement. English law has always said that “where there is a right, there is a remedy” and that that remedy will consist in, at root, enforcement of criminal law by a criminal penalty, or in civil law a civil ruling providing for compensation or a mandatory compulsion or prohibition.

There is a further point. In order to get from right to remedy, you need a mechanism with which to do that. In an ideal society, every citizen would be educated enough, have sufficient will or resolve (and the means necessary) to be his/her own lawyer. In reality, there is a need, in every society beyond the smallest and most primitive, for a group of lawyers, so that citizens can be advised, protected, fought for, defended, and also so that society functions with relative smoothness.

As societies progress, they go from having no lawyers, to having a few who are supposedly unpaid amateurs or monied gentlemen who receive only gifts (honorarii) from the grateful, then on to having lawyers who are paid freelancers (or, in some countries, salaried employees of the State).

The question arises as to how to remunerate lawyers. In England, there were at one time several kinds of lawyer: barristers, “attorneys”, “sergeants”, “notaries” etc. These categories were whittled down (for most purposes) to only two by the late 19th Century: barristers (in four “Inns of Court” in London) and solicitors. The barristers, when paid, were paid by the solicitors, who in turn were paid by their lay clients (the term “lay” coming, like much else, from the ecclesiastical vocabulary of the late Middle Ages).

The first State-paid legal aid scheme (criminal) in England dated from the 1890s and covered only the most serious offences (particularly murder, then a capital offence). After WW2, it became gradually clear that both justice and convenience required State funding for at least the more serious criminal offences dealt with at the Assizes and Quarter Sessions (from 1971, the Crown Courts). Civil legal aid dates from 1949 and expanded greatly until 2010, when it started to be drastically cut back, along with criminal legal aid.

When I started at the Bar in 1993 as a real working barrister and not a mere “first six” pupil (spectator and dogsbody), I did quite a lot of publicly-funded work: criminal “rubbish” (in the charming Bar term) in the magistrates’ courts and (far less commonly) the Crown Courts; Legal Aid-funded and also privately-funded civil work in the County Courts (housing, landlord and tenant, contract, various tortious disputes) and in the High Court: judicial reviews (mostly housing or immigration-related), which were via Legal Aid; also contractual problems, libels etc, which were privately-paid.

Even in 1993, criminal legal aid was not too generous (I was in the wrong sort of chambers to get lucrative frauds or other really serious criminal cases), though I still recall the unexpected pleasure at getting a £5,000 fee for 5 days at City of London Magistrates’ Court, an “old-style” committal in a cheque fraud case which later went to the Old Bailey for trial. A Nigerian solicitor and another Nigerian, a recently-Called barrister, cheated me out of that trial, but that’s another story….

I do recall that I did go to court from time to time for “Mentions”, a nuisance involving going somewhere, dressing up, then appearing for (usually) 5 minutes before a judge, all for £45, if memory serves (I was told about 10 years ago that the fee for that was still below £50, 15+ years later!).

On the other hand, I knew several people who, having gone to the Bar in 1988 or 1989 with relatively modest academic qualifications, had started to get lucrative and legally-aided criminal work by 1993. One was making around £100,000 p.a. by being led (i.e. by a Q.C.) in large-scale frauds. The average salary in the UK at the time would have been around £15,000 to £20,000, I suppose.

It is a question of where the line is drawn. The general public read of the few barristers making millions (some from legal aid) and are unaware of the fact that many barristers (solicitors too) make almost joke money, such as (in 2018) £20,000 a year, £30,000 a year etc. That applies especially to criminal barristers (and solicitors). The barrister has many expenses to pay, too, from Chambers fees and rent (which work out at as much as 20% of gross fees received) to parking, fuel etc (in the 2002-2008 period I myself travelled all over the UK, and also to mainland Europe and beyond by car, ferry and plane).

