Chrisy Morris - Parking Tickets and Bailiffs.

[Wakeman52]

Er, isn't the Royal wedding in Windsor?

Yes and it should be obvious, even to the dumbest of Morris' associates, that the whole of that part of the UK, including London, is going to be locked down tight for several days. Advertising on FB for heavies takes his stupidity off the scale.

[notorial dissent]

Er, isn't the Royal wedding in Windsor?

Yes and it should be obvious, even to the dumbest of Morris' associates, that the whole of that part of the UK, including London, is going to be locked down tight for several days. Advertising on FB for heavies takes his stupidity off the scale.

I would at this point be more than certain that his comments/antics have now made the notice of the professional paid paranoids, and it will NOT the kind of attention he craves.

[Heidi Hi]

Copy and pasted from Ken Thompson FB:-
Here are our notes from " R v CHRISY MORRIS" Manchester Crown Court April 19th 2018.
THESE NOTES WERE TYPED UP BY LIBERTY & JUSTICE PROTECTION ALLIANCE (LJPA) ON
THURSDAY 19th APRIL 2018 FROM THE HANDWRITTEN NOTES TAKEN FROM ONE OF OUR
MEMBERS WHO APPEARED AS A PERSONAL ADVOCATE / COLLOQUIALLY KNOWN AS A
MCKENZIE FRIEND TO CHRISY MORRIS IN THE APPEAL CASE OF R v CHRISY MORRIS
NOTICE: THEY ARE NOT A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTION OF THE COURT SESSION. NOR ARE
THEY AN APPROVED TRANSCRIPTION OF THE COURT SESSION. THESE ARE PERSONAL
NOTES TRANSCRIBED ON THE DAY BY LJPA.ORG
REFERENCE: LBB/CM/MINSHULL
Officer Jackson present in Public Gallery
Left gallery at just before 10:46am
10/06/2016
Writ of Possession
Panel of 3 - HHJ Lawton & JP Mrs Norman & JP Mr Sisodi
(“CB”): MS Claire Brocklebank – Counsel for CPS (18SJS)
Opening : Appeal for conviction of Obstruction of High Court Officer
HHJ Section 10? Criminal Law Act 1977
a) Enforcement officer ???
b) Engaged ???
1. It is a defence for someone to say he honestly didn’t believe he was a high court
enforcement officer that he was resisting
2. ??? Executing ???
11:22 AM COURT RISES
Ms BROCKBANK HAS CONFERENCE WITH CARL GROCOCK WITH MR MORRIS AND MR
MORRIS ADVOCATE PRESENT.
CB: I can only ask about the writ (shows copy of writ to Carl Grocock)
Carl Grocock: That is what we used on the day
CB: What happened to the original?
Carl Grocock: assume it is with High Court Enforcement Group
CB: Where was it when you executed?
Carl Grocock: I don’t know what goes on behind scenes, I would have thought it goes back
to Solicitors.
CB: Do you not have the original normally when you execute?
Carl Grocock: No, we have a photocopy like that and one on a tablet form
CB: That’s it.
ENDS AT 11:33AM
CB ENDORSED ABOVE AS TRUE AND ACCURATE REFLECTION OF THE MINUTES OF THE
CONFERENCE AND INFORMED JUDGE SHE HAD READ HANDWRITTEN NOTES MADE BY MR
MORRIS ADVOCATE AND ENDORSED AT 11:34AM
COURT RESUMES AT 11:35AM
HHJ Lawton makes comment that it would have to be signed by high court judge?

[Wakeman52]

These appear to have been written on the back of a fag packet and are nearly as much use. Did the court really believe Chrissy's defence? I can't tell from this incoherent ramble.

