Richard D.Hall facing censorship. Free downloads.

[Seeclearly]

Richard is facing a full on attempt to silence him now, in particular his work exposing the Manchester Arena false flag operation.
He sent this email to his mailing list today ,explaining the situation & suggesting possible actions we could take, including download links for related book & films.


Greetings,

As you may know, the BBC and all mainstream media have recently produced
further hit pieces against myself and in particular my work covering the
2017 Manchester Arena incident.

The BBC has criticised me for 'profiting' from the Manchester Arena
incident because I published a book about it. I have therefore decided to
give the book away as a free download here …

https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/Night_of_the_Bang.pdf

Please download the book (right click and save link as) from the link and
send it to everyone you think may be interested in the content.

You can find reviews (scroll down) about the free book from this link,

https://www.richplanet.net/amazon

It is clear from their recent articles that the legal action they have
described, which they say has been submitted to the High Court against me
(but I still have not to date yet received notice of), has the intention to
censor/remove my book permanently and remove all my videos on this subject
- as well as attempting to hit me with a 'damages' claim.

The associated films and lecture can be watched from the links below. I
advise you download and re-distribute these also, as it appears that the
intention is to censor all my work on this subject, which consists of no
more than hard evidence and honest opinion.

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_gen...&part=1&gen=99

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_gen...&part=1&gen=99

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_gen...&part=3&gen=99

UK Critical Thinkers videos on the subject can be found here ...

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_gue....php?person=18

If you wish to donate to my impending legal costs, please use this link ...

https://www.richplanet.net/legal.php

Sapere aude,

Richard D. Hall

[Tintin]

Many thanks

Another post was made earlier today sharing the same information.

Please see the Turmoil in the UK thread, this post here

[Seeclearly]

Oh ,right ,I did do a search & nothing came up .Thanks though.
I also thought it deserved it's own thread anyway t.b.h.

[Tintin]

Posted by Seeclearly (here)
I also thought it deserved it's own thread anyway t.b.h.

Yes, I do agree with that as well

[Brigantia]

Posted by Tintin (here)

Posted by Seeclearly (here)
I also thought it deserved it's own thread anyway t.b.h.

Yes, I do agree with that as well

Me too - it didn't occur to me to start a new thread. It's heartening to see that in less than a day, his fundraiser has reached over a quarter of the £10K target. A lot of people care about Rich, I've met him twice, including one very long session at the bar after one of his talks. I wonder about the veracity of some of the truthers but Rich is as genuine as they come, has produced excellent material over the years and has a lot of time for his followers.

[Blastolabs]

[Seeclearly]

Posted by Brigantia (here)

Posted by Tintin (here)

Posted by Seeclearly (here)
I also thought it deserved it's own thread anyway t.b.h.

Yes, I do agree with that as well

Me too - it didn't occur to me to start a new thread. It's heartening to see that in less than a day, his fundraiser has reached over a quarter of the £10K target. A lot of people care about Rich, I've met him twice, including one very long session at the bar after one of his talks. I wonder about the veracity of some of the truthers but Rich is as genuine as they come, has produced excellent material over the years and has a lot of time for his followers.

Wow , "over a quarter" ,that's brilliant news ! I couldn't agree more about his character ,salt of the earth. It's concerning that they have the audacity to even acknowledge his claims as he makes a very conclusive case. Sadly I feel it is because (as he has highlighted over the years) the system is so thoroughly corrupt that the outcome is usually divorced from the truth.
Let's hope that somehow he prevails.

[thepainterdoug]

I always loved and respected Richards work. I got to know and met once Andrew Johnson who would often be on his show.
I painted Richards portrait for my 100 portraits of whistleblowers series.
www.dougauld.com

[happyuk]

Bump, bump, bump...

Please do give generously to his appeal. He presents facts and questions official narratives and yet is being smeared as some kind of terrorist. I've spoken to him a number of times, at both his shows and at his shop (before the doddering dimwits at Merthyr Council closed it down), and I can vouch that he is a thoroughly decent and sincere bloke.

