There's been a mistrial declared because either...
1) The judge decided he was not competent to conduct his own defence.
2) Crabbert tried to play the "jury nullification" card.
3) The CPS fucked up.
In that order of likelihood.
The fact that CPS are carrying on does not bode well for our idiotic crustacean and suggest they are determined to make the charges stick.
JULIAN: I recommend we try Per verulium ad camphorum actus injuria linctus est.
SANDY: That's your actual Latin.
HORNE: What does it mean?
JULIAN: I dunno - I got it off a bottle of horse rub, but it sounds good, doesn't it?
I for one am quite disappointed that he didn't return to his squatting quarters only to find them boarded up and occupied by guards with dogs.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
I want you to exit this guy off the premises, I want you to exit him off his feet and I want you to use his head to open the fucking door.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
My understanding is that whilst awaiting trial you are always on bail, it's just that you can be on bail with no conditions. If his previous conditions have been lifted and the residential requirement no longer applies, it would mean that the mortgagee is now free to move to evict their squatter.
Another FOTLer !!!success1!!
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity - Hanlon's Razor
I would expect if bail has not been discussed at the hearing it would continue on the same basis as before. Possibly dealt with in a few words which no one bothered to report.
That leads to an interesting legal point. Suppose one is bailed to stay at address X but get evicted. What are the implications? I would assume you are obliged to notify the court, or return to the court to explain that you can no longer stay at address X and negotiate an alternative bail arrangement. You can't blame the evictor(?) as they have acted lawfully.
"There is something about true madness that goes beyond mere eccentricity." Will Self
ArthurWankspittle wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:51 amThat leads to an interesting legal point. Suppose one is bailed to stay at address X but get evicted. What are the implications? I would assume you are obliged to notify the court, or return to the court to explain that you can no longer stay at address X and negotiate an alternative bail arrangement. You can't blame the evictor(?) as they have acted lawfully.
I agree, you could say that if the bail condition was that he resides at a given address, and he can no longer comply then he either needs to agree different terms, or get banged up. I can't see that a bail condition can create a legal entitlement. I'll bet also that the address was provided by Mr Crab, and the court/CPS simply agreed.
ArthurWankspittle wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:51 am
That leads to an interesting legal point. Suppose one is bailed to stay at address X but get evicted. What are the implications? I would assume you are obliged to notify the court, or return to the court to explain that you can no longer stay at address X and negotiate an alternative bail arrangement. You can't blame the evictor(?) as they have acted lawfully.
Criminal Procedure Rules 2015, Part 14. The defendant needs to make an application to the court to vary the bail conditions (either by removing the residence requirement altogether or proposing a new address). The prosecution may make representations against the new address, and the magistrates decide whether it's acceptable - if not, the defendant may be required to move into a bail hostel, or be returned to custody. Failing to notify the court of the new address is an offence.
I love the way you lot jump to conclusions without knowing the facts, you really do not have anything going on in your lives.
If only you knew the truth eh, if i told you whats happened you wouldnt believe me and twist it so theres no point.
Keep guessing and stick to the conjecture
Why don't you lay the truth on us, Zeek, and don't assume we will not believe you or get the twist. In fact he opposite, we want to know the truth, we want to know what his position is. We would love to know the legal argument he is putting forth to regain his properties, and come out of bankruptcy all from a trial on affray. Please tell us the truth, and let us try to believe.
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
Zeek wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:13 pm
if i told you whats happened you wouldnt believe me
That's because nothing you said makes us feel any confidence in the veracity of what you say.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
This is pure speculation on my part but I think the reason he’s still in the house is that he’s started to co-operate with the trustee and begged to save the Sheerness property. The trustee’s agreed to pay the mortgage and arrears from the proceeds / income of the properties he’s seized hold of.
AndyPandy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:34 pmThis is pure speculation on my part but I think the reason he’s still in the house is that he’s started to co-operate with the trustee and begged to save the Sheerness property. The trustee’s agreed to pay the mortgage and arrears from the proceeds / income of the properties he’s seized hold of.
Surely that's not likely given the way he's dealt with the trustee to date, and also if his affairs were such that there was spare money available to the trustee to pay his mortgage shouldn't that be going to the original creditor?
Maybe he's done a deal quietly with just the bank, not involving the OR. From memory the OR has at best a charge on the property, which was in joint names, and not an order for sale. Meanwhile the Crab managed to hang onto nearly a year's rent from his properties without presumably paying out any of their expenses, so might still have cash to spare. On the other hand I don't think it was ever explained why he stopped paying the mortgage on his home in the first place.
aesmith wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:52 am
Maybe he's done a deal quietly with just the bank, not involving the OR. From memory the OR has at best a charge on the property, which was in joint names, and not an order for sale.
Hang on a minute.... If the mortgage was an endowment in joint names and one of the people named had popped their clogs recently...
Didn't the unfortunate Mrs Bait shuffle off this mortal coil?
Do you see where I'm going with this?
JULIAN: I recommend we try Per verulium ad camphorum actus injuria linctus est.
SANDY: That's your actual Latin.
HORNE: What does it mean?
JULIAN: I dunno - I got it off a bottle of horse rub, but it sounds good, doesn't it?
longdog wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:09 am
Hang on a minute.... If the mortgage was an endowment in joint names and one of the people named had popped their clogs recently...
Didn't the unfortunate Mrs Bait shuffle off this mortal coil?
Do you see where I'm going with this?
Yes, Mrs. Crab Bait did die in the last few months. If she was an owner, it is possible that the inheritance process is still going on. I don't know how it works in the UK, but I recently had the simple, uncontested will of a grandparent take two years to play out.
aesmith wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:52 am
Maybe he's done a deal quietly with just the bank, not involving the OR. From memory the OR has at best a charge on the property, which was in joint names, and not an order for sale.
Hang on a minute.... If the mortgage was an endowment in joint names and one of the people named had popped their clogs recently...
Didn't the unfortunate Mrs Bait shuffle off this mortal coil?
Do you see where I'm going with this?
Very much so - there will have been the endowment policy and possibly level term assurance so that on the death of one party the mortgage would be repaid. He's possibly been dug out of a hole on his house.
Wouldn't the OR want a slice of the action though. Mind you there might be enough of a surplus to keep the OR off his back on the former matrimonial home ...
It'll be a while before it is all sorted out as well.
Footloose52 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:22 pmVery much so - there will have been the endowment policy and possibly level term assurance so that on the death of one party the mortgage would be repaid. He's possibly been dug out of a hole on his house.
Wouldn't the OR want a slice of the action though. Mind you there might be enough of a surplus to keep the OR off his back on the former matrimonial home ...
Surely the same point would apply, the OR should have first call on any payout, and will decide where the money goes. So question, would an insurance company know someone was bankrupt and that the payment should go to their trustee?
Hmmmm... She was insured, and passed away at an opportunistic time, and Crabby could be in for a windfall that may cover his outstanding debts? I am surprised the conspiracy prone crowd on his facebook page haven't suggested her death may not have been natural. Obviously the Bank did it, to cash in on what is rightfully due to them.
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
