Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by littleFred »

Lee Munro (real name Lee McGarry) isn't a blonde bombshell. He is, dare I say, somewhat nebbish. I may be his only fan. His videos are astonishingly funny, but I admit he may be an acquired taste.

He isn't a guru, and I doubt that he aspires to be one. Perhaps he represents the rank-and-file freeman in the street.

So far, his videos have consisted of him reading aloud letters that he sends to various authorities.

His first, Council twats, 6 Nov 2014, has his letter to a council following an incident when (he says) he threw a parking ticket in the face of a parking officer. Transcribed, so any typos are mine:
Dear Sir,

As Lee Munro of the clan Munro I write to you in response to the incident mentioned in the letter I am returning to you. It is my understanding that equality before the law is paramount and mandatory so I hereby claim those rights. I now request clarification as to what law was broken other than any statutory regulations which I hereby do not consent to.

Furthermore I am declaring to you that I do not litter the streets with my own used property or litter anyone else's property. I also demand the name of the person making this claim against my person as I have the right under law to know my accuser. Failure to disclose this information will make your claims heresay.

Furthermore the litter you refer to is in fact not my property nor was it ever my property so under common law jurisdiction can you tell me what law was broken? I simply handed the note back to the corporate officer as I did not want to enter into a contract with his corporation.

I hereby seek clarification of the documentation so that I may act accordingly in the eyes of the law and maintain my entire body of inalienable natural rights. It is also my understanding that the council, being a service created by man, cannot hold property, it simply holds property in trust for the public. I do not see why the council sees fit to sue me for littering when the corporate officer in employment, and therefore representing the council, also was leaving litter on my own property, which was my mode of transport.

Furthermore, I reserve the right not to act under any contract that I did not enter into knowingly and intentionally, and I do not accept the the limited liability of any contract or commercial agreement not revealed to myself, which are my rights pursuant under common law of the land.

Furthermore, any property being held by me at the property, being intellectual property, real estate, trade tools, automobiles and any contents at the private postal address [redacted] are held under claims of right.

It is also my opinion and understanding that in the UK we have the right to a fair trial and due process, and all fines and forfeits to persons before conviction are null and void. The Bill of Rights Act 1689, which cannot be repealed, states that all grants or promises of particular fines on particular persons before conviction in a fair trial are null and void until the person or human being is convicted in a court of law. This is a constitutional act and protects our constitutional rights. Also, under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to a free trial and due process and in civil cases it protects the right to a public hearing from an independant and impartial tribunal within reasonable time. It is also my understanding that the council is a service created by man to serve man and requires contracts in order to claim authority over man.

As a gesture of goodwill I will accept liability and pay the fines upon the following demands that I make.

a. The council prove that I have harmed the council or caused the council any financial loss of any kind.

b. That there is a contractual obligation that I have infringed.

c. That allegations are part of a lawful investigation without unlawful prejudice.

Failure to accept this offer or clarification completely and in good-will will, within seven working days of receiving this offer, be deemed by all parties that you and your principal or other parties abandon all demands upon me. All replies should be sent to the address mentioned no later than seven working days from the date of receiving this letter using recorded delivery.

Yours sincerely and in good faith,

Sir Lee Munro of the clan Munro.
In short, Lee hasn't signed any contracts about parking properly or not littering, so shouldn't be fined for this.

Next, he is worried about bank fraud so he writes to Mortgage twats demanding to see a whole load of stuff.

His girlfriend has a student loan, so he writes to Studentloan.gov.ltd???. She accidentally hasn't paid her £10/month recently, but will start to do so again provided they send him loads of stuff, but won't pay the debt collector.

Then we return to the parking issue. TPTB have replied. Council twats 2 is his response. I'll summarise it: he mistakenly parked in a disabled bay. He doesn't follow David Icke, thinking the queen is a reptile. He won't pay a fine, or appeal, and claims the right to a trial. The council's threat of a warrant is hollow as only courts can issue warrant, and they have to be signed by judges. Maybe he shouldn't have mentioned paedophilia. Statutes don't apply to him.