Lawyers must be paid, but how well? Unfortunately, this cannot be left to public sentiment. Just as, per Bill Clinton, “you can’t go too far on welfare” (because the public love to see the non-working poor screwed down on), it seems that the public have, understandably but ignorantly, no sympathy for lawyers! The newspapers make sure of it. On the other hand, read what “Abused Lawyer” has to say…

Further Thoughts

My first thoughts are that the governments since 2010 and perhaps before have had no real interest in the law as a major pillar of society. The court buildings themselves are often not much to look at. Many of the newer (post 1945) Crown Courts are in the “monstrous carbuncle” region, though there are a few modern courts that are better, such as Truro and Exeter, both of which I visited often when practising at the Bar out of Exeter in the years 2002-2007.

Some County Courts are appalling to look at: I once had to appear at Brighton County Court, which is or was like a public loo in almost every respect. Again, I was once only at Walsall County Court: I saw a magnificent 18thC building in the neoclassic style (pillared frontage etc) with the legend “Walsall County Court” on it. However, it turned out that that building had been sold and that the real County Court was now situated nearby in what had obviously been a shop, possibly a furniture emporium. Now, about 14 years later, I have just read that the original building is a Wetherspoon’s pub! Britain 2018…

If you visit courts in the United States, you often find that they embody “the majesty of the law”: pillars, atria, broad stone steps etc. Not all, but most. Even the modern courts make an effort to seem imposing. Not so in the UK! You might ask “so what?”, but image and impression are important. The same is true of the Bar. It is infuriating to see some barristers hugely overpaid, particularly at public expense, but at the same time law and society are diminished if the Bar is reduced to penury.

The question is not simple: the Bar has become overcrowded. Even now, we see that every other (or so it sometimes seems) black or brown young person wants to become a barrister (quite a few English people –so-called “whites”– too).

When I was at school and vaguely thinking about the idea (in 1973, the year in which I in fact dropped out of school!), the Bar had about 4,000-5,000 members (in practice in chambers), whereas now, in 2018, there are 16,000 (but the official definition now includes some —perhaps 3,000— employed barristers). In very broad terms, you could say that the number of practising barristers has tripled in 40 years. However, it seems that in 2017 and 2016, the number exceeded 30,000! Has there been a cull in the past year or so? I do not have the information with which I might answer my own question.

Looking at the situation from my present eyrie of objectivity, it seems to me clear that the Bar (and also the solicitor profession) as a career for many is going to disappear. Britain is getting poorer and the plan of the international conspiracy is to manage that. How? By importing millions of unwanted immigrants (who breed); by getting the masses used to the idea that Britain is getting poorer and/or “cannot afford” [fill in whatever: the Bar, the law, the police, the Welfare State, defence, decency…]. Also, by labelling the few non-sheep standing up against it all as “extremists”, “neo-Nazis”, “racists” etc.

The fees for the criminal Bar and the lower end of the civil Bar will only become more modest. Large numbers of often rubbish barristers will compete for the badly-paid cases going (and some more affluent young barristers, with family money supporting them, will willingly work for peanuts anyway). There is also the point that, when I was at the Inns of Court School of Law in 1987-88, you had to go there for a year in order to take, eventually, the (then) three days of the Bar Examination. Now, all sorts of poor places offer a “Bar Finals course” (now, I believe, called the Bar Vocational Course or BVC, or some even newer name). Thus the supply of (often poor) barristers has increased.

A final word on fees. Traditionally, barristers were not supposed to care about fees. They could not sue for their fees. These attitudes still exist, though in very modified form, today. At the same time, some solicitors take advantage. I suppose that my critics will call me biased etc, but I found that the non-paying solicitors were mostly the smaller, often Jewish or other “ethnic”, firms who, almost invariably, were also very lax on ethics (i.e. were crooks, in blunt language). I suppose that some will ask why I accepted instructions from such firms. Well, there are ways to get out of things, but the “cab rank” rule limits what you can say and do, and the joke “Code of Conduct” would make it impossible to say “no Jews, no blacks, no browns” (etc)…

Looking further ahead, the legal profession is likely to be hard-hit by AI (artificial intelligence).

