The Crawfords Keep Looking For A Unicorn

[The Observer]

New thread for discussion of what Tom and his relatives are still doing to make fools of themselves.

[arayder]

Tom's not evil. He's stupid, obnoxious, dishonest, greedy, gullible, a bully, and a professional victim, sure. But he's just parroting what others have taught him. He couldn't have come up with any of that drivel on his own. He was agreeing with Judge Godsmark until Ebert coached him otherwise. He's a tool of people like Ebert and Ceylon, who want to promote their theories at no risk to themselves. Tom's not a kingpin; he's the low-ranking operative who gets caught committing the actual deed, and pays the actual punishment while everyone who put him into that situation skates.

I agree with you on Ceylon but Ebert has paid a very high price over the years and that has to make you wonder how he is so effective at getting people to follow his advice without question.
I take it this is the end now for Tom? And as long as he does not break the law (criminal) his days in court are no more?

There's talk about whether or not debunkers should sit by and watch as Menard, Clifford, Ceylon, Peter of England and the rest spin into irrelevance.

I really don't know how big a role these phony gurus still play in the self-reinforcing loop of freeman woo chatter.

But it seems to me that a few years ago freemanary was about trying to beat speeding tickets and public urination charges. The disturbing trend, it seems to me, is that the woo pitchers are now giving out bad advice about mortgage and credit card debt problems.

It's one thing to give out bogus advice that ends up jacking up the cost of a ticket, or putting the dupe in jail for the night on a contempt charge. . .and quite another to talk a poor fool into losing his home or running up a massive credit card debt.

[The Observer]

Regardless of what type of idiocy sovruns/FOTLers try to talk other people into, its wrong. But the problem is a two-part issue: as long as there are people out there who believe that they can get something for nothing, that they should not have to take responsibility for their actions, and that life should be fair to them, they are going to listen to the likes of Menard, Clifford, Belanger, and all of the other gurus.

[daveBeeston]

Tom reminds me of Elmur Fudd as both are chasing something they will never get....


It saddens me that someone would put so much effort into the continual lying and deceiving others in an attempt to further their own cause at others expense, anyone that follows Tom's advice and looses their home/property should sue him and although they wouldn't get any money as Tom appears to be broke it would serve as a warning to these false advice peddlers.

[TheNewSaint]

Tom reminds me of Elmur Fudd as both are chasing something they will never get....

You misspelled "fwaudulent wawwants."

Since we're doing this, let's run Amanda's famous post through the Elmer Fudd Dialectizer:

WE NOW HAVE DE UNICOWN IN OUW POSSESSION, uh-hah-hah-hah. I WEPEAT WE HAVE DE UNICOWN, uh-hah-hah-hah. .....Howevew its got no hown what so evew and is about as usefuw as a piece of bog woww! (Shockew) I can't cuwwentwy go into it to much as we've got some things to sowt out in wewation to it and its being thowoughwy anawysed but as soon as we'we abwe we'ww put it up fow you aww to see wif aww its defects wisted. De saddest thing of aww is that it wouwd be absowutewy hiwawious if it wasn't so sewious! I can confiwm now though that it is a county couwt wawwant and NOT a high couwt wwit. And yes. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! ..yes they did bweak into ouw home wipping down fencing wawws and the doow to get in, uh-hah-hah-hah. And viowentwy wemoved my mothew often giving hew thweats to hewp wemove hew........ Wif no notice!

[Hercule Parrot]

Regardless of what type of idiocy sovruns/FOTLers try to talk other people into, its wrong. But the problem is a two-part issue: as long as there are people out there who believe that they can get something for nothing, that they should not have to take responsibility for their actions, and that life should be fair to them, they are going to listen to the likes of Menard, Clifford, Belanger, and all of the other gurus.

Yes, I agree. As fast as the fake guru leaders fall, others step forward. And the greedy, stupid and/or desperate followers will just hop on the new bus. Just tell them that they don't have to pay their taxes or they're exempt from speeding fines, and they'll carry you shoulder-high.

[letissier14]

Over on EFOTB they are trying to get the sympathy vote

Coral Melissa Penn shared a link.
8 hrs

Notice

Help Combat Cyber Harassment & Internet Defamation!

Its a shame but a hard fact that Cyber harrasment & Internet defamation exists. Prior and since the out right unlawful eviction of the Crawford family from 3 Fearn Chase, Carlton, Nottingham, NG4 1DN on the 2nd July 2015 Tom Crawford & Family, friends and associates have become targets of a number of Cyber harraser groups & individuals some using Pseudonym names working on social media hate group platforms including Face Book.

Considering the length of time now lapsed and with this subject in mind Tom Crawford & family are keen to raise awareness of their case and help educate others through their experience of Online Cyber harrasment in order that we may come together and stop this criminal activity from carrying on and with Facebook community standards in mind. Sadly it has also become apparent through the un-warranted predatorial cyber harrasment of the family that other Cyber victims and groups have come to light and are being attacked in this way. Whilst an regrettable topic , Tom Crawford & family will be moving forward with this in mind, hopefully the time has come for all of us to begin creating Good out of a Bad situation

https://www.ipredator.co/cyber-harassment/.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing

[Chaos]

so the cfrauds are finally going to drop the charade and the defaming of bailiffs and harassing the court system?

