Moderator: ArthurWankspittle
Cracked wrote: "sovereign citizens," those nutty folks who believe that exempting themselves from society's rules is simply a case of shouting out the correct combination of nonsense phrases, like they're trying to transform into the Green Lantern or something.
Ya know, that pretty much exactly covers the whole fantasy sub culture minus the having your tongue in the right corner of your mouth while hopping up and down on one foot all the while turning anti-widdershins and reciting your magic incantations, but yeah.TheNewSaint wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:56 pmCracked wrote: "sovereign citizens," those nutty folks who believe that exempting themselves from society's rules is simply a case of shouting out the correct combination of nonsense phrases, like they're trying to transform into the Green Lantern or something.
Anti-widdershins is "deosil", in case anyone has to perform the act in question.notorial dissent wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:23 pm Ya know, that pretty much exactly covers the whole fantasy sub culture minus the having your tongue in the right corner of your mouth while hopping up and down on one foot all the while turning anti-widdershins and reciting your magic incantations, but yeah.
Bequests were sometimes made in connection with bounds-beating. For example, at Leighton Buzzard on Rogation Monday, in accordance with the will of Edward Wilkes, a London merchant who died in 1646, the trustees of his almshouses accompanied the boys. The will was read and beer and plum rolls distributed. A remarkable feature of the bequest was that while the will is read one of the boys has to stand on his head.
I live a few miles from Leighton Buzzard and this, known as Wilkes Walk,still takes place. A member of the church choir now does the standing on the head bit.eric wrote: ↑Tue Nov 20, 2018 12:15 am I didn't think this would be appropriate however although I am sure I could have corralled a few to aid me in this important part of the ceremony:Bequests were sometimes made in connection with bounds-beating. For example, at Leighton Buzzard on Rogation Monday, in accordance with the will of Edward Wilkes, a London merchant who died in 1646, the trustees of his almshouses accompanied the boys. The will was read and beer and plum rolls distributed. A remarkable feature of the bequest was that while the will is read one of the boys has to stand on his head.
Doesn't matter how many times you tell these idiots. You do not get sent to prison for inability to pay council tax. Magistrates must make an enquiry into your financial situation (income, outgoings, dependents). They must then make a decision: are you guilty of “wilful refusal to pay” or “culpable neglect to pay”. Magistrates also expect councils to show that they have been trying to work it out and that. It is not a crime to be in debt and the High Court has a history of quashing any sentences that do not meet these conditions.aesmith wrote: ↑Tue Nov 20, 2018 8:27 am Don't know if this link works ... https://www.facebook.com/groups/1957436 ... %22O%22%7D
Lady facing prison for non-payment of Council Tax and unsure how to defend herself. Seems never have heard of Magistrates, finds it hard to believe they can send someone to prison. Usual idiotic advice about contracts, Dunn and Bradstreet etc.
I suppose the next stage will be a commital order. Clearly the bailiff chap was just ticking a box by calling round, they must have the Renshaw flagged as a loony and expected nothing more, but the baliff company will collect thier fees for the visit eventually, so they are not all that bothered with his nonsense.hucknallred wrote: ↑Sat Nov 24, 2018 12:37 pm Dean Renshaw's latest
https://www.facebook.com/dean.renshaw.9 ... 343340589/
Before quite clearly threatening the bloke with a baseball bat, he does the whole lexicon of FMOTL gibberish.
He's read up on the fictional name nonsense but couldn't parse the word so gives his own version - the "fictational" name.
Quite the scumbag this bloke.
Oh dear, I think you might know where this one's headed.Cheshire CTO issued speeding fine under my name (unknown name Manager of the CTO on behalf of Cheshire CE Constable) I have challenged Ticket office and CE Constable as well. Both informed that I DO NOT CONSENT FOR ANY PROCEEDINGS.