Notes

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

Update, 1 December 2018

A tweet about a Crown Court trial by the author of a recent high-selling book on the broken justice system of the UK continues the theme:

As to why (criminal) barristers are now working for peanuts in many cases, see above blog post, and also:

  • most criminal barristers cannot do anything else and are by no means always of much interest to those who might pay more, i.e. employers of whatever type;
  •  most criminal barristers are “me too” pseudo-liberals with the backbone of a jellyfish, as witness their lack of (public) support for me when a Jew-Zionist cabal (“UK Lawyers for Israel”) made malicious and politically-motivated complaint against me to the Bar Standards Board in 2014 (hearing 2016);
  • following above theme, most barristers (not only criminal ones) are scared of the (absurd) BSB, the Bar Council, their instructing solicitors, their own shadows (etc);
  • some have family money and/or are trustafarians.

Update, 13 December 2018

Another relevant contribution, from a barrister calling himself Cayman Taff…

Update, 16 December 2018

Solicitors: civil legal aid firm numbers reduced by well over 1,000 (from about 3,600 to 2,500), so a reduction of over a quarter. The BBC says “decimated”, but I have ceased to expect much literacy from BBC (or other msm journalistic) staff…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46357169

and I just noticed this tweet (see my mention of “Mentions” in the body of my blog post, above)…

“Mark Lewis Lawyer” Tries to Have Part of the Case Against Him Thrown Out

  • The Jew-Zionist lawyer (solicitor) Mark Lewis, best known for the UK phonehacking cases of some years ago, is facing a disciplinary tribunal under the auspices of the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority, and is trying to have part of the case against him thrown out on the specious basis that he was “merely responding” to rude comments about him by “a Who’s Who of neo-Nazis” (as if that were a defence? Oh well, let’s leave that aside…he’s not my solicitor, thank God!). I post the link to the Law Society Gazette report below.

I should add that I am neither party nor witness in those disciplinary proceedings.

I shall be blogging further about this unpleasant individual, probably in considerable detail, at a later time. For the moment, I shall confine myself to saying that

  • Mark Lewis started to send me a small number of abusive tweets (unprompted by any tweets from me to him) in 2012 or 2013. I did not reply in kind and blocked him on Twitter;
  • Lewis’s then wife (a short-lived marriage), one Caroline Feraday (a “Z List” would-be “celebrity” about 20 years ago) was in fact the first to abuse me on Twitter, having seen a tweet by me about the “WW2 Jewish looted art” “restitution” scam, reported on by the Radio 4 Today Programme. Lewis joined in her hysterical abuse against me. (The marriage failed after less than a year and after a few years —in 2018— she had a child by another man in Southern California, to where she —and Lewis, for a while, in 2013— had relocated);
  • I had to block both Caroline Feraday and Mark Lewis on Twitter because of their unpleasant abuse; I should add that, until they started to abuse me online, I had never heard of either of them;
  • Some time after I blocked Mark Lewis on Twitter, I was informed (and saw evidence from his own online output) that he had tried to make complaint against me to the Metropolitan Police in or around 2013. I know the name of the police officer who was (in Lewis’s words) “dealing with the case”, a woman who had previously served in the Royal Military Police. The complaint failed (in fact, I was not even contacted by the Metropolitan Police);
  • Mark Lewis is or was a leading member of, and office-holder in, two Jew-Zionist organizations, UK Lawyers for Israel [UKLFI] and the so-called Campaign Against Anti-Semitism [CAA]. The first cabal (UKLFI) made complaint against me to the Bar in 2014 (6-7 years after I ceased practice, a purely political and malicious complaint based on a small number of tweets, none of which were addressed to any individual but were general comments on society). I was disbarred in 2016 as a result of that complaint. The second cabal (the CAA) has tried on several occasions to have me prosecuted, via malicious complaint to Essex Police [see link below] and elsewhere (but now is itself under investigation by the police in relation to several matters);
  • Mark Lewis has from time to time posted other rude or abusive comments about me online, the last being about a year or two ago;
  • Mark Lewis is supposedly now relocating to Israel, and the London law firm which employed him for a couple of years, Seddons, parted company with him a while ago.

