The Second Battle of Crawford's Castle, a Nottingham Farce...

[ArthurWankspittle]

Seems to have ditched the three piece suit he wore for previous court appearances Perhaps it's in the lock up.

And there's me hoping to recycle the old joke: "How do you address a Crawford support who is wearing a suit? The Defendant".
Seriously now, Magistrates court or Crown court in November?

[Skeleton]

Thanks for that NG3. It seems the freeman woo is in full force.

Representing self - Check
Refusing to lodge a plea - Check
Judge deciding plea for them - Check

I can see this is going to end well

Or Tom as usual getting it wrong. Two choices and both would have been the correct answer, yet he still manages to foul it up and provide a wrong one. The man is a walking disaster area.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Judge deciding plea for them - Check

That's more by default. You can almost take it that if the defendant says anything other than "guilty" a plea of "not guilty" will be entered.
Time for a reminder: Tom and Monika's case is sub judice until November 18th at least.

[NG3]

Seriously now, Magistrates court or Crown court in November?

I'd imagine the magistrates. The police and courts are not that bothered by these wasters, they just really wanted the bail conditions to keep the nutters away from disturbing normal people.

Why do you think they let Craig hang around at the affray?

They could have moved him on, but knew if he stayed he'd screw up and they'd be able to slap bail conditions on him. Craig was just to stupid to see it coming.

By November the house will be sold, everything will be over, and Tom could probably get away with a metaphorical slap on the wrist, unless he's stupid enough to play silly beggar freeman in court...

[wserra]

Tom. You played the game and lost. Accept it.

Yokel deputy: "Is this a game of chance?"
Sheriff W.C. Fields: "Not the way I play it, it's not."

Applies double to sovcit games.

[vampireLOREN]

Tom Crawford told a court he has 'no case to answer' as he appeared before a District Judge charged with assaulting a police officer....

Read more: http://www.nottinghampost.com/Tom-Crawf ... z3hSsSNZS7
Follow us: @Nottingham_Post on Twitter | NottinghamPostOnline on Facebook

Seems to have ditched the three piece suit he wore for previous court appearances Perhaps it's in the lock up.

I think that is the jacket from that 1970s stylish apparel , and the Notts Post appear's to think That the adorable Monika is doing an Amanda impression

[hanlons razor]

no fixed abode

And whilst I wouldn't want to fall foul given the matter is still on going, I'm sure I saw video of one of the offences either being committed or at least admitted on the day by one of those charged. But I stand to be corrected on this matter.

[Jeffrey]

I take it Monika is the one who allegedly spit on the cop?
(Things you have to do round here and all I get is some MCSO underwear and an old Juventus top.

[AndyPandy]

Judge deciding plea for them - Check

That's more by default. You can almost take it that if the defendant says anything other than "guilty" a plea of "not guilty" will be entered.
Time for a reminder: Tom and Monika's case is sub judice until November 18th at least.

The problem is is that he's loving the notoriety ! A solicitor would review the evidence and advise accordingly as to an early plea, duty solicitor's provided free of charge, but no, has to play silly buggers because the silly sod's loving it in his attempt to stick two fingers up at the Judiciary. He needs a good dose of Mead vs Mead !

[Skeleton]

no fixed abode

And whilst I wouldn't want to fall foul given the matter is still on going, I'm sure I saw video of one of the offences either being committed or at least admitted on the day by one of those charged. But I stand to be corrected on this matter.

No you are correct there is video footage.

[Skeleton]

I take it Monika is the one who spit on the cop?

Yes, allegedly.

[NG3]

The problem is is that he's loving the notoriety ! A solicitor would review the evidence and advise accordingly as to an early plea.

Early pleas qualify for a "discount" on their sentence.

For those facing the affray charge, for example, if they pleaded guilty, at the first opportunity, it could mean perhaps getting a 8 month sentence, instead of a 12 month one.

Being silly can be costly in a courtroom.