Dvla twats is about unpaid road tax and a fine. I summarise: can he de-register? Isn't road tax unlawful and fraud and so on? He claims his right to a fair trial. He's happy to pay provided they answer his stupid questions.

Returning to the main story, Lee's littering fine has escalated from £35 to a total of £302.50. Magistrates twats, 20 Feb 2015, is his written response to the court. The case has been held (on 10 Feb). He was in court but didn't stand up. He got contempt of court. Now he wants copies of court documents on his case, and want to know why they spelled his name wrong, and in capitals. His trial wasn't fair. He hasn't really been found guilty. The allegation was a lie: he didn't throw the parking ticket and ticket bag, but merely the ticket. He didn't rip the ticket into a million pieces, but merely into four. He didn't throw the ticket to the ground, but at the parking officer. Anyhow, she picked it up. He wants to see the video evidence. He is thinking about filing charges on the judge: harassment, fraud, treason and wasting Lee's time. He shouldn't have to pay costs or a victim surcharge. TPTB can't take away his car. Lee doesn't consent to anything. He will take it to Queen's Bench if they don't accept his final offer of £2, which they have to accept because of the Bills of Exchange Act.

I suppose they didn't accept his offer of £2. They may have suggested that disputing the evidence when the trial is over was pointless. At any rate, this brings us up to date, with Lee's latest offering, Magistrates twat2. This is a recording of Lee on the phone to the court. He wants to ask the woman who answers the phone a few questions. They spelled his name wrong - does that make any difference? Under his laws, he hasn't broken any laws, so he shouldn't have been found guilty? Does she know the difference between the law of the sea and the law of the land? [At this point, she goes away to check something, but just before Lee is put on hold I think I detect the beginnings of a fit of giggles.] She comes back and explains he can ask the Crown Court for leave to appeal out of time, and he can complain to the court manager about court processes. He's not going to pay the fine because he's not guilty; the court had no authority; why did the summons say he deposited the ticket's plastic cover when the only thing he threw was the ticket?

[As this point, I am ROFLing, as the young people say. He is trying to argue his case all over again, to an administrative person in the court. This is entirely pointless. Admin staff can do nothing to help. His case has been heard. Unless he appeals, it is ended. And the case never turned on the amount of litter he discarded, merely that he discarded some, which he freely admits.]

She reads out the charge: "threw down, dropped or otherwise deposited litter, namely a penalty charge notice and ticket bag". Lee tries to explain to her, for the record, that he didn't throw the bag. She tries to explain something to him; probably that this discussion is a waste of electrons. He hasn't finished telling her what he wants to tell her and doesn't like her "butting in". She says, "I'm sorry, I'm going to put the phone down now," and does so.

Lee's story hasn't ended. I doubt that he'll be granted leave to appeal, and I doubt that he'll pay the fine. I look forward to more entertainment.
Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:28 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by Normal Wisdom »

Lee is certainly going for it isn't he? I fear it is already too late to hope he will undergo a Jamie Barnes like redemption. It's going to be bittersweet entertainment watching him go down, potentially losing his car, house, girlfriend and liberty in the process.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
wanglepin
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1215
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by wanglepin »

Normal Wisdom wrote: potentially losing his car, house, girlfriend and liberty in the process.
And his sanity
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by notorial dissent »

I think Lee has long ago lost whatever tenuous grip he may have had on reality, as he certainly isn't showing any here, and at this point, I can only predict that things will get progressively worse for him and anyone else in close proximity. He strikes me as being neither overly bright or particularly well educated as well as just plain stupid.
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.
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by Dr. Caligari »

Normal Wisdom wrote: It's going to be bittersweet entertainment watching him go down, potentially losing his car, house, girlfriend and liberty in the process.
If he loses his girlfriend, maybe he can take up with Hannah Sotbolt.
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
Arthur Rubin
Tupa-O-Quatloosia
Posts: 1753
Joined: Thu May 29, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Brea, CA

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by Arthur Rubin »

Dr. Caligari wrote:If he loses his girlfriend, maybe he can take up with Hannah Sotbolt.
I knew I needed that keyboard shield. :naughty:
Arthur Rubin, unemployed tax preparer and aerospace engineer
ImageJoin the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign!

