Practical Lawful Dissent FMOTL antics, continued...

[aesmith]

Decoding the ramblings I suspect he's been charged with combination we see so regularly, speeding and failure to provide driver details, the so-called S.172. Yesterday was his chance to save his licence by offering to plead guilty to speeding if they drop the failure to provide. Trial date may still not be too late, but I suspect he'll try their A61 nonsense instead. I've noticed in these cases the Goofies tend to focus on defending/disputing the speeding allegation, not realising that it's completely irrelevant to the S.172 charge. My guess he'll go down for S.172, get 6 points and a totting ban. Of course it's possible that in his ignorance he may admit being the driver, and maybe cop for the speeding as well. Unless he can be more creative and turn it into prison (in addition to the ban of course).

[exiledscouser]

I agree that going into court spouting failed freeman bollocks (which this appears to have retreated into, not much magnum Carter any more) is hardly likely to endear yourself to the court.

BRD says he needs his licence for work so is off to court so salvage the situation. Under duress of course, missing the point that no one, Footle or otherwise volunteers to go for the sheer pleasure of being fined/banned/sent down.

He says he already has six points on his licence so there may be more than just one speeding matter to put it at risk - unless he was doing significantly more than the limit. For non Brits reading if you hit the magic 12 points then the court can ‘ban’ you from driving. It’s not automatic though and they have wide discretion.

As others have said, BRD should bite the bullet, eat humble pie and he’ll have a much better chance rather than bringing along half a dozen gob shite rabble mates you’ve met on tinter-net, all chipping in from the back with helpful observations as to the parentage of the bench.

If he thought about it a good brief could argue that any ban would be unduly harsh etc. and probably save the day.

So it’s off to a trial and the defence will be all the tried and tested freeman arguments used to such success in the past with a bit of plate cloning thrown in for good measure.

One poster can’t believe they have trials in the Mags court at all and that to do so in this case is clear evidence of treason blah blah. Others legal giants think there should be a jury present.

I’m no lawyer myself but I’m willing to bet a million Re, 12 Quatloos and all the uneaten sickly Ferrero Rochers left from Crimbo that it won’t be before a lay bench but a District Judge - the clerk will have tipped off listings that an unruly mob is expected on the day. Again for non Brits, a DJ is a legally trained magistrate holding a paid office and, not to put too fine a point on it, they take no shit. From anyone.

[SteveUK]

Crabbies take on the whole sad affair.

Code: Select all

Derby update. Bellion Re David agreed under duress to appear at Derby magistrates court to defend an alleged speeding offence from March 2017, there were 9 witnesses in the public gallery to witness the unlawful hearing. David has never seen any evidence from the prosecution about the alleged offence. We were called into cage about 11am. David was not there to make a plea, the clerk suggested the magistrates put forward a plea of not guilty on Davids behalf, he asked if they had read his notice of lawful objection concerning Article 61 Magna Carta 1215 and that he did not want them to enter a plea. They ignored his question and obviously did not know anything about the notice and they tried to dismiss the question. Apparently the prosecutor did have some photographic evidence of the alleged offence and was prepared to give David a copy to read. 

The case was stood down for what was supposed to be 15 minutes to give David a chance to look at the evidence, we then all left the cage and waited for them to produce the evidence. As usual in magistrates courts the clerk was running the show and the magistrates were clueless as to what was going on. When the so called evidence was produced we could see why it was not revealed before, there were some black and white photos which looked like a black sky at night with a few white objects scattered about. 

While we were waiting to go back in the cage security were informed and were watching our every move, just over an hour later we were called back in. It was pretty obvious they had decided what they were going to do about the case. We were all checked for any recording equipment before they carried on, and a large security officer was standing by. The lawful objection notice question was asked again and also the jurisdiction question was asked, they weren’t interested and had obviously made their minds up to send the case to trial. 

The date was set for a trial for 5th February in the same court, different cage number 6. I can’t say that I have ever heard of a trial being held in a magistrates court, so it should be an interesting day on the 5th February. Before we left the cage David asked for the magistrates and clerks names, they refused and said he could find out by writing to the court. They were told by one of Davids witnesses that it was their duty to reveal their names, security appeared and we peacefully left the court.

To be continued on 5th February, it would be great if we could get a lot more rebels to appear at the next hearing, please make a note in your diary.

[notorial dissent]

So what, the numpty didn't respond when he was called and the clerk then suggested a not guilty plea in absentia, and probably set a trial date and enter a no show warrant, and then he finally said something and wanted to go in to his spiel and the court wouldn't let him? Such geniuses.

