"practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

SteveUK
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 8:30 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby SteveUK » Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:21 pm

Robotham lying about his conviction again. I’m surprised he carries on given the wealth of info. You do not get 18 months for 6 weed plants.

Well brothers and sisters if you are on the edge and feeling unsure about joining in and making a stance you should read my post in full.in 2015 my home was raided by the policy men and smashed my front door off causing over 2000 pounds of damage ,they searched my property and found 6 yes 6 hemp plants that I was nurturing for my personal use as I suffer from cancer ( in remission at present) due to my self medication no doubt, they put me in prison for 18 months and started a POCA against me as I have a mortgage they wanted ALL the equity I own and fined me£18976 which as a 59 year old man with I'll health I can't find or borrow, if I don't pay by 28 Sept 2017 they will put me back in prison for 9 months with no early release and impose interest on the fine at 8% daily until it is paid forcing me to put my home up for sale,the relationship stress resulting in divorce proceedings.they won't allow me to sell my house to pay the and they have seized my property and made my separated partner liable at a hearing held behinds closed doors so now they want her equity as well,resulting in making us both homeless and bankrupt and they still want to put me in jail as a bonus.I have issued them with every notice possible including affidavit with no response from the treasonous system.so I am having to evade their capture for how long I don't know ,they are trying to get me to denounce A61 and shut me up but that will never happen ,they are trying to break our resolve and if they succeed not only us but our children will all be fucked forever ,I have only given an overview of what has happened as the full story is too gut wrenching to share at the moment I'm sure if you attend the protest that David Robinson will give more info ,sorry I can't reply at moment but will update when I can.peace
Is it SteveUK or STEVE: of UK?????

longdog
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1851
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:53 am

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby longdog » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:42 pm

An eighteen month sentence for six plants even with previous convictions is unlikely unless of course those convictions were for... Just for the sake of argument... Possession with intent to supply of a quarter of a kilo of hash and a quarter of a kilo of speed.

Oh.... What a coincidence... http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/drug-dealer-gets-18-months-2096871
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?

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 10919
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby notorial dissent » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:50 pm

I think it is pretty much a given that Robotham is lying just so that he can get his poor abused me routine going.

On the other side I think you may be overestimating the critical, or any for that matter, thinking of the group in question. They've shown it is not something they practice or experience often or ever. They have shown a willingness to accept at face value as absolute truth whatever anyone they deem with them says, so not really surprising.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

montbelliard
Stowaway
Stowaway
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:23 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby montbelliard » Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:13 am

It seems unlikely to me that the Wales amphetamines Robotham is the same one as our friend. That one was 33 in 2009. This one is 59 in 2017. That's a very big age discrepancy, even if he's exaggerating his age now.
Also, the second name of the Wales Robotham is given as Anthony, and the electoral register for our man shows his second initial as J. (He leaves his address un-obscured on some documents)
Has anyone seen a court report of his latest conviction that shows that he WASN'T done simply for cannabis cultivation as he says? The sentence seems high but it I'm not sure that's enough to prove that he is lying about the case.

Chaos
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 9:53 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby Chaos » Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:24 am

montbelliard wrote:It seems unlikely to me that the Wales amphetamines Robotham is the same one as our friend. That one was 33 in 2009. This one is 59 in 2017.



meth is a bitch

User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 3558
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:02 am

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby grixit » Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:20 am

Siegfried Shrink wrote:They really do have no idea what 'tyrannical beyond belief' means, do they?


On a scale of 1-100, where 1 is a boot camp instructor, and 100 is Stalin, these people are almost ready to stand up to a high school principal.
I voted for Hillary, and i didn't even get a stupid tshirt!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4

User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 3558
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:02 am

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby grixit » Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:36 am

SteveUK wrote:Wow, Peter really is stewing over Ceylon’s attack.


Put it this way, and I mean nothing personally... I hear it all the time: "it doesn't work" (which is a complete lie) and it is very annoying, and I can't help but question the mentality of the person saying it. Article 61 is the people uniting and restoring their ancient laws and customs. Saying (along the lines of) it doesn't "work", it's worked several times in history. The last time being the Glorious Revolution.



Peter's problem is that he thinks his group are the disgruntled british officials and military, leaving James in the lurch because they'd had enough. But in fact they are more like the later Stuarts, thinking a few slogans and some grand gestures will demonstrate the rightness of their cause. Except of course, unlike the Pretenders, they haven't got anyone to put their lives on the line for their folly.

Also, a standard interpretation of the Glorious Revolution is that it shows the transition from royal legitimacy to social contract as the basis for establishing government. But footles don't contract, right?
I voted for Hillary, and i didn't even get a stupid tshirt!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 10919
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby notorial dissent » Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:49 am

grixit wrote:
Siegfried Shrink wrote:They really do have no idea what 'tyrannical beyond belief' means, do they?