I'm afraid Daro you don't get to define what is and isn't an offence. Anyway, they weren't accusing you of speeding, they were simply asking you who the driver was at the time an alleged speeding matter took place.Both asked is speeding a crime ( no harm-no crime).
That's what they generally do with 'twats' who want to go head to head with them.Asked for proof of contract obligation me to any form of cooperation with them. Twat from CTO send me letter twice saying that they will use all Police powers to get what they want.
The result?I have asked them is UK policed by consent? Or policed by harassment?
Never got reply. I have also asked them not to share my personal data with any third party and if they will I will charge them a flat fee for that.
Liz has had a 100% success rate with that approach, having failed 100% of the time.Send to we buy any debt We have a standard discharge notice re Chicago styles and dog Latin that works rather nicely
He seems to have overlooked why he's been fined and gained a pointy licence.i haven't committed any crime, They haven't got any evidence that I was a driver (I wasn't anyway, I was traveler only) I refused to cooperate , not giving consent to any proceedings. haven't been given answers to my questions...... I have proved that Cheshire Constabulary is a private business. They don't give a s........ They do what they like. They believe they are inviolable.....
Well that's Daro sorted. Welllll, no actually. That's not for him.well the options are limited.
Appeal is possible but without any specific route to attack their case it is very unlikely to succeed and will just incur more costs. Appeal against sentence again is possible but the points are fixed. Might get a lower fine amount if you can make a good exceptional hardship case.
At this stage you case is still with the court which is good. You can speak to them direct. The next step is either deductions from earnings or bailiffs. These options are bad as more costs and less room to negotiate. I would speak to the fines officer at the court. Discuss payment and what you can offer.
If it's £10 a week they won't entertain it at this stage but something sensible might well be accepted. Then your case is put on hold as you pay. 3 years later points drop off and life goes on. I don't know your circumstances but if you said you could pay £35 a week then it would be cleared in 6 months and the court would probably be happy. Or smash out a shit load of overtime and pay it off.
Criminal fines (from the criminal courts not whether we think it's a genuine crime or not) are a pain and people often mix them up with civil debts but they need to be dealt with very differently!
He doesn't believe the fine is genuine. Gary again;Thanks, but It is not the solution for me. That would be pointless exercise for me at first place refusing to cooperate to now appeal....and put my self under theirs jurisdiction...
Stuart OTF Wragg has travelled this path before;Well if you don't believe it's genuine either call the court or pop in to confirm. Then you'll know for sure
Oh dear. I wonder how the Footles wriggle out of the inevitable ban from accumulated points?you should be so lucky I got £880 TWICE for ignoring them!!!...still ignoring them & they will never get a penny!
Oh right. She follows up;sorry mate I've been down this road myself a won the battle, you simply asked them to jump through hoops( ask them to provide lots of individual evidence plus the name and number of the officer making allegations ) give them 14 Days to reply. Otherwise you consider claim closed.
Stuart sort of agrees;I received two of these a couple of months ago , I simply stated that they needed to confirm their ALLEGATIONS, I required them to supply full colour pictures complete with Time,Date & Speed, I also require the name and number of the Officer making the Allegations, plus I required a dated calibration certificate and gave them 14 Days to reply, when they replied they did not give me the name and number of the officer and they had gone beyond the 14 days so I informed them they had failed in their obligations and therefore I considered the case closed,.
The driver vs traveller thing has never succeeded, anywhere. They all know it too; we've even got Stuart and the rest of the Wraggs conceding that "I haven't heard of any successes on this one" and half a minute spent on YT confirms that the sound of the 'traveller's' car window going through immediately follows their denial of reality.Brilliant response Sheena & it worked for you...of course others have tried different methods like deny being a driver as opposed to a traveller although I haven't heard of any successes on this one...I have tried a similar approach like yours some time ago but never had quite the result you had but I did get a result eventually & had a judge overturn the original penalty.