[He Who Knows]

So those notes were typed up by Liberty & Justice Protection Alliance (LJPA) and signed by Counsel, were they? LJPA sound very similar to Land & Property Protection Alliance (LPPA) which bought Patel Cottage for £2 back in 2016 and sold it to Tunkashila soon afterwards for £100. As I recall LPPA was Wrecka's parents' company which I see has now been struck off. Funny that.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10477732

[TheNewSaint]

You know what's missing from those notes? The part where Chrissy won. I don't see a dismissal of the case, or anything that would suggest a favorable outcome. Those are pretty hard to overlook.

In fact, this seems like basic fact-finding. Chrissy starts with "is it a defense if i genuinely didn't think he was an officer." (A cynical opening move for someone who promotes himself as a bailiff-buster, if you ask me.) Then theres some discussion about whether the writ was original or a copy. The point of this conversation is unclear, especially since the notetaker doesn't tell us who.Carl Grocock is.

But we all know where this is going: it's not a real writ because it wasn't signed in royal pigs blood at a 45-degree angle during the equinox, or whatever. To support the "honestly didn't believe" defense.

It ends with the note-taker asking himself "HHJ Lawton makes comment that it would have to be signed by high court judge?" Clearly this is wishful thinking, as it would play into Chrissy's brilliant defense strategy.

Then the hearing stops without any kind of denouement, less than an hour after it started. My guess is that it will be resumed later.

[hucknallred]

ter, if you ask me.) Then theres some discussion about whether the writ was original or a copy. The point of this conversation is unclear, especially since the notetaker doesn't tell us who.Carl Grocock is.

The HCEO he obstructed. He's had a vendetta going against him since the incident.

Mr Grocock does seem to have a colourful past. From school he's graduated from doorman to HCEO, he went to arguably the roughest (now demolished) school in Nottingham, in the heart of what was known as Gunny territory, I've no doubt he'd be associated with this lot.

I've spared you having to click through a Chrisy malicious call, in this video he's found an article in the Nottingham Post about Mr Grocock & a Police sting involving a big bag of cash. I can't find the actual article myself.

Not a pillar of the community.

[SoLongCeylon]

Chrisy Morris Facebook
April 25 at 7:36am ·

Here are some notes from my successful appeal, they aren't verbatim but are accurate.

If I'd have followed certain former 'friends' advice (who I believe took money from the bailiff industry so the appeal would fail) I would never have got this win.

Loads more to follow x

I could of accepted a caution. I could of gone for an abuse of process or technicality and got myself a win but that would not have been honorable or helped anyone else.

There is a screen shot aswell of what seems to be the Judge's summary saying that because the Prosecution cannot provide the original warrant in Court for Cwissy's hearing, it is not admissible to provide a photocopy. That looks like how he " got off" I can't copy the screen shot though.

[TheNewSaint]

There's this video, dated 22 hours ago, in which Chrissy says his conviction was overturned on appeal for failure to produce a proper writ.

https://youtu.be/gSBOKww9YnE

[dannyno]

Man acquitted of blackmail after picking up cash
Nottingham Evening Post,
9 February 2011, p.2

A Man accused of blackmail has been acquitted.

Carl Grocock was arrested on December 1, 2009, after police caught him trying to pick up a bag containing £11,000.

The money was dropped off on Low Wood Road, Bulwell, by police after they were alerted by a businessman who said Gary Penwarden was blackmailing him.

Under police interview, Grocock, 36, said he had been paid £500 by Penwarden to pick up a bag from a bus stop.

He took the bag to his home at Moss Close, Arnold, and Penwarden was later seen leaving the property, carrying a bag and then driving to his home in Arnside Road, Leen Valley.

Grocock told the court he did not know the victim or his family and had no involvement with the blackmail plot.

He said he had known of Penwarden, 48, for some years and that had lied at his first police interview about who had dropped him off at the pick-up point, to protect Penwarden.

Yesterday, at Nottingham Crown Court, the jury found him not guilty of blackmail.

