Steve McRae - Expert in F*** All

[Footloose52]

Expert in FA’s latest crackpot theory

http://www.expertinalllegalmatters.com/ ... ncil-fraud

I can’t be bothered to debunk it here as , as always , he debunks himself the second he opens his mouth.

And I can't connect to the site at all.

edit - and now I can, how odd.

[SoLongCeylon]

I find it difficult to hear what McFuckall is saying at the best of times, let alone begin to try an understand it, but his latest video starts off with a demonstration of his eating habits. It's enough to put me off my porridge and blueberry breakfast.

NB About 60 seconds of the video is enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqyHxKi0YMY

[Siegfried Shrink]

I managed about 3 minutes and samples. I really think the incoherent mumblin limits his ability to do any more harm, I could detect some references to the Cestque vie act 1666, the usual nonsense, but even if you were really keenly seeking some woo and ready to believe anything, there does not seems to be any content to believe.

[John Uskglass]

He's obviously trying to emulate that great and sadly missed pillar of the Bar Rowley Birkin QC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/fastshow/ch ... rkin.shtml

[SteveUK]

As well as his nonsensical trust and vatican garbage templates, Expert in FA has now branched into DIY Title Deeds. I'm not suite sure why, if you genuinly own the place, you'll have a nice set issued by the relevant authorities. I cant help but think this aimed at the recently reposessed set who want to "prove" the property is still theirs.

He describes them as thus:

On this page we will show real Title Deeds we have created for our clients, who have claimed back their land and properties from the corrupt land registry. Under the legal conscript of their rules, the holder of the title and the certificate is the true owner of the land and property, which is why they insist on you registering with the Land Registry, so that legally, you own nothing, they do (under the legals, not lawfully we might add)

As always, its a childish effort probably using Coreldraw 1 or Paint:



no mention of the price, but so far there's been one mug taker.

http://expertinalllegalmatters.com/real-title-deeds

[longdog]

It's the sort of thing 419 scammers send and about as convincing.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Just when you think it can't get any sillier, it does.

It might have helped their credibility if the product looked remotely like a real title deed, but then it would have looked far less 'impressive' which is far more important than 'valid' in the eyes of the deceiver and the deceived. We have the deeds to this house tucked away somewhere but all I remember specifically was a restrictive covenant forbidding us to turn the house into a pub, something we felt we could live with.

No one with half a brain would give his deed a second glance. "Given under the Great Seal of the Simon and Dawson Estate" my arse.

I assume the diagonal Expert in FA markings are a watermark to prevent people printing off free copies. I cannot see why anyone other than someone wanting a line in colourful toilet paper would want to.

I note 'Simon and Dawson' as a new way of not using the legal name fraud.

[notorial dissent]

It might help if their material actually made any semblance of sense, but then why change a business model that has worked so well so far.

[grixit]

As always, its a childish effort probably using Coreldraw 1 or Paint:

I'd guess one of the Broderbund products.

[SteveUK]

Expert in FAs latest mug who bought a coat of arms. A most unfortunate Clan name.

[Burnaby49]

I think you all owe Steve an apology. You've mocked him and mocked him. But it appears that instead of sitting around whining how badly he's treated he's actually worked up the beginnings of a viable business. The essential building block for success is desperate greedy morons willing to be suckered by nonsense and as far as I can see, like Peter of England, he's found his market. Britain seems full of them.

[notorial dissent]

I think you all owe Steve an apology. You've mocked him and mocked him. But it appears that instead of sitting around whining how badly he's treated he's actually worked up the beginnings of a viable business. The essential building block for success is desperate greedy morons willing to be suckered by nonsense and as far as I can see, like Peter of England, he's found his market. Britain seems full of them.

Alas, all too true. When you find a viable business model and a guaranteed bonified and vetted sucker client list, then go for it.

[JimUk1]

I think you all owe Steve an apology. You've mocked him and mocked him. But it appears that instead of sitting around whining how badly he's treated he's actually worked up the beginnings of a viable business. The essential building block for success is desperate greedy morons willing to be suckered by nonsense and as far as I can see, like Peter of England, he's found his market. Britain seems full of them.

He will never make David Icke level crazy though.

On the freeman Richter scale, Ickey is a full blown 10, Expect In FA is probably a low-key 5, if only he could climb the ladder more he’d end up with a £13 million fortune.

I’m still amazed people go see Ickes marathon 12 hour rants, and that people pay premiums for the tickets, but Sov Cits seem to gravitate to him-

https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=60

[Burnaby49]

He will never make David Icke level crazy though.

You're moving the goalposts. I've never said he's crazy at all. Although I'd agree that's a leap of faith after watching a few of his videos. I Judge Sovereigns by one criteria. Can they scam money out of suckers or not? Steve, athough apparently just collecting pocket change at present, is on the plus side of the ledger.

[Hercule Parrot]

He will never make David Icke level crazy though.

