Quatloos!

Posted: **Sat May 20, 2017 9:28 am**

SteveUK wrote:I thought our friend Tom Boyce (etfob) crew had been quiet recently.

Arrested and dragged to Crown Court today (all day) for non-appearance. Judge wouldn't let me submit papers to prove who I was NOT. Asked me what name I would like to be called. "Tom of Cheshire". That was entered on the record aka Thomas Boyce. "Objection Sir! Did you not get my notice of Corporation?" He said "Yes I have seen that". "Well that proves I am not he". All he said was "hmmm". I replied "I am a living man, you are all dead entities and you cannot hear me. Where is the proof of claim?" "There is no claimant in criminal matters" said the Judge. "If there is no claimant then there is no case to answer to". He then told me to stand. I asked him "IS that an order or request" He said it an order and threatened me with contempt of Court. "Excuse me Sir. Who's name has just been called urs or mine. I sure it was mine, which makes it MY court. Now you shut up and I will shut up and we will both be ok, unless you have some authority over me. "I do" he said. "Produce it now then and produce your public oath and your bond of security in case I am damaged". He said "I do not have to". I said "your a public servant and this is a public record" Ignored me for 5 minutes. Usher said would you please stand, it is a request. I did and case adjourned until 24th July for a trial. To me that is a result. Not remanded,no tag. Losing the fear, every day. Waiting on my official paper-work now and we start again.

Insulting and aggravating the judge who will shortly decide your sentence? Please continue, Mr Boyce....

Posted: **Sun May 21, 2017 3:20 am**

There's a reason why law schools title the classes on courtroom behavior as "Trial Diplomacy".

These Sovtards almost invariably manage to turn an encounter that could result in a mere traffic ticket within 3 minutes into a twenty minute argument that ends with handcuffs, and courtroom proceedings that could end quickly with small fines into prolonged jousts that are often punctuated with jail sentences.

Posted: **Sun May 21, 2017 1:28 pm**

Back on the original Goofy a member has defaulted on his Council Tax, Liability Order issued and now it's being taken from his wages via an Attachment of Earnings. See Attachment of Earnings

For some reason at least one Goofy thinks this is progress of some sort ..

Jinxer wrote: can't help with an answer to your question, but I just want to congratulate you for getting this far forward with not paying this awful tax. You have done really well to manage for this long and I can only imagine how hard a road this has been to travel. I gave up quite easily I would say at the first hurdle a good few years ago. I tried and failed at Court 3 times around 2004 on wards. So well done and good luck for the future and hopefully someone will be along to help with an answer.

Posted: **Sun May 21, 2017 2:57 pm**

The level of cluelessness and denial is just amazing.

Posted: **Sun May 21, 2017 5:27 pm**

aesmith wrote:Back on the original Goofy a member has defaulted on his Council Tax, Liability Order issued and now it's being taken from his wages via an Attachment of Earnings. See Attachment of Earnings

Well at least Tiggy is giving out some good advice:

Unfortunately, if your boss doesn't process the AoE he's going to be fined, think it's £1000.

We had one guy at work who had so may garnishee orders against him that he was left with 10% of his take home. It's not the employer's job to sort out which orders have priority and to take into account that the employee should be left with a certain proportion of their pay - they just obey. Our employer finally told him to get his act together when he didn't have sufficient take home to pay for his far below market value rental rates company housing. (Our employer has company housing that is 30% of take home, all in, which means that you may end up paying less than half of market rates. Good deal, except that it's a trap for the unwary)

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 3:49 am**

"A man accused of possessing cannabis refused to enter the dock at Exeter Crown Court because he says it would make him subject to maritime law."

The man, Mark Angell, also charged the CPS £2million.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 4:31 am**

I think whatever he has been using for ink has gotten to his brain,
"common law court as ordained by statute" now there is a mouth full of oxymoron by a sovrunidjit.

Talking nonsense is just a fraction of his problems from the sounds of this.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 6:07 am**

littleFred wrote:"A man accused of possessing cannabis refused to enter the dock at Exeter Crown Court because he says it would make him subject to maritime law."

The man, Mark Angell, also charged the CPS £2million.

An excellent example of turning a slap on the wrist into something worse.

Well played that man.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 6:36 am**

From the article:

Angell was then brought up in custody. He was arraigned and told the judge he would only attend a common law trial as laid down in statute.

I am trying to get my head around this. He is saying the "common law courts" that the footles are always harping on about are a product of statute law? Would that not mean the common law court obtains its authority from statute?
This is an angle I have never seen before.