Saturday, 7 September 2013

Michael Le Vell, English Actor of Coronation Street (1983) and well known for garage mechanic, Kevin Webster, but accused of Sexual Nature ..


Michael Le Vell is an English Actor of the ITV Soap Opera Coronation Street (1983) and well known for his role of garage mechanic Kevin Webster. Michael Le Vell real name is "Michael Robert Turner (15/12/1964-)" and lives in Hale, Greater Manchester, which is about a few minutes from my home in Altrincham. The Area of Altrincham/Hale/Bowdon is the most expensive and wanted of the whole UK and may the interest of the case itself. I had been follow the case of sexual nature offence from Le Vell to a little girl and now she is a 17 year old, but for legal reason/s unable to disclose ID and her Mother has begun her evidence (interference)?-Michael Le Vell (case) was accused in September 2011 by the same offense and the girl and the case was dropped for lack of evidence, but re-opened again (14/2/2013) with 19 offences may committed between 2001 and 2010, including rape, indecently assault and sexual activity with the same child. Le Vell appeared at Manchester Magistrates Court and said: "I am innocent of these charges and intend to fight them vigorously". ITV Soap Opera Coronation Street said: "Le Vell would not be appearing in Coronation Street pending the outcome of legal proceedings" -I made a note regarding the matter (2011) but as Le Vell case was dropped, then the note as well. The note consisted of: Le Vell is an Actor of Coronation Street since 1983 and he himself worked with two little girls since birth as his own child's (Rosie and Sophie), now full adults themselves, but none of them ever accused Michael Le Vell of any sexual nature. The youngest Sophie Webster still as his daughter on the Soap of Coronation Street (7/9/2013) and no complains in the matter either and I believe the Courts should take that as one part  of evidence from the side of Michael Le Vell as a "good behaviour"-The work of Michael Le Vell is/was a full time father/career of those two children/s (Rosie and Sophie) since birth, including Holidays, with the idea to make the story more realistic. Where Sally and Kevin Webster (Le Vell) works together as a Parents of those 2 girls (Rosie and Sophie) on Coronation street set and not even once any of those child/s (Rosie and Sophie) made a false accusations against Michael Le Vell of sexual nature (1983-2013). Unfortunately/fortunately the Law works with evidence on behalf of the whole community, including the Child who accuse the Actor (Le Vell) and Michael Le Vell, both together have full rights to defend reputation in any Court of Law and not to be Judged lightly. I believe strong based on the Sophie and Rosie Webster case, as full time daughters of the Actor himself Michael Le Vell and for many years since birth, the case itself should be dropped based on "good behaviour" and because in this case is two girls (Rosie/Sophie) against one (the child that accuse Michael Le Vell). Where there is not evidence of sexual nature by those 2 girls (Rosie and Sophie) with full time care from Michael Le Vell in the set of Coronation Street, which was long hours and since birth, but goes against the Mother of the Child/Victim and the one that the ID is protect for legal reasons, but somehow not Michael Le Vell reputation?-Where victims of rape or serious sexual offences are entitled as a matter of Law, "anonymity in the media", even if their name has been given in court?- "Where everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent, until proved guilty according to Law"-I had not read the evidence from either of the parties (Le Vell/Mother/Child) and only using common Law "as it is"-I have a right to do advocacy to the party, that I see is falsely accused in a court of law, but not evidence whatsoever, except slander/lies/tales. I have a right/s to the community as a whole in a court of law and to do advocacy to human people, particularly the one that got no defence (Michael Le Vell) and not to be Judged lightly. As you need to wear my shoes first of a "victim of rape myself due to lies/slander/tales of family problems and for some reason/s not to be heard in a court of law worldwide, to clean my name?"-I am not qualify Solicitor, Barrister, Judge or Court attendance, but studying Law at home, for the same level of criminality to my life. Where, I believe strong in Law and in any case, particularly of criminal nature, two evidences should be used and not just one, in which Michael Le Vell side of the matter is at disadvantage. Michael Le Vell is accused of criminal activity of Sexual Nature with 19 offences, but not evidence whatsoever, except the words of a child translate by the Mother's?-According to the Law, any sexual nature offences (not matter age) takes place in a private setting and the victim is the only witness, but with Michael Le Vell case (circus case) the Mother of the victim is the only one that gives own daughter evidence (?) and the public is full aware of the matter, with little respect to either parties?-Now, if the defendant pleads guilty, by Law the victim need to give evidence in court, but "Michael Le Vell appeared in court on 17/5/2013 and he pleaded not guilty to all 19 charges?