Tom Crawford failed judgment 3/9/15 Part 1 & 2

[PeanutGallery]

I had to visit Nottingham police today so am enjoying a pie and a pint in my new favourite pub the Ewles Arms. Not worried

Maybe Nicole will be back in to get another Christmas menu?

[Normal Wisdom]

Extended civil restraint orders

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extended-ci ... s-in-force

If a judge orders an extended civil restraint order, the order is limited to a specified group of courts.

They last 2 years, but can be renewed for a further 2 years. They’re usually given when a person’s application for a court hearing is refused but they won’t accept the judge’s decision.

Tom Crawford managed to get into this club. He is in good company and his friends Russell McGarry and his wife Jacqueline McGarry are also members.

Russ reckons that he is back in court (the Royal Courts of Justice no less) on 6th November in connection with his eviction and subsequent allegations against the police ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR6cYkdXFSE

[Pox]

TC has said on many occasions that criminal charges are being lodged, by the Crawfords I presume?

Is he talking about theft or assault or fraud? Or something else? And against whom?

Anybody got any ideas regarding where we think it is going?

How much does it cost for an individual to bring criminal charges and what route would such an individual take?

[ArthurWankspittle]

It was everything against everyone - fraud, theft, assault by the Police anything you can think of. Of course it is all BS. Even if he brought a case it would either be dismissed for any of several failings or, more likely, it goes to the bottom of someone's in tray and eventually gets taken over by the Crown Prosecution Service and dropped, which is what usually happens in these situations.

[Jeffrey]

How much does it cost for an individual to bring criminal charges and what route would such an individual take?

Private criminal prosecution is, in summary, a bullshit concept that the GOODF UK crowd have latched on and keep repeating. Burnaby posted a longer explanation at one point about a process in Canada where you can file some paperwork but it eventually gets taken over by state prosecutors.

There is no such thing as private criminal prosecution and there probably has never been in the history of western civilization. The state always prosecutes criminal matters and it's been that way since ancient Greece.

You can go back to some of the pre-Crawford eviction videos like Russ McGary making the "I'll privately prosecute you" threat towards police and bailiffs, or maybe even further back to the "arresting a judge" fiasco. They always say they'll private prosecute, they've never done it successfully in the history of the movement because it cannot be done.

[Daft Ada]

I am sure that some old archaic law can be exercised to put and end to this fiasco.

You only have to look at the Neelu case that collapsed to see that they will bring somd old law into play if they want to put an end to something (vexing a priest was the law in her case I think)

Even though the case against Neelu was not sucessful (well done CPS), it does show willingness to examine "Ye olde law book" and find something.

Alternatively, could this work in TC's favour if he found some old law from the 1700's that had not been superceded.

Example may be:
A man has a RIGHT to a home if he lives there with at least one chicken and an old hag that the rest of the hamlet fears.
Any attempt to remove a man living in these conditions is an offence and punishable by finger nail pulling and the taring of the individuals connected with the crime.

[NG3]

Alternatively, could this work in TC's favour if he found some old law from the 1700's that had not been superceded.

Example may be:
A man has a RIGHT to a home if he lives there with at least one chicken and an old hag that the rest of the hamlet fears.
Any attempt to remove a man living in these conditions is an offence and punishable by finger nail pulling and the taring of the individuals connected with the crime.

No, because the CPS would take the trial over and discontinue it as not in the public interest.

[Jeffrey]

if he lives there with at least one chicken and an old hag that the rest of the hamlet fears

Pretty sure you've just invoked the law against being a witch.

[Dr. Caligari]

Pretty sure you've just invoked the law against being a witch.

I don't know... does the chicken weigh more than a duck?

[YiamCross]

At my bequest, not Notts police btw. Maybe someone else my get hauled in as a result, let's see how effective our police are in cases of assault and harassment.

In my experience, my local constabulary are not very effective in such matters and I had to take matters into my own hands ( via the legal route,I might add although I did have an offer from a friend of a friend to carry out some patella surgery which was a bit scary) but if you don't ask, you don't get.

I hope that Notts police are more effective.

If they asked you to make your way to Nottingham again (to give a statement, for example), it looks to me as though they were trying to deter you from taking this step as I believe that they should have either come to you (as the alleged victim) or they could have asked your local force to take a statement.

I don't expect my experience will be any different. I got the impression it would expedite things if I went to them plus I had a few inquiries to make regarding some building work I'm pricing up for a potential future project. It's all good fun.

[PeanutGallery]

In regard to private prosecutions, they do exist, I can recall of one actually being successful in recent memory (a student brought a claim of harassment against another, he did a very good job of both gathering the relevant evidence and presenting it, such that when the CPS reviewed the case they concluded their was a realistic prospect of a conviction and declined to intervene). This was a very rare event, such that it made national news when it was in fact a relatively minor case that would likely have only warranted a small column in a local newspaper.

