Michael (of Bernicia) Waugh, UK bankster-buster

[longdog]

In New York City, about 25 years ago, I was waiting for a bus and a guy came up to the waiting passengers with steaks, wrapped in cellophane like they would be at a supermarket (though without any supermarket's logo), offering them very cheaply. I politely declined, being dubious of their provenance.

I sometimes get offered meat on the same basis and always reply that I am a vegetarian (not true) but even if I wasn't I wouldn't buy mean that had been liberated from Tesco inside somebody's underwear (true).

[John Uskglass]

His website is down,

Back up now, but you go through a DDOS screen before you land. So we can still access the dire warning he sent to all MP's.

And there, to our great surprise, we find that the threat of legal action contains a certain amount of wriggle room:

However, in the event you fail to do so, for any reason whatsoever, a QC and legal team will be engaged to lay the information before a court of competent jurisdiction at the earliest opportunity and the Private Criminal Prosecution will commence.

(emphasis mine)

Call me Mr Cynical, but that does look as if under all the bluster and 'legalese', we're back to 'I'll get my mates in the CLC on you'.

Which is perhaps, because we're told that the legal authority for this unprecedented attempt to lay criminal proceedings against every MP*is 'Dr Bonham's case'. However, even a cursory examination suggests that once again, MoB is preparing another 'utterly without merit' line of argument.

6. In any event, as Lord Coke, the draftsman of the Petition of Right, said in the 1610 decision of Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians 8 Co Rep 107a; 77 Eng Rep 638, commonly known as Dr. Bonham’s Case, in the Court of Common Pleas:

“In many cases, the common law will control Acts of Parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void: for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will control it and adjudge such an Act to be void.”

Should you collectively move to set aside the act which the Common Law ajudges to be repugnant, as well as void ab initio, as per the Dr Bonham case, no later than the midnight on the 2/10/2020, this action will be suspended.

Apparently MoB's legal erudition doesn't stretch to consulting Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Bonham%27s_Case

The full article is too long to quote, but worth a read for those interested in obscure corners of legal history.

For our purposes it will be sufficient to pick out a couple of lines:

The decision in Bonham's Case has been described by John Campbell (Lord Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor in the 19th century) as "a foolish doctrine alleged to have been laid down extra-judicially". Philip Allott, in the Cambridge Law Journal, simply called it an "abortion".

The case's modern irrelevance is such that Philip Hamburger wrote in 2008, "Bonham's Case scarcely deserves mention in a history of judicial duty, except for reasons that are now largely forgotten".

Given all that, one can only suppose that the 'top QC' who has agreed to take on the prosecution is none other than Rowley Birkin...

https://www.flubu.com/blog/2019/01/10/rowley-birkin-qc/

*Even Sinn Fein, who famously refuse to take their seats, Michael?

[Dr. Caligari]

The full article is too long to quote, but worth a read for those interested in obscure corners of legal history.

Slightly less obscure in the U.S., which did adopt the rule of judicial review. I remember hearing vague mentions of Dr. Bonham's Case in a class on legal history back in law school many decades ago. Though Marbury v. Madison, the 1803 U.S. Supreme Court case which established the power of U.S. courts to strike down unconstitutional laws, did not cite Bonham as precedent.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Given all that, one can only suppose that the 'top QC' who has agreed to take on the prosecution is none other than Rowley Birkin...

"Ver Ver likelah....but we were all ver ver drunk at the time"

[AnOwlCalledSage]

A "top QC" will presumably be aware of the SRA warning that disciplinary action can be brought against a solicitor, or in the case of a barrister by the Barrister Standards Board, for:

* bringing a claim without first investigating whether it is valid

[JimUk1]

In New York City, about 25 years ago, I was waiting for a bus and a guy came up to the waiting passengers with steaks, wrapped in cellophane like they would be at a supermarket (though without any supermarket's logo), offering them very cheaply. I politely declined, being dubious of their provenance.

I sometimes get offered meat on the same basis and always reply that I am a vegetarian (not true) but even if I wasn't I wouldn't buy mean that had been liberated from Tesco inside somebody's underwear (true).

The Greenwood Avenue pub (sadly, it’s no longer with us on the lovely Orchard Park) was a great place for knock-off meat and other goods of questionable origin. I’m pretty sure the draft beer was probably knocked off too.

[longdog]

The Greenwood Avenue pub (sadly, it’s no longer with us on the lovely Orchard Park) was a great place for knock-off meat and other goods of questionable origin. I’m pretty sure the draft beer was probably knocked off too.