[He Who Knows]

Here are the full appeal court "notes" of Chrisy Morris's 19th April Appeal at Manchester Crown Court (previous postings on Q only showed half the "notes"). They're taken from Ken Thompson's "Ya I Know Productions" FB site, so not reliable but do give an insight :

Here are our notes from " R v CHRISY MORRIS" Manchester Crown Court April 19th 2018.
THESE NOTES WERE TYPED UP BY LIBERTY & JUSTICE PROTECTION ALLIANCE (LJPA) ON
THURSDAY 19th APRIL 2018 FROM THE HANDWRITTEN NOTES TAKEN FROM ONE OF OUR
MEMBERS WHO APPEARED AS A PERSONAL ADVOCATE / COLLOQUIALLY KNOWN AS A
MCKENZIE FRIEND TO CHRISY MORRIS IN THE APPEAL CASE OF R v CHRISY MORRIS
NOTICE: THEY ARE NOT A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTION OF THE COURT SESSION. NOR ARE
THEY AN APPROVED TRANSCRIPTION OF THE COURT SESSION. THESE ARE PERSONAL
NOTES TRANSCRIBED ON THE DAY BY LJPA.ORG
REFERENCE: LBB/CM/MINSHULL
Officer Jackson present in Public Gallery
Left gallery at just before 10:46am
10/06/2016
Writ of Possession
Panel of 3 - HHJ Lawton & JP Mrs Norman & JP Mr Sisodi
(“CB”): MS Claire Brocklebank – Counsel for CPS (18SJS)
Opening : Appeal for conviction of Obstruction of High Court Officer
HHJ Section 10? Criminal Law Act 1977
a) Enforcement officer ???
b) Engaged ???
1. It is a defence for someone to say he honestly didn’t believe he was a high court
enforcement officer that he was resisting
2. ??? Executing ???
11:22 AM COURT RISES
Ms BROCKBANK HAS CONFERENCE WITH CARL GROCOCK WITH MR MORRIS AND MR
MORRIS ADVOCATE PRESENT.
CB: I can only ask about the writ (shows copy of writ to Carl Grocock)
Carl Grocock: That is what we used on the day
CB: What happened to the original?
Carl Grocock: assume it is with High Court Enforcement Group
CB: Where was it when you executed?
Carl Grocock: I don’t know what goes on behind scenes, I would have thought it goes back
to Solicitors.
CB: Do you not have the original normally when you execute?
Carl Grocock: No, we have a photocopy like that and one on a tablet form
CB: That’s it.
ENDS AT 11:33AM
CB ENDORSED ABOVE AS TRUE AND ACCURATE REFLECTION OF THE MINUTES OF THE
CONFERENCE AND INFORMED JUDGE SHE HAD READ HANDWRITTEN NOTES MADE BY MR
MORRIS ADVOCATE AND ENDORSED AT 11:34AM
COURT RESUMES AT 11:35AM
HHJ Lawton makes comment that it would have to be signed by high court judge?
CB avoids the question? She says: My instructions are that is the writ used.
HHJ Lawton asks her opinion on whether she would expect a writ to have a high court judge
signature on the writ, bearing in mind that even a low level search at a magistrates is signed
by a Circuit Judge.
She expresses she doenst have an opinion on it and repeats her instructions are that this is
what it is.
HHJ Lawton then asks about PC Jackson and whether as the main investigating officer
whether he can shed any light as to where original writ is as he would have surely have
conducted enquiries? HHJ Lawton agreed terms as before CB to ask only specific questions
and Mr Morris and Mr Morris advocate to be present to record minutes of the exchange
and for CB to endorse minutes afterwards.
Court Rose
CONFERENCE WITH PC JACKSON 2347
CB: I have permission to speak to you only about a specific issue, the issue to talk about is
the writ and the original writ and where it is? My question to you is… What enquiries have
been made?
PC Jackson 2347: I emailed HCI (or HCE) Cardiff, they advised they couldn’t provide the
original.
CB: Did they explain why?
PC Jackson 2347: They didn’t explain why they couldn’t provide the original.
CB: What did you do then?
PC Jackson 2347: I passed the matter to the Legal team at Derbyshire Constabulary
As far as I know they contacted the high court to ask about the authenticity and I am aware
of there being notes are on there but that’s all I know.
ENDS @ 11:43AM
Above Endorsed by CB at 11:44AM as a True and Accurate Reflection of conference with PC
Jackson 2347.
CB and HHJ Lawton have exchanges back and forth re PC Jackson.
HHJ and two JP’s deliberate quietly.
HHJ Lawton I’m going to rule on this issue.
This is an application to appeal a conviction of Obstruction a High Court Officer in execution
of lawful duty who was executing an apparent writ of poession of 27/03/2016
Writ attempting to seize a premises
Obstruction in execution of the writ. The question as the validity of that writ has been raised
throughout by Mr Morris from before arrest and all throughout proceedings.
Prosecution have been unable to produce original writ.
I have considered carefully about whether I can allow the photocopy as secondary evidence.
Rules of Admissibility have been helpfully clarified in DPP v Sugden [2018] EWHC 544
(Admin) where it sets out documents relevant, the document if a copy is acceptable unless
there is an issue raised. If reasonable explanation of original could be explained as to why It
cannot be produced then this can be a factor for the court to consider
If not produced then the court is to take consideration and draw an inference or use
probative weight to attach to why it cannot be produced.
In the instant case we are talking here about the document which purports to be a writ of
possession which gives the authority of a Mr Grocock which is key to the heart of the appeal
which is that it is needed to establish and prove the authority of the officer.
There is no good explaination offered. I do not accept that this is a writ of possession at only
1 page and I find it remarkable that it would not bear a signature of a high court judge.
It is wholly unfair to Mr Morris to allow the prosecution to rely on this photocopy as
secondary evidence in this appeal and it is a fundamental question and I do not allow it to
be used as secondary evidence I rule it inadmissible.
He invites CB to where the Prosecution go now he has made judgmenet on prelimainary
issue.
CB: My instructions are to proceed to go through the evidence your honour
HHJ Lawton: But without it you have no case? Perhaps take 5 minutes to seek instructions
CB: Thank you
All Rise
Court restarts at 12:06
CB: I have taken instruction and the Crown no longer contests the appeal.
HHJ Lawton: No you cannot oppose, therefore the conviction is formally quashed.
I will allow for reasonable costs Mr Morris.
(Discussion of trips and costs are made regarding number of trips from Essex to
Manchester)
£320.00 is payable from Central Funds to Mr Morris.
END at 12:20 (APPROX)