Butterflies are free. T-shirts are $19.95 $24.95 $29.95
Hercule Parrot
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:58 pm

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by Hercule Parrot »

Oh dear. He's not very bright, is he?
This looks like it could become entertaining.
"don't be hubris ever..." Steve Mccrae, noted legal ExpertInFuckAll.
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by PeanutGallery »

Why do I find his accent so humorous, well I suppose the content is helping me enjoy this find. Admittedly as a person with an elderly disabled parent, who recently suffered a rather crippling injury, I have a special dislike of people who 'accidentally' park in disabled bays, these bays are often very clearly marked, much larger and often allow easier access, and when they aren't available it can make helping my parent to get out and about much more difficult. I would say that the only reason someone could 'accidentally' park in such a bay is if they were not exercising due care and attention when driving. Lee admits to not having seen a painted disabled bay marker or a sign or one supposes the cross hatching between bays and the fact that the bay was substantially wider.

I am curious as to what purpose he thinks uploading this videos to YouTube does, is this the new Sov version of 'proving' you sent a letter?

I also note that he claims not to be paying "Road Tax" which I find doubly hilarious, first because nobody in the United Kingdom pays Road Tax any more, we pay Vehicle Excise Duty which is linked to emissions and pollution and isn't actually used to pay for road use or repair. I also take issue with the statement made in his opus "Dvla twats" where Lee describes himself as a "taxpayer" I'm reasonably sure you stop being a taxpayer when you refuse to pay your duty.

He's also fallen into the hole of believing that a maxim, is somehow law or legally binding and also reciting some very old FMOTL (or rather FreeMan On The Sea) ideology - which I had thought had long been debunked and dropped over here.

Thank you for providing such a delightful find.
Warning may contain traces of nut
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by notorial dissent »

Hercule Parrot wrote:Oh dear. He's not very bright, is he?
This looks like it could become entertaining.
Definite understatement I would say.

I will say in all fairness, that I know locally that there are handicapped slots that are so poorly maintained and marked that it is next to impossible to identify them, I would also say that this is generally more the exception than the rule. So it is conceivable that he parked in one unknowingly, but I doubt it.
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.
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6107
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

Dr. Caligari wrote:
Normal Wisdom wrote: It's going to be bittersweet entertainment watching him go down, potentially losing his car, house, girlfriend and liberty in the process.
If he loses his girlfriend, maybe he can take up with Hannah Sotbolt.
As I've noted before, Hannah has personal qualities which go far beyond what is needed to cancel out any pleasure to be derived from looking at her. However, if Lee Munro is as stupid as he appears to be, he may do well with her, because neither of them will be bright enough to realize how screwed up the other one is.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by PeanutGallery »

notorial dissent wrote: I will say in all fairness, that I know locally that there are handicapped slots that are so poorly maintained and marked that it is next to impossible to identify them, I would also say that this is generally more the exception than the rule. So it is conceivable that he parked in one unknowingly, but I doubt it.
I think it's quite notable that Lee doesn't raise any issue about their being a poorly maintained bay or deficient signs. Instead he simply claims not to have seen either the sign or the road marking. I would imagine that if the road markings had been so poor he would have mentioned it in his letter.