-Somehow the Mother of the child will give evidence on behalf of her daughter and the law accept the corruption. As who is the Mother to interfere in the matters of her daughter, even as a minor, where the child/victim need to give evidence in the same way as Michael Le Vell, by both parties or there is not case at all in any court of law worldwide. Where I am not sure if solicitor/barrister/judge full aware of the UK law, when dealing with Michael Le Vell case, or trying to frame him with a case that lacks evidence. When conflict of evidence ("Michael Le Vell said: Child Rapes "Didn't Happen"), the prosecutor has a duty of care and responsibility to assess credibility and reliability of the victim's evidence and by Law and so where was the child's evidence, at the Courts?-Where words of "false accusations" were exchanged regarding the matter, but no evidence, like for example: Le Vell got a spot in his legs, etc, but nothing at all was mentioned at the Courts!!- One thing is to accuse somebody of a crime and another different is to be the criminal in question, but with no evidence as Michael Le Vell?-In today's world the community tends to use bad practice of accusing people of tales "before a court hearing"-I,  myself lost: unborn children, brother, country of birth, marriage of 27 years, etc, for the same level of abuse and matter, that with this on mind prompted me to study Law at home to clean my name. I lost all, everything gone thanks to slander/lies and defamation to my persona and without my permission, consent or knowledge in the matter, the criminals went against a disabled woman (cowards!), including the ex/husband sister/social worker that should know better. So Yes, I know what is like to be on the other end and alone, where the bullies even kill. The police looks for corroboration or support evidence: medical/scientific, CCTV, or eyewitnesses evidence to events prior to or after incident/s. As a rule no need to be essential on prosecution and hearing can still go ahead without it, but prosecution need to prove the defendant's guilt, otherwise the case is null. The case may fail when Jury is unable to decide: what defendant or victim says and reason/s whys so important to obtain forensic and scientific evidence, ASAP. When one person’s word against another, then forensic evidence is "primordial"-As sexual nature (rape) violence need to report incident as earlier as possible in order to gain a good chance of strong prosecution case, otherwise the opposite party can sue for defamation, lies and slander and in this case Michael Le Vell. Now, Sexual abuse/violence/rape is a “very serious crime in Law”, but you cannot relay on myths, stereotypes, tales and society perceptions of how women or men (old and young) need to behave in Society”-The Crown Prosecution Service (to help Michael Le Vell case) apply to courts for victim to give evidence (not the Mother's victim to give evidence at any time), with Special Measures include:

-Playing the courts victim/witness video interview, taken by Police Officers during investigation.
-Victim/witness can give evidence behind a screen in courtroom, or live television link, to avoid presence at the courts.
-Private evidence with no public involve in the case, to avoid intimidation.
-Evidence using machine to detect lies: Polygraph (important in this case/matter)
-Mediation instead of court hearing.
“Each case, each victim and each witness is dealt at the Courts in a different ways/manner”-When victim withdraw support for prosecution and no longer wish to give evidence, no necessarily the case will stop, but the court hearing may be delayed to investigate real facts and decide what is the best course of action, so why not for Michael Le Vell case?-In this case the child's age as the mother oppose, even if by law, everyone need to follow the rules/protocol and regulations of the courts. The Police need to take statement and explain reasons for withdrawal. Include and non/extent original complaint if true/false or victim is under pressure to withdraw support, but with Michael Le Vell case is the Mother of the victim, who is giving evidence and in which grounds in Law?-Investigation may be launch and press charges for intimidation direct/indirect to Michael Le Vell case, as no evidence and case can continue, even against victim’s own wishes. When Crown Prosecution Service choose not to continue (rape case) altering the charges, they will contact the person within 24 hours of decision. The Mother of the victim to give evidence is unlawfully procedure/corrupt and cheat the Law. Michael Le Vell said: "This is a life changing thing. It will cost me my job. As he, himself told the court/s: he had never been arrested or cautioned before to help his good behaviour Police record and should be taken into account to aid him in this matter"-Tell me about it, as I lost all myself, where I do advocacy for people that I see the Law is bending to one side, like this one and not necessarily by age, but by the case itself, where there is not or lacks evidence. Where I do not question the child's attitude but the Mother's, as she should know better. Now, if true of the matter why not to wait until daughter is an adult and can give evidence as the Law request to everyone not a third parties (her Mother), or to avoid time consuming then use the Special Measures listed below. As the Law is not made for certain people, age, colour of the skin, religion, sexual orientation, etc, but to aid the whole community including Michael Le Vell. "Where if for a second chance wins the case once more time Michael Le Vell and with the help of my note, that my God is our only witness. Please just drop me a good reference and a cheque of you own estimate for my job, research, expenses and to help to pay my house bills and mortgage and earn a decent