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

[Hercule Parrot]

I am sorry, but i think my comment will cut against the grain.
I think the Crawfords have come out of this better than him...

I'm surprised that that you see it that way, and I think few if any others will agree. But you won't be called a troll or shill for your opinion here. It's good to hear a different view, it makes us take a second look.

You're still wrong though....

[Hercule Parrot]

How would a hero have acted? Should I have decked an old man and his fat wife? I can put my hand on my heart and say that looking back at the video I would not have chosen to add or subtract any word or action from the encounter and I would behave exactly the same again in a similar situation.

I thought you handled it well, and I think that's what Ada was saying too.

[letissier14]

The only thing I do wish I had was a dash cam to show Crawford stop and reverse up to me in an attempt to prevent me from pulling onto the road and driving off.

We have installed them in all cars (front & back cameras) after our neighbour recently reversed into us whilst we were parked. She admitted she hadn't seen us and apologised.

2 months later we get informed by our insurance company that the accident was being dealt with on a 50/50 basis, meaning we were both to blame equally, as my neighbour had changed her story, denied she hadn't seen us and said that we reversed into her as she was reversing also.

Our neighbours can't even look us in the face now and keep their heads down when they drive or walk past.

[NG3]

I can put my hand on my heart and say that looking back at the video I would not have chosen to add or subtract any word or action from the encounter and I would behave exactly the same again in a similar situation.

I've failed to see the debate personally, he effectively pulled you over, you've gone to see why, you've tried reasonably civil discussions, he's got hostile, you've attempted to behave in a manner that might diffuse the situation, Tom & co have become increasingly manic and abusive and you've decided remaining would be pointless so you've left.

If there were a text book on the subject I'm fairly sure the prescribed method to handle such a situation wouldn't deviate to far from that.

[Skeleton]

I can put my hand on my heart and say that looking back at the video I would not have chosen to add or subtract any word or action from the encounter and I would behave exactly the same again in a similar situation.

I've failed to see the debate personally, he effectively pulled you over, you've gone to see why, you've tried reasonably civil discussions, he's got hostile, you've attempted to behave in a manner that might diffuse the situation, Tom & co have become increasingly manic and abusive and you've decided remaining would be pointless so you've left.

If there were a text book on the subject I'm fairly sure the prescribed method to handle such a situation wouldn't deviate to far from that.

Exactly NG, I said up thread that the Crawford's were in no mood for a debate. ANY questions or points on the subject of the mortgage or the eviction from Yiam would only have made the situation worse, Tom asked a number of questions but in the usual Freetard way, no right of reply was given. When Yiam did manage to get a word in what he said was largely ignored as Tom again as Freetard's do, pushed his own agenda.

Tom found out Yiam was in the area and went looking for him, I think that much is clear. By the time he found him he was wound up and angry which is clear from the video, in his position I would be to but i hope i would conduct myself a little better and i certainly would not be chasing folk down the street. The Crawford's need to be very careful here, who is viewing that house is none of their business, but they seem hell bent on interfering at every possible step, Amanda telling the EFOTB group who is viewing and when shows that, their are plenty of nut jobs in that group who are more than capable of interfering and she knows that which is why she posted the information.

The Crawfords would be well advised to tread carefully over the marketing of that house, but they won't, they are simply to stupid to think of the possible consequences of interfering.

[littleFred]

I suspect losing your house is a bit like becoming divorced, and evictions are like acrimonious divorce. But sniffing around one's ex in order to vet possible suitors, or to fight them off or whatever, isn't a smart idea.

I hope I would have done exactly what Yiam did.

[PeanutGallery]

Gentlemen please. I don't think Yiam did anything that would seem out of the ordinary, according to his version of events, which I see no reason not to believe, Tom made an effort to prevent his vehicle from leaving and initiated the encounter by stopping him on the road. Yiam seemed to want to know, initially what had caused the vehicle in front of him to do this. I think he suspected it was Tom, he may even have seen Tom in the drivers seat.

Yiam did not go to Carlton looking for Tom Crawford, in fact Yiam went to places where he knew Tom Crawford was not supposed to be. Tom's bail conditions are widely available, we also know that the Elwes is excluded because of statements Sue made to Ceylon when they held the post eviction meeting and walk.

It would seem to me that Tom was looking for Yiam, he knew a member of this forum had gone to his house, and I can see a valid reason for doing so, the house is an infamous property. If I were in the Nottingham area I would be tempted to visit the Chase and have a good old gawp at it. A small little bungalow that has caused such a giant amount of fuss. I don't think Yiam did anything wrong in going to the house, although it angered Tom, his anger was based on his belief that the house was still his. It is not. It belongs to a third party, that party is selling it, part of selling a property is that people will come to view it. Tom doesn't have the right to have a say about who views the bungalow because it is not his house any longer.

I don't buy into Tom's statement that Nicole went in to the pub and noticed Yiam filming her. This is for a couple of reasons, Nicole hasn't really been seen in that many of the Crawford video's, we don't know her. She's not a loudmouth like Amanda, nor is she a social media whore like Craig. She's relatively anonymous, in fact until the actual day of eviction I didn't even know Tom Crawford had another daughter. I still don't think, having had scant sight of her, that I would be confident to identify her.