[YiamCross]

Lack off full disclosure makes contracts null and void no?

Please cite the relevant contract law case that substantiates your claim.

It really makes no difference whether it's yes or no if you think about it. Since thinking is not part of Pigpots's skillset I'll do it for him/her.

If the contract is null and void then title to the property never passed to the Crawfords so it was never theirs. If the contract is not null and void then the Crawfords broke it and the bank is perfectly entitled to obtain a remedy by repossession. I'm not even going to try to explain why a mortgage agreement isn't a contract, that would be a step too far.

[Jeffrey]

No you are correct there is video footage.

Yes, but does SHE know that there is alleged to be video of her spitting on the cop and admitting to it?

[FatGambit]

I'm surprised Tom hasn't been charged with resisting arrest rather than what he has, I don't want to say more, but I am surprised to say the least, if you've seen the video you'll know which bit I'm talking about.

However, I do have no doubt Tom's expert legal team will manage to cock this up, like everything else.

[letissier14]

Tom has just updated his status on EFOTB

Tom Crawford
11 mins

Hi all

Thanks to all those who came along today and watched yet another charade.

It went as expected the "judge" attempted to railroad me, but it didn't matter, as what has now transpired is what we wanted it to and it has gone to a criminal court now on November the 18th, where they have to produce the evidence, EVERYTHING that they relied upon to enable them to be there on the day.

I can't got into this to much because in the words of our grandparents, careless talk.....

Thanks to a member of the public gallery, he pointed out that I pleaded " no case to answer to" the member of the public then stated that it is now, on the record that the judge took it upon himself to change My plea, with that the judge replied that it was NOT on the record.

Amanda asked if the whole proceedings today were on the record and I quote he replied "no, no magistrates courts are currently on public record" as we all know in Halisburys law "every court must be a court of record and have a seal" so where were we today?

[pigpot]

It's a little like doing 51 in 50. It's only against the law IF you get caught.

Incorrect. You have contravened the law.

For heavens sake don't shoot me for a mere suggestion.

You are encouraging someone to break the law.
How many court proceedings have you filmed?

Not at all. I did what I wanted to do and nobody stopped me. The only thing that didn't happen was the enFORCEment of the "law". Without "Force" the "law" has nothing behind it so therefore there is no "law" and being a... "nothing" NOTHING was broken. "Laws" require enFORCEment without "FORCE" they don't exist.

You seem to be living in a very primitive age when people just accepted perceived "AUTHORITY" (realised as POWER). It's not that way any more. Lots of people are questioning EVERYTHING...

I'll give you the answer to "IT" all... It's simple...

Go see the "guy" who holds the reset button... Press it. Before you do go watch "Nicholas Cage" in "The Knowing".

[pigpot]

Tom has just updated his status on EFOTB

Tom Crawford
11 mins

Hi all

Thanks to all those who came along today and watched yet another charade.

It went as expected the "judge" attempted to railroad me, but it didn't matter, as what has now transpired is what we wanted it to and it has gone to a criminal court now on November the 18th, where they have to produce the evidence, EVERYTHING that they relied upon to enable them to be there on the day.

I can't got into this to much because in the words of our grandparents, careless talk.....

Thanks to a member of the public gallery, he pointed out that I pleaded " no case to answer to" the member of the public then stated that it is now, on the record that the judge took it upon himself to change My plea, with that the judge replied that it was NOT on the record.

Amanda asked if the whole proceedings today were on the record and I quote he replied "no, no magistrates courts are currently on public record" as we all know in Halisburys law "every court must be a court of record and have a seal" so where were we today?

So "It's" still on then... Can a "Judge" change a plea from the "bench"?

[Jeffrey]

It's not "changing the plea", his response is functionally a not guilty plea.

[Skeleton]

I think that is the jacket from that 1970s stylish apparel , and the Notts Post appear's to think That the adorable Monika is doing an Amanda impression

Given the amount of venom Amanda spits, easy mistake for the paper to make.