One of my dogs comes from there.

The sister of a woman I know only vaguely was in there when a smack-head was trying to sell a whippet puppy for £10. The sister of the woman took pity on the poor little mite and bought her with the intention of passing her on to the woman. Said woman's two Siamese cats took an instant dislike to said puppy and beat the crap out of her at every opportunity and, knowing I liked sight-hounds, she asked me if I would take her in. Of course I said I'd take her on a trial basis to see if my Saluki and Greyhound would accept a new member of the pack and they did so she's still here.

Her early experiences have made her a bit of a stroppy git prone to random acts of extreme violence, or maybe she was like that anyway, but I still love her

Oh... And it's not Orchard Park... North Hull Estate if you don't mind.

[aesmith]

Breaking news, TGBMS is back on! Or it will be, real soon. From one of his emails, also of Facebook but you don't seem to be able to link a single post nowadays ...

With an estimated half a million UK mortgagors currently in default of their illegal mortgages, it's time to unveil the relaunch of the TGBMS Class Actions.

The land registrars for England and Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as the keeper of the register in Scotland, will soon be served a Final Demand, requiring them to cancel every mortgage in the registers, on the ground that they have all been fraudulently registered.

Failure to do so by 01/11/2020 - the day evictions are due to start again - will result in them all being served with Notices of Intended Private Criminal Prosecution, for eleven million breaches of the Fraud Act 2006.
etc
etc
etc

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Failure to do so by...

His previous admission that his family trust had 12 properties sold under his watch whilst retaining 1, presumably because the revenue realised on the first 12 meant that it was no longer an asset that required liquidation, must have the establishment quaking in their boots

[longdog]

Breaking news, TGBMS is back on! Or it will be, real soon. From one of his emails, also of Facebook but you don't seem to be able to link a single post nowadays ...

With an estimated half a million UK mortgagors currently in default of their illegal mortgages, it's time to unveil the relaunch of the TGBMS Class Actions.

The land registrars for England and Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as the keeper of the register in Scotland, will soon be served a Final Demand, requiring them to cancel every mortgage in the registers, on the ground that they have all been fraudulently registered.

Failure to do so by 01/11/2020 - the day evictions are due to start again - will result in them all being served with Notices of Intended Private Criminal Prosecution, for eleven million breaches of the Fraud Act 2006.
etc
etc
etc

So in summary... He had to abandon the civil action either because The Land Registry had told him to go piss up a rope or he couldn't find anybody willing to piss money up the wall on a case that was totally devoid of merit... Or both.

Now he's threatening a private criminal prosecution which would depend on finding a magistrate to sign off on it, which they wouldn't, and in the unlikely event they did, the CPS not taking over the case and terminating it... Which they would.

Obviously I don't need to point out how ludicrous his demand that they cancel the mortgages is given that he knows the civil case was doomed so a criminal case with a higher burden of proof is even more doomederer.

Come to think of it? Would his "final demand" even be legal in the first place? He's basically threatening criminal charges unless The Land Registry does something it doesn't have the power to do... That seems to be sailing dangerously close to blackmail... Idiotic blackmail that nobody would take seriously but blackmail none the less.

[exiledscouser]

I don’t think The Halifax etc needs to be too worried. Elsewhere MoB states that his venue of choice for the Private Criminal Prosecution to be one where victory will be a foregone conclusion. Not for him the treasonous state-run courts run by their financier friends and running dogs.

Sadly whilst the CLC can always be relied on by the plaintiff to deliver the right verdict, enforcement of them cannot.

The man is spouting bollocks - as has already been observed, why, after the dismal failure of his civil case would he think a criminal one based on exactly the same “facts” would fare any better?

[aesmith]

His previous admission that his family trust had 12 properties sold under his watch whilst retaining 1, presumably because the revenue realised on the first 12 meant that it was no longer an asset that required liquidation, must have the establishment quaking in their boots

It's pure guesswork because he only shared documents showing his failures. However my guess is that the one property saved, which he refers to as his sister's home, was probably nothing to do with the family trust. The trust property was all commercial investment, for example Asquorn House of sainted memory was a block of flats not any sort of ancestral family home. It's perfectly possible that his sister, having more sense, paid her mortgage.

[aesmith]

Shit just got real, folks...

https://www.thebernician.net/mps-served ... mic-fraud/

Now reckons he's got a barrister prepared to take this on ...