Unfortunately, I was unaware until recently that Lewis was being “tried” for abuse online against others, and was only aware today that Lewis had made preliminary application to throw out the case in part on the basis that he was merely “replying” to abuse by “neo-Nazis” (in which category he apparently places me). In my case, I was tweeted by Lewis; I was neither rude nor insulting, still less abusive to Lewis, yet he was –unprompted– horribly rude and abusive to me, as was his short-term and hysterical then wife, though she soon moved on and concentrated on (risibly) trying to convince her Twitter followers —mostly bought– that she was still, really, a “celebrity” (apparently a few people still remember her reporting on London traffic congestion etc);

  • It is important to underline that I was never even rude, still less abusive, to Lewis. His abuse was unprompted, unexpected both in itself and in its ferocity, and not the result of anything I tweeted to him (he addressed me “out of the blue”).

I await the results of the disciplinary proceedings with interest.

Notes

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/lewis-prosecution-is-disgraceful-considering-hate-campaign-against-me/5068417.article

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/fee-dispute-i-wasnt-sure-what-work-mark-lewis-was-doing-law-firm-chief-tells-court/5063455.article

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/when-i-was-a-victim-of-a-malicious-zionist-complaint/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2184723/RICHARD-KAY-DJ-Caroline-Feradays-brief-encounter.html

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20140519/282273843396961

https://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster63/lob63-mark-lewis.pdf

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/mark-lewis-my-ms-consultant-told-me-not-to-do-anything-stressful-so-i-went-after-murdochs-phone-6370688.html

 

Debate about this on Twitter…

https://twitter.com/IKWiltshire186/status/1065911406162309121

Update, 23 November 2018

It appears that the hearing has in fact now started and that Lewis failed to get part of the evidence (and so the case) thrown out:

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/lewis-regulatory-action-inevitable-after-death-threat-tweets-tribunal-hears/5068449.article?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Lewis apparently has given evidence that, at times, he “had no idea what he was doing” because of the drugs he was prescribed! Glad that he is not my solicitor!

download

170217-lewis-die-e1533384703639

Psychotic (or maybe the MS he has afflicts mind as well as body); he himself, at trial, blamed drugs for some nasty tweets, but he stands by those shown above!

Update 26 November 2018

Lewis was given a fairly lenient penalty by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority for his sins: £2,500 fine plus £10,000 costs. Pity he was not struck off the solicitors’ roll. He admitted that he sometimes has no idea what he is doing because of prescription drugs. He’s on the way out.

On Twitter, the whole UK Twitter Jew Zionist cabal (many of them lawyers, several of them Jews with not obviously-Jewish names) is out in force, defending Lewis’s behaviour. Take a look on Twitter under “Mark Lewis” or “@mlewislawyer”.

Also, compare the lenient treatment given to Lewis (whose ferocious abuse was aimed at named individuals and addressed directly to them) to that meted out to me, disbarred for tweeting 7 (reduced to 5) tweets critical of or mocking Jew Zionism!

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

Update, 27 November 2018

Jews immediately set up crowdfunding pages for Lewis. Already, about £8,000 has been given (by Jews, presumably and judging from names of donors) and it seems likely that the SRA financial penalty and costs will all be paid that way. Lewis may even make a profit on it all! I cannot imagine that Lewis and his “carer”/”partner” Mandy Blumenthal (a property “investor”) are exactly short of money anyway.