On a scale of 1-100, where 1 is a boot camp instructor, and 100 is Stalin, these people are almost ready to stand up to a high school principal.

Nah, my chemistry teacher would have eaten them alive and spat them out as their constituent parts and not even have broken a sweat, and let's not even discuss what the principal would have done, nuh uh!!!!!
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

SteveUK
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 8:30 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby SteveUK » Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:50 am

montbelliard wrote:It seems unlikely to me that the Wales amphetamines Robotham is the same one as our friend. That one was 33 in 2009. This one is 59 in 2017. That's a very big age discrepancy, even if he's exaggerating his age now.
Also, the second name of the Wales Robotham is given as Anthony, and the electoral register for our man shows his second initial as J. (He leaves his address un-obscured on some documents)
Has anyone seen a court report of his latest conviction that shows that he WASN'T done simply for cannabis cultivation as he says? The sentence seems high but it I'm not sure that's enough to prove that he is lying about the case.


Good spot. I’m still inclined to think it is our man though. He earlier mentioned the £18k was a proceeds of crime slap on the wrist. 6 plants would not get you £18k profits. So either way, he’s still full of shit.
Is it SteveUK or STEVE: of UK?????

JimUk1
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 654
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 11:47 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby JimUk1 » Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:25 am

grixit wrote:
SteveUK wrote:Wow, Peter really is stewing over Ceylon’s attack.


Put it this way, and I mean nothing personally... I hear it all the time: "it doesn't work" (which is a complete lie) and it is very annoying, and I can't help but question the mentality of the person saying it. Article 61 is the people uniting and restoring their ancient laws and customs. Saying (along the lines of) it doesn't "work", it's worked several times in history. The last time being the Glorious Revolution.



Peter's problem is that he thinks his group are the disgruntled british officials and military, leaving James in the lurch because they'd had enough. But in fact they are more like the later Stuarts, thinking a few slogans and some grand gestures will demonstrate the rightness of their cause. Except of course, unlike the Pretenders, they haven't got anyone to put their lives on the line for their folly.

Also, a standard interpretation of the Glorious Revolution is that it shows the transition from royal legitimacy to social contract as the basis for establishing government. But footles don't contract, right?


The Glorious revolution was a sort of Coupe contrived by parliament, which also included the stationing of Dutch soldiers in England; which is were the PLD rhetoric comes into direct conflict, as Dave and co. keep banging on about foreign troops taking over the UK! But then in the same statement, bangs on about the Bills of rights, which old Dutch King William of orange sorted out for the English!

You'd have thought they'd be kissing he arse of the Dutch but hey ho!

SteveUK
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 8:30 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby SteveUK » Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:16 pm

The award for ‘stupidest advice to get Robotham off his fine’ goes to rebel Rodney (how apt!)

Have you tried discharging the debt with a promissory note?
Is it SteveUK or STEVE: of UK?????

montbelliard
Stowaway
Stowaway
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:23 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby montbelliard » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:27 pm

With POCA the police need to prove very little. If they discover £18k going through his bank account (turnover, not profit), and he can't prove that they weren't proceeds of crime, then the court can slap a big POCA fine on him. The burden of proof will have been on Robotham to show where the money came from. Plenty of small time drug dealers/growers who work in the cash economy on other projects (eg self-employed labourers) have found themselves caught by this, because their paperwork is lacking. Their problem was to have been dabbling in drugs AND evading tax.

Also, a discrepancy of middle initial AND an age discrepancy of 18 years seem pretty conclusive to me.
Last edited by montbelliard on Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hercule Parrot
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:58 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby Hercule Parrot » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:15 am

montbelliard wrote:With POCA the police need to prove very little. If they discover £18k going through his bank account (turnover, not profit), and he can't prove that they weren't proceeds of crime, then the court can slap a big POCA fine on him. The burden of proof will have been on Robotham to show where the money came from. Plenty of small time drug dealers/growers who work in the cash economy on other projects (eg self-employed labourers) have found themselves caught by this, because their paperwork is lacking. Their problem was to have been dabbling in drugs AND evading tax.

Also, a discrepancy of middle initial AND an age discrepancy of 18 years seem pretty conclusive to me.


Welcome, montebelliard (a beautiful corner of France, by the way - if your nickname relates to location or home area, you are blessed).

I agree with both your points above. Would just add that although this Robotham might be different to the one reported in the media, he is nonetheless lying about the circumstances of his conviction. It is inconceivable that a cancer patient would get 18m custody for growing a few cannabis plants for personal use.

A judge today refused to jail a cancer victim who has twice been caught growing cannabis...... 36 plants in his home and to supplying some to his lodger. ......12 months conditional discharge. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ju ... im-4125347


That's at the lenient end, especially given the admission of supply, but it illustrates the point. 18m custody for a personal grow of herbal cannabis etc would be swiftly and successfully appealed. Robotham is lying.
"don't be hubris ever..." Steve Mccrae, noted legal ExpertInFuckAll.