He makes this statement in Council twats 2. I will admit to finding his position in this quite contradictory, he denies the infraction but at the same time freely admits it. He also thinks that because it was a "genuine mistake" this absolves him of responsibility. It doesn't. His mistake was one where the state has decided to give a fine to ensure that such a mistake isn't repeated. Lee's position and attitude towards this strikes me as being rather selfish, overly entitled and very childish.
Warning may contain traces of nut
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by littleFred »

I have no sympathy with people who knowingly park in disabled slots.

Taking Lee's story at face value, he made a mistake. We all make mistakes. A rational person might apologise and hope that traffic wardens (as I still think of them) will sympathise. If they don't, then £35 is an expensive lesson in not making mistakes.

But some people see a hole and a shovel, and are impelled to start digging. The further down they go, the more they think they will hit some imaginary paydirt. They do this of their own free will. Nobody has told them to do this. Perhaps some guru with experience of hole-digging has said that this is wonderful, and we can all be free provided we dig enough holes of sufficient depth. And a poor sap believes this but can't understand how he keeps getting covered in dirt.

This is the stuff of comic fiction (eg Lucky Jim, the John Cleese film Clockwise) but it seems so much funnier in real life.
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by notorial dissent »

PeanutGallery wrote:I think it's quite notable that Lee doesn't raise any issue about their being a poorly maintained bay or deficient signs. Instead he simply claims not to have seen either the sign or the road marking. I would imagine that if the road markings had been so poor he would have mentioned it in his letter.
I agree with you in the main, but we can't quite discount the stupid factor, Lee sounds like he really is stupid enough that he can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

The other half of it is, that if he is that oblivious at something as simple as parking, do we really want him out on the public thoroughfares being a public danger. I have a feeling that one of the best things that could happen to him is losing his license and car in that order.
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.
ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 3755
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by ArthurWankspittle »

notorial dissent wrote:.... I have a feeling that one of the best things that could happen to him is losing his license and car in that order.
The vast majority of parking offences do not affect the right to hold a driving licence in the UK. Ditto, not taxing a car is not enforced by licence penalties, but by fines and confiscation.
"There is something about true madness that goes beyond mere eccentricity." Will Self
vampireLOREN
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 764
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 10:18 am

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by vampireLOREN »

Lee is one of those people that if you found yourself stuck in a lift with him ...would cause thoughts of murder/suicide to come. But, his online persona is a delight!!! , His North Eastern accent adds so much to the video, combined with his lack of personality. I hope this runs ...at least until his debt reaches £600 plus. . :beatinghorse:
If people from Poland are called Poles Why are aren't people from Holland called Holes?
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by notorial dissent »

I was of the impression from prior postings that our subject here was opposed to paying his road taxes, which presupposes his licensing and insurance for his car as well, which seems to be de rigueur for this crowd. Thus I was presupposing the eventual loss of his car from those, not necessarily the parking and court fines, although he may yet manage that as well the way he is going.


vampireLOREN I would suspect yours is not an unreasonable expectation, for some reason :sarcasmon: , FOTL/sovrun types seem to have a native, nay an inborn talent for turning something minor like a parking citation in to a major felony, and I have every faith our illiterate, ill spoken, and intemperate friend here will rise, or perhaps that is sink, to the occasion. After all stupidity will out.
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.
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Lee Munro, UK litterbug

Post by littleFred »

In the OP, I highlighted the littering because that is what Lee concentrates on, but also because I think it's the stupidest and funniest issue. Then we've got the parking ticket itself (another £35?), and unpaid car tax (probably £100 upwards) and fine for not taxing the car (£150?). So he could be at £600 already. And the more days he insists at court, the more costs he will be charged, and court fines are always higher than tickets which are mere offers to settle out of court.

Of course, it is his right not to accept offers to settle out of court. It is an important right, which I fully support. But when (as in Lee's case, I suppose) he has no defence whatsoever, claiming the right to a trial wastes time and Lee's money.

Not paying court fines is an expensive hobby. They will give him time to pay, but if he doesn't, they'll take his stuff.

I like his accent. I've always had a fondness for the accent (and everything else) about that part of England.