Peter of England & WeRe Bank get Canadian Court Ass-Kicking

[Hyrion]

We Canadians can screw ourselves by getting even deeper into debt than you

Never mentioned it before.... I'm in Edmonton myself

Edmonton? You're in the perfect location to be a Quatloos court reporter. Most of the decisions I report seem to come out of Edmonton. Vancouver has pretty much dried up of freeman cases but Edmonton has the hard-core. I'd love to attend and report on Denise Eddie's ongoing saga as a Poriskyite follower. Just craziness.

While I'm in the right place - I'm not quite as free of time as you are. I still have a couple decades to go before retiring.

It's not at the top of the list, but having a personal hobby of following cases of interest after I retire is on the list of possible options - think I might be just as crazy as you... just younger

[Burnaby49]

Things happen. When I retired I didn't even know that Freemen or Quatloos existed. It hadn't crossed my mind to sit in on court cases. Just sort of came out of nowhere.

[chronistra]

Regrettably, PoE ISN'T the point of contact with the host nations laws in any of these cases, the sovrunidjits who are passing his faux checks are.

If PoE ever sent a checkbook to a mark via a method that included a trip through the U.S. mails, or induced said mark to mail money to Dulcie Street via U.S. mail, he may well have run afoul of federal laws about mail fraud. However, until one of the sovrunidjits or their next-of-kin make a complaint to the postal inspectors, nothing is likely to happen on that front. The creditors getting stuck with the phony checks aren't interested in who sold the scheme but in who tried to use the phony check to pay a real bill.

[longdog]

Regrettably, PoE ISN'T the point of contact with the host nations laws in any of these cases, the sovrunidjits who are passing his faux checks are.

If PoE ever sent a checkbook to a mark via a method that included a trip through the U.S. mails, or induced said mark to mail money to Dulcie Street via U.S. mail, he may well have run afoul of federal laws about mail fraud. However, until one of the sovrunidjits or their next-of-kin make a complaint to the postal inspectors, nothing is likely to happen on that front. The creditors getting stuck with the phony checks aren't interested in who sold the scheme but in who tried to use the phony check to pay a real bill.

The UK doesn't really have an offence of 'mail fraud' like the US and as the UK can't / won't extradite someone for an offence which doesn't exist in the UK that's a non-starter.

Every-day-of-the-week-common-or-garden fraud however is and extraditable offence.

[chronistra]

The UK doesn't really have an offence of 'mail fraud' like the US and as the UK can't / won't extradite someone for an offence which doesn't exist in the UK that's a non-starter.

Every-day-of-the-week-common-or-garden fraud however is and extraditable offence.

Would not the case of United States v. Herbage be controlling? Herbage, a British citizen, was extradited to Florida in 1985 on indictment for 23 counts of mail fraud (among other charges); after he pled guilty to three counts of mail fraud with the other charges dismissed, he challenged his extradition on grounds that mail fraud was not a crime in the U.K. and not set forth in the extradition treaty.

He lost. The U.S. courts found that the use of the mail was merely a jurisdictional element, and that the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, had considered this argument and properly extradited him because the conduct charged, which was theft by deception and false accounting, was illegal under the Theft Act 1968. (That is, using the mails to do something illegal is an extraditable offense if the "something illegal" is illegal in Britain as well, because Britain does not [or at least did not at the time] consider mail fraud as an offense separate and distinct from common fraud that falls under the jurisdiction of a particular prosecutor.)

[Dr. Caligari]

I agree with chronista. For our UK friends, let me explain: in the United States, the general power to punish crimes lies with the individual states, not the federal government. So murder, theft, rape and the like are state, not federal, crimes. The federal government does, however, have certain enumerated powers under the U.S. Constitution, including the powers to regulate "interstate commerce" and the postal service. So if the U.S. Congress wants to make something a crime, they need to find a jurisdictional hook to one of those federal powers. Thus, it is a federal crime to use the mails, or communications that cross state lines (via telephone, the internet, etc.), to perpetrate a "scheme or artifice to defraud." The U.S.'s extradition treaties with most foreign countries spell out that someone can be extradited to the U.S. for a fraud or theft that would be criminal in the foreign country, notwithstanding that U.S. law also includes such a "jurisdictional" element that wouldn't be needed under the foreign country's law.

[nebuer]

Regrettably, PoE ISN'T the point of contact with the host nations laws in any of these cases, the sovrunidjits who are passing his faux checks are.

If PoE ever sent a checkbook to a mark via a method that included a trip through the U.S. mails, or induced said mark to mail money to Dulcie Street via U.S. mail, he may well have run afoul of federal laws about mail fraud. However, until one of the sovrunidjits or their next-of-kin make a complaint to the postal inspectors, nothing is likely to happen on that front. The creditors getting stuck with the phony checks aren't interested in who sold the scheme but in who tried to use the phony check to pay a real bill.

