The Crawfords Keep Looking For A Unicorn

[NYGman]

I see Colon is presenting secrets in plain sight, like how really his good stuff is crap, everyone else can see it, but the Mugs, who have paid good money to hear him ramble on about things that he clearly has no understanding of, but then he probably did say that he stands under no one, so it all good in the end.

[doublelong]

I take it O’Dreary and Ceylon have kissed and made up. They seem to be having a meeting a month these days going over the same old crap.

[littleFred]

Over on the Canadian subforum, there's a post with a link to a discussion between Ben Lowery and Doazic on the decline of FMOTL, with a roundup of the major players.

They quote the rumour on Quatloos about the bank coming after the house Sue inherited from her mother, without realising it was a rumour started on Quatloos with no evidence that Sue's mother ever owned a house, or that any of the Crawfords inherited anything.

[notorial dissent]

Needless to say started by one of the English members, and it was also discussed that there wasn't really any evidence to support that supposition.

[Hercule Parrot]

Tom talking bollocks again

One of a parade of losers. None of the speakers brings any authority, expertise or success.

[letissier14]

[notorial dissent]

Somehow, I doubt that is exactly what the LCJ said or all that he said.
To Wit:

The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property. That right is preserved sacred and incommunicable in all instances, where it has not been taken away or abridged by some public law for the good of the whole. The cases where this right of property is set aside by private law, are various. Distresses, executions, forfeitures, taxes etc are all of this description; wherein every man by common consent gives up that right, for the sake of justice and the general good. By the laws of England, every invasion of private property, be it ever so minute, is a trespass. No man can set his foot upon my ground without my licence, but he is liable to an action, though the damage be nothing; which is proved by every declaration in trespass, where the defendant is called upon to answer for bruising the grass and even treading upon the soil. If he admits the fact, he is bound to show by way of justification, that some positive law has empowered or excused him. The justification is submitted to the judges, who are to look into the books; and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law. If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment.

Our legal genius leaves out the part that says:

that some positive law has empowered or excused him

and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law

The juicy bits old Tom conveniently ignores.

[JimUk1]

Is that only if you have fulfilled your contractual obligation, and your the legal owner of said property tho Tommy?

[grixit]

Yeah, but:

wherein every man by common consent gives up that right

All they have to do is not consent.

[Colin123]

Who's going this time ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_Bf1JW ... e=youtu.be

[notorial dissent]

Yeah, but:

wherein every man by common consent gives up that right

All they have to do is not consent.

Except, I don't remember anything about consent being mentioned in the ruling. Ah Gee!!!

[He Who Knows]

David Robinson explains "Impactions to us all" at the Nottingham Wake Up jolly. What has faeces lodged in the intestine got to do with Article 61?

[ArthurWankspittle]

Somehow, I doubt that is exactly what the LCJ said or all that he said.
To Wit:

The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property. That right is preserved sacred and incommunicable in all instances, where it has not been taken away or abridged by some public law for the good of the whole. The cases where this right of property is set aside by private law, are various. Distresses, executions, forfeitures, taxes etc are all of this description; wherein every man by common consent gives up that right, for the sake of justice and the general good. By the laws of England, every invasion of private property, be it ever so minute, is a trespass. No man can set his foot upon my ground without my licence, but he is liable to an action, though the damage be nothing; which is proved by every declaration in trespass, where the defendant is called upon to answer for bruising the grass and even treading upon the soil. If he admits the fact, he is bound to show by way of justification, that some positive law has empowered or excused him. The justification is submitted to the judges, who are to look into the books; and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law. If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment.

Our legal genius leaves out the part that says:

that some positive law has empowered or excused him

and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law

The juicy bits old Tom conveniently ignores.

And no mention of the risks and rewards of offering your property as security for a mortgage.

[AndyPandy]

Practical Lawful Dissent is SOOO much fun, I like Albert !!

Read the comments highlighted

https://m.facebook.com/comment/replies/ ... 7&__tn__=R

Coral Melissa Penn
Absolutely criminal tactics against a good man, heart goes out to him and his family for the atrocious treatment dished out to him by this corrupt establishment. Apart from the fact that they are blatently using shadow courts they are labelling ordinary men & women freeman types as evidenced by the court memorandum used against Guy Taylor in his last court case when he was kidnapped and whipped of to Wales from Herefordshire to Kangeroo Court, also both the Crawford & Parker familys have found that the process of their unlawful evictions have been totally through these same shadow courts including Tom Crawfords where it has been proved that these courts obviously working ouside the jurisdiction are not even going by their own rules, interestingly because of the fight for justice by these families the Police have applied the label (special conditions) in other words Domestic terrorists and Ollie may have very well be classed the same.
Like4Hide · 4 hours ago

Albert Burgess
what total tosh Tom Crawford had a short fall on his endowment mortage he should have paid his mortage like everyone else, Taylor is a serial criminal who knows nothing about the law, Hayes deserved to be arrested and jailed. You cannot cock a snook at the law and expect to get away with it for ever. You people really should learn the law.
LikeHide · 4 hours ago

Albert Burgess
I have met Taylor and did not like him I was a founder member of the BCG with Hayes whose knowledge of the law would not fill a postage stamp
LikeHide · 4 hours ago