Meanwhile, on Twitter, the debate continues:

https://twitter.com/arryTuttle/status/1067334995449126912

https://twitter.com/Tir_Tairngire/status/1067329329749737472

The division is sharp: Jews and a few “useful idiot” non-Jews supporting Lewis (I dare say that most are unaware of the true facts of Lewis’s persistent and long-term abuse of people or have been misled by the story his Counsel put forward on his behalf); non-Jews mostly not supporting his position.

Here for example, we see Aisha Ali-Khan, an oddly pro-Lewis Muslim woman (and married to a one-time policeman, himself given a suspended sentence for a criminal offence as well as dismissed from the police), supporting him. She often calls on Twitter for the prosecution of supposed “anti-Semites” etc. Strange hypocrisy: she herself has been imprisoned two or three times for contempt of court, harassment and so on. Maybe she considers Lewis, as another abuser, to be a kindred spirit! I forgot to mention that, at one time, she was assistant to ex-Labour and Respect former MP George Galloway. I wonder what she was up to…

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/16171212.george-galloways-former-parliamentary-assistant-jailed-for-contempt/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26873650

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jealous-copper-spied-george-galloways-3943177

Pathetic minor academic Ben Gidley (another Jew-Zionist), here posing as one of his other Twitter faces, “Bob From Brockley” (yet another of his aliases is “@antinazisunited”; he was also “@TheSoupyOne” but was expelled from Twitter for –again!– harassment! Those Zionist Jews never seem to learn…), and here supports Lewis in reply to Katie Hopkins, dragging me into it all! Note that my featured tweet is not addressed to Lewis…In fact Gidley/BobFromBrockley is once again wrong: I have not been on Twitter for about 7 months now; I no longer have an account. Ben/Bob also falsely implies that I was part of “a concerted campaign” to harass Lewis. No…in fact I never tweeted to him except perhaps (and politely) once, when Lewis started his campaign against me (mostly from the shadows).

and it seems that Mandy Gargoyle is not very well thought of, either.

Here is some pseudonymous Jewess, “Anna”, attacking Katie Hopkins, and also persecuted singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz. I have seen tweets identifying “Anna” (and other accounts) as… Mandy Gargoyle, but I have no idea whether she is or not. Maybe not: probably straight from Tel Aviv, judging by the poor English (eg Alison Chabloz as someone’s “son“!). No matter. [note, 29 November 2018: the Twitter account “Anna” has now disclaimed being Mandy Blumenthal, though claiming that she is “honoured” that “one antisemite” “keeps on” making the association. No idea who that might be….I’m looking but not finding, today].

Here’s an amusing one. Jew (odds-on) who thinks that Lewis should not have been prosecuted by the SRA because tweeting in a personal and not professional capacity.

Well, I pleaded that (inter alia) when Jew-Zionists had the Bar Standards Board “prosecute” me (2014-2016). The tribunal decided (quite wrongly on the facts) against me. I never held myself out as barrister on my Twitter profile or in any of the 5 supposedly offending tweets (none of which was addressed to a named individual). Lewis has always (typical…) self-promoted as a “lawyer” (solicitor) on his Twitter profile. I shall be blogging about the so-called “top lawyer” in greater detail at a later date.

Anti-Zionist Jew, Gilad Atzmon, mentions Lewis and his behaviour here:

https://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2018/11/26/gilad-needs-additional-support

This is an amusing one, from Simon Myerson QC, who is part of the Jewish Zionist troll group called “@gnasherjew” on Twitter. My impression over the years is that he constantly tweets “as a Jew”, but here he claims not! In fact, his Twitter profile used to self-describe as “ocean-going Zionist QC”, a neat way of wearing his Jewishness on his sleeve while also bragging (about being both a QC and an ocean yachtie).

