Saturday, 16 May 2015

Statement following verdicts Southwark Crown Court 15 May 2015


The verdicts against me, delivered after the jury’s lunch and deliberations lasting a mere 90 minutes or so, surprised and shocked me and my legal team. 
The trial lasted a full four weeks.  It was overwhelmed by hundreds of pages of detailed numerical analysis, much of it disputed.  In the end, my five successive days of cross-examination and all the defence evidence and rebuttal counted for nothing.  It was obviously ignored.
I am advised we have good grounds for an appeal, and work is starting on it immediately.   Meanwhile, the judge has called for reports.
As my many supporters already know, I spent five years after my unexpected election to the European Parliament in 2004 fighting tirelessly towards the UK leaving the EU lunatic asylum, and meanwhile trying to protect the interests of constituents in SE England.  Millions of Brits want the UK’s independence and freedom as a global trading nation restored.  That was my aim, too. 
As my eBook memoirs A Mote in Brussels’ Eye prove in great detail, I was increasingly supported in Brussels by a growing number of bureaucrats turned whistle-blowers, and others, who wanted the EU’s institutionalised corruption and mismanagement cleaned up.  During those five years I spent enormous amounts of time and money pursuing that aim.  The jury heard little of it.
Despite being based on my daily diary, the book itself was not allowed as evidence in court, except a few specific extracts relating to previous evidence. 
This was a huge handicap, as were two other obstacles put in my way by the current judicial system.  Despite being 79 and with serious, medically diagnosed, memory problems, I was not permitted to use notes in the witness box.  Even worse was the prosecution’s freedom to use my court case in 2007, when the EU tried to exploit a legal situation to unseat me, as evidence against me in this case, too.  I have effectively been tried twice on the issue of my benefit claim when I was out of work 20 years ago.
Together with the understandable current climate of cynicism against anyone in politics, with hindsight these factors combined to make a successful defence virtually impossible.
Surprised at the outcome?  Yes.  Bitter at the current judicial system?  Yes.   Beaten?  No.

Thursday, 16 April 2015

Statement after Legal Argument Hearing, Southwark Crown Court, 15 April 2015

Statement by Ashley Mote.
Independent MEP for SE England, 2004-09

Legal Argument Hearing, Southwark Crown Court, 15 April 2015

The timing of the charges against me - alleging deception, false accounting and fraud – is no accident.  At the trial starting on Monday 20 April 2015 at Southwark Crown Court they will be strongly disputed. 

The trial has been set to run throughout the election campaign and is clearly intended to damage UKIP’s prospects.  The timing is blatant politics.

The charges follow over ten years of continuous investigation by the EU into my political activities while a MEP (2004-09), and since. 
On instructions from the EU, the British police raided my home without warning in March 2013, a month after publication of my whistle-blowing memoirs A Mote in Brussels’ Eye.    
Now, over two years later, I am finally charged right in the middle of a UK general election. 

The allegations made against me are rejected without qualification. 

The EU’s bureaucrats have unlawfully pursued a vigorous and deliberate policy of harassment against all anti-EU MEPs for over two decades.  It must stop.

Meanwhile, the CPS and Hampshire police have some serious questions to answer.  The freedom of MEPs to act according to the mandate on which they were elected is protected by law – the EU’s own treaties.  Furthermore, officials have no right to interfere with those activities, however distasteful and inconvenient they may be to pro-EU bureaucrats. 

My meticulous accusations against the EU stand.  They include incontrovertible evidence of institutionalised corruption by EU officials; proof of systematic looting of taxpayers’ money; the deliberate dilution of national identities by mass immigration; the EU’s funding of illegal raw uranium exports to Iran; the establishment of the EU’s Global Security Fund – essentially a private slush fund: and European taxpayers’ money used to finance Hamas terrorists in Gaza.  (Hamas recently became an approved EU organisation.)

My collective investigations into EU fraud and corruption resulted in two visits to the Serious Fraud Office with boxes of documents and evidence accumulated with the aid of a leading forensic accountant, and the former Chief Accountant of the European Commission. Another visit was made to Scotland Yard with documents and evidence of malfeasance against members and officials of the British government.  All were ignored.

The Government Resources Act 2000 calls for public accounts to ‘present a true and fair view’, and demands ‘that money provided by parliament has been expended for the purposes intended by parliament’.  Why has the law never yet been applied to funds sent to the EU? 

My memoirs, A Mote in Brussels’ Eye, encapsulate my defence.  The contents have long been in the public domain and the book itself has been selling well all over the world since publication over two years ago.   Memoirs link :

My website :   has a full statement rebutting these latest allegations.  It will be updated as events unfold.                                                    (ends)

Saturday, 21 March 2015

The EU is interfering in the British general election

The EU is interfering in the British general election

Does the EU have the right to interfere in the British general election, let alone try to influence the outcome?  Right now that’s a very good question because that is what it is doing.

The EU was responsible for much of the funding of three programmes recently broadcast on two British television channels.  All three attempted to demean anti-EU opinion in the UK.  Two also set out specifically to undermine support for UKIP.  Not their business at any time, you might think, let alone in the run-up to a general election.