Please do watch Richard D Hall's documentary The Night of the Bang, it's incredible and compelling stuff. No wonder they put smear merchants like Marianna Spring on him.

Off-topic, but I see that Dr John Campbell recently received a YouTube "strike", though it's not at all clear what the offending material was. Maybe worth archiving his stuff too, given YouTube's propensity for zapping content they don't like (such as Hall's).

Update: good to see the donations continue to steadily trickle in, and well on their way to reaching the 10 grand target.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/richard-d...fund/donations

[Seeclearly]

Here is latest email from Richard , just received now.


Greetings,

Firstly THANK YOU to everyone who has so far donated to my legal fund. I am
very grateful to you.

I have received notification that a legal claim has been filed against me
in the High Court.

The claim is seeking damages and an injunction for harassment and breaches
of the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018.

Note that there is no claim of libel or defamation which has been
incorrectly reported across most of mainstream media.

I have until the 1st of June 2023 to submit my defence.

I am in the process of appointing a solicitor/barrister and am appealing to
you to recommend a reliable, suitably experience and qualified professional
to present my evidence in court.

If you wish to help financially, I have set up a fund to pay for legal
fees, here,

https://www.richplanet.net/legal.php

(Note : the Gofundme funds are being transferred to my bank account daily,
therefore there is no risk of losing the funds).

Iain Davis has written an excellent article covering the issue here,

https://off-guardian.org/2023/04/19/...ll-propaganda/

My book is available free here ...

https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/Night_of_the_Bang.pdf

Thankyou

Richard D. Hall

[Note : do not reply to this email. Use : richard@richplanet.net

[Brigantia]

Posted by Seeclearly (here)
Here is latest email from Richard , just received now.

Thanks for posting, you beat me to it! His Gofundme is now less than £700 from his target, we're right behind you Rich.

I'll read the Off Guardian post later, it's a long read but looks very interesting. It's a fundamental issue of free speech.

[happyuk]

Posted by thepainterdoug (here)
I always loved and respected Richards work. I got to know and met once Andrew Johnson who would often be on his show.
I painted Richards portrait for my 100 portraits of whistleblowers series.
www.dougauld.com

Those portraits on your home page are incredibly vivid Doug - are these unfortunate victims of acid attacks or burns victims?

[Brigantia]

A further update from Rich; more harassment has seen his GoFundMe taken down:

"Greetings,

Just to make you aware of a few things that have happened.

On 24th May I received an email from the Daily Mirror, they asked

---

Hi Richard, I'm a reporter for the Daily Mirror.

I'm doing an article based on your newsletter sent out on May 9. I've copied the contents below.

It's focusing in on you asking followers for legal recommendations.

If you wish to respond at all or give any update, deadline is 7pm today.

---

I did not reply. The following day they published this hit piece,

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...-asks-30063329

The article states, " He's set up a GoFundMe page to raise funds for his legal defence, raising over £15,000 already. "

Not long after this was published, Gofundme removed my account. I did not lose much money because I was having the money transferred to my account each day.

If you wish to donate, I would prefer a BACS transfer. Details can be found here,

https://www.richplanet.net/legal.php

I am so grateful to everyone who has so far donated, it is a massive help. Some of it has already been put to good use in preparing the defence.

I am due to submit my initial written defence within the next few days. I will update further as things transpire.

Thanks again for your continued support,

Richard"

[Mari]

Richard's latest film featuring the Manchester Arena 'bombing'.

Manchester on trial

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_gen...&part=1&gen=99

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

This may all come to a head soon.

This statement on his website:

--------------------
Richard D. Hall will be appearing at a High Court hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London, WC2A 2LL on Monday 29th January 2024, starting at 2pm, and time allowed is 2 hours and 30 minutes. The hearing will be heard in a court room, although which court room has not yet been decided.