[longdog]

BRD says he needs his licence for work so is off to court so salvage the situation. Under duress of course, missing the point that no one, Footle or otherwise volunteers to go for the sheer pleasure of being fined/banned/sent down.

He says he already has six points on his licence so there may be more than just one speeding matter to put it at risk - unless he was doing significantly more than the limit. For non Brits reading if you hit the magic 12 points then the court can ‘ban’ you from driving. It’s not automatic though and they have wide discretion.

Many companies I've worked for have a six point limit on driving company vehicles... Allegedly 'for insurance reasons'. If you only ever use company vehicles for nipping to Greggs for the morning sausage roll bulk purchase this isn't a problem as you can use your own vehicle or just send somebody else. If driving is an essential part of your duties you're left looking for another job and actually getting a driving job with more than 6 points is as near impossible as makes no difference.

[longdog]

Robert White

...can’t say that I have ever heard of a trial being held in a magistrates court, so it should be an interesting day on the 5th February.

What?

[Hercule Parrot]

The Clerk was shaking and having some facial spasams as if he had 240 volts up his ass lol.

They obviously are not skilled at recognizing barely-suppressed laughter.

Not necessarily. I've seen a few pompous magistrates and legal advisers who expect to be treated with fawning respect. If faced with an assertive, insolent defendant and a crowd of disrespectful onlookers, they would probably lose their composure much as described. To be honest it's their own fault, helpful guidance has been published by HMCTS and the Justices' Clerks Society, and if they walked into that courtroom without a gameplan then they deserve their ruffled feathers.

However in the longer term it will do our heroic Rebel no good at all. As others have said, he will be listed for trial and his silly A61 defences will be to no avail. He will be convicted and sentenced at the higher end of the applicable tariff for s172 refusal, and probably banned from driving. His followers may continue to disrupt proceedings, but security and police will be ready next time. Delays and non-appearances may slow the process, but the wheels of justice will grind inexorably forward. And if they can't find some level-headed magistrates capable of dealing with this, a professional District Judge will be sent in.

The defendant is an utter muppet. He was caught speeding, he could have walked away with 3 points and £100 fine. Instead his desire to play the hero for this pathetic rabble is going to lead to him losing his job (perhaps the only PLD member who earns an honest living). He will also be deemed to have been dismissed for misconduct, incurring a 13 week delay before entitlement to state benefits. I dread to think what lies he's telling his wife, as he wrecks their family's prosperity and security.

[SteveUK]

Another PLD inspired eviction!!!1!!!

Hi guys after serving 3 notices on spire solicitors regarding the eviction and alleged money owed by my father in law, we have heard nothing then this came in the post yesterday. Do i send notice 4 to spire solicitors or start with the county court. Also if they do come on the 16th how do I proceed with the bailiffs. Do i explain to them why there paperwork is not valid as it has not been issued correctly in a properly convened court and is not lawful?

However, one rebel dares to offer up some advice:

you need to fill in a n244 form and ask the judge in section 10 to suspend the warrant of possession and ask for a hearing so that you can, explain about the gentlemans agreement which is legally binding

...and so it goes on

Shaun Orme really i thought based on the fact that article 61 is in place i shouldnt be asking a so called judge for anything

Paula Davies is article 61 cover your father in law?

Shaun Orme my father sent his oath shortly after me

Paula Davies i'm not sure how article 61 relates to someone elses land, and a gentlemans agreement, when they live in the bullshit legal stuff and you and your father in law don't, sorry

Shaun Orme i thought that since article 61 gives these so called courts no power then surely there warrants etc are also powerless

Good old Ash Hall then launches a hilarious personal attack.







EDIT - images added

[ArthurWankspittle]

Again for non Brits, a DJ is a legally trained magistrate holding a paid office and, not to put too fine a point on it, they take no shit. From anyone.

I would prefer to word it as the DJ (District Judge) is a judge who acts in the same capacity as a bench of magistrates. https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the- ... e-mags-ct/

As others have said, if this idiot manages to act out his A61 fantasies he could easily lose his driving licence and consequently his job. He also won't get another job easily. I could also contrive a S172 as an "honesty" type of offence and not just a motoring offence.

As to White's FIL, the poster is correct. If he is evicted for non-payment of rent or mortgage he is "intentionally homeless" and isn't entitled to council assistance.

[grixit]

If he thought about it a good brief could argue that any ban would be unduly harsh etc. and probably save the day.