Update, 3 December 2018

The Jews continue to pile in for Lewis. Twitter is still full of Jews wishing Lewis well in his move to Israel (supposedly the day after tomorrow), and Legal Business magazine here quotes a lawyer saying things helpful to Lewis. Was the lawyer a Jew, one wonders?

https://www.legalbusiness.co.uk/blogs/media-lawyer-mark-lewis-fined-2500-in-controversial-sra-antisemitism-row/

and Legal Business continues:

“The partner added: ‘Is it the role of the SRA to intervene in Twitter rows? This is a case about boundaries, and it suggests that the SRA’s boundaries are in a different place to that of the public.’”

Well, how very supportive. Where were all these supporters of free speech when the Jew-Zionists had me disbarred for 5 tweets about society generally?

In fact not every tweeter has supported Lewis and his appalling behaviour:

Update, 4 December 2018

Another Jew lawyer weighs in on Lewis’s side, at the same time wishing him bon voyage to Israel…

A day or two premature, nicht wahr?

Update, 6 December 2018

Yes, the dog has indeed left!

Landing in Israel, Lewis said to TV reporters that Jews should clear out of Europe:

“In my opinion, Europe has ceased to be a place for Jews, we are a wandering people and it is time to wander again,” Lewis concludes”

https://www.10.tv/news/177728

https://www.timesofisrael.com/europe-is-finished-leading-lawyer-says-as-he-leaves-uk-for-israel/?fbclid=IwAR0zICcsod6xz3RfW92qUvwO_0ZgX3o4ovK-32XjGK9b2u6WVe8AGcCRwjs

Lewis says that “Europe is finished”, when what he means is “finished” in the sense of “no longer so easily exploited by Jew-Zionists”!

As for “finished”, he looks pretty finished himself, a shambling wreck in fact, as shown in this clip from RT News:

In fact, Lewis’s remarks seem to be almost incoherent. It is not clear whether that is because of disjointed RT News editing, the long flight to Israel, the effects of his medication on his brain (as mentioned in his recent “trial” before the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority) or some other cause (such as any degenerative effects on the brain caused by progressive MS). It has occurred to me several times over the past 6 years that Lewis’s brain might have been affected by some side-effect of his MS condition itself, but I do not know enough about MS or medicine generally to say whether that is possible (I read that it is, though) or likely. He often seems to me to leave rationality behind.

What would “Golda Meir” have said?

Dt6s0pEWwAEylHO

Anyway, here’s someone calling himself “Golden Anglo”, a tweeter who seems to be yet another critic of Lewis and his attitude etc…

https://twitter.com/GoldenEagle_BBC/status/1070710098660638720

Reminds me of this amusing ten-minute cartoon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKDeyuM0-Og

Update, 7 December 2018

Some (a random selection of) very recent tweets about Lewis and Blumenthal (funny though how RT News seems to have swallowed the same bs as the “British” msm about how Lewis is or was a “top lawyer”…)

https://twitter.com/DundeeBloke/status/1071088207360679936

https://twitter.com/AuldgitzFarts/status/1071116522452647937

https://twitter.com/MomentumCV/status/1071119262142607362

https://twitter.com/D_HairyLemon/status/1071140634055114753

https://twitter.com/bigfatgit/status/1071144086558658560

https://twitter.com/xMATTxLAWx/status/1071144408282775552

 

Lewis denying that he has property in Israel:

Lewis may or may not have a house in Israel (yet), but he certainly has or had (I suspect still has) an apartment, as he admitted in this 2011 interview with the [London] Evening Standard:

“I was devastated,” he says. “I’d been turned down for so many jobs, I’m thinking to myself, I can’t go on any more, you can only get so many knockbacks. I’m giving in and going to my flat in Israel and retire in Eilat.”