[He Who Knows]

The judge allegedly said:

There is no good explanation offered. I do not accept that this is a writ of possession at only
1 page and I find it remarkable that it would not bear a signature of a high court judge.
It is wholly unfair to Mr Morris to allow the prosecution to rely on this photocopy as
secondary evidence in this appeal and it is a fundamental question and I do not allow it to
be used as secondary evidence I rule it inadmissible.

M'learned friends on Q:
1) am I right in thinking it is not necessary for a high court judge to sign writs 66 and 88 as were used in this eviction (see various photos of writs on this thread and Rekha Patel thread, Youtube etc)
2) am I also right in thinking that a photocopy will suffice as evidence in court unless there is an issue. Assuming 1) above is true, there is no issue.

How Chrisy Morris could have got off on such a tiny technicality is beyond logic.

[Burnaby49]

Your British courts seem extremely lenient. It's a wonder how anyone gets convicted. Send his case to the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta for more satisfying results.

[ArthurWankspittle]

The judge allegedly said:

There is no good explanation offered. I do not accept that this is a writ of possession at only
1 page and I find it remarkable that it would not bear a signature of a high court judge.
It is wholly unfair to Mr Morris to allow the prosecution to rely on this photocopy as
secondary evidence in this appeal and it is a fundamental question and I do not allow it to
be used as secondary evidence I rule it inadmissible.