You're moving the goalposts. I've never said he's crazy at all. Although I'd agree that's a leap of faith after watching a few of his videos. I Judge Sovereigns by one criteria. Can they scam money out of suckers or not? Steve, athough apparently just collecting pocket change at present, is on the plus side of the ledger.

I agree. The ExpertinFuckAll is 20% crazy and 80% predatory. David Icke is a total nutbag, but harmless.

[JimUk1]

Another sucker recommend to Expert in FA....I get the impression this person is not telling the whole story here, but hey ho, why let the cat out of the bag so early?

https://m.facebook.com/groups/388605611 ... 7887538241

[notorial dissent]

Another sucker recommend to Expert in FA....I get the impression this person is not telling the whole story here, but hey ho, why let the cat out of the bag so early?

https://m.facebook.com/groups/388605611 ... 7887538241

Oh say it ain't so!! One of these paragons of ethics and morality not be totally forthcoming, the very idea.

[Siegfried Shrink]

The full nitwittery if you are not a facebook user.

Howlin Gael > ‎Practical Lawful Dissent.

A fellow rebel in need of advice please, i have had two officers turn up at my door and after having been refused concent two take a witness statement from my daughter who is a minor. they told me that their sargent has instructed them that they didn't need my consent as they would force her to give a statement as a "hostile witness" and that i HAD to provide MY details also, I obviously told them where to go! After a number of phone calls I eventually contacted a sargent to try and get the officers details as i was going to make a complaint, immediately this sargent tried telling me that , firstly there was no difference between lawful and legal AND that we had NO constitution,I tried to correct him on that but he was having none of it! That aside, he seems to think that the officers had every right to FORCE her to give a statement. Can anyone source any info that may help my case?
June 29 at 4:33 PM · Public
Like

React

Share
Like4
View previous comments…
David Sheaf
To be treated as a hostile witness is a baristers term in court when the witness that was meant to assist stays quiet or changes their story. No one can be forced to give a statement.. but inferences may or may not be made in the ensueing proceedings
2 · Like · React · Report · Jun 29 at 7:55 PM
Howlin Gael replied · 1 reply
Badvoc Truelove
tell her to say she can't remember , you don't have to give them any details as they are Private an you chose who you wish to contract with , an contract is = to you giving them anyone your details , which you should think long an hard about , they can't force you into that , get it !
Like · React · Report · Jun 29 at 8:34 PM
Justin Truths
Your children are your property, as you have created them. The state knows this, though does not want the general public to know that children are property of parents. As they are your property, you have sole exclusive rights, which cannot be taken away by force.

That which man or woman creates, becomes the property of its creator. This is why the father gives away his daughter, as a bride, to the groom, and the bride and groom give themselves to each other in the wedding ceremony.
3 · Like · React · Report · Yesterday at 2:43 AM
Michael Lukas Kaleb
Know your rights, " you have the right, to remain silent " even the corporate police officer tells you this..
Like · React · Report · Yesterday at 1:48 PM
Rick Powell
The fuzz love telling you that you have the right to remain silent. But may harm your defence should later rely on it in court (COURT! WOOW, scare tactics) And anything you do say may be recorded and used against you.

But you actually have shit loads more rights than the ones they tell you.

Remaining silent supposedly gives them nothing to work with.... wrong. Or rather not completely true. Your silence, they assume, gives them licence to screw you over, as they accept that as acquiescing by estoppel. Your silence is acceptance to their fuckery, because you didn't object or refuse. They just cast the spell, shove a ring through your nose and lead you off to slaughter.
Edited · 1 · Like · React · Report · Yesterday at 2:16 PM
Anthony Ruiz replied · 2 replies
Chris Pryor
https://crimebodge.com/ is also a great resource

CRIMEBODGE | UK Cop Watch
crimebodge.com
2 · Like · React · Report · Yesterday at 9:16 PM
Steve Allan
Which police force?
Like · React · Report · Today at 7:01 AM
Howlin Gael
Police Scotland

Apart from the deplorable spelling, you'd think they would have some rudimentary grasp on the 'no comment' interview and its uses.

If the interviewee had any sense they'd have insisted, being a minor, on having a responsible adult present, and this could be someone other than their gobby parent. Although I am not quite sure if its 16 or 18 to be a minor for purposes of interview. If the interview is not under caution, they cannot use the actual interview in court, although they can base further investigation upon it. And of course it does not preclude a futher interview under caution.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Don't forget this will be under Scottish Law so there may well be differences from England and Wales.

[longdog]

"If the interviewee had any sense they'd have insisted, being a minor, on having a responsible adult present, and this could be someone other than their gobby parent."

An appropriate adult is not required for police to take a statement unless the 'child' is suspected of an offence. In any event if the parent was present then that takes care of any responsible adult requirement.

What we are being told in this obviously skewed version of events is that the parent 'refused consent' to the taking of a statement... What we don't know is the 'child's' attitude. It could well be that the minor is actually 17 years old and wanted to give a statement. It's a pretty fair bet that 'Howlin Gael' is a card carrying member of the ACAB fraternity and was just being obstructive for the sake of it.