Quatloos!

I actually got a visual listening to this of a District Judge leaning back and saying "Mr Bradley Knight law one does not improve their case by repetition"
This chap might be known to most of you? but for me he is a relatively new discovery and a fine example of what YouTube can produce.
https://youtu.be/SmK0y0378dA
I hope to see posted here more information on this chap.

Thank You.

Whoever he is he and Wesley Ahmed are currently having a little contretemps over on the "Eviction the fraud..." FB page.

Wesley is accusing BK of messing cases up on purpose for the state. Craig Crawford is weighing in on WA's side as well.

slowsmile wrote:Whoever he is he and Wesley Ahmed are currently having a little contretemps over on the "Eviction the fraud..." FB page.

Wesley is accusing BK of messing cases up on purpose for the state. Craig Crawford is weighing in on WA's side as well.

I'm not surprised Bradley Knight posted a video in support of Danny Bamping ....

I love it when there just aren't enough conspiracy theories to go round so they start attacking each other.

Normal Wisdom wrote:

slowsmile wrote:Whoever he is he and Wesley Ahmed are currently having a little contretemps over on the "Eviction the fraud..." FB page.

Wesley is accusing BK of messing cases up on purpose for the state. Craig Crawford is weighing in on WA's side as well.

I'm not surprised Bradley Knight posted a video in support of Danny Bamping ....

I love it when there just aren't enough conspiracy theories to go round so they start attacking each other.

Kind of reminds me some of the "debates" between different 9/11 twoofer factions eg the Judy Wood space beamers and the mini-nukes brigade - the other side are always "disinfo", "paid shills" etc

Bradley Knight has now posted a video attacking Mr Ebert and supposed his legal expertise.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... WrCtes2_zI

Bradley seems to be yet another amateur legal expert / crusader that gives people advice on legal matters and probably represents them in court. I don't know anything about him, his level of knowledge or his rate of success. He is undoubtedly correct in his view of Mr Ebert's knowledge and personality. However, the problem with using amateurs is the huge ego that seems to come with it. I suppose in relatively minor cases it might be worth taking the risk of consulting such "experts" but I wouldn't let them within a million miles of case that might involve me losing my home or a significant amount of money.

I'd also say that Bradley's videos would be a lot more watchable (and shorter) if he composed his thoughts first rather than stumbling through a rambling stream of consciousness.

Normal Wisdom wrote:Bradley Knight has now posted a video attacking Mr Ebert and supposed his legal expertise.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... WrCtes2_zI

Bradley seems to be yet another amateur legal expert / crusader that gives people advice on legal matters and probably represents them in court. I don't know anything about him, his level of knowledge or his rate of success. He is undoubtedly correct in his view of Mr Ebert's knowledge and personality. However, the problem with using amateurs is the huge ego that seems to come with it. I suppose in relatively minor cases it might be worth taking the risk of consulting such "experts" but I wouldn't let them within a million miles of case that might involve me losing my home or a significant amount of money.

I'd also say that Bradley's videos would be a lot more watchable (and shorter) if he composed his thoughts first rather than stumbling through a rambling stream of consciousness.

I first wondered if Bradley Knight presents a case in front of a Judge in the same manner as his videos?. I can see the point in listening to his opinion on a legal matter and based on the facts I have seen to date his motives appear genuine. Just left with a thought why is he doing any of this? in one video he stated he seeks fame. Like the other players in this tangled web of nonsense, how much has a basis of truth?.

Not sure if this the one that was previously posted but it is interesting to hear from Mr Ebert himself. Tom actually fell for this nonsense ?

Bradley Knight Law explains position on Ebert

Bradley Knight law talks with Ebert, Tom Crawford

These are in addition to

Bradley Knight Law and Sandra on Ebert

and

Bradley Knight, Danny Bamping on Tom Crawford

Bradley Knight talks about Tom Crawford case

And the man himself can be seen here in person

Bradley Knight & Fabrice Bardsley - Adventures In Legal Land



Looks a little like Jimmy

I think we might hear more about this guy down the line.

Seems like he's operating a lucrative little fake law firm with plenty of clients.

Bradley knight is a fraudster. The man himself is currently imprisoned for fraud!!

Jack546 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 1:40 am Bradley knight is a fraudster. The man himself is currently imprisoned for fraud!!

I wouldn't be surprised, but we require evidence for statements like that on this site.

Arthur Rubin yes he got 30months. My friend is his ex partner, she has confirmation from Luton crown court about his imprisonment. People should be aware of this fake fraudulent man.

Jack546 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:22 am Arthur Rubin yes he got 30months. My friend is his ex partner, she has confirmation from Luton crown court about his imprisonment. People should be aware of this fake fraudulent man.

I believe Arthur said statements like that require some sort of proof. A statement proclaiming it to be true is not proof. Links to court documents, newspaper articles, news stories, things like that are proof.

JamesVincent wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:08 pm I believe Arthur said statements like that require some sort of proof. A statement proclaiming it to be true is not proof. Links to court documents, newspaper articles, news stories, things like that are proof.

I did a search of Law Pages. Couldn't find it. Circumspection is justified.