However even if that is true, then what is Tom doing going there? If Nicole was so concerned for her safety why didn't she call the police, or confront Yiam from the safety of the pub? Why would she go and get her father, who happened to be nearby and then have him confront Yiam while he was leaving the area. Why also did her father not mention this photography of Nicole when he first spoke with Yiam. You'd think it would be the first thing on his mind, yet he seems more intent on berating the man in the street.

I take the view that Yiam was driving a very distinctive vehicle, I would also think that Yiam likely parked said vehicle either in Fearn Chase or in the Elwes Arms car park and walked to the Chase for the viewing. At some point it was established that he was going to view Tom's property, it's a small local area and I would think that someone, either a former neighbour of Tom's or a person at the Elwes would have told Tom what Yiam looked like, what the vehicle he was driving was and where Yiam was. Tom then got Sue and Nicole and went to find Yiam. I don't doubt that he wanted to see one of us in the face and confront us.

As to the encounter, I think Yiam possibly made a mistake by getting out of the vehicle. However at that time I'm not sure he really knew what was going on. Yiam remained calm throughout and did not try to antagonise or denigrate either Tom, Sue or Nicole. He didn't really have a chance to put any questions to Tom and when he did these were simply ignored. Tom had no interest in anyone speaking who wasn't on board with team Crawford. Here's the dangerous bit, Tom wanted violence, he wanted a fight. He was hoping that Yiam would get physical, because if Yiam reacted to Tom's intimidation then Tom would do everything he could to get Yiam arrested and charged. Tom would even try to make out a charge of attempted murder, based on the blood thinning drugs he was on and an earlier statement from one of his videos about having a thin and fragile skull. For someone who claims to be so frail, he does seem to enjoy throwing his weight around.

Did Yiam come off badly? No. As I said I would likely have remained in my vehicle and waited either for Tom to leave or if he continued I would call the police and have them deal with it. I am sure mentioning the name Tom Crawford and Carlton and Fearn Chase and he's standing in the street shouting would bring a rather quick response from the boys in blue.

Did Tom come off poorly, well he hasn't lowered my opinion of him, but he's not raised it either. Tom came off like the dolt he is. He's swallowed the woo hook line and it's sunk him.

[getoutofdebtfools]

Morning gents,

Let's move on from YiamTomGate

Can somebody provide a calendar timeline to the upcoming events in this most excellent saga? E.g. Viewings, Auction, court cases etc?

Thanks in advance

[#six]

I agree entirely Peanut. I think there was little Yiam could have done to change the situation. Tom was looking for a fight. He had no reason to be In the area. No reason to stop Yiam.

[wanglepin]

Can somebody provide a calendar timeline to the upcoming events in this most excellent saga? E.g. Viewings, Auction, court cases etc?

I think the Silly Hat Six are due in court soon. Early November I believe. Where I am hoping to see the king of Goofsville Mark Ceylon Haining actually practice what he has been preaching and instructing others in how to perform in the court room. He had a chance not too long ago, to show how this was done,but failed, it turned out that he was just "too tired". He did tell us though that his Mrs did know "what he was going to do" but he let her down too.

P.S. You acted quite correctly Yiam. Well done lad.

[Pox]

For the record, I agree with NG3,Skeleton and PeanutGallery above -

Yiam behaved appropriately faced with the aggression shown to him.
He tried to diffuse the situation which is something negotiators are trained to do.

As I have said previously, if it was me, I would HOPE that I wouldn't have got out of my vehicle just for personal safety reasons.
TC would then have either given up, or turned more aggressive - who knows?

Hindsight eh? Dontcha just love it!

Well done Yiam for keeping your cool

[ArthurWankspittle]

Can somebody provide a calendar timeline to the upcoming events in this most excellent saga? E.g. Viewings, Auction, court cases etc?

Thanks in advance

Off the top of my head: Auction 3rd Nov. Rooftop six Crown Court 6th Nov. Tom and Monika around the same time. Craig ditto. Pretty much everything happens first week November.

[bagman]

I am sorry, but i think my comment will cut against the grain.
I think the Crawfords have come out of this better than him...

I'm surprised that that you see it that way, and I think few if any others will agree. But you won't be called a troll or shill for your opinion here. It's good to hear a different view, it makes us take a second look.

You're still wrong though....

Never claimed my opinion to be the correct one, but i tip my hat to all on here, (and yes, you Yaim) for allowing a different view point to stay on the thread,,,as we well know, the btbatb and any of the Crawford pages, any view not the same as there's is removed along with the person that wrote it....I appoligies to Yiam, as I was not there, so i cant say that i would have remembered to question tom, or been able to get a word in edge ways for the screaming from the loons in the car. I took my stance from watching only the Crawford video (toms upload)
Hope that puts a end to this. if not lets all have a mass brawl in the elmes car park (not you tom, you are bared)

[Skeleton]

Can somebody provide a calendar timeline to the upcoming events in this most excellent saga? E.g. Viewings, Auction, court cases etc?