Chris Cartwright
i get that, there seems to be alot of misconception of not payng and withholding and who to etc, whats lawful whats legal , whos a person / legal fiction etc, the courts and government are not giving a damn about that now , it did work, but as we are seeing it isnt now, I respect the comment of learning the Law as it is vital to survival, and upon research i have discovered that council tax is seperate from parliament/ government and they have even stopped calling it a local government, However it is presumed that when the oath is taken that anyone who takes that oath should not agree to any demand from anyone who has not taken that oath to the barons!? i am just stating this is reply to everything on here im not leaving backing down or disrespecting anyone or any views on the matter.
Like1Hide · 3 hours ago

Chris Cartwright
and if you use the process the correct way eith the correct Legal terms in their LAW their silence or lack of evidence or proof = consent and its is written that they agree to the information you have provided in the notices,
LikeHide · 3 hours ago

Chris Cartwright
now in order for the above to work you need to research the law of contract.
LikeHide · 3 hours ago

Amanda Pike
What the bloody hell are you talking about he most certainly DID pay his mortgage obligation IN FULL maybe you need to stop listening to trolls (unless you are one) Tom crawford most certainly DID pay I've seen the paperwork to prove so myself. Get your facts right. People like you are the problem. Why are you even in this group if you believe all your fed by those who only wish you harm. Good day!
Like2Hide · 3 hours ago

Coral Melissa Penn
Albert Burgess You are wrong and quite obviously have not been keeping up with recent events regarding the Crawford case. The Endowment mortgage disappeared same as the Parker family i find it interesting and quite irresponsible that you would claim such things on a public forum without obviously 1st hand knowledge according to this statement unless you feel you are protected in some way by doing so . i also find it dubious when i witness fb members involved with prolofic trolling groups airing their opinions ? Gives one about as much credibility as prolific troll Badda ?
Like3Hide · 3 hours ago

Sally Jane Shaw
stating something as fact without any first hand knowlege of a case is highly stupid in my opinion . albert it would be wise to learn what the facts are and dont rely on a mans opinion as factual . ive heard the facts whilst sitting in the galleries as i took the time to do that .you clearly havent so sure of yourself are you .
Like1Hide · 2 hours ago

Coral Melissa Penn
Albert Burgess Who cares about your opinion regards Guy Taylor does not give anyone the right to unlawful arrest and drag him of to wales to a Kangeroo Court. sorry a private administration hearing
Edited · LikeHide · 2 hours ago

Albert Burgess
Coral Melissa Penn there is no such animal as a kangeroo court in the UK
LikeHide · 2 hours ago

Sally Jane Shaw
private hearing centers .....
LikeHide · 2 hours ago

Amanda Pike
Trolls like him always are sadly which he is being a part of the groups he is. A grown man part taking in such things. How sad. I thought he was ex police, isn't he? So the truth won't matter to him. Your wasting your breath but no fear his libelous comments have been screen shot and filed with allllll the other trolls stuff. Redicolous behaviour . He knows exactly what you mean ladies he's just here to troll or he would answer you not reply like a child and pretend he doesn't understand or simply to "correct" you. His lack of ability to answer simple questions speaks the most. Leave him to it I pity such sad and nasty people they can't have much in their lives to attack people/cases they know nothing about clearly so pitiful :-/
Edited · LikeHide · 2 hours ago

Coral Melissa Penn
Albert In actual fact theres only one true Court the Common Law Court all the rest are administration hearings and in the words of Lord Denning these Courts have no authority as they are unlawful.
Like1Hide · 2 hours ago

Sally Jane Shaw
clearly does not have any first hand facts of the case . id move back onto the subject that the thread was created for .
Like2Hide · 2 hours ago

Sally Jane Shaw
sorry ollie that the thread went haywire . i dont know much about your subject but its very interesting that asking questions gets such attention .
Like3Hide · 2 hours ago

Coral Melissa Penn
Sally i was stating facts ?
Like1Hide · 2 hours ago

[letissier14]

Amanda and her fellow Crawford supporters are beyond stupid. No matter how many court cases Tom loses or how much evidence is provided proving that they surrended the endowment and failed to pay back the original capital borrowed, they will just continue to shout foul play. They must have one hell of a long list of people they are going to sue for Libel.

[longdog]

They must have one hell of a long list of people they are going to sue for Libel.

That would be great fun... Even if you lost which of course you wouldn't. All you'd have to do is insist you'd paid the damages and then sue them if argue with you.

[AndyPandy]

Why didn't they present this to the Court then, you would have thought instead of just showing it to your daughter it was the obvious thing to do when you have a possession order against you !

Amanda Pike
What the bloody hell are you talking about he most certainly DID pay his mortgage obligation IN FULL maybe you need to stop listening to trolls (unless you are one) Tom crawford most certainly DID pay I've seen the paperwork to prove so myself. Get your facts right. People like you are the problem. Why are you even in this group if you believe all your fed by those who only wish you harm. Good day!
Like2Hide · 3 hours ago

[ArthurWankspittle]

Another unicorn - the Crawford mortgage redemption statement.

[Hercule Parrot]

Coral Melissa Penn
Albert In actual fact theres only one true Court the Common Law Court all the rest are administration hearings and in the words of Lord Denning these Courts have no authority as they are unlawful.

Odd that this seismic judgement isn't more widely discussed, really...

[TheNewSaint]

I wonder what "paperwork" Amanda thinks she saw that prove Tom paid the mortgage. And, why they spent so much court time on warrants and wet ink seals and other rubbish, when they had documentation that would have easily settled the matter if true.