Well if that doesn't work he should be heading for the nearest Town Hall steps to bear his arse to the elements. More bilge from Karen;If they have anything to state in correspondences with you, and you only deal with matters of consequence by letter, ensure any letters are signed correctly by a human being with a wet signature by a pen by hand over a signature block that clearly states the name and designation of the person writing the letter; the true hand written signature and signature block (of your responding letter) is a good example of how you expect the responding letter to be signed like when you receive it and you always insist a paper trail is maintained.
On and on the debate rages. Pete weighs in with what must surely be the game changer, a sure-fire winner!yep seems daft but all unsigned letters sent from corporate criminals acting on behalf of dead corporate business entities send out letters on behalf of the dead corporate business entity because they want to contract with unsuspecting/ignorant people known as clients customers account holders etc etc. all legal labels all legalese terminology word jargon trickery and deception used to entrap extort and exploit inherent freedoms time 'money' and energy from people who consent to being a legal person. all legalese terminology is specific to legal construct. whereby customers clients etc etc are all legal constructs terminology that is and has been created by those who re present the legal system for the purposes of commerce. there has never been a man or woman son or daughter born named customer or account holder by their mother and father at birth. these words therefore have only ever existed on paper for the purposes of unlawful legal contract. customer client etc etc have never and can never exist in reality. so yes perhaps Lawrence could have written - I do not consent or comply with coercion and neither do i consent or comply with your wilful intent to contract with me unlawfully i.e anonymous pp signed so on and so forth. However what Lawrence has written clearly states the awareness of legal fraud moreover Lawrence has taken the time to help whereas you Norton?
Alas, Daro sadly responds;Ask for the police officers training details, most of them are not trained in the ussage of speed cameras.
Oh bollocks!it was average speed camera on M6
. This post here is specific for the the admin and moderators.
This page has been here for a good number of years and has provided evidence of fact time and time again for the proofs of the state we call "lawful rebellion", to the extent whereby a number of cases have been successful against the Crown.
Many times have people come here with doubts, but after being shown the evidence of proper constitutional protocol, have sworn their oath and got on with it.
I have police in Belfast investigating as it is plainly obvious to them. I am now about to engage with a prominent political party here in Northern Ireland who are very interested in what it could mean for our citizens.
The fact that our establishment is in defiance of it is not proof of lack of proof of it effectiveness.
Please refrain from allowing posts of pure disinformation through to the main page. If you are unsure of how to answer a post by a member, do not allow the post in the hopes that one of us will do it for you. You should know better than to allow it up to be commented on by members who are just getting to grips with this concept only to have their doubts bolstered by more uneducated doubts.
While David Robinson is away, I will be very militant with posts and will assist admin and moderators in dealing with members who blatantly ignore the information contained in the files, particularly the layman's guide. We have been here long enough to know better than posting up ideas that have already been addressed many times over. This page is for addressing an already evidenced fact. Keep to that and don't deviate from it. The law we promote is very clear. We tell people about it. They either accept and swear their allegiance or they reject and remain in outlawry. It is that simple. The law cares not for snowflakes who feel their freedom of speach or freedom of information is being affected. There are only two points to consider. Swear your oath or don't. Keep it simple.
Wait, what? So where does that leave Mr Robinson and his complaints of establishment cover ups of chemtrails causing ringing in the ears?The law cares not for snowflakes who feel their freedom of speach or freedom of information is being affected.
David Robinson
Good afternoon dissenters....
Just to let you know that I was readmitted to hospital last night after having to get an ambulance to assist me at the local Wetherspoons pub Yeovil....my catalogue of disasters continues.....
aesmith wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 1:05 pm Looks like Mr Robinson is still quite seriously ill, back in hospital ...David Robinson
Good afternoon dissenters....
Just to let you know that I was readmitted to hospital last night after having to get an ambulance to assist me at the local Wetherspoons pub Yeovil....my catalogue of disasters continues.....
Not sure how to interpret that oneafter having to get an ambulance to assist me at the local Wetherspoons pub