The UK doesn't really have an offence of 'mail fraud' like the US and as the UK can't / won't extradite someone for an offence which doesn't exist in the UK that's a non-starter.

Every-day-of-the-week-common-or-garden fraud however is and extraditable offence.

Yep, under the Fraud Act 2006. But also, there's the Malicious Communications Act 1988 which might on occasions apply in this case.

[Wake Up! Productions]

Not to be a downer, but this is a very REal belief. Kate of Gaia is proof of this. It is all he/she promotes - hence why he/she is a tranny - i.e. the duality of the sexes. The idea that we are both male and female at the same time.

In PoE's case, he is both a BANKER and a BANK ROBBER at the same time !!!

But, in all seriousness, I should add that once you understand THEIR way of thinking, everything is very clear. It is the very reason why certain GURUS have fallen out of favor with other GURUS.

For example, Santos Bonacci promotes "syncretism" (the idea that everything is ONE), whereas Kate of Gaia promotes the Polarity Principle (the idea that everything is TWO).

I guess you could say that Santos Bonacci and Kate of Gaia are POLAR OPPOSITES - which would actually and factually make the Polarity Principle the correct theory. Sorry Santos !!!

Things that make you go "hmmm" !!!

How is this on topic.

It is "ON TOPIC" because it explains, in greater detail, a TERM (the "Principle of Polarity") that PoE used in his Facebook post. A term that even Burnaby admitted that he had never even heard of.

[NYGman]

The "Principle of Polarity" sounds like panto. As in:

"That's not a real bank it is a Fraud!"
"Oh no it isn't."
"Oh yes it is."
"Oh no it isn't."
"Oh yes it is."

Either that or something out of Monty Python

Argument Clinic @ 1:18

[longdog]

Would not the case of United States v. Herbage be controlling? Herbage, a British citizen, was extradited to Florida in 1985 on indictment for 23 counts of mail fraud (among other charges); after he pled guilty to three counts of mail fraud with the other charges dismissed, he challenged his extradition on grounds that mail fraud was not a crime in the U.K. and not set forth in the extradition treaty.

He lost. The U.S. courts found that the use of the mail was merely a jurisdictional element, and that the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, had considered this argument and properly extradited him because the conduct charged, which was theft by deception and false accounting, was illegal under the Theft Act 1968. (That is, using the mails to do something illegal is an extraditable offense if the "something illegal" is illegal in Britain as well, because Britain does not [or at least did not at the time] consider mail fraud as an offense separate and distinct from common fraud that falls under the jurisdiction of a particular prosecutor.)

I agree with chronista. For our UK friends, let me explain: in the United States, the general power to punish crimes lies with the individual states, not the federal government. So murder, theft, rape and the like are state, not federal, crimes. The federal government does, however, have certain enumerated powers under the U.S. Constitution, including the powers to regulate "interstate commerce" and the postal service. So if the U.S. Congress wants to make something a crime, they need to find a jurisdictional hook to one of those federal powers. Thus, it is a federal crime to use the mails, or communications that cross state lines (via telephone, the internet, etc.), to perpetrate a "scheme or artifice to defraud." The U.S.'s extradition treaties with most foreign countries spell out that someone can be extradited to the U.S. for a fraud or theft that would be criminal in the foreign country, notwithstanding that U.S. law also includes such a "jurisdictional" element that wouldn't be needed under the foreign country's law.

That makes logical sense.

I am indebted to m'learned friends

[exiledscouser]

The principal is "reciprocity" in that the offence in say the UK has to have a rough equivalent in the other jurisdiction.

No exact match is needed.

So mail fraud is fraud committed throught the postal system, in the UK fraud is fraud, however committed. So it would be perfectly possible to size Peter up for a fetching orange jump-suit.

Now wouldn't that be nice, save our tax payers the cost of a trial and Peter can make lots of new friends called Bubba.

The UK leading the way in top class criminal exports.

[notorial dissent]

PoE isn't safe cowering in his beat up camper in the UK from prosecution in the US. It is unlikely that any of the states would bother with the expense of extradition, but since the tougher sentences would come at the Federal level he could face trouble there, particularly if one of his suckers tries to pay off their taxes, and one of them ultimately will, with one of his funny checks. Using the US mails to commit fraud and aiding in tax fraud could get him in serious trouble. That being said I don't know what the likelihood of it actually happening is.

[Bones]

So is Peter Fraud of England, pretty much ignoring that he has been declared a con man in Canada and WeRe Bank has been confirmed as a scam ?

