Michael (of Bernicia) Waugh, UK bankster-buster

[notorial dissent]

I would also equally expect that doing ones ministerial duties would not constitute a crime no matter how much it offends/offended O'Bonkers and company.

[SpearGrass]

It's fairly clear what happened at Westminster: the judge (who is no sort of a fool, by the way) went through the various tests for a private proseuction. The parts which the application passed (the court has jurisdiction, it's not an offence requiring the DPP's consent etc) have been quoted. But the rest of the tests, including the most important - does the application disclose an offence known to law - are fails. Now this is more like Bake Off than A-Levels. If you fail, you fail. You can't keep doing it until you persuade someone to give you a pass. R v South Tyneside JJ ex p CPS: a decision on an application is binding, you can't hawk it round the countryside until you find someone who will grant it.
Historically that's what used to happen, because there was limited communication between courts (not for much longer though). But this is exactly the sort of case where it's never been possible to pull this trick. It attracts attention, meaning all justices' legal advisers and court associates are alerted. And because the case involves Parliament, all cases must be handled by the Chief Magistrate's office, so the chances of a repeat applicaiton slipping through is nil.
This happened to Neelu's prosecution of HM the Queen for treason, and you know what happened to that. Or perhaps you don't, because nothing happened - that's rather the point.
Now there is no barrister this side of Edward William Ellis who would be advising Mr Waugh that this was going well. With regard to these barristers we can say what Betsy Prig said to Mrs Gamp: "I don't believe there's no sich a person".

[hucknallred]

You don't have to consider whether the queen is immune to charges of stepping on the cracks in the pavement because stepping on the cracks in the pavement is not a crime.

Constable Savage may beg to differ.

[longdog]

You don't have to consider whether the queen is immune to charges of stepping on the cracks in the pavement because stepping on the cracks in the pavement is not a crime.

Constable Savage may beg to differ.

Ah yes... Along with being in possession of an offensive wife

[grixit]

SPG?

[hucknallred]

SPG?

Special Patrol Group see also Blair Peach in the linked article.

[grixit]

Oh. Was this the group featured in the tv show Zed Cars?

[John Uskglass]

Was this the group featured in the tv show Zed Cars?

You're thinking of Bastard Squad

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... rd%20Squad

[longdog]

SPG was also a hamster.

[John Uskglass]

The latest post on Waugh's 'Bernician' site from 26/11 is pretty much as the 24/11 update elsewhere but with this final paragraph:

The People v Tyrannical Government

In the meantime, rest assured that, whatever the establishment throws at us, the PCP is moving forward, with or without a warrant being issued to prevent further crimes being committed.

However, as the senior partner at the firm we have engaged stated rather sadly during yesterday’s call, it appears that there is no remedy available to hold members of Parliament accountable for their crimes, other that the one we are actively engaged in pursuing. In every other respect, serving MPs are held by the courts to be above the law.

If that’s not a chilling insight into the tyrannical system of government the People are up against, I don’t know what is.

Nevertheless, if that is the beast we must slay to peacefully restore the Common Law and guarantee the freedom of our children and grandchildren, then that is exactly what we are going to do.

https://www.thebernician.net/pcp-procee ... plication/

And so the backtracking begins...

How long will the faithful stay that way, I wonder.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

The People v Tyrannical Government
...
However, as the senior partner at the firm we have engaged stated rather sadly during yesterday’s call, it appears that there is no remedy available to hold members of Parliament accountable for their crimes, other that the one we are actively engaged in pursuing. In every other respect, serving MPs are held by the courts to be above the law.
...

I'm calling bullshit on his engaging a barrister. An actual barrister would not state "rather sadly" that there is no remedy available at this stage. It's called Crown Immunity. They would have said so in their first communication if they actually existed. It's just such a basic part of English law.

I'm erring on this being O'Bonkers softening up the idiots for some top level grifting.

[notorial dissent]

The People v Tyrannical Government
...
However, as the senior partner at the firm we have engaged stated rather sadly during yesterday’s call, it appears that there is no remedy available to hold members of Parliament accountable for their crimes, other that the one we are actively engaged in pursuing. Which is to say nothing. In every other respect, serving MPs are held by the courts to be above the law.
...

I'm calling bullshit on his engaging a barrister. An actual barrister would not state "rather sadly" that there is no remedy available at this stage. It's called Crown Immunity. They would have said so in their first communication if they actually existed. It's just such a basic part of English law.

I'm erring on this being O'Bonkers softening up the idiots for some top level grifting.

I rather suspect that a real solicitor would have at the very least have valiantly attempted to stifle a mild snort or guffaw if not outright laughed in his face, since there is no way in reality that they were going to get a warrant, let alone a private prosecution of a sitting Crown Officer. I think this is just more of the usual bullhooey that O'Wah regularly servers up to his collection of suckers, who have exactly no BS discrimination function. This one didn't even make very far.

[noblepa]

The People v Tyrannical Government
...
However, as the senior partner at the firm we have engaged stated rather sadly during yesterday’s call, it appears that there is no remedy available to hold members of Parliament accountable for their crimes, other that the one we are actively engaged in pursuing. In every other respect, serving MPs are held by the courts to be above the law.
...