The hearing is for a summary judgment application submitted by the Claimants - who claim they were injured in the Manchester Arena bomb attack. Their application to the court has been made in order to attempt to prevent all of Richard D. Hall's evidence about the alleged bombing being heard at a future trial. The basis of this, is that they claim that his evidence would have no chance of success at a trial, because they claim that the truth about the Manchester Arena bombing was already established by a public inquiry. He will be opposing the application at the hearing, in order to get his evidence heard. It is expected a decision will be made by the judge at the end of the hearing. The main part of the claim is that the opinions expressed in Richard D. Hall's book and films about the Manchester Arena incident amount to a harassment of them, and they are seeking damages of £50,000 and an injunction against his published work.

If anyone wants to attend, there are seats, but limited to a certain number, and they are allocated on a first come basis. Please dress well if you are coming to support, please do not speak in the court room and do not try to record the hearing.

[Seeclearly]

The hearing went ahead & he is awaiting a judgement "in due course " .
Here is an update & report of the hearing from his website.....

I (Richard D. Hall) appeared at a High Court hearing on Monday 29th January 2024. The hearing was to determine the outcome of the Claimant's application to accept without question the official narrative of the Manchester bombing, and thus prevent me from presenting any evidence which challanges the official narrative at a trial.

I was expecting a decision at the end of the 2 1/2 hour hearing, but the judge has reserved judgment and will give a judgment in due course.

I did a short interview with Ben Rubin of UK Column after the hearing which I suspect will be broadcast at 1pm on UK Column News on Wednesday 31/1/2024.

Ben Emlyn Jones was present and has posted this account (slightly modified).

Richard D Hall has appeared in court and I went along to support him and report on proceedings. The case was held at one of the highest courts in the land, the Royal Courts of Justice in London. I got there early to maximize my chances of getting a seat in the public gallery. I was also worried that Marianna Trench would bring in a gang of her deep-sea bottom feeders from the BBC to hog them all; as it turned out, she never even showed up. As it was, so many people were there, all on Richard's side, that some couldn't get a seat. My good friend and comrade Dr Nick Kollerstrom was there, and I should have guessed he would be; he is an ace at analyzing legal dramas. The Royal Courts of Justice was built in the 1870's and is a grand and striking building; but, I think, ugly and intimidating. It has a very bad energy. It reminds me of Dracula's castle or Barad-dûr. The courtroom itself was quite small and the public gallery was mixed in with the counsel benches. The security at the main entrance was similar to that at an airport. I had to empty my pockets and step through a metal detector. All potential weapons cannot be taken into the courts... including sharpened spikes no doubt! Richard turned up dressed in a dapper grey suit with waistcoat, the first time I haven't seen him wearing brown or black. I wasn't sure how he would react to my presence because, as you know, he and I have had our differences; but he greeted me warmly and thanked me for coming. He had no barrister with him and was defending himself, typical of his style. His counsel was a McKenzie Friend who is a retired solicitor.