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/mark-lewis-my-ms-consultant-told-me-not-to-do-anything-stressful-so-i-went-after-murdochs-phone-6370688.html

Lewis, like Israel, prefers to get his “defence” in first…

In other words, Lewis (and Blumenthal) now exhibit their primary (in fact, really, only) loyalty, i.e. to the state of Israel and to their fellow-Jews. Yet Jews always say that it is “anti-Semitic” to say that Jews have (even) dual loyalty, let alone that they put Jewry and Israel first, before the host country (in this case, the UK). Here we have a typical case: while in the UK, Lewis and Blumenthal were “British” “patriots”, even putting themselves above real British people in that regard, but as soon as they have emigrated to Israel, Europe (not just the UK) is “finished”, “anti-Semitic”, “unsafe” and Britain is not a home for the Jews but just a “Hotel California” where they spent a few years, or a few generations…

The people I despise are the British ones who, out of naivety, or bribery, or fear of career repercussions etc, doormat for the Zionists. Most barristers, for example, are either such doormats or are silent through fear of being blackballed by the Jewish-Zionist lobby in the legal professions, and particularly by Jewish solicitors who might withhold work. The same applies in the world of entertainment and the msm in general.

Update, 8 December 2018

Tweeters are still commenting…

https://twitter.com/The_JPR/status/1071281996268093440

https://twitter.com/BLOG7O7LOL/status/1071307229545025541

She made money out of a contrived Zionist stunt? It might not be on the “Ann Frank” scale but still, “not a bad little earner”…

…and Lewis’s ex-wife Caroline Feraday cannot stop herself from commenting! Well, why not? After all, he cannot slap her from Israel!

Dt6s0pEWwAEylHO

Meanwhile, Lewis answers one of hundreds of critical tweeters. Note that he —a Jew born and brought up in Manchester, UK— describes the Jews as “my people”: he’s left behind the fiction that he is “British” except in terms of one of his passports (he now proudly holds up his new (?) Israeli one). He’s an Israeli now even officially. I hope, though without much confidence, that he now shuts up about UK matters.

…and Mandy Gargoyle has now joined in, trying to intimidate a tweeter who is tweeting under a pseudonym. She is not very intelligent. Just as well. Malice and intelligence would be harder to laugh off.

Update, 10 December 2018, P.M.

Meanwhile, dirty little pro-Zionist propagandist Douglas Murray blogs in favour of Lewis. His brief piece made me laugh out loud, so credit where due! Lewis, says he, never sought limelight for himself! Hardy ha ha! “Modest” (ha ha!), “self-effacing” (ha ha ha!), “cerebral” (what on Earth is Murray on?!), “upholding…the principles of a free and fair society” (!). Ah, so that was what Lewis and his fellow Jew Zionists (of “UK Lawyers for Israel” and “Campaign Against Anti-Semitism”) were doing when they had me disbarred for daring to tweet the truth, when they had Alison Chabloz prosecuted for singing songs, when they had Jez Turner imprisoned for speaking the truth in a public speech…

“Though he was near to limelight, he never sought it for himself. A modest, self-effacing and cerebral figure, his career was not about seeking personal notoriety, but of practising the law, representing his clients and upholding what he saw to be the principles of a free and fair society.”

https://unherd.com/2018/12/why-are-jewish-people-wandering-again/

Update, 16 December 2018

Here below, at the foot of this section, is one of Lewis’s tweets about me, from over 2 years ago. As you, the reader, will see, he refers to me as “failure as a barrister and as a human being”, among other things.

I suppose that most people who read that tweet were unaware of the irony: until Lewis got onto the “phonehacking” wagon, he himself was at rock-bottom. He had parted company with a firm of solicitors in Manchester under unclear circumstances (rather a theme…see below), had been divorced (ditto), and in or about 2009 was only making about £9,000 a year (as he admitted to a newspaper interviewer a few years later).

The phonehacking stuff paid off, and soon Lewis was busily “creating” a legend as “top lawyer”. The phonehacking stuff did not last long of course. Technology moved on and phonehacking is now just a footnote in legal history (it’s a purely UK story anyway: hardly anyone in the USA has heard of it). Lewis left his next firm, in London (where he was a “consultant”), under acrimonious circumstances (he much later sued that firm and they countersued, but it is not publicly known how that ended, the matter presumably having been settled and sealed).