Agreed, assuming he has no priors. If he has some, there' no real defence.

[notorial dissent]

The problem is that with all this crowd, taking just about anything they say at face value is almost certainly a bad idea. I question if any of them are capable of being straight about even the weather.

[The Seventh String]

It was probably one of several dozen cases listed that day for pleas to be entered. Enter a guilty plea and either they'll sentence you there and then if they have sufficient info to do that (e.g. prior offences, no need for mental health reports, etc.) or adjourn for sentencing. Enter a 'not guilty' and they'll adjourn for trial on a date to be fixed. Talk a load of bollocks and they'll adjourn for trial anyway as they've got a lot to get through and don't need to listen to your inane ramblings.

Yes, sounds like the court was so terrified of the rebel’s worthiness and impressed by their Magna Carta authorised rebellion against the Crown and Queen that it followed the usual procedures it applies in every case brought before it.

S172 of the Road Traffic Act is a killer, it’s intended to make it a wiser decision to admit to being the driver or naming the driver than staying silent. There are a couple of statutory defences available, but oddly enough neither of them involve being in service to a lord who is in “Magna Carta authorised Lawful Rebellion” against the Queen. Especially when none of the Lords in question seem at all inclined to lead their heroic horde of rebellious commoners in storming the gates of Buckingham Palace to evict the Queen.

Which is a bit of a pity, a proper medieval style punch-up on Horse Guards Parade between the massed Lawful Rebels and a mounted squadron or two of the Household Cavalry would make for a very entertaining - and very short - youtube video.

[The Seventh String]

Robert White

...can’t say that I have ever heard of a trial being held in a magistrates court, so it should be an interesting day on the 5th February.

What?

What indeed.

Once again we have living, breathing proof that we have to travel past stupid, really stupid, utterly stupid and several more degrees of stupid before finally arriving at FMOTL Magna Carta Rebellion grade stupid.

This lot really couldn’t get a clue if they smeared themselves in clue-musk and stood stark naked in the middle of a football stadium packed with desperate clues in the middle of clue mating season.

[longdog]

"God bless them" says Ben Grimes after being put straight by Stanley Town Council....







Kudos to Stanley Town Council's social media wallah for a nicely concise demolition of their crap.

[JimUk1]

"God bless them" says Ben Grimes after being put straight by Stanley Town Council....







Kudos to Stanley Town Council's social media wallah for a nicely concise demolition of their crap.

Is that a real social media account for a local bourgh council?

That’s an brilliant rebuttal if it is, excluding the last part.

These idiots actually believe they have barons on their side.

[rosy]

If real, I am very impressed with Stanley Town Council's media person.

[katiHWB]

Is that a real social media account for a local bourgh council?

That’s an brilliant rebuttal if it is, excluding the last part.

If real, I am very impressed with Stanley Town Council's media person.

Yes it's real (and there's more comments on the post (yesterday at 9:36pm) too - https://www.facebook.com/pg/stanleydh9/ ... e_internal

[SteveUK]

Ben really has lost the plot.

[Wakeman52]

I actually went to FB for a look:

The 'Lawful Rebels' are in effect nothing more than a bunch of sad losers who think an obscure clause in a 800 year old treaty which was in effect for less than a year means they don't have to pay their bills... I really recommend people read it as it's hysterically funny watching this bunch of tightwads trying to get out of paying their bills by the invocation of magical spells (what they call 'notices of misprison of treason').. No... Seriously... They think Magna Carta means that not only do they not have to pay for their electric / gas / water / mobile phone / satellite TV the suppliers have to keep supplying them because otherwise it's 'treason'.

I would point out that these 'notices' and this 'rebellion' have NEVER succeeded... Not once... Ever. There have been evictions, bankruptcies, deductions from benefits / wages and even one cretin getting himself jailed. All of this to a background of their gurus saying 'Don't worry... They can't do that' shortly before 'they' do 'do that'.

These sad individuals seriously believe they are part of a mass movement rather than the handful of cheapskates they are

It would be good if you came out with some sort of credible explanation as to how they are wrong. When I say explanation I mean something credible rather than a lot of twaddle you're learned from the likes of David "send me some money for phone credit" Robinson or Robert "Made Bankrupt In Spite Of All My Notices" White.

Brilliant. Well done...

[Hercule Parrot]

If real, I am very impressed with Stanley Town Council's media person.

I agree. Down to earth and direct, but not nasty. A well-balanced rebuttal which many larger councils could learn from.