salary. As I am unemployed, disabled and accused of tales by the DWP staff that cuts my benefit and expect me to pay my bills, based on fresh air. In any case, I represent myself, nobody has any consent, permit or knowledge over my own affairs and the reasons why I study law at home, but I need to pay house bills, in the same way as everybody else. I cover myself with the Human rights #25 (1/30) in the UK as I am Mexican National with British Citizenship and I have the rights to earn my living in a foreign country. Where I am not begging but doing a job and helping you, Michael Le Vell at the same time as me, with thanks. I know it may sound weird, but not need to use anybody else to represent you, except yourself Michael Le Vell in a court of law and use this statement, as a full Statement - try to add anything else that you think it may help the case, otherwise, leave the statement "as it is" and stand your ground with the words of: "Where everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent, until proved guilty according to the Law"-Request at all the time evidence in a tape recorder by the child, not the Mother for future references, as they keep coming back for more. Stand your ground that whatever comes from this case is the end of the matter or you will sue them for defamation, lies and bullying in which legally you could do it from now, as there is not evidence. Demand questions to the child direct, not the Mother like which colour of your underpants you were wearing on that time, moment and seconds of the incident/s (19 counts) and ask you wife, if you ever owned those items. Request to know in legal fields as a form of evidence from the child direct not the Mother, anything to aid your case and do not be afraid, shy or think is out of etiquette but just ask, even the size or colour of your manhood (big apologies) etc. "Remember at all the time when you are dealing in this matter, that the person that will end up in prison is yourself and not the child, mother or the holly ghost, but you. So you need to fight as hard as you can not matter how morbid, forbid or out of question it may looks like to whom it may concern and keep remember them this real fact, as you need to survive in the false accusations (19 counts, almost nothing!). As you need to prove in law your innocence, not them and furthermore do not let them to win at any moment, time or second, without the real evidence/facts in law"-As nobody has any rights to intimidate you at any time in court, not even the Judges or trying to confuse the matter of "nickers for socks", as they are talking about sexual nature, not the shoe size in order to seek your downfall. Remember the people at the courts comes with years of experience and remain the courts for patience in the matter as you are representing yourself and full charge of your own advocacy in the same way as the Mother of the child. At any time in court if not sure, simple do not answer question/s or try to be polite except outside the courts, as the representatives of the law can use anything to bring you down. Always address the matter and people at the courts with full respect and explain in plain English your position in an honest way, instead trying to impress. I would request Rosie and Sophie Webster, your girls of Coronation Street to accompany you in your court hearing/s for the length of time they know you and since birth as a reference only. Otherwise get a court order in order to stand on your grounds on "good behaviour", by using those two girls (Rosie and Sophie) not your natural daughter as a prove in law -  Above else do not forget the Special Measures mentioned here on this note and very important to your case. At any time do not accept anything below the standards, as it's you against them and you need to prove to the courts not them, unfortunately. Please kiss goodbye anything that stand in the middle of you and your case, as the person is not going to be in prison with you if everything else fails, and I mean your legal representatives (solicitor, etc), unless you get a warranty. As I can see your legal representatives are not helping/stopping, "false accusations" regarding your reputation and can be liable in law. The regulations of the courts should not break the Constitution - Principles of laws, rules, regulations, code of practice/conduct or anything that breach your Equality act, Human rights acts (1 till 30), Strasbourg Human Rights Courts/Acts as part of the European Union, or even falsely accused your persona, as they got no rights.  "Where everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent, until proved guilty according to the Law"-As a Mother but a victim like you, in which I was abused as a child/adult in all fields of the law, by the "family problems"- I need to study law in order to survive them, as the ex/husband sister/social worker should know better. Please don't to be bullied or intimidate by Mothers, Girls, Grandmothers, Daughters, Women's or even Judges that have daughters and select by the media (councils, etc) to open cases as yourself, in order to help the Mother/child not you. The Law works in the case "as it is" with full evidence and nothing else, but your evidence from the child, not the Mother, where is it?- It's frightened, but it's you against them and the person who will end up in prison is you, not them, if not act fast and leave matters of life or death to professionals that do not reach standards, points in your case or stand on your ground, good luck!! (, Rosario Castellanos de Parker.