Hercule Parrot
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:58 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby Hercule Parrot » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:44 am

Do we know what Robinson's Heroes are planning here?

Image

I saw some jibber-jabber about "distraining" a major public building in Birmingham, so I assume this relates to David Robinson's infatuation with David Robotham. Maybe they're going for the Crown Court, Official Receivers Office or something? Hopefully they will livestream it and share plenty of photos and anecdotes from the 'action'.

To be honest I'm torn about this. It will be funny to have another tiny turnout and some hollow, impotent posturing directed at a couple of bored PCSO's. But I almost hope they muster a big enough mob to make the Police take them seriously. West Midlands can handle a bit of public order, and the day would probably end with all our constitutional heroes in cells.

Basically, it's like a childhood Christmas. I don't know what I'm going to get, but it's going to be great!
"don't be hubris ever..." Steve Mccrae, noted legal ExpertInFuckAll.

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 10919
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby notorial dissent » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:44 am

They're dumb enough to do something really stupid, and provide lots of unintended comedy. And yes, I think stay at her Majesty's Pleasure would do them all some good.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

BoomerSooner17
Pirates Mate
Pirates Mate
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:07 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby BoomerSooner17 » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:05 am

Hercule Parrot wrote:Do we know what Robinson's Heroes are planning here?

If the above was a Hogan's Heroes reference:

https://tenor.com/view/see-nothing-hear ... if-4351550
"Never in the field of human conflict, was so much owed (but not paid), by so few, to so many." - Sir Winston Churchill

SteveUK
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu May 21, 2015 8:30 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby SteveUK » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:46 pm

Another idiot sees a win (!!!1!!!) where there is only loss.

M20 variable speed limit. First letter sent back unopened. Then signed my oath. Second letter, requesting drivers name sent back with Conditional Acceptance. Third letter, requesting drivers name sent back with Default and Opportunity to cure.
This letter seems like a good result? My question then. Should I not bother sending the further 2 letters to Mr Policeman, but just wait to see if magistrates do consider doing anything, then start process again?


Image
Is it SteveUK or STEVE: of UK?????

AndyPandy
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:29 pm

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby AndyPandy » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:07 pm

Hercule Parrot wrote:Do we know what Robinson's Heroes are planning here?

Image

I saw some jibber-jabber about "distraining" a major public building in Birmingham, so I assume this relates to David Robinson's infatuation with David Robotham. Maybe they're going for the Crown Court, Official Receivers Office or something? Hopefully they will livestream it and share plenty of photos and anecdotes from the 'action'.

To be honest I'm torn about this. It will be funny to have another tiny turnout and some hollow, impotent posturing directed at a couple of bored PCSO's. But I almost hope they muster a big enough mob to make the Police take them seriously. West Midlands can handle a bit of public order, and the day would probably end with all our constitutional heroes in cells.

Basically, it's like a childhood Christmas. I don't know what I'm going to get, but it's going to be great!


It'll either be the Magistrates Court or the Court that awarded the POCA against him, which I think can only be the Crown Court. Don't armed Police patrol those buildings now ??

longdog
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1851
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:53 am

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby longdog » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:25 pm

SteveUK wrote:Another idiot sees a win (!!!1!!!) where there is only loss.

M20 variable speed limit. First letter sent back unopened. Then signed my oath. Second letter, requesting drivers name sent back with Conditional Acceptance. Third letter, requesting drivers name sent back with Default and Opportunity to cure.
This letter seems like a good result? My question then. Should I not bother sending the further 2 letters to Mr Policeman, but just wait to see if magistrates do consider doing anything, then start process again?


Image


That's a post from a month ago that's been bumped when he added this...

Brian Williams

Well, I looks like the PLD notices have worked. No more correspondence about this. That plod letter was almost 2 months agos. The 'alleged offence, from August. So 2 first class stamps ( I didn't bother to send registered), 2 envelopes, 4 sheets of paper and a bit of printer ink saved me £100. Can I call this another success for Practial Lawful Dissent?


Leaving aside the fact that that post is probably enough evidence to support a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice the idiot clearly hasn't any idea what comes next which is a £600-£1000 fine and six points. This should be very entertaining.
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?

rumpelstilzchen
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:00 pm
Location: Soho London

Re: "practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

Postby rumpelstilzchen » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:48 pm

He is obviously unaware that the old bill have six months from the date of offence to lay the information with the court. He really is a stupid boy. The six months will run from the date of failing to furnish, not from the date of the speeding offence.
BHF wrote:
It shows your mentality to think someone would make the effort to post something on the internet that was untrue.


Return to “United Kingdom”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Common Crawl [Bot], DotBot [Bot] and 0 guests