This no doubt has spurred the Freemen on in their quest to get their own private prosecutions started, however many of them are severely deficient in understanding the amount and level of work needed to mount a prosecution, for one the burden of proof is elevated considerably and this requires a greater evidential burden. As we saw from Ceylon's recent attempt to gain an injunction against Mark Gillard and from Tom Crawford's case, they often spend a lot of time waffling on about inconsequential aspects and seldom address points that would be germane to the point they are trying to argue. Of course it's also true that often enough they don't have a point that has any basis in law. That and they usually can't help themselves from filling up the argument with teh crazies.

Additionally they tend to bring prosecutions out of a vexatious spite, targeting (as I believe Guy Taylor did) the bailiffs whose alleged crime was simply to follow the orders given to them by the court.

[Bungle]

Extended civil restraint orders

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extended-ci ... s-in-force

If a judge orders an extended civil restraint order, the order is limited to a specified group of courts.

They last 2 years, but can be renewed for a further 2 years. They’re usually given when a person’s application for a court hearing is refused but they won’t accept the judge’s decision.

Tom Crawford managed to get into this club. He is in good company and his friends Russell McGarry and his wife Jacqueline McGarry are also members.

Russ reckons that he is back in court (the Royal Courts of Justice no less) on 6th November in connection with his eviction and subsequent allegations against the police ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR6cYkdXFSE

His 'restraint order' bans him from pestering Liverpool County Court for two years. He is therefore allowed to waste the time of the Royal Courts of Justice. Could be an interesting hearing to sit in on. Could be worth a day out.

[Bungle]

Extended civil restraint orders

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extended-ci ... s-in-force

If a judge orders an extended civil restraint order, the order is limited to a specified group of courts.

They last 2 years, but can be renewed for a further 2 years. They’re usually given when a person’s application for a court hearing is refused but they won’t accept the judge’s decision.

Tom Crawford managed to get into this club. He is in good company and his friends Russell McGarry and his wife Jacqueline McGarry are also members.

Russ reckons that he is back in court (the Royal Courts of Justice no less) on 6th November in connection with his eviction and subsequent allegations against the police ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR6cYkdXFSE

His 'restraint order' bans him from pestering Liverpool County Court for two years. He is therefore allowed to waste the time of the Royal Courts of Justice. In the case of Tom Crawfraud, he is banned from wasting the Royal Courts of Justice time. With Ebert though.... he has the full monty. He can't take civil proceedings in ANY court. Unfortunately, he is not banned from fleecing unsuspecting idiots like Crawford into taking worthless court proceedings.

Could be an interesting hearing to sit in on. Could be worth a day out.

[getoutofdebtfools]

But remember Tom doesn't need the Courts when he's got his own Grand Jury....

[longdog]

But remember Tom doesn't need the Courts when he's got his own Grand Jury....

This is something that's been in the back of my mind for some time. Tom has had a favourable decision from the grand jury of the Nottingham common-law court of whatever for months but he doesn't seem to have acted on it and reclaimed Crawford Cottage... I wonder why?

[letissier14]

If only this report was true, it would explain so much lol

MAY 12, 2015

Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

“These humans appear to have all the faculties necessary to receive and process information,” Davis Logsdon, one of the scientists who contributed to the study, said. “And yet, somehow, they have developed defenses that, for all intents and purposes, have rendered those faculties totally inactive.”

More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”

While scientists have no clear understanding of the mechanisms that prevent the fact-resistant humans from absorbing data, they theorize that the strain may have developed the ability to intercept and discard information en route from the auditory nerve to the brain. “The normal functions of human consciousness have been completely nullified,” Logsdon said.

While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.

[rumpelstilzchen]

This is something that's been in the back of my mind for some time. Tom has had a favourable decision from the grand jury of the Nottingham common-law court of whatever for months but he doesn't seem to have acted on it and reclaimed Crawford Cottage... I wonder why?

Because the Nottingham common law court overturned Godsmark. Godsmark said (according to Ebert) that Crawford had won. Reversing that decision meant that Tom had lost.

[Pox]

In regard to private prosecutions, they do exist, I can recall of one actually being successful in recent memory (a student brought a claim of harassment against another, he did a very good job of both gathering the relevant evidence and presenting it, such that when the CPS reviewed the case they concluded their was a realistic prospect of a conviction and declined to intervene). This was a very rare event, such that it made national news when it was in fact a relatively minor case that would likely have only warranted a small column in a local newspaper.

Thanks for this, and to all others that contributed.
I suppose that it is good that an avenue exists as I suspect that when the CPS says 'not in the public interest' they mean 'the budgets a bit low at the moment' or 'this isn't high profile enough for us'.

I'm not thinking of bringing such a case but am curious to know how one would go about it? And the cost?

[fat frank]

private criminal prosecutions, are free to start, but are a pain as need lots of evidence, and the CPS can take over any time and throw out of court, this is what tom will claim is happening so he can say that TPTB are stopping him at ever turn,

he might then try a civil case, but will fail as well, he will prob then go down the common law court route and claim its a great victory

[getoutofdebtfools]

But who is he really going to make a private prosecution against?

Judge Godsmark? The CEO of B&B? The CEO of UKAR? The Chief Inspector at Nottingham Police? The lead County Court Bailiff?

If he is really going to go down this route I would suggest he start with Ebert, Taylor and Haining