![Image](http://i.imgur.com/4BMKmNn.png)
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/kwHgs36.png)
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/CQB0QZF.png)
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/qCumvs9.png)
Moderator: ArthurWankspittle
IM BACK i lost my password SquatLoosers, but hey im glad you took the time out to watch me mate you must really have a sad life that you have to sit in a boozer car park watching whats going on are u lot really that sore QuatSnoozers or Loosers mate i know you are all butthurt because we didn't go to jail but feck me come on to sit and actually stalk someone is sad as fuck, i would of bought u a pint if i had known u was there you know like the old saying goes NO HARD FEELINGS and the THE BEST MAN WIN and all that well MEN AND WOMAN you gets me fam!Bones wrote:James Bradley, spent most of his time looking at his phone - either he is addicted to Candy Crush or it is a clear sign of someone that didn't want to be there.
James, I know you backed out of the debate rather sharpish which you originally asked to start, may be you would like to comment
While you are at it, just what is a PSHYCO ?
I looked it up in a dictionary and it said
"A small irritating idiot, who has lost his mind (and several businesses) and is losing hair"
"A sufferer of turrets, who is unable to stop themselves shouting PEADO"
"A loser of other peoples boats and houses"
WELL SAUSAGE HEAD BOTH MY ACCOUNTS ARE BANNED FUNNY THAT ISNT IT WOULD YOU LIKE SCREENSHITS TO PROVE ITBones wrote:Not that I would ever accuse someone of James Bradley's high morale standing of not being completely honest, but FB has nothing to do with this forum and there is nothing to prevent him from posting here - facebook ban or no facebook banmidjit-gems wrote:Jay brad appears to be saying he can't post on fb groups at the moment, apparently him and his followers believe the trolls have reported him because they didn't like the outcome of the case. Though I fail to see what he's posted that could have been reported and violating their community standards enough for him to be unable to post.![]()
![]()
There is also the little matter of the fact that he has two facebook accounts. So even if one was banned, it is more than likely that he could still post using the other
Account 1
https://www.facebook.com/budgetcars2gow ... ts&fref=ts
Which he used an hour ago![]()
Account 2
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id ... ts&fref=ts
So I am afraid James Bradley is unable to use that as an excuse for backing out of the debate that he himself requested
FatGambit wrote:Paint being sprayed in someone's face? I'm pretty sure that would be fairly easy to prove, just a photo of the victim would do, if I understand correctly, they wouldn't even have had to prove who held the can, so are you seriously telling me they bought a prosecution with no actual evidence?
As for the warrant, I wasn't there so was just guessing, I presume you were there wankspittle?
Jeffrey wrote:I'm pretty sure the "no evidence" line is something Crawford supporters made up.
There is obviously evidence of them trespassing and breaking into the home, they're on video doing it and admitting to it. The problem is the prosecutors went for aggravated trespass which requires proving "intimidating those persons or any of them so as to deter them or any of them from engaging in that activity", which clearly the rooftop 6 did not do. They snuck onto the roof from the back with a ladder, there was no intimidation.
And the other possible issue is that they would have to be obstructing the guards on the property from doing their jobs. Going on the roof of the house didn't really impede the guards.
But has this restored Tom to the house? Have they given him back the keys? Placed his name back on the deeds? What exactly did you accomplish by clambering onto the roof, getting arrested and going to court? Tom doesn't have the house back, he's under a CRO so he can't litigate for it to be returned or for his name to go back on the deeds. Have you managed to get Tom his house back, or for that matter been shown the warrant?JayBrad wrote:Watch the news you ITV News you all have profiles on my account go take a look at them on my wall "The prosecution offered no further evidence"
Infact why not just get the transcript have a quick whip round and get the transcript you are good at doing that aint you!
And one song Tom definitely wouldn't sing is "I fought the Law", the lyrics don't quite fit his viewpoint. I suppose he could try "Money for Nothing".Burnaby49 wrote:I hope Tom isn't in the Elwes Arms singing when I go for a pint next summer. I'm not up for Krawford karaoke.
My - limited - understanding is that "no further evidence" would be the phrase used to indicate that the prosecution had completed their case and were passing the matter over to the defence to continue. "No evidence" would indicate that they acknowledged that they had little chance of securing a conviction and that they were, effectively, withdrawing any evidence they had presented so far and were conceding the case.Jeffrey wrote:Jay, you do know there's a world of difference between "no further evidence" and "no evidence" right?
I don't know. I can certainly see that the Dead Kennedys version might fit with Mark Haining's views on the iniquities of Nottingham council.Footloose52 wrote:And one song Tom definitely wouldn't sing is "I fought the Law", the lyrics don't quite fit his viewpoint.
