TheNewSaint wrote:I wonder why Rekha burns through so many gurus.
As each fails her she doubles down and moves on to another. There’s no shortage of them unfortunately.
Had she just done everything legally and “by the book” from the start she wouldn’t be in this mess. What some people don’t seem to realise is that the state and legal system have had centuries of experience of people trying to play fast and loose and making imaginary stuff up. If there was a magic form of words or bit of legal magic that absolved people of everyday debts leaving their creditors out of pocket it would have been blocked a very long time ago. The economy couldn’t function if it were possible.
To the extent that there is a legal process that removes unpaid debts it’s to be found in the bankruptcy procedures. Which Ms Patel is quite possibly going to end up very familiar with indeed if she keeps this up.
Last edited by The Seventh String on Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
TheNewSaint wrote:I wonder why Rekha burns through so many gurus. First Chrisy, then Ken Thompson, now Liz Nolson. Chrisy being left on the sidelines is especially surprising, since he and Rekha were going to each other's court cases, and seemed to have some genuine bonhomie.
Possibly her stirling character, her warm and endearing personality, her charming and winning ways, her dulcet soothing voice, oh bother, it's probably that she is barmier than they are and doesn't /won't listen to anyone??????
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Yup, Wrecka's before the beak at Stockport Magistrates on Tuesday 28th November, 9am. That's 2 days before her mate Chrisy Morris who's at Manchester Crown Court on Thursday 30th for the same offence, Obstructing a Court Enforcment Officer (appeal). Should be an entertaining week.
The wise man does at once what the fool does finally (Niccolo Machiavelli)...and what the FMOTL never does (He Who Knows)
Well, the lawyers actually since they are the ones suing Wrekha, for costs and fees they earned. The neighbor as far as I can tell is well out of it, other than the ongoing harassment, after the insurance company took care of things, and then it was their fight.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
notorial dissent wrote:Well, the lawyers actually since they are the ones suing Wrekha, for costs and fees they earned. The neighbor as far as I can tell is well out of it, other than the ongoing harassment, after the insurance company took care of things, and then it was their fight.
Well, yeah, but I'm assuming the law firm would keep the neighbor apprised of the situation. If only for comic relief. If kindness really were a currency, Rekha would still have a gigantic deficit.
As far as I understand it, the neighbour's legal expenses were covered by insurance, so I think it's the insurer's solicitors who are pursuing the costs, albeit that Wrecka has conflated this in her own mind and is attributing it all to the neighbour.
Yes, my understanding also that it is now the insurance co and solicitors trying to get their expenses back, and they still keep mounting with her every temper tantrum and bit of acting out. A very expensive snit she's thrown.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Well, I hope she's moved her chattels from Hanover Cottage already, because one of the possible outcomes tomorrow is a stay at Her Majesty's Pleasure.
Our future is like that of the passengers on a small pleasure boat sailing quietly above the Niagara Falls, not knowing that the engines are about to fail. James Lovelock.
Wakeman52 wrote:Well, I hope she's moved her chattels from Hanover Cottage already, because one of the possible outcomes tomorrow is a stay at Her Majesty's Pleasure.
No chance in hell that this will happen IMO, but it should. From what zilch knowledge I have of the English justice system she has a long way to go yet until she gets a custodial sentence - which is why she continues to play the system/waste the courts time (to the detriment of those that have real issues requiring court time).
Selfish and self centered is what she is.
Wakeman52 wrote:Well, I hope she's moved her chattels from Hanover Cottage already, because one of the possible outcomes tomorrow is a stay at Her Majesty's Pleasure.
No chance in hell that this will happen IMO, but it should. From what zilch knowledge I have of the English justice system she has a long way to go yet until she gets a custodial sentence - which is why she continues to play the system/waste the courts time (to the detriment of those that have real issues requiring court time).
Selfish and self centered is what she is.
She has implied that she won't be appearing tomorrow, so there is a small chance of being held on remand till her case is relisted. but if she does not show up most likely outcome is being found guilty in her absence a £500 fine plus costs.
Pox wrote:
From what zilch knowledge I have of the English justice system she has a long way to go yet until she gets a custodial sentence - which is why she continues to play the system/waste the courts time (to the detriment of those that have real issues requiring court time).
I would imagine the issue is real enough from the insurance company’s point of view. She owes them quite a lot of money and has done nothing likely to persuade them to take pity on her.
As for sentencing, if there’s a guilty verdict that’s down to what the court make of her when considering the relevant sentencing guidelines.
Pox wrote:
Selfish and self centered is what she is.
Indeed. Also foolhardy, unwise and very far out of her depth.
Pox wrote:
From what zilch knowledge I have of the English justice system she has a long way to go yet until she gets a custodial sentence - which is why she continues to play the system/waste the courts time (to the detriment of those that have real issues requiring court time).
I would imagine the issue is real enough from the insurance company’s point of view. She owes them quite a lot of money and has done nothing likely to persuade them to take pity on her.
As for sentencing, if there’s a guilty verdict that’s down to what the court make of her when considering the relevant sentencing guidelines.
Pox wrote:
Selfish and self centered is what she is.
Indeed. Also foolhardy, unwise and very far out of her depth.
It's a safe bet that if there is anything stupid and self destructive to have done, then she will most likely have done it. That seems to be her pattern in life. Pox's comment is right on point.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
I would add "malicious", "manipulative" and "scheming" to that list. She's been going around certain shops in Glossop (Health food shop, charity shops, etc) spreading the word about the 'nasty neighbour' the 'corrupt' police, judge, barrister, court enforcement officers, in fact the whole giant playground of the world is just nasty, evil & racist and they're all ganging up on her.
The wise man does at once what the fool does finally (Niccolo Machiavelli)...and what the FMOTL never does (He Who Knows)
He Who Knows wrote:I would add "malicious", "manipulative" and "scheming" to that list. She's been going around certain shops in Glossop (Health food shop, charity shops, etc) spreading the word about the 'nasty neighbour' the 'corrupt' police, judge, barrister, court enforcement officers, in fact the whole giant playground of the world is just nasty, evil & racist and they're all ganging up on her.
Everyone always seems to leave out "stupid", and I think that is an integral and dominating component of her behavior.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