JamesVincent wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:08 pm

Jack546 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:22 am Arthur Rubin yes he got 30months. My friend is his ex partner, she has confirmation from Luton crown court about his imprisonment. People should be aware of this fake fraudulent man.

I believe Arthur said statements like that require some sort of proof. A statement proclaiming it to be true is not proof. Links to court documents, newspaper articles, news stories, things like that are proof.

Hi James,

I have the email from court, tried uploading it but don’t think I can from my smart phone to here?! It is true, he is out now on probation. Him and Sandra Pilcher are currently lying to the courts and trying to sue his ex who’s an innocent single mum. There are YouTube threads about his fraudulent behaviour people he’s ripped off, I have screenshots of these too before Sandra deleted the comments.

I am not lying about this man, people need to know what he is about and avoid him!!!

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... RT-XBL3PAw
The UK Companies House contains the following information:

Bradley KNIGHT
Date of birth
17 December 1980
Nationality
British
Disqualifications
Court order (28 May 2020)
Address provided by the disqualifying authority
35 Parkwood Drive, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom, HP1 2LD
Start date
18 June 2020
End date
17 June 2030
Case Reference
T20190189
Court
Luton Crown Court
Disqualified for conduct while acting for
BOUTIQUE TOYS LTD
BRADLEY KNIGHT ENTERPRISES LIMITED
LONDON TOY CO
VAST GRP HOLDINGS PLC
Reason
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (Section 2): Disqualification on conviction of indictable offence

I am not sure if this is the same Bradley Knight, but it seems like there is some basis for further investigation.

Jack546 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 1:37 am I am not lying about this man, people need to know what he is about and avoid him!!!

This isn't Facebook where people will believe anything that Zuckerberg allows to be posted. No one is suggesting that you are lying, but the nature of this forum is that independent verification of information is usually asked for. The Companies House listing by jcolvin2, for example. This gives a case number which should allow it to be looked up.

There are several free sites that allow the uploading of images and documents. Google Drive is one. Microsoft One Drive another. Dropbox is also free for low usage. There are others. You can then post a link to them.

It seems like this topic should be ported to the UK sovereign citizens section. The topic may have been inactive and thus overlooked when the UK section was initially set up.

Done. - WS

Good old Bradley Knight. He "helped" me bring a case against the Crawfrauds which lasted for over 2 years and was absolute hell mostly because of his bad advice at the start. On the plus side, he backed out of it when he tricked me into paying for his photocopying at a print shop opposite the Old Baily and I asked to be paid back. It was after that I found out exactly how poor his knowledge of the law is and how his personable confident manner could suck anyone unfamiliar with the legal system into believing him.

Another thing which became apparent only too late was his addiction to alcohol and his banshee of a wife. You do not want to get on the wrong side of her but I never knew anyone who'd managed to find a right side. When I knew him they had a taste for the highlife and liked to frequent cocktail bars and expensive restaurants in the West End. Back then he portrayed himself as a warrior against the FOTLers and was especially anti-Crawford, I think it was this latter aspect which led him to me when they doxed me and started harassing me. He said he gave legal help for free but pretty soon he began to charge a little to cover his costs. As I say, I fell out with him when he tried to get cash from me by devious means but it wasn't long before I heard of him taking quite large sums of money from other people whilst leading them into bad places with bad advice. All that is behind me now and I have nothing to do with any of them these days though I'm still occasionally in touch with another ex-friend of BK's who's quite a decent bloke and is also out of that scene. It was through him I heard of BK's imprisonment but it's news to me the man is out again.

Hopefully prison has cured him of his alcoholism and it seems his wife has now divorced him but if he's back in league with Sandra Pilcher trying to get back into court then it seems like he has not learned his lesson.

My advice to anyone struggling with a legal problem is to stay well away from Bradley Knight.

jcolvin2 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 5:38 am https://find-and-update.company-informa ... RT-XBL3PAw
The UK Companies House contains the following information:

Bradley KNIGHT
Date of birth
17 December 1980
Nationality
British
Disqualifications
Court order (28 May 2020)
Address provided by the disqualifying authority
35 Parkwood Drive, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom, HP1 2LD
Start date
18 June 2020
End date
17 June 2030
Case Reference
T20190189
Court
Luton Crown Court
Disqualified for conduct while acting for
BOUTIQUE TOYS LTD
BRADLEY KNIGHT ENTERPRISES LIMITED
LONDON TOY CO
VAST GRP HOLDINGS PLC
Reason
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (Section 2): Disqualification on conviction of indictable offence

I am not sure if this is the same Bradley Knight, but it seems like there is some basis for further investigation.

For all of those barring the London Toy Co, for which I could find no trace in companies house, that is indeed the same Bradley Knight. Those companies were registered with the address I had for him at the time and his ex wife's name is Tracey. The address provided by the disqualifying authority is different but I know the house he was living in when I knew him was repossessed so I can only guess that's his subsequent address. I imagine that since his incarceration and divorce things will have changed again.

It seems odd that they would have dragged these companies up as they were all dissolved way back in 2014-15. Maybe when someone is convicted a search is done to see if they have any history of directorships and they are automatically disqualified from future office.