I am disappointed there has been no cash call to start a class action, after all the previous ones went so well

[Burnaby49]

For you document freaks a pile of pdf's of many of the documents that Parlee used in his attempt to beat the mortgage foreclosure.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/0blyczdya ... 3_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/9wobbe5yx ... 7_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/gtb5c3o6p ... 3_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/xns2p8ntm ... 3_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/1vto5vcpi ... 0_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/nnu6j29jz ... 2_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/ot499dr8e ... 9_2015.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/4duargna4 ... rranto.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/kmsjb839j ... rranto.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/9ypq505w3 ... y_%231.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/sbh61h9tr ... y_%232.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/view/q6j0awhkh ... cation.pdf

[nebuer]

Well, to be fair to him, he can sign his name and (almost) write in complete sentences. So he's a cut above the usual suspects, as it were.

[Joinder]

PoE isn't safe cowering in his beat up camper in the UK from prosecution in the US. It is unlikely that any of the states would bother with the expense of extradition, but since the tougher sentences would come at the Federal level he could face trouble there, particularly if one of his suckers tries to pay off their taxes, and one of them ultimately will, with one of his funny checks. Using the US mails to commit fraud and aiding in tax fraud could get him in serious trouble. That being said I don't know what the likelihood of it actually happening is.

The answer to your last sentence is probably "none".
He remains as free as a bird, despite being labeled s con man, despite his venture being called fraud, despite being reported over and over again by Quatloosians to various authorities, no one is prosecuting him, and none of the members of his " fraudulent" bank have moved to take action against him.
Of course that may well change, but I would be interested to know what charges the CPS would consider worth pursuing in the UK.
Peace

[noblepa]

PoE isn't safe cowering in his beat up camper in the UK from prosecution in the US. It is unlikely that any of the states would bother with the expense of extradition, but since the tougher sentences would come at the Federal level he could face trouble there, particularly if one of his suckers tries to pay off their taxes, and one of them ultimately will, with one of his funny checks. Using the US mails to commit fraud and aiding in tax fraud could get him in serious trouble. That being said I don't know what the likelihood of it actually happening is.

The answer to your last sentence is probably "none".
He remains as free as a bird, despite being labeled s con man, despite his venture being called fraud, despite being reported over and over again by Quatloosians to various authorities, no one is prosecuting him, and none of the members of his " fraudulent" bank have moved to take action against him.
Of course that may well change, but I would be interested to know what charges the CPS would consider worth pursuing in the UK.
Peace

Yet...

You're right, of course, that no law enforcement agency, on either side of the pond, has yet taken any action against him. We don't know if they are building a case or not.

Again, its true that none of his customers (that we know of) has, as yet, filed a criminal complaint against him.

However, fraud cases can take years to develop. While the individual amounts he has received from his customers is small, the authorities have, in the past, prosecuted people alledgedly running small cons, when the number of victims becomes large enough.

While Peter hasn't defrauded any banks, councils, credit card companies or others, directly, it might still be possible for the big banks to file a complaint, arguing that his actions have cost them time and money. IANAL and I don't live in the UK, so I don't know if this is true. I think that a big bank could probably have a large civil case against him. Again, IANAL, so take this opinion for what it is, and with a rather large grain of salt.

[AndyPandy]

now this Judgment has been handed down, could the Parlees face a criminal prosecution for using a dud cheque ? What's the law in Canada in relation to attempting to pass this type of cheque?

Apologies, if this has been asked and answered previously.

[Hercule Parrot]

While Peter hasn't defrauded any banks, councils, credit card companies or others, directly, it might still be possible for the big banks to file a complaint, arguing that his actions have cost them time and money. IANAL and I don't live in the UK, so I don't know if this is true. I think that a big bank could probably have a large civil case against him. Again, IANAL, so take this opinion for what it is, and with a rather large grain of salt.

I don't think they'll bother, to be honest. They lost a tiny bit of time and money in the early months, before were-cheques were widely recognised as fraudulent 'magic bean money', but it isn't causing them any real trouble now.

The people who are losing big-style are the stupid, greedy and desperate individuals who send their real-money subscriptions to PoE, and get in return nothing but false hopes and encouragement to destroy themselves. They are not yet complaining with any weight of voice, and they will be ignored by law enforcement. People of that kind will waste their money one way or another, so it doesn't really matter which particular scam or addiction they fall for.

PoE knows what he is doing, this isn't his first idiot fleecing operation. He has a good chance of slipping away with a suitcase of cash in a while. The only thing which might derail him would be if a disgruntled were-customer dragged him into a court case, either as a party or by witness summons. So, fingers crossed....

[notorial dissent]

Could always report him to Inland Revenue, since I'm sure that PoE is such a law abiding individual that he is reporting all this income.