I'm calling bullshit on his engaging a barrister. An actual barrister would not state "rather sadly" that there is no remedy available at this stage. It's called Crown Immunity. They would have said so in their first communication if they actually existed. It's just such a basic part of English law.

I'm erring on this being O'Bonkers softening up the idiots for some top level grifting.

And I don't think a barrister would say that serving MPs are "above the law". Rather, he would, rightly, point out that MPs can't be sued or arrested for actions taken in the normal course of their duties. That's not the same thing, at all.

[John Uskglass]

I'm calling bullshit on his engaging a barrister

I agree that he's most likely engaged the service of m'learned and imaginary friend Rumplestiltskin of the Bailey However, as previously mooted, it could be that a less than scrupulous firm has seen the opportunity to part a fool from his money. Or, as let's not forget that EWE is actually a qualified solicitor, he's managed to find someone similarly afflicted.

While I'm sure that the vast majority of lawyers are irreproachable in their conduct, this list shows that there are some wrong un's out there.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/s ... erventions

I particularly like

Solicitor who falsified documents with Tipp-Ex struck off

Respondent thought his actions were ‘common and unobjectionable’.

mainly because I wasn't aware that Tipp-ex was still a thing!

[Foggy]

nobbling a member of the government ...

Nobbling? Nobbling?

That sounds like a great word, but what does it mean? How do you nobble something

[SpearGrass]

While solicitors and barristers are not (gosh!) perfect, there are always reasons for their deliberately giving bad advice. A tiny minority, like EWE, are mentally ill. A larger, but still small number, might do it deliberately, fueled by panic, haste, or greed. But it's impossible to imagine a sane lawyer deliberately giving advice as bad as this in such public proceedings. What would they have done if the judge had issued the summons?
However we can now see without a doubt that these lawyers are imaginary. The giveaway is the reference to "a firm". He's been talking throughout that he has been advised by barristers, but barristers aren't organised in firms. That's solicitors. Laymen make that mistake, but lawyers never do.
Given how easily pseudo-legals are conned (think of Neelu,Elizabeth Watson, Baron Ward etc), there is a possible alternative to these 3 barristers and their firm being made up by Mr Waugh - have some people been pretending to be lawyers while taking his £££, and are now extricating themselves?

[TheNewSaint]

Nobbling? Nobbling?

That sounds like a great word, but what does it mean? How do you nobble something

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy roughly defines nobbling as "the prevention of art, or at least crimes committed in the name of art." This is inferred from the name and activities of the Mid-Galactic Arts Nobbling Council.

No word on if Matt Hancock escaped O'Bernicia's private prosecution by gnawing one of his own legs off.

[notorial dissent]

nobbling a member of the government ...

Nobbling? Nobbling?

That sounds like a great word, but what does it mean? How do you nobble something

Silly me, I thought it was spelt with a "k".

I can well imagine that there are unscrupulous solicitor types who wouldn't be above separating a fool and his money, but the problem here is that O'Wah doesn't have any to share or be separated from, and money ONLY goes one, what little he gets, way with him, to him.

[ArthurWankspittle]

nobbling a member of the government ...

Nobbling? Nobbling?

That sounds like a great word, but what does it mean? How do you nobble something

Nobbling comes from horse racing. Nobbling is interfering with a runner usually being drugged to slow them. It extended to some use to cover where something is corrupted to change a result, e.g. a nobbled jury.

[Foggy]

Hmm. Multiple definitions, no real agreement.

Why, that reminds me of the time Dave Barry wrote a column wherein he opined that Indiana was weird because it's called "The Hoosier State" but nobody knows what Hoosier means.

Boy, was he wrong. In his next column on the subject, he reprinted parts of several letters from actual Hoosiers, who gladly explained EXACTLY what it meant.

"Hoosier" was the name of a contractor who worked on the Ohio River in the early 19th century.

"Hoosier" is a word meaning "highlander" or "hill-dweller."

"Hoosier" is a word referring to anything large of its kind.

"Hoosier" comes from when somebody would knock on a cabin door, and Indiana people would say, "Who's there?"

"Hoosier" comes from when Indiana people would stand on the riverbank and shout to people on boats, "Who is ya?"

"Hoosier" comes from when Indiana families would hold big reunions, and the mothers, referring to the children, would ask each other "Who's yours?"

"Hoosier" comes from the aftermath of knife fights in Indiana taverns, when somebody would pick up a lump of flesh and say, "Whose ear?"

All of these explanations, which I am not making up, were sent in by actual Hoosiers. So from now on, when you hear people proudly refer to themselves as "Hoosiers" you will know exactly what they're referring to: an inquisitive, one-eared, hill-dwelling Ohio River contractor, large for his kind, who has a lot of trouble with pronunciation ...

Anyway, now we know.

Nobbling means the prevention of art while interfering with a horse with the use of drugs, or at least crimes committed in the name of art while interfering with a horse by using drugs.

I knew it would have a cool definition!