Michael (of Bernicia) Waugh, UK bankster-buster

[exiledscouser]

Like a persistent bad smell, he's back tilting at windmills, taking on the world. This from Friday;

At 16:23 pm this afternoon, one year after the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens' decision to reclassify COVID-19 as no longer being considered a High Consequence Infectious Disease was published by Public Health England, the papers were laid electronically at a south London Magistrates Court, in the People's Union of Britain's momentous Private Criminal Prosecution against Matt Hancock, Chris Whitty, Patrick Vallance and Neil Ferguson for pandemic fraud.

Yes, they're all going to prison this time. Or maybe not. This time MoB makes additional demands including;

.....autopsies are to be carried out for all alleged COVID deaths, which will be held as evidence in the forthcoming trial, on the ground that we have expert witness testimony of the falsification of death certificates, as per UK Government policy.

He'll struggle if they were cremated. And there's more;

We are also asking for a moratorium on the UK flu and COVID 'vaccinations' programmes to be declared for period of at least 90 days, in order to definitively establish whether it is COVID-19 or 'vaccines' that are killing people at a minimum mortality rate of 377 per 100,000 healthy adults, as per the leaked WHO approved 'vaccine' safety study which we are adducing into evidence.

Ha ha har, in your face MoB!, I've had both of mine and even though I've grown a third testicle with an eye - you and your army of experts ain't gettin' it back!!!!!!.

Undeterred by a sad Scouse and his small prick MoB gets into his stride, claiming that this time, oh yes, this time there is a;

Boatload of Prima Facie Evidence

and that you are to;

prepare yourselves for the inevitable shitstorm on the near horizon, after the defendants' QC's tell them that their only defence is to plead gross negligence. However, the evidence is so emphatic that they knew exactly what they were doing that the jury will almost certainly convict them as charged.

However, having been rebuffed before he cautions the faithful, buying himself another month in which to put forward the usual excuses;

If the summons application is granted, a pleading hearing would then be listed to take place within the next couple of weeks. This would take us to 28 days from now and probably represents the earliest time that the defendants will be summonsed to plead in the Magistrates Court. The informal application for the declaration would also be dealt with at that hearing.

Given the seriousness of the charges and the urgency of the situation, with clear evidence of fraud with murderous consequences already adduced into evidence, we will then ask the court to list a trial by jury at the very earliest opportunity, which will almost certainly take place at the Old Bailey.

It's all very combative and we see the usual MoB superlatives being rolled out, if somewhat predictably;

it is the considered opinion of the former CID fraud detective and the team behind the scenes who have supported me every step of the way that the Statement of Case is "monumental", "truly historical" and:
"Regardless of the judiciary's response to it, once the information is in the public realm/consciousness, along with the cited evidence, it will be incendiary. The accused will squeal like the little swines they are."

Honestly, if its all nailed on and the defendants are going into court with 'no possible defence' I don't know why we don't just skip the judicial bit, light the torches, dig out the pitchforks and have done with anyone MoB points us towards. I know I'm convinced by all of this and the voice of a disgruntled "ex-CID detective" I find entirely persuasive.

Anyway, at the end of the day something of MoB always shines through - in the final analysis, the endless posturing and hyperbole - its all and always about HIM.

If I'd had the evidential weight we have in this case in my family's High Court actions against Bank of Scotland, it would have taken a year to beat them, instead of almost a decade.

I think the appeal court had a different opinion but that's just detail! mere detail! We are swept towards the reflective conclusion as MoB books his ticket to Fantasy Island;

Suffice to say, in the words of Vinnie Jones' character in Lock Stock & Two Smokin' Barrels, a film which reminds me of when I was living and working in swinging nineties London, when these ancient lands were still a place where even a committed recalcitrant like myself could live freely in relative peace and prosperity - it's been emotional.

Sticking with the Lock Stock theme I see another failure looming despite all the grandiose rhetoric. I'll leave the last word to Soap;

I'd rather put my money on a three-legged rocking horse.

[John Uskglass]

it is the considered opinion of the former CID fraud detective and the team behind the scenes who have supported me every step of the way that the Statement of Case is "monumental", "truly historical" and:
"Regardless of the judiciary's response to it, once the information is in the public realm/consciousness, along with the cited evidence, it will be incendiary. The accused will squeal like the little swines they are."

Isn't it spooky how the rhetorical style of the 'former CID fraud detective' matches Mr Waugh's so closely?

[hucknallred]

If this were to be a real court case & not some layabout's wank fantasy, wouldn't all these postings be prejudicial to the eventual hearing?

[AnOwlCalledSage]

If this were to be a real court case & not some layabout's wank fantasy, wouldn't all these postings be prejudicial to the eventual hearing?

Not until charges are laid. But of course that is never going to happen

[John Uskglass]

If this were to be a real court case & not some layabout's wank fantasy, wouldn't all these postings be prejudicial to the eventual hearing?

Am I right in thinking that if charges were ever laid as per the 'indictment', it would mean that a whole load of conspiracy peddlers would be in danger of falling foul of prejudice rules?

[longdog]

At 16:23 pm this afternoon, one year after the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens' decision to reclassify COVID-19 as no longer being considered a High Consequence Infectious Disease was published by Public Health England, the papers were laid electronically at a south London Magistrates Court, in the People's Union of Britain's momentous Private Criminal Prosecution against Matt Hancock, Chris Whitty, Patrick Vallance and Neil Ferguson for pandemic fraud.

This alone shows how totally devoid of merit his "case" is.