[notorial dissent]

The problem I think is that the Crawfraud dictionary was bought at a remainder sale and was defective. The dictionary seems to define lawful foreclosure and eviction as unlawful eviction, and cyber stalking and harassment as someone telling the truth about the Crawfraud claims and outright lies and showing the actual documents they claim don't exist.

[exiledscouser]

The saintly Ms Penn going all mainstream with pleas about fighting cyber stalking. All very laudable and proper if a bit pompous & self-righteous.

But wait - what's this, just three posts earlier? The self same princess of piety posting a link to the wholly unpleasant internet practice of "Doxing" - purely for "information purposes only" you understand, not encouraging this sort of thing at all, oh no, not me.

As ever, a bunch of hypocrites the lot of them.

[aesmith]

... Sadly it has also become apparent through the un-warranted predatorial cyber harrasment of the family ...

Another missing warrant?

[AndyPandy]

Is this the evidence they're using to say there isn't a valid warrant - what a set of absolute numpties - why would a Police Officer have these documents - they didn't carry out the repossession and do they honestly think a Police Officer can just walk into a Court and obtain any document ???

https://scontent.fman2-2.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=59551F7B

Seriously, they're even stupider then I thought and I always thought they were pretty stupid !!

[SteveUK]

Deluded. And the longer this drags on for the more ludicrous their counter arguments become.

[TheNewSaint]

Tom Crawford & Family, friends and associates have become targets of a number of Cyber harraser groups & individuals some using Pseudonym names working on social media hate group platforms including Face Book.

Considering the length of time now lapsed and with this subject in mind Tom Crawford & family are keen to raise awareness of their case

Yeah, well, that happens. Whenever anyone tries to "raise awareness of their case", whatever that my be, some people are going to disagree with that case. You cannot then go screaming "cyber harassment" about every person who expresses that disagreement. If you don't want negative feedback, then kindly keep your stupid cause off of Facebook, YouTube and the like. What a bunch of snowflakes.

[notorial dissent]

It might also have something to do with jsut how generally pleasant the Crawfrauds are to one and all, that might just have something to do with the reaction they are getting back..

[daveBeeston]

While i have no doubt that some people will be going after the Crawford's via social media(those who latch onto anything to actually troll or abuse people)you cannot cry foul if you yourself and your friends engage in the same antics.

How many people have the Crawford's threaten with releasing their address, contact details or asking people to supply them so they can take action all why throwing insults at those that disagree with them or dare to expose their lies?

If you want people to leave you alone then stop trying to drum up publicity and support for your lies, if you don't people will continue to expose those lies and will comment on your actions as they have every right to do.

[Hercule Parrot]

Is this the evidence they're using to say there isn't a valid warrant - what a set of absolute numpties - why would a Police Officer have these documents - they didn't carry out the repossession and do they honestly think a Police Officer can just walk into a Court and obtain any document ???

https://scontent.fman2-2.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=59551F7B

If a police officer had lawful need to obtain these documents, they could of course do so. TC's error was to imagine that he could force an absurdly detailed burden of proof upon the Crown Prosecutor.

[littleFred]

TC's error is also in thinking that after losing a court case, he can appeal on the basis that "the other side didn't provide enough evidence to win".

Except that they did. The fact that Tom doesn't own that house has been established in court. If Tom actually had any new evidence of ownership that he couldn't have produced earlier, that might be the basis of appeal. If the judge erred on a point of law, likewise. But merely asserting that "the other side can't provide some documents so shouldn't have won" is hopeless.

[TheNewSaint]

All the Crawfords' conspiracy-mongering about the CPS case misses another important point: they fabricated the entire case. Tom vandalized the property, creating a criminal case, on the misguided basis that this would let him re-argue ownership. The case had nothing to do with taking possession of the home; that was already completed. So they're arguing there's a paperwork conspiracy in a case that didn't need to exist at all. I again point out that the judge said:

Let's not make the mistake of thinking we are dealing with the Bradford and Bingley. No-one else is in the court but you.

Of course, their graphic glosses over all these points. As stupid as this family is, they are pretty skilled at presenting their story in a way the FMOTL world will get behind.

[notorial dissent]

TC's error is also in thinking that after losing a court case, he can appeal on the basis that "the other side didn't provide enough evidence to win".

Except that they did. The fact that Tom doesn't own that house has been established in court. If Tom actually had any new evidence of ownership that he couldn't have produced earlier, that might be the basis of appeal. If the judge erred on a point of law, likewise. But merely asserting that "the other side can't provide some documents so shouldn't have won" is hopeless.

Which is the brainless and useless approach they have been taking all along.