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

[NG3]

Oh dear...

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.

All of them?

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

You were already in a criminal court and that's what happens.

where they have to produce the evidence, EVERYTHING that they relied upon to enable them to be there on the day.

Wrong again Tom

You are charged with assaulting a police officer, your land dispute is irrelevant to the charge.

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

All your talk is careless.

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?

You were in court, obliged to plead guilty or not guilty, " no case to answer to" will be recorded as not guilty.

[YiamCross]

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?

Why could they not have dealt with this today? No wonder the courts are so jammed if they have hearings to set hearings where they may decide to go to trial etc etc. I'm surprised anyone gets to court before they die of old age.

I don't know if I'll last until November, I'm sure they won't.

I see the court steps were absent a mob of supporters. Or any at all. Looks very much like the small court was rather empty. Oh dear.

[timcurgenven1]

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?

Why could they not have dealt with this today? No wonder the courts are so jammed if they have hearings to set hearings where they may decide to go to trial etc etc. I'm surprised anyone gets to court before they die of old age.

I don't know if I'll last until November, I'm sure they won't.

I see the court steps were absent a mob of supporters. Or any at all. Looks very much like the small court was rather empty. Oh dear.

Things are never normally dealt with on first appearance unless pleading guilty

[wanglepin]

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

he seems to have ditched his top legal team too, Normal.

Both defendants represented themselves.

Read more: http://www.nottinghampost.com/Tom-Crawf ... z3hSsSNZS7

[Syf]

So is this another victory then?

[AndyPandy]

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.

Exactly !!

[timcurgenven1]

http://www.nottinghampost.com/Tom-Crawf ... story.html

[Bungle]

he seems to have ditched his top legal team too

No, it is simply the case that his 'legal adviser' (Guy Talor) was otherwise engaged miles away at Hereford Magistrates Court where his own sentence was being handed down.

12 month Community Order

150 hours of community work

£1,000 fine

Restraining Order imposed banning him from going near his previous property; Bodenham Manor or its new owner (Mr Davies).

[littleFred]

Why could they not have dealt with this today?

Trials take a fair bit of time for the prosecution to collate statements, to organise diaries of witnesses and so on. The point of a brief hearing (15 minutes or so) is to give the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty, saving the time and effort of a trial. In return, the defendant gets a discount.

This is standard procedure. With a "not guilty" plea, evidence is gathered and paperwork exchanged between the parties prior to the trial. Beyond a brief explanation of why the police were there in the first place, and perhaps mitigation about the defendant being upset, the history won't matter. Magistrates won't listen to arguments that the eviction was illegal or whatever.

After the hearing, the trial is often about 6 months later.

[NG3]

So is this another victory then?

Yes, Tom has increased any sentence that might be handed down, in order to say "Show us the warrant" to a magistrate that will point out it's irrelevant to the charge (& that if he labours the point, disrupting the case he will be charged with contempt, & if he still carries on the court will hear the case in his absence, while he sits in a cell, and only bring him up for the verdict & sentence).

A stunning victory!

[Bungle]

http://www.nottinghampost.com/Tom-Crawf ... story.html

So we have Tom Crawford confirming to the court that he now has no fixed abode. 'Monika' is also in the same position. Crawford's legal adviser, Guy Taylor also advised the court earlier this month that he too has no 'fixed abode' and is penniless.

I don't know the background to 'Monika' (whether she supports FMoTL or Sov City) so for the moment it would not be right to inlcude her in my comment, but these two others dont seem to realise that their FMoTL views have caused their downfall.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Things are never normally dealt with on first appearance unless pleading guilty

This ^. A defendant's legal representative would need time to prepare a defence. All sides need to sort out their schedules. Court needs to allocate time for the case to be heard properly. Tom as usual hasn't a clue and thought there was a chance the case would proceed there and then.

[Bungle]

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

It certainly did my old china!!! This is EXACTLY the way that the court wanted the case to go.

This way, Crawford is under a court order not to go anywhere near his previous home and allows the forthcoming sale to go ahead without him being around.

[letissier14]

I don't know the background to 'Monika' (whether she supports FMoTL or Sov City) so for the moment it would not be right to inlcude her in my comment, but these two others dont seem to realise that their FMoTL views have caused their downfall.

It's safe to say 'Monika' is firmly in the fmotl camp

https://youtu.be/wBUrGTRluG0

[Skeleton]

So is this another victory then?

Yes, Tom has increased any sentence that might be handed down, in order to say "Show us the warrant" to a magistrate that will point out it's irrelevant to the charge (& that if he labours the point, disrupting the case he will be charged with contempt, & if he still carries on the court will hear the case in his absence, while he sits in a cell, and only bring him up for the verdict & sentence).

A stunning victory!

As others have alluded to the house will have gone and going by today so will his support, his family, in particular Amanda seem to be very good at doing nothing but bellyaching about anything and lashing out at anyone who is deemed not fit to be a supporter. Last nights tirade about the delivery drivers was approaching pathetic and must have further eroded any support that is left.

I do not think it will even get to trial and will be quietly dropped, and the Crawfords will be disappointed with that outcome.

[ArthurWankspittle]

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.

Oh it's better than that. Suppose you suspect you will be found guilty whichever court, Magistrates or Crown. You plead guilty at the Magistrates court at first opportunity. The magistrate(s) deal with the guilty plea there and then. But the most a Magistrate can jail you for is 6 months for the one charge. Plus you get 1/3 off for the guilty plea. You could be out within 10 weeks. Meanwhile, you ex-co-defendants are still on bail and looking to have to spend at least 6 months inside in the near future.

[NG3]

I do not think it will even get to trial and will be quietly dropped.

If the house has gone by then (which I'd fully expect) then, yes, they may well drop the case.

I have an ex in Notts police & Crawford is seen as a nuisance offender, similar to a drunk in the street, or a common flasher, and with offenders like that the main interest is to keep them away from the places where they become a nuisance to the public, so to the police, in incidents like this, the bail conditions are more important than the actual case.

[ArthurWankspittle]

....as we all know in Halisburys law "every court must be a court of record and have a seal" so where were we today?

Unable to spell Halsbury apparently. Plus a pound to a pinch of pig shit that quote either doesn't exist or is out of context.

[Skeleton]

I do not think it will even get to trial and will be quietly dropped.

If the house has gone by then (which I'd fully expect) then, yes, they may well drop the case.

I have an ex in Notts police & Crawford is seen as a nuisance offender, similar to a drunk in the street, or a common flasher, and with offenders like that the main interest is to keep them away from the places where they become a nuisance to the public, so to the police, in incidents like this, the bail conditions are more important than the actual case.

I can understand that and come November it may well be the that a court case may re-energize a cause that is dead in the water and offer Crawford some much needed publicity. I get the impression though he is in this for the long haul, and he himself could be leading a new life among the main players (or so he would like to think) in Loony land, be interesting to watch how that bit plays out. Tom enjoys the limelight that much is apparent.

[ArthurWankspittle]

If the house has gone by then (which I'd fully expect) then, yes, they may well drop the case.

I think it will have to be demolished too. If there's a house still there it will be a magnet for the rent-a-mob morons to re-take. In 12 months time (perhaps when some people get out of prison) and there is an empty building plot there it doesn't have the same attraction.