He seems to be claiming that the fact Covid-19 was "downgraded" from an HCID means it's not high consequence or infectious or a disease or some combination of these. But that's not what HCID means of course. It's a technical classification that means a disease meets (if memory serves) seven different criteria one of which is that it has no reliable test.

Once a reliable and rapid test was developed it ceased to be classified as an HCID.

Not only was the reason it ceased to be classified as an HCID published on the .gov website it was published before he claims it was. He just didn't read it even though it was reported in the media and when, or if, he did read it he stopped after the first two line paragraph.

Not only is he wrong even if he was right it is completely irrelevant as HCID doesn't mean what he keeps insisting it means. The .gov page actually tells him what exactly it means but he has to ignore that because it's inconvenient.

[John Uskglass]

It's a technical classification that means a disease meets (if memory serves) seven different criteria one of which is that it has no reliable test.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-conseq ... eases-hcid

As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK.

The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I suspect if the "defendant's QC" were to say anything at all, over the laughter, it would be: "Haven't you heard of Crown immunity? Now bugger off you spotty little twerp."

[notorial dissent]

I suspect if the "defendant's QC" were to say anything at all, over the laughter, it would be: "Haven't you heard of Crown immunity? Now bugger off you spotty little twerp."

Yeah, that. I am expecting the sounds of crickets from the magistrates court when they go about rejecting it however they do.

[longdog]

I suspect if the "defendant's QC" were to say anything at all, over the laughter, it would be: "Haven't you heard of Crown immunity? Now bugger off you spotty little twerp."

Yeah, that. I am expecting the sounds of crickets from the magistrates court when they go about rejecting it however they do.

I believe the procedure is that O'Bonkers lays the paperwork at any magistrates court. Because it concerns a government minister it gets referred to The Chief Magistrates Office.

At this point I'm guessing it lands on the table of a highly experienced court clerk who pronounces it legally groundless bollocks and sends it up to the CM who agrees with him and tells him to tell O'Bonkers to get stuffed.

[notorial dissent]

I suspect if the "defendant's QC" were to say anything at all, over the laughter, it would be: "Haven't you heard of Crown immunity? Now bugger off you spotty little twerp."

Yeah, that. I am expecting the sounds of crickets from the magistrates court when they go about rejecting it however they do.

I believe the procedure is that O'Bonkers lays the paperwork at any magistrates court. Because it concerns a government minister it gets referred to The Chief Magistrates Office.

At this point I'm guessing it lands on the table of a highly experienced court clerk who pronounces it legally groundless bollocks and sends it up to the CM who agrees with him and tells him to tell O'Bonkers to get stuffed.

In the nicest possible way of course. But yeah.

[aesmith]

Just referring back to something I thought I remembered. Here it is, back in October he was going to prosecute every single MP ..

The barrister we have engaged is preparing to have summonses issued against every MP charged in the Private Criminal Prosecution, which alleges multiple COVID-1984 crimes against the People.
They will lay the information as soon as the drafting of the paperwork is completed and the summonses will be issued on the same day, requiring every defendant to appear in court to answer to the charges soon afterwards.

https://www.thebernician.net/summonses- ... iminal-mp/

[Hercule Parrot]

If the summons application is granted...

And when it is refused, all this bloviation dissolves like wet tissue paper.

[longdog]

I wonder what the excuse will be this time.

"The judge said my case was the bestest he'd ever seen and would put a barista to shame but there is so much Pimark Facecream evidence we need to whittle it down or they'll be in prison for 3000 years".

or

"The judge refused because he is corrupt but I'm going to take the case to a play-court like I did with the mortgage "class action". Then I'm going to just quietly forget it".

[notorial dissent]

I'd go with excuse two, it would go over better with the punters/followers/suckers/idjits that he plays to, and fits in better with their pre-conceived fantasies.

[aesmith]

Excuse three. Say nothing about the complete failure. Start a new campaign about something completely different. The failed prosecution can get quietly left on the shelf and forgotten along with his campaign that was going to bring down Bank of Scotland and reclaim all his family's properties, Magna Carta 2020 and the TGBMS nonsense.

His followers will blindly and adoringly follow his new promise and forget the failures.

[notorial dissent]

Excuse three. Say nothing about the complete failure. Start a new campaign about something completely different. The failed prosecution can get quietly left on the shelf and forgotten along with his campaign that was going to bring down Bank of Scotland and reclaim all his family's properties, Magna Carta 2020 and the TGBMS nonsense.

His followers will blindly and adoringly follow his new promise and forget the failures.

True, with that bunches short attention span and even shorter long term memory plus being able to hold one thought in they po' widdle haids at any one moment, it is a much more ideal solution. A case where everything truly is new again.

[noblepa]

True, with that bunches short attention span and even shorter long term memory plus being able to hold one thought in they po' widdle haids at any one moment, it is a much more ideal solution. A case where everything truly is new again.

Au contraire. Those people can usually hold three or four ideas in their heads at the same time.

Unfortunately, those ideas are almost always mutually exclusive. i.e. someone is both a communist and a Nazi.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Unfortunately, those ideas are almost always mutually exclusive. i.e. someone is both a communist and a Nazi.

I'd have gone with "Money is fictitious and has no value, but here's my Go Fund Me page."

[John Uskglass]

In the absence of any realistic possibility of obtaining justice against the banksters in an increasingly tyrannous system, which we have already seen time and time again is rigged to protect them from the consequences of their myriad of crimes,

Given the absence of a justice system in Britain

we're going to launch a private prosecution against the government...