9 September 2013
I have been reading the court evidence in which I thank you for sharing it to the public, as the Actor Le Vell is not standing alone, but I support his innocence and I use Sophie and Rosie Webster as a "good behaviour" in this matter to his aid. Particularly when he was a full time Father and Career of two girls, not one, but none of them ever, said or mention anything of sexual nature of Mr Le Vell. When reading here,  there is not a single evidence from the girl in question of physical body of Michael Le Vell, including and not extent the colour of Le Vell nickers when the sexual nature (rape) happened. I hate to take sides, but I lost all due to slander, lies and deceit to my persona and today I live as a recluse from the same intolerance plus I am disabled person myself. Today is not the day of sympathy to no/one, but the day of holding the evidence to a innocent man and Le Vell is in question by the UK law and with little or non/evidence of his manhood either (colour, size, etx). Apologies but this is a sexual nature charge, not a drink and drive charge, let think that for a minte and not to confuse with red and blue. If Le Vell is charged wrongly is for a life, not the little girl and her mother, but Le Vell and his career goes with him as well for some many years (30), that he worked hard for and his reputation, even holding Sophie and Rosie. In Law Le Vell should use anything to help to his aid and right this second I old those two girls against the one is accusing Le vell to his aid . One think is charged with drink and drugs and another very different to be charge of sexual nature. so lets do he things properly and using the proper side of the law and case and forget age of the people, but evidence. Today is evidence so forget the questions of the Qc Persecutor as she already did the verbal abuse against Le Vell last week and gained nothing as there is nothing at all. No Evidence, or show me otherwise. Rosario Castellanos de Parker.

10 September 2013.
I want to thank you as this matter was more of a Principle of Laws that any other reasons for me, as we are all the Children of God, not just the few blessed ones, Congratulations!! .. I want to thank you for to give the chance to come forward and using the "online services" and to do advocacy of Coronation Street Actor Mr Le Vell, in which I feel strong that the Jury should based own decisions on REAL EVIDENCE and FACTS. I want to remain all of yours with all my respect to the higher places, that the Actor in question is accused on "Sexual Nature" and with no evidence of the real facts which is including part of his "physical body, clothing he was wearing, manhood, etc", but was a father figure of Rosie and Sophie in Coronation street and since birth. In which neither of those 2 girls, Rosie and Sophie have come forwards in aid of Mr Le Vell's defence, if he ever needs to as "good character reference" (primordial). As Mr Le Vell worked for 30 longer years at the Coronation street set and not 30 days. I want to remained the courts that today the verdict is "Sexual Nature" and not "Drinks or Domestic problems charges"-In which his wife or anybody affected by it, should recur to the correct channels, and "prove it as well in law" of the real facts and reasons why of the man in question, Mr Le Vell behave that way. I believe strong was because "his wife was poorly and maybe an escape of the moment to have a few drinks here and then, so where is the crime?"-Please stop mixing things or misleading in the courts, as "domestic problems, drinks or any other relate problems with tales, lies, defamation or their likes" and pretend was a "sexual nature"-If there is victim (Mr Le Vell) should access the correct channels in order to stop the slander, lies and defamation. As if there is any merit in the matter, then to do the matter in the correct way, channels and the courts. I believe strong this Man Mr Le Vell is INOCENT of all charges, as for what I could read there is nothing at all against him to direct to the real crime or matter, as slander, lies or defamation is not plausible in law. I myself made a note of my own investigations in the matter and with no evidence to see, but using the common Law. As I am not a Solicitor, Barrister of Judge, but studying the Principles of Laws at Home, in which I have all the books and even the Mexican and American Law, so anytime. Please in the name of God lets do the things properly and according to the Law. As nobody has any rights to pass the law, in the UK only the Queen Elizabeth II and she never, ever done, so who give you the rights to abuse power and profession against an innocent man, which is Mr Le Vell. The reasons why I came in defence of a man and not 2 little girls (child and the mother) is because I can not find a single evidence towards Mr Le Vell, but wrongly accused by the media and he need to probe by the Law of the same. The Law was made for the AID of the community and not only for certain people, here is Mr Le Vell part of the community as well with 30 years of excellent career and as a of "good behaviour" as a father of 2 girls on the set of Coronation street . Mr Le Vell work may waste for a crime that got not Evidence or real Facts in Law, but two girls (Rosie and Sophie) stand against one (the accuser) in which may be slander, lies and defamation. This is not the way to deal with "sexual nature and abuses", but slander, lies and defamation case and charges, the same drink or domestic problems. Stop mixing Water with Oil and do the things in the correct way. Today is sexual abuse of some kind of nature with 19 charges, not domestic abuse/violence or drink, lies, or etc charges, please stop misleading people and use the correct channels in law, thanks!! Rosario Castellanos de Parker.

I want you to know that this case of Michael Le Vell, English Actor of Coronation Street won, not by protecting the crime or criminality, but by protect the Principles of Laws, which mean case and matter relevant to the Sexual Nature, not slander, lies  or defamation, that even a domestic abuse, which either of those two (slander/lies/defamation or domestic abuse) need to be address appropriate and explain properly with evidence, where it was the Sexual Nature here?-Rosario Castellanos de Parker.