Rekha Patel loses her house

[SteveUK]

I've just rang Stockport Magistrates. Princess Shoutypants is on after 10am today and it's for two counts of criminal damage and one count of squatting.
She's being dealt with by the TSJ (Transforming Summary Justice) .

Never heard of the TSJ - theres this though. The irony.

• The Transforming Summary Justice initiative was adopted by all criminal justice agencies from June 2015. Its aim is to reform the way that criminal cases are handled in the magistrates’ courts, and to create a swifter system with reduced delay and fewer hearings. If it is successful, it will reduce the amount of distress that victims and witnesses suffer during the court process

[AnOwlCalledSage]

The Law Society is a bit sceptical about TSJ

The CPS seems unaware that ‘summary justice’ has connotations of justice made faster by omitting formalities required by law, which is no justice at all, of course. It also has overtones of vigilante law.

However, to explain why it's relevant, as this hearing is 14 days after the offence rather than 28, it would seem they are expecting a guilty plea.

A CPS spokesman explains: ‘TSJ involves listing cases where a guilty plea is anticipated – known as GAP cases – in dedicated magistrates’ courts 14 days after charge and dealing with as many as possible at that first hearing.

[notorial dissent]

Does anyone know for certain what charges she is facing?

The charges are detailed in the first posting of the Peter McDowell thread.
Looks like Stef Shambala's gift of £50 to the GoFundMe private prosecution fund has now brought the total up to £145.
That should pay for an hour's legal advice on whether suing the entire world is a good idea...or not

At least that way she would be providing pay and amusement to the legal set. They can have a good laugh, tell her she's wasting her time and needs her meds checked, and then show her to the door and tell her to take her silly ass on down the road.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Referring to Ms. Patel as Princess Shoutypants seems to me to be the sort of casual abuse that really should not survive leaving the primary school playground.

[longdog]

Referring to Ms. Patel as Princess Shoutypants seems to me to be the sort of casual abuse that really should not survive leaving the primary school playground.

Oh I don't know about that. We seem to have nicknames for most of the leading kooks and "Princess Shoutypants" is both accurate and only mildly abusive.

[SteveUK]

deathly silence in the sovrunosphere.

Shall we get the official sweepstake going?

1-no show, arrest warrant issued.
2-arrives, go full on sovcit, jailed.
3- arrives, pleas guilty, walks free.
4- arrives, is lawyered up and an actual hearing occurs. guilty.
5-Ken T QC arrives to make the judge abandon ship. His common law knowledge reigns supreme, all statutes found to be illegal/unlawful.

My 1000re is sadly on (3).

[He Who Knows]

Siegfried Shrink wrote:
Referring to Ms. Patel as Princess Shoutypants seems to me to be the sort of casual abuse that really should not survive leaving the primary school playground.

The name Princess Shoutypants was coined after our heroine had a spell of writing everything in block capital letters, and had been shouting at the estate agents, the neighbours etc. She also referred to herself as a Princess who also had a Princess bedroom. So I think the name is very apt.
In any case, it's nicer than some of the names she's been called on here such as Princess Braindead, Princess Stupid and Wrecka.

[He Who Knows]

SteveUK wrote:
deathly silence in the sovrunosphere.

Shall we get the official sweepstake going?

1-no show, arrest warrant issued.
2-arrives, go full on sovcit, jailed.
3- arrives, pleas guilty, walks free.
4- arrives, is lawyered up and an actual hearing occurs. guilty.
5-Ken T QC arrives to make the judge abandon ship. His common law knowledge reigns supreme, all statutes found to be illegal/unlawful.

My 1000re is sadly on (3).

My 1,000 we-re is on 2 & 5 followed by Crown Court in October.

[TheRambler]

I've just rang Stockport Magistrates. Princess Shoutypants is on after 10am today and it's for two counts of criminal damage and one count of squatting.
She's being dealt with by the TSJ (Transforming Summary Justice) .

So no Breaking and Entering, that casts a slightly different light on it. If she behaves in court and pleads guilty she should walk, maybe a community order. But if she kicks off then it will be Crown Court in the autumn.

TheRambler

Edited to add: The charges really do put it in the balance. The magistrates will be well aware that a CC time is limited and expensive and will be minded to deal with it there and then. One of the main criteria in their decision will br the likelihood of her reoffending.

[SteveUK]

The prospect of seeing Rekha and Ken performing their legal bollocks in front of a Crown jury would be amazing!!1!!


However, I fear we will only have an appeal total waste of time to look forward to. 6 months max on the squatting, the criminal damage stays with the mag if less than £5k. I suppose you could argue she's done £72,000 worth of criminal damage

I'm curious if, regardless of the outcome today, the mag could/would tag on some sort of restraining order with threat of jail.That'd be what, Section 5, Protection from Harassment Act?