But the bureaucrats in Brussels clearly don’t care a fig about what is right and acceptable, and what is not.

Anyone who saw the two programmes broadcast on Channel 4 earlier this month (March 2015) mocking UKIP, or the one on the BBC a week later claiming that leaving the EU would be a disaster for the UK, will know the viciousness of the scorn poured over British anti-EU opinion on prime-time television.

Only in the small print of the closing credits was there any indication that the EU was directly behind such outrageous interference in Britain’s internal affairs at a crucial time in our democratic process.

Channel Four’s UKIP: The First 100 Days was funded by Culture, an EU funding agency which is, and always has been, an integral part of the European Commission’s long-term financial programme to gain public support.   

As recently as last December Culture was openly advertising the provision of up to 500,000 Euros each from the EU’s bottomless pit of taxpayers’ funds to any “creative and cultural organisations” needing to fund the “co-development, co-production and programming” of new ventures.  

Of course, funding of the BBC via the EU’s Investment Bank has been known for many years.  In my memoirs as an MEP (A Mote in Brussels’ Eye) I reported the admission by Margot Wallstrom, the Swedish Commissioner for Communications, finally prised out of her after years of obfuscation, that the BBC had received over 100 million Euros from the EU up to 2009.  

I have no reason today to think anything much has changed.  Indeed, the EU made no attempt to hide its funding of the BBC’s The Great European Disaster Movie. The producer Annalisa Piras, a left-wing Italian journalist based in London, advises both the BBC and The Guardian on European affairs.  She has worked closely with Bill Emmott, formerly editor of The Economist, on other films produced by Emmott’s Springshot Productions, as indeed was this one. 

According to the credits, funding came from a least half-a-dozen public service broadcasters in Europe.  The leading financial backer was Arte, the Franco-German Euro TV Channel founded in 1991 in Strasbourg (were else?) by Helmet Kohl, Francois Mitterrand and others.  They have been busy ever since peddling pro-EU rhetoric all over the continent.  The BBC’s programme was merely the latest.

Then, even more recently, Channel 5 broadcast a supposed documentary, Farage Fans and UKIP Lovers.  The credits appeared to suggest this was an internal production, but the content suggested an EU finger in the pie somewhere.  The programme’s research team had gone to great lengths to find a handful of truly odd-ball nutters, including an overweight nurse into bondage and self-flagellation, an arrogant old bachelor with verbal diarrhoea, a lesbian couple with four children, and a heavily tattooed toy soldier fanatic of truly weird appearance.  Yes, we also heard from a London cabbie, a blind ex-serviceman, a classics graduate, and two Asian businessmen - all in the name of what producers call ‘balance’. 

But Channel 5’s purpose was obvious.  Most UKIP supporters are extremists and weird-dos.  Only a trawler fisherman and his crew provided any serious – and valid – contribution to UKIP’s case for leaving the EU.  And they did it well.  More like that and the programme might have been worth watching.  Instead it was a worthless lampoon.

So was the EU involved?  Could Channel 5’s producers have resisted the EU Culture fund’s offer of half-a-million Euros to help finance a programme ridiculing UKIP?  No chance.  Channel 5 is a commercial channel after all.  Apart from anything else, lower costs equal higher profits.  

Three major UK television channels – Channel Four, the BBC and Channel 5 – all setting out to ridicule UKIP.  And the EU openly funding at least two, and probably all three of them.

The question stands.  What business is it of the EU, either directly or via one of its many funding vehicles, to seek to interfere in, let alone influence, the outcome of a general election in a sovereign state?

Answers on a postcard please, to  :  

 Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, Brussels.

Don’t expect an answer – not even a lying denial.  The EU regards itself as above criticism and answerable to no-one.


Monday, 26 January 2015

Proof of my work in Brussels on behalf of British taxpayers  

Below are the links to several videos of my speeches in the European Parliament over the years 2004-09, which are all on the public record.  I was normally allowed one minute only – so they are mercifully short.
You Tube also carries a great many more of these short speeches, and many other longer speeches shot at public meetings around the country.
These clips demonstrate my straightforward and uncompromising stance on matters concerning British taxpayers funds. 
They were also dreaded – and ignored whenever possible – by officials and commissioners. 
NEVER ONCE was anything I said in the EP ever challenged or disputed by any official or Commissioner.  Not once.
I believe any juror (or judge for that matter) seeing these few minutes of material would recognise my work for what it was – say what needed to be said and to hell with the consequences. 
(I hope their reaction to my memoirs A Mote in Brussels’ Eye would be the same.)
[To access each video press the Control button and simultaneously press the left of mouse]
OLAF DG “does not snoop” 
EIB funds BBC and bought its support
US Ambassador to EU knows about fraud
Appointment of Competition Commissioner
Court of Auditors are a charade

Unexplained deaths of senior EU officials involved in ECB
SFO briefed on EU fraud and corruption
EU’s secret Global Security Fund
500 euro banknotes and a new central banker
UK contributions to EU unaccounted
Lack of Budget Control
Finally, part of a speech I gave in the UK.  It last about 10 minutes, but contains some important facts about the way the EU operates, hitherto unknown
Enjoy – and circulate as you please