I think the Silly Hat Six are due in court soon. Early November I believe. Where I am hoping to see the king of Goofsville Mark Ceylon Haining actually practice what he has been preaching and instructing others in how to perform in the court room. He had a chance not too long ago, to show how this was done,but failed, it turned out that he was just "too tired". He did tell us though that his Mrs did know "what he was going to do" but he let her down too.

P.S. You acted quite correctly Yiam. Well done lad.

Judge "State your full name and address please"

Ceylon "No, I havent got a name"

Judge "Don't be silly everyone has a name, but as i can't identify you, you will have to be held in a cell until i can"

Ceylon "In that case my name is"

If your really lucky he may get that far, but thats it, the mans a gutless coward who is another that sells the woo knowing it really does not work so will not try it himself. You can also rinse and repeat that conversation for one-cell

[SoLongCeylon]

Thanks in advance [/quote]Off the top of my head: Auction 3rd Nov. Rooftop six Crown Court 6th Nov. Tom and Monika around the same time. Craig ditto. Pretty much everything happens first week November.[/quote]


Remember Remember the first week of November
Trial time for Nottingham's big hitters
There'll be Haining and Crawford doing an Ebert
plus lovely Monika - the spitter

[ArthurWankspittle]

In connection with the trials, would anyone attending please take note of a couple of things that aren't likely to be bothered with reporting but are of interest to us. First, addresses of defendants. Second occupations. Third, if found guilty and fined and victim surcharged, I think some or all of this is banded depending on income, so anyone present gets a guide as to how much a defendant is earning. All the above should be interesting in some cases.

[YiamCross]

Never claimed my opinion to be the correct one, but i tip my hat to all on here, (and yes, you Yaim) for allowing a different view point to stay on the thread,,,as we well know, the btbatb and any of the Crawford pages, any view not the same as there's is removed along with the person that wrote it....../.

I don't want to carry on with this but I have to say I find Bagman's hypocrisy breathtaking and for so long as he wants to keep his obvious grievances with me public I will do the same.

Hats off for allowing a different point of view to stay on the thread? That's pretty rich coming from someone who messaged me relentlessly last night wanting to meet "face to face" to say to him personally the things I've written in the thread above, tried to voice call me on my laptop then sat there watching me chew gum and type (yep, I can do both together but only because I'm sitting down and don't have to focus on standing up) for, he said 20 minutes (now that's what I call weird) and then blocked me from his facebook pages and personal account.

He even had the audacity to ask me if I'd actually visited a school as he thinks Craig claimed. That I did find offensive but then I can only marvel at the level of stupidity it demonstrates.

So, hats off to Bagman for having the front to come crawling back with weasel words having realised that his attempts to stir sentiment against me on Quatloos has failed and he's made himself look as ridiculous as the Crawfords. I guess he'll have to carry on trying to fan the flames of abuse against me over on Facebook but then he's not very smart about that since I can't see any of the crap he's as likely as not spreading because he's blocked me from his account. The only other people I know who are stupid enough to work that policy are the Crawfords. He fits in well with them.

He seems to be very much in the freeman camp. Maybe it's time to start a Steve Barron comes out thread.

And yes, Steve, I'll say all that to your face anytime you want to phone and actually speak instead of silently watching me.

[YiamCross]

In connection with the trials, would anyone attending please take note of a couple of things that aren't likely to be bothered with reporting but are of interest to us. First, addresses of defendants. Second occupations. Third, if found guilty and fined and victim surcharged, I think some or all of this is banded depending on income, so anyone present gets a guide as to how much a defendant is earning. All the above should be interesting in some cases.

Addresses? You'll be accused of stalking them...

[Burnaby49]

It's 2:30 in the morning in Vancouver and time for bed but a comment from a moderator before I have to get heavy-handed again. Enough is enough. Quatloos used to have a forum called Flame Wars where we moved discussions when they went off track and started getting personal. We removed the forum and now act directly. We don't censor opinions or positions but when they devolves down to personal squabbling we get to a point where it is time to stop or have the entire series of postings deleted. We've reached that point here. Yiam, you've been questioned by Bagman and you've responded in full. Bagman, you've had your say and, one more post on this, and all of your posts are gone. Don't like it? Then stop squabbling. Yiam just said;

I don't want to carry on with this but I have to say I find Bagman's hypocrisy breathtaking and for so long as he wants to keep his obvious grievances with me public I will do the same.

So fine, both stop.

[#six]

In connection with the trials, would anyone attending please take note of a couple of things that aren't likely to be bothered with reporting but are of interest to us. First, addresses of defendants. Second occupations. Third, if found guilty and fined and victim surcharged, I think some or all of this is banded depending on income, so anyone present gets a guide as to how much a defendant is earning. All the above should be interesting in some cases.

Addresses? You'll be accused of stalking them...

Agreed - No addresses. Regardless of them putting themselves in the public arena everyone has a right to some level of privacy and I would draw the line at any way of contacting them (address, place of work, email or phone numbers all included)

Edit to add:
If anyone does want these sort of details then they have every right to attend court themselves.