The hearing only lasted about an hour and three quarters and was actually quite simple. I didn't take down any written notes because I wasn't sure how it would look to do so, but I didn't need to really. This was not Richard's trial, just a preliminary hearing establishing the rules of the future full trial, but it is vitally important as I explain here . The claimants' barrister began by explaining why he thinks all Richard's evidence should be struck from the record. This was, he said, because all the facts of the Manchester Arena attack have been established by other proceedings such as the Manchester Arena Inquiry. He also provided some reports from Martin and Eve Hibbert's doctors. The facts don't need to be disputed because the facts are legally agreed upon already; that was the purpose of the Inquiry. Richard countered by saying that the facts were not all agreed upon. In fact 28% of the public say they think the real truth about the Manchester Arena bombing is being kept from the public. The Public Inquiry was not a proper legal ruling anyway. He then provided a "skeleton" of his own research. The judge had been given a "bundle" of more that he could study outside the court. Viewers of Richplanet TV will be familiar with this information, for example see here. Martin Hibbert sat at a bench on the back row; a space had been cleared for his wheelchair. In front of him were two of the claimants' counsel's solicitors and the barrister himself occupied a solo seat on the front row next to Richard and his counsel. I gather there is a reason for this formation because the barrister insisted upon it. Mr Hibbert himself remained silent throughout; in fact no witnesses were called at this hearing. His daughter Eve was not present. Richard spoke with authority and drive; he explained how his evidence has every bit of legal validity and should be presented at the trial. He comprehensively discredited the claimants' counsel's case. None of his defiance has slipped an inch. There's no doubt he won the performance competition. The judge did not announce a ruling and said he would have to consider for a while. Hopefully Richard should receive a verdict in two weeks or less. What will that ruling be? Well, obviously I hope it will be in favour of Richard and in any fair judiciary it would be; however, we all know other forces are at work in the establishment. If the judge rules in favour of the claimants then we can safely say there is no doubt at all that the forces of darkness have marked this proceeding and they are trying to rig the process beforehand so that Richard cannot win. Anyone can beat the world's best athletes in a marathon if you make referee break the legs of all the other competitors. Nevertheless, we should hope for the best. See here for a HPANWO Radio interview with Nick Kollerstrom about this subject: (coming soon).

https://www.richplanet.net/index.php

[Seeclearly]

The judgement has come through.I am unequipped to comment or summarise other than to say that the M.S.M. says he has lost ,he says otherwise.

Link to judgement.
http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com...ard%20Hall.pdf
(if link doesn't work, it can be found on the update) >


& here is an update from his website , with links to judgement,articles & evidence.
https://www.richplanet.net/index.php


Text of update ,without links...

Legal action against Richard D. Hall

I (Richard D. Hall) appeared at a High Court Hearing on Monday 29th January 2024. The Hearing was to determine the outcome of the Claimant's Application to accept without question the official narrative of the Manchester bombing, and thus prevent me from presenting any evidence which challenges the official narrative at a trial.

The Judgment can be found here.

I will make some points about the Hearing

Point 1 : At the Hearing I presented video evidence which was filmed at the scene of the Manchester incident, in the City Room, filmed 4 minutes after the blast. It showed a woman, Ruth Murrell, walking without impairment or any visual injury - who it was claimed had a nut or bolt travel all the way through her leg (15cm), and out of the other side. I also showed the merchandise stall completely in tact, which was just yards from the blast and in direct line of sight. This evidence is not specifically referred to in this Judgment, and was not shown at the Public Inquiry. I also showed images at the Hearing, of the City Room shortly after the blast, showing that no visible building damage was caused, and no blood is visible on the floor, and windows were not broken etc. This evidence is also not specifically mentioned in the Judgment. The evidence is first hand video and CCTV evidence from the crime scene.

Point 2 : None of the CCTV evidence which is relied upon by the Claimants, which would demonstrate they were present at the Arena, has been released by the Public Inquiry to my knowledge, and has not been seen by the Court, nor by myself. I submitted an Application to the Court to have this CCTV evidence released. I submitted a second Application to the Court to have the 2017 medical records of the Claimants released for a surgeon to view, (I first requested medical records in January 2023). Both of the Applications have been rejected in this Judgment. With regards the CCTV evidence, what was relied upon, were statements made by two people who claim to have seen the CCTV evidence, but no footage or images have been provided.

Point 3 : I spoke about many other evidential points, some of which are explored in my films, and also the BBC's actions against me in relation to the timing of the Claim.

Point 4 : I am awaiting a copy of the Hearing transcript.

Media Coverage

I have submitted a complaint against the BBC about their article on the summary judgment Hearing. Their article implies that I have lost the case, which is not true. It also fails to mention any of my arguments or evidence which were put forward at the Hearing.

[Seeclearly]

This is the last paragraph & conclusion from the judgement.