COVID-1984 PRIVATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION UPDATE: The barrister has now agreed in principal to take the case and we will move forward on Monday, when she will present it to her partners.
But in her words, she doesn't anticipate any problems, even after we told her we strongly suspect that certain chambers have been warned not to take the case, as she is confident that the allegations are founded upon enough evidence to convict and that the partners will be in agreement.
In other words, my friends, followers and family, our arguments have the backing of a barrister who specialises in convincing a jury that fraud has been committed, in private criminal prosecutions.
If this course of events was a Star Wars movie, it would be called The People Strike Back. So may the force of truth, freedom and justice be with us all because we are aiming to hit the Death Star where it hurts.

The charges are now determined ..

Michael O'Bernicia
Fraud, treason and genocide

Although why does he need an advocate if he's such a hot shot himself?

Michael O'Bernicia
I've got a 100% track record dispensing with fraudsters over the last two decades, so the government fucked up big time by presenting us with such emphatic evidence that they have committed criminal fraud. The treason and genocide only make their prospects a hundred times worse for them.

[John Uskglass]

But in her words, she doesn't anticipate any problems, even after we told her we strongly suspect that certain chambers have been warned not to take the case, as she is confident that the allegations are founded upon enough evidence to convict and that the partners will be in agreement.

I think I might just be able to see where this is going....

Will the partners turn out to be Illuminati, Jews, or Lizards?

I also note that there's no mention of the barrister doing this pro bono. Presumably if they were, he'd be telling us all as evidence of the rightness of his cause. So I'm rather hoping that he's been charged for an initial consultation, even though the barrister knows there's no hope, and they'll come back to him saying 'You had a great case mate, brilliant, but those fuddy duddy old stick in the muds back at the office just won't have it. What can I say, I'm gutted. Now, about my fee.' Before snickering all the way to the bank.

[HardyW]

It may well be that "our arguments have the backing of a barrister who specialises in convincing a jury that fraud has been committed, in private criminal prosecutions".
The problem is, if he is still planning to "prosecute" the Land Registry, that they are not the body that is committing the alleged fraud.

So the barrister will have to convince the hypothetical jury (or presumably the DPP who will have to approve the private prosecution or not) that a fraud has been committed, which we assume are the banks who have been relying on fake signatures on mortgages. Then somehow deflect the culpability onto the Chief Land Registrar, for whatever odd reason MOB has for targeting them.

[aesmith]

This is his other case, prosecuting every MP for fraud, genocide and treason.
https://www.thebernician.net/mps-served ... mic-fraud/

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I would have to doubt the competence of any "barrister" taking up his cause. He has made it quite clear that it is a criminal case. However, the one slight fly in the ointment is that Crown Immunity prevents criminal proceedings against the Crown

Civil tort and contract cases are the only ones permissible, but the Home Secretary and Attorney General still have to approve it.

O'Bonkers really is too stupid to realise that he is stupid.

[ArthurWankspittle]

'You had a great case mate, brilliant, but those fuddy duddy old stick in the muds back at the office just won't have it. What can I say, I'm gutted. Now, about my fee.'

Just wondering if he could be getting conned. Oh yes, I'm a barrister and I'll take your case on. Just need some up front fees and costs covered.

[longdog]

I'm not sure genocide is actually an offence under UK domestic law. The murders that make it up, when they actually happened, are but of course they didn't happen.

Treason of course has a definition and whatever he thinks it is it isn't that. I'm also pretty sure a government department like The Land Registry by definition cannot commit treason. As an arm of the state it ultimately acts as an expression of the will of HMtheQ (gawd bless 'er) and HMtheQ (gawd bless 'er) is the one person in the realm who cannot commit treason... That's pretty much the whole point of the thing.

So that just leaves fraud... Good luck with that.

This has crowdfunding scam written all over it.

[longdog]

Just wondering if he could be getting conned. Oh yes, I'm a barrister and I'll take your case on. Just need some up front fees and costs covered.

I suppose it depends on your definition of the word "conned". In my shambolic working life I've encountered more than one person who won't take "can't be done" or "beyond economic repair" as an answer. They want an in depth (and preferably optimistic) analysis of their options, fully priced, and presented in a nice folder. I'm quite happy to go along with it if they want to pay me an extortionate "consultation" fee up-front as I can write verbose bollocks quite well if I put my mind to it... But it'll still say "It's knackered" which I would have already told them free, gratis and for nuffink.

I assume barristers are not supposed to take on cases which they know are completely devoid of merit but I assume they are also allowed to take people's money to tell them why their case is totally devoid of merit.