Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

[Hercule Parrot]

Discharge – this is when the court decides that given the character of the offender and the nature of the crime, punishment would not be appropriate. There are two types of discharge:

- Absolute discharge - no further action is taken, since either the offence was very minor, or the court considers that the experience has been enough of a deterrent. The offender will receive a criminal record.

- Conditional discharge - the offender is released and the offence registered on their criminal record. No further action is taken unless they commit a further offence within a time decided by the court (no more than three years).

https://www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesse ... ncing.html

IMHO, TC would be suitable for neither. Firstly by the concerted nature of his troublemaking, and secondly because he would refuse to accept a discharge. I think a moderate fine or some community service will be the outcome (if he isn't acquitted).

[mufc1959]

However it turns out, there'll be a spin on it:

- acquittal means the court recognised that Tom still owns the house;

- conditional discharge means the magistrate had no option but to convict because of the influence of TPTB, but s/he secretly recognises Tom still owns the house;

- conviction + sentence means that, although everyone in the courtroom knows Tom still owns the house, TPTB cannot allow him to be seen to win, otherwise the whole system will break down and there'll be anarchy.

[aesmith]

What are his references to "Privet" meetings on his Youtube thing? He must be so sure he'll get the house back that he's recruiting help to do some gardening.

[afateworsethandeath]

I suspect for TC this is more about keeping himself in the limelight than winning some criminal damage acquittal or even getting the bungalow back. Even he must now realise that the bungalow belongs to an innocent third party

[exiledscouser]

What are his references to "Privet" meetings on his Youtube thing?

He's found a 'hedge' fund to help him out.

[getoutofdebtfools]

And who's paying for all these morons?

I presume Crawford is spending his mother-in-laws loot but what about Guy Taylor and all the other freetard losers? J Brad? Haining? Michael Waugh/Ough (same bloke?). Chrisy Morris seems to be filming his toothless brainless drivel every 5 minutes on Youtube whilst travelling miles to spout crap at evictions whilst getting himself nicked

My bet is that most are quite happy to take funds from the state.

[Firthy2002]

And who's paying for all these morons?

I presume Crawford is spending his mother-in-laws loot but what about Guy Taylor and all the other freetard losers? J Brad? Haining? Michael Waugh/Ough (same bloke?). Chrisy Morris seems to be filming his toothless brainless drivel every 5 minutes on Youtube whilst travelling miles to spout crap at evictions whilst getting himself nicked

My bet is that most are quite happy to take funds from the state.

I think you answered your own question. For most of them it is likely us the taxpayer indirectly since they seem to be able to travel around to harass bailiffs/interrupt meetings/make videos spouting rubbish at a moment's notice. I work full time and I wouldn't be able to manage being half as prolific as most of them.

[Pox]

And who's paying for all these morons?

I presume Crawford is spending his mother-in-laws loot but what about Guy Taylor and all the other freetard losers? J Brad? Haining? Michael Waugh/Ough (same bloke?). Chrisy Morris seems to be filming his toothless brainless drivel every 5 minutes on Youtube whilst travelling miles to spout crap at evictions whilst getting himself nicked

My bet is that most are quite happy to take funds from the state.

I think you answered your own question. For most of them it is likely us the taxpayer indirectly since they seem to be able to travel around to harass bailiffs/interrupt meetings/make videos spouting rubbish at a moment's notice. I work full time and I wouldn't be able to manage being half as prolific as most of them.

Some, like TC are retired, others appear to be of working age, so I agree , who or what puts the bread on the table?

As some appear to be able to attend 'events' with, in many cases, little notice either they have a very forgiving employer, are self employed, have a private income or are living on benefits?

Who knows?

But I would love to know, if anybody has the info?

[getoutofdebtfools]

I did wonder if someone like Guy Taylor charges for his laughable forensic document examination? After all, he was taught by the best....

[doublelong]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnk1yiqSplg
So since being introduced to this free man crap I have been entertained no end over the last 18 months. I do find the talks by this crowd the most comical though and usually listen to them when I am working but this latest talk by Tom I did not find as comical and for different reasons.
For one he looks ill or medicated or both. The subject matter of his talk is very worrying with references to the Bible and Babylonian history mixed up with the usual crap, loose the name and maritime law. I do feel he is heading down a very dark path with signs of mental illness. As such I did not find his latest talk as amusing as I normally do but more anger towards the idiots who encourage him but more so to his family who are most likely the only ones who can help him. So if you do read this (and you do) Craig, Amanda and Nicole, it is obvious your farther needs help.