It is true that if the Issues formed part of the trial, here would likely be more
evidence on them. Where summary judgment applications are concerned, that
is very often the case. Self-evidently, that is not in itself a reason to direct
disposal of the Issues at a trial. What the court must consider is whether
reasonable grounds exist for believing that a fuller investigation into the facts of
the case would add to or alter the evidence available to a trial judge and so affect
the outcome of the case; see Easyair principle (vi). In relation to disclosure, the
test is the same. namely whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that
disclosure may materially add to or alter the evidence relevant to whether the
defence has a real prospect of success; see Okpabi at paragraph 18 above. The
important and governing principle is whether there are reasonable grounds forKB-2023-002102
case would evidence believing (or, have in and this to case, consider investigation the and Issues). will the time increase There are the required no volume to such do of SO. reasonable material But it is that grounds clear trial that Further judge the
that further evidence or investigation would affect the outcome of the
material will not affect the outcome
Conclusion
39,
For these reasons, I find that the defendant has not discharged the evidential burden
which rests on him. He has no real prospect, indeed no prospect at all, of success On
the Issues and I will resolve them in the claimants' favour
40.
The defendant's applications for third party disclosure are also dismissed
41
I will list the case for a further hearing to decide consequential orders, costs and
directions to take the claim forward to a final determination. 1 invite the parties to
submit a draft order reflecting the outcome of this hearing and a draft order for
directions for future conduct.

[Seeclearly]

Here is an article from Iain Davies . I've copied the end of it as he makes very good & important points about the consequences of the ruling.

"For those of you following Richard D. Hall's case and the horrendous travesty of justice delivered in the summary judgment of UK High Court of Justice Master Davison, I hope you will find this article interesting and share it"

https://iaindavis.com/richard-d-hall...ty-of-justice/

End of the article....

Hall has also reported evidence that indicates the claim against him was potentially instigated by the BBC. If so, it can certainly be considered part of a wider drive by the government to censor all dissenting opinion. While the case has already taken a massive toll on Richard D. Hall, and threatens to ruin his life, the broader potential implications for investigative journalism cannot be overstated.

It seems likely that an injunction granted against Hall will necessitate that all of his evidence is taken down and years of his painstaking research expunged from the public record. Any such decision will be nothing short of book burning.

In many respects, this case, and specifically the “summary judgment” has ramification as damaging for journalism as those the Assange case portend .It appears that High Court of Justice Master Davison has set a precedent, based upon his appraisal of the “balance of probability,” that will have a crushing impact upon journalism and anyone’s ability to question power.

Despite the known fact that governments perpetrate acts of false flag terrorism, both at home and abroad, there is now virtually no scope for any investigative journalist to question the official narrative of any future false flag terrorist attack. All the State needs to do is convince a purported victim to launch a similar claim and the court can cite Richard D. Hall’s summary judgment to deliver the same brand of “justice” to them.

The potential exists for this ruling to be applied to the broader questioning of State narratives. A civil court action, claiming some sort of harassment or harm caused, may well be sufficient for any published criticism to be silenced. Journalists hoping to emulate the great questioners of power, such as Gary Webb or the late John Pilger, could face penury and ruin if they ever dare to express doubt about official, Sate claims.

Ultimately the public will suffer the consequences. No longer able to access dissenting opinion, their views will be controlled by an effective Ministry of Truth.

[Brigantia]

Posted by Seeclearly (here)
Hall has also reported evidence that indicates the claim against him was potentially instigated by the BBC.

I do have a look at the newspaper front pages that are posted on the BBC website, that's the only interaction I have with that malignant organisation and I haven't had a TV licence for a few years now.

One thing that I noticed two days ago on their website's newspaper front pages is that they included Metro, that free paper that you get on buses and in railway stations. That is the only time that I've ever seen Metro included on that web page, and guess what - the front page story was a demonisation of Rich Hall.

Yep, absolutely the BBC is behind this victimisation of Rich.