Lewis married, in 2013, one-time local radio presenter Caroline Feraday. “Top lawyer marries celebrity”, or at least that is how the narrative went. Stories were seen in the Press about how Lewis “had clients in the USA” to where he and la Feraday would be relocating (to her new apartment in West Hollywood, no less). She, in her turn, seemingly had various Hollywood opportunities lined up, the newsreading public was told.  She already had a part in a TV sitcom arranged —had “been cast” in it—, the gullible (?) readers were told. More than that! She was busy “writing a book”, which was to be turned into a film and “several studios are interested…”

Lewis, the Daily Mail’s tame showbiz reporter was told by Feraday, had clients in the U.S. and would “commute” between LA and London. As 1950s people were wont to say, “get you!”…

Lewis and Feraday moved to West Hollywood, flying Virgin Upper Class (well, after all, they were, er, “celebrities”, weren’t they?) to LA. They joined the West Hollywood branch of the Soho House club, on Sunset Boulevard. “Celebrities” have more than a few thousand Twitter followers, of course, so they both “acquired” tens of thousands of new “followers”, Lewis ending up after a week or so with about 80,000!

Sadly, all that hype seemed to disappear like a mirage in Death Valley. La Feraday never did get into an American sitcom (or if she did, it must have bombed, or been pulled immediately…there never was one, I am guessing). I have no idea whether she ever got any part in American film or TV. Her breathless “look at me, people—a celebrity in sunny Hollywood!” Twitter account said nothing (that I saw, anyway) about her getting a acting part, but that is unsurprising. After all, why should an acting part on American TV, or in a film, go to someone without any acting experience, and who was nearly 40? The supposed book deals and film options also vanished without trace.

As for Lewis, his brave new Californian world crumbled into ashes. American lawyers soon realized that Lewis (unlike, er, me) had never qualified at the Bar of any American state and so was not qualified to practise in California (or any other state). Those lawyers made sure that the California Bar was aware of the foregoing. The upshot (whatever the causes…and I have heard a few stories) was that the marriage foundered after only a year (including a few months in LA) and Lewis returned to the UK in 2014 with his tail between his legs.

By the following year, Lewis had joined the well-known London law firm, Seddons, as a partner (salaried “partner”, not equity partner). At the time, I was surprised that Seddons had taken him on, but there it is. He left in 2018, just as it became known that he was coming up for “trial” in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal (where he was found guilty on all charges). Seddons’ statement was that Lewis had resigned as a partner because of his upcoming “aliyah” (emigration) to Israel (he is now an Israeli citizen).

Lewis’s second ex-wife, Caroline Feraday, stayed on in LA, did some amateur comedy appearances there and a few 2-minute reports about the Oscars etc for the British local TV news show, BBC South-East Today (cheaper than actually sending someone, I suppose), and eventually had a child in 2017 by another man.

Lewis is now an Israeli citizen and resident (he has or had a flat there). He is not now a partner or employee of any law firm in the UK and has stated that he will not seek admission to whatever Bar may exist in Israel. He has a degenerative progressive medical condition and is, apparently, on medication.

[note: much material about Lewis, including some newspaper coverage, has mysteriously disappeared from the Internet, or at least from Google searches]

Update, 12 January 2021

For further information, please see: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2018/12/20/self-publicizing-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis-full-transcript-of-disciplinary-hearing-judgment-now-released-by-tribunal/; and https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/01/11/update-re-mark-lewis-lawyer-questions-are-raised/; and https://ianrobertmillard.org/2018/12/22/mark-lewis-lawyer-latest-update/; and https://ianrobertmillard.org/2018/12/19/the-latest-revelations-about-zionist-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis/; and https://ianrobertmillard.org/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/.

Lewis is pretty much washed up in every way now.