[Pox]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnk1yiqSplg

For one he looks ill or medicated or both. The subject matter of his talk is very worrying with references to the Bible and Babylonian history mixed up with the usual crap, loose the name and maritime law. I do feel he is heading down a very dark path with signs of mental illness. es if you do read this (and you do) Craig, Amanda and Nicole, it is obvious your farther needs help.

He looks OK to me so I'm not seeing what you are seeing.
Looks a bit tired perhaps but maybe he joined Guy in the bar the night before?
He did say that they started the meeting about an hour late - the morning after the night before perhaps?

[letissier14]

He is a fully blown freeman - deluded old fool

[AndyPandy]

I managed to about 2 minutes 30 - the point where he said we're all dead people making contracts with other dead people as well as marrying them, switched off then.

He looked OK to me, just a silly old sod in a hat talking drivel!

[letissier14]

I managed to about 2 minutes 30 - the point where he said we're all dead people making contracts with other dead people as well as marrying them, switched off then.

He looked OK to me, just a silly old sod in a hat talking drivel!

You missed the bit where he talks about Maritime law ... Jesus said to Paul get out the boat and walk (get out of maritime law because that is the dead mans law)

[letissier14]

According to TC he says and I quote

if you are in court or church and the judge/vicar asks you to rise, get out of there fast, because he is raising the dead

[Llwellyn]

Yeh, after listening to this.. the same old deluded, misconstrued, unintelligent 'points' and 'facts'.. strawman, legal name fiction.. blah.. blah.. (I really don't understand law, simple english, or anything) blah.. (It is all a conspiracy I tell you) blah.. blah..

I am still amazed that the 'copyright' on a birth certificate is even listened to.. Simple disproof of it is .. take the most common last name.. (in the UK wales/england) ...

http://surnames.behindthename.com/top/l ... wales/1991
http://surnames.behindthename.com/name/smith

Smith (Variants are not included in the near 1% of population that has that last name)... could there be.. maybe 2 people in all that population, with the name John Smith.. (or James Smith) .. I would wager that there IS indeed.
Immediate disproof of the Copyright, legal name fraud.

and just as a super bonus, because I wanted to... there is only 587 listed on linkedin
https://ca.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Tom/Crawford

Llwellyn
Guardian and Keeper of the Tor

[littleFred]

I confess I laughed at Tom's stupidity. At 5m45s:

You can also, if you really want to take a hold of that name, you can register your name as a corporation. You can also trademark it as well, so every time they use your name, they're committing another offence. [...] You can trademark, it costs £170.

But that is clearly garbage. Coca-Cola is a trademarked name, rigorously enforced, but that doesn't prevent anyone from mentioning the name. A supplier to the Coca-Cola company will address his bills to that company, without fearing he will be sued for infringing the trademark.

Is Tom really that stupid or deluded? Has he himself wasted £170 on a pointless trademark?

[Llwellyn]

Ah yes, the using of a name/trademark is committing and offense etc etc.. In law, it IS committing an offense IF the use of said name/trademark helps someone else gain profit (without the permission). This is a very complicated and HARD to prove thing.. you need to prove loss of income, loss of profit and many other things.. Which is why in general, all companies usually do is get a Cease/Desist order, which is much much more easily obtained.

Llwellyn
Guardian and Keeper of the Tor

[littleFred]

Of course, if I tried selling a drink that I called Coca-Cola I would be jumped on from a great height. But Tom seems to think that trademarking his name prevents anyone from writing his name on a bill, or whatever.

Like Ceylon, Tom has nothing useful to say, so just spouts any old rubbish.

[Gregg]

Have you forgotten Betty -


~~~snip~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~snip~~~

No update on Betty though, as far as I know.

I thought Betty had entered witness protection and relocated to see out her days in Key West. That or a fox.

[/quote]

Betty indeed is waiting tables and I've heard turning tricks for Pirate Parrots in Key West, my Quatloos sidekick and I have these first hand pictures