M'learned friends on Q:
1) am I right in thinking it is not necessary for a high court judge to sign writs 66 and 88 as were used in this eviction (see various photos of writs on this thread and Rekha Patel thread, Youtube etc)
2) am I also right in thinking that a photocopy will suffice as evidence in court unless there is an issue. Assuming 1) above is true, there is no issue.

How Chrisy Morris could have got off on such a tiny technicality is beyond logic.

I look at it this way. Chrisy has accidentally hit on an issue that has become relevant to his appeal. The judge, rightly, has asked for the original paperwork. CPS has only a copy. Judge says not good enough. You can draw your own conclusions what may have happened if the original was available.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I do not accept that this is a writ of possession at only 1 page and I find it remarkable that it would not bear a signature of a high court judge.

Isn't this the real issue. The prosecution turned up with only a photocopy of page 1 of the writ. The implied judgement is that if there had been a photocopy of the whole multi-page writ - including the Judge's signature, there would not have been a problem.

Much as I'd have laughed at Chrisy getting his just desserts, this is prosecutorial incompetence and deserves to be treated as such. We either have courts of law that apply to everyone or we don't!

[NYGman]

Much as I'd have laughed at Chrisy getting his just desserts, this is prosecutorial incompetence and deserves to be treated as such. We either have courts of law that apply to everyone or we don't!

No, no, no. you have it all wrong, Crissy won due to his superior intellect, and kean legal mind. He mezmorized them with the facts and showed without a doubt, the Writ is fake, and thus unenforceable. Wreka can go get her house back now. All hail the new legal genius, who has won a defining victory, despite the fact that the courts are working against him.

[Burnaby49]

Much as I'd have laughed at Chrisy getting his just desserts, this is prosecutorial incompetence and deserves to be treated as such. We either have courts of law that apply to everyone or we don't!

No, no, no. you have it all wrong, Crissy won due to his superior intellect, and kean legal mind. He mezmorized them with the facts and showed without a doubt, the Writ is fake, and thus unenforceable. Wreka can go get her house back now. All hail the new legal genius, who has won a defining victory, despite the fact that the courts are working against him.

Rheka can get her house back but not Tom? Have we all forgotten about Tom? The British Quatloos forum was built on the back of Tom and his facilitators selflessly throwing away Tom's home and retirement for our enjoyment. And yet when a Johnny-Come-Lately like Rheka shows up everybody forgets that Tom is owed a home too. Shameful, shameful treatment.

[TheNewSaint]

Jesus, this is just the worst. This scumbag not only gets off scot-free, but in a way that lends credence to stupid freedman beliefs about copies of things. And Rekha Patel's shrieking about her house being stolen. All because the prosecution couldn't produce even a complete copy of the paperwork. Utter incompetence. Sack the lot of them.

[He Who Knows]

AnOwlCalledSage wrote:

Isn't this the real issue. The prosecution turned up with only a photocopy of page 1 of the writ. The implied judgement is that if there had been a photocopy of the whole multi-page writ - including the Judge's signature, there would not have been a problem

But Writ 66 for possession is NOT a multi-page writ. It is only a one-page document. And no judge's signature is required. Google Writ 66 then look on Rekha Patel's FB page (Rekha Patel backed by community) to see a photo of the one-page writ 66 used.

Again, a photocopy of the writ is admisable in court unless there is an issue, which there wasn't.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Again, a photocopy of the writ is admisable in court unless there is an issue, which there wasn't.

No that is the problem. Chrisy has been using SovCit playbook 101 "The writ isn't valid" claim from the start. It therefore is an issue. The CPS didn't have the original which is what the judge wanted in the circumstances, therefore a major bit of evidence isn't allowed into court, appeal granted. The fact that SovCits always say "the writ isn't valid" means Chrisy lucked out on this one because the CPS messed up.