[AnOwlCalledSage]

So no Breaking and Entering, that casts a slightly different light on it. If she behaves in court and pleads guilty she should walk, maybe a community service order. But if she kicks off then it will be Crown Court in the autumn.

I think breaking and entering is a US offence. It would be a stretch to charge her with burglary or violence to secure entry.

She's not a master criminal, just a stupid misguided person who has listened to the wrong people over the years.

I expect a community order and a fine. Never get why people think community service orders are a lesser punishment than a few weeks in jail. They can take quite some time to complete and you get litter picked at the same time.

Where attention should be focused are any conditions rather than the headline punishment.

I'm curious if, regardless of the outcome today, the mag could/would tag on some sort of restraining order with threat of jail.That'd be what, Section 5, Protection from Harassment Act?

Yep. A magistrate can now add a restraining order for any criminal offence. And as we found out for Neelu Berry and Sabine McNeill in the Hoaxtead case, it can be imposed even if there is an acquittal!

[notorial dissent]

Doesn't she have more of a record of NOT showing up, and of making a big fuss at arraignment hearings?

[TheRambler]

TheRambler

I think breaking and entering is a US offence. It would be a stretch to charge her with burglary or violence to secure entry.

It is indeed, possibly the closest equivalent is the Scottish Law offence of Attempt to Open a Lockfast Place. That’s academic in this case.

However the burglary charge could be used if it was deemed possible to show that she made entry with the express intention of committing criminal damage. I agree that is unlikely as the criminal damage probably only occurred as a consequence of the squatting.

TheRambler

[ArthurWankspittle]

I suspect the criminal damage is to the door or similar, so < £5000 and complicated to relate it to squatting or breaking in.

[He Who Knows]

Well it looks like none of us were right and have lost our 1,000 WeRe bets.
Princess Shoutypants appeared today and has been remanded on conditional bail to appear at Manchester & Salford Magistrates on 31st July.
The bail conditions are not to contact the neighbour(s) directly or indirectly and to stay away from Simmondley Village.

[notorial dissent]

Well it looks like none of us were right and have lost our 1,000 WeRe bets.
Princess Shoutypants appeared today and has been remanded on conditional bail to appear at Manchester & Salford Magistrates on 31st July.
The bail conditions are not to contact the neighbour(s) directly or indirectly and to stay away from Simmondley Village.

Wonder how long it will be before she violates the conditional? She just can't help herself.

[TheRambler]

Well it looks like none of us were right and have lost our 1,000 WeRe bets.
Princess Shoutypants appeared today and has been remanded on conditional bail to appear at Manchester & Salford Magistrates on 31st July.
The bail conditions are not to contact the neighbour(s) directly or indirectly and to stay away from Simmondley Village.

Having spent a little time investigating TSJ, that could be the explanation. It seems to rely upon; among other things; Guilty pleas (GAP) and Not Guilty Pleas (NGAP) being heard initially in separate courts. If we consider this morning’s proceedings as a NGAP case management hearing then the remand for summary trial at a later date becomes understandable.

That’s how I see it anyway.

TheRambler

[HardyW]

Well I happened to be not too far away so went to observe this hearing this morning. It was on a list with other short hearings: as you said every defendant pleading not guilty and various arrangements being made for future trial dates.
The more "normal" ones being disposed of first, Rekha came along represented by a bona fide solicitor, whose first task was to explain to the magistrates why the Princess would feel "anxiety and distress" if forced to go into the dock. After the solicitor had spent some time explaining ("I am simplifying this a lot") the dispute over ownership of the cottage, the magistrate told her to stop, and said Rekha must go into the dock like every other defendant. Which she then did "Under duress" .

The lawyer made an application to vary or remove the bail condition that requires her to spend every night at a specific address in Glossop. (It seemed the owner of that address has had enough.). The prosecution said they had no view on that as long as the other two conditions remained in place. So that was agreed and that condition removed.

The other issue was that Rekha wished to challenge the requirement to stay away from Simmondley Village. Of course on the ground that she had a legitimate tenancy there. Her lawyer wished to have sight of the legal opinion concerning the ownership of Hanover Cottage that Derbyshire Police used at the time of the eviction. That is the issue for the 31st which (subject to case management) will be before magistrates and a district Judge.

So it seemed that the actual criminal trial is some time further off. Unless of course the District Judge accepts that she is indeed entitled to occupation!

And yes the two counts of criminal damage were both for damage to doors at Hanover Cottage (which, when read out, prompted the princess to attempt to correct the name)

[He Who Knows]

Wow, that all sounds rather civilised unlike last time she appeared at Stockport Magistrates when spells were cast and no one stood for the Magistrate who later "abandoned ship".
Was there no sign of Ken Thompson or Peter McDowell? Have they abandoned her now that Hanover Cottage Casa Patel is on the Land Registry?

[exiledscouser]

Excellent work Agent HardyW.