Hi jay. pay no heed to these losers and congratulations on your massive success!!!!1!!!!! in court recently. You certainly showed them for what they are didn't you .JayBrad wrote:IM BACK i lost my password SquatLoosers,
Welcome back James - Lost your password, boy that is very convenientJayBrad wrote: IM BACK i lost my password SquatLoosers, but hey im glad you took the time out to watch me mate you must really have a sad life that you have to sit in a boozer car park watching whats going on are u lot really that sore QuatSnoozers or Loosers mate i know you are all butthurt because we didn't go to jail but feck me come on to sit and actually stalk someone is sad as fuck, i would of bought u a pint if i had known u was there you know like the old saying goes NO HARD FEELINGS and the THE BEST MAN WIN and all that well MEN AND WOMAN you gets me fam!
Well sausage, funny how you was able to post using your banned account as shown in the pictures above. I suppose it is a bit like losing your password for this forumJayBrad wrote:WELL SAUSAGE HEAD BOTH MY ACCOUNTS ARE BANNED FUNNY THAT ISNT IT WOULD YOU LIKE SCREENSHITS TO PROVE ITBones wrote:Not that I would ever accuse someone of James Bradley's high morale standing of not being completely honest, but FB has nothing to do with this forum and there is nothing to prevent him from posting here - facebook ban or no facebook banmidjit-gems wrote:Jay brad appears to be saying he can't post on fb groups at the moment, apparently him and his followers believe the trolls have reported him because they didn't like the outcome of the case. Though I fail to see what he's posted that could have been reported and violating their community standards enough for him to be unable to post.![]()
![]()
There is also the little matter of the fact that he has two facebook accounts. So even if one was banned, it is more than likely that he could still post using the other
Account 1
https://www.facebook.com/budgetcars2gow ... ts&fref=ts
Which he used an hour ago![]()
Account 2
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id ... ts&fref=ts
So I am afraid James Bradley is unable to use that as an excuse for backing out of the debate that he himself requested
I fear you ask to muchdaveBeeston wrote: So come on Jay answer the questions that have been posed to you,or are you like the Crawfords offer lots of talk but no proof?
Bones wrote:Hello James Bradley, welcome to Quatloos. Sorry I could not reply to you earlier, as I have a "proper job", I could not reply until I got home.
You have said that you would welcome debate but time will tell.![]()
Shall we begin by debating the Godsmark Judgement.
Q. Do you agree with Tom Crawford, Craig Crawford, Amanda Crawford, Mark "Colon" Haining, Guy Taylor and co that Tom won !1!!!! that case as explained to the reporter of the nottingham post by both Tom and Guy ? With Colon going so far as to claim that she must be on crack to think Tom lost (even though the judgement said he lost)
If you do, please explain how you are able to reach such a conclusion after reading the judgement which was dumbed down and written in plain english
If you are serious about debating and you have not just created an account to try and look big and clever to your chum's here are a few other things we can debate - being some of the misinformation posted by the lovely Amanda Crawford
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=10688&start=1480#p202274
I look forward to debating these points and others with a fellow intellectual
IM BACK i lost my password SquatLoosers, but hey im glad you took the time out to watch me mate you must really have a sad life that you have to sit in a boozer car park watching whats going on are u lot really that sore QuatSnoozers or Loosers mate i know you are all butthurt because we didn't go to jail but feck me come on to sit and actually stalk someone is sad as fuck, i would of bought u a pint if i had known u was there you know like the old saying goes NO HARD FEELINGS and the THE BEST MAN WIN and all that well MEN AND WOMAN you gets me fam!
It was playing hide and seek with the unicorn warrant that Amanda said would be posted many many months agovampireLOREN wrote: Great Young Lochinvar is back!, Where was the password?.....pesky thing.
I can only guess that it has no horn because it had seen that video of Amanda dancingAmanda 'loves a onesie' Crawford wrote:31 July 2015
Great news just in -
Amanda Pike
52 mins ·
WE NOW HAVE THE UNICORN IN OUR POSSESSION. I REPEAT WE HAVE THE UNICORN......However its got no horn what so ever and is about as useful as a piece of bog roll! (Shocker) I can't currently go into it to much as we've got some things to sort out in relation to it and its being thoroughly analysed but as soon as we're able we'll put it up for you all to see with all its defects listed. The saddest thing of all is that it would be absolutely hilarious if it wasn't so serious! I can confirm now though that it is a county court warrant and NOT a high court writ. And yes...yes they did break into our home ripping down fencing walls and the door to get in. And violently removed my mother often giving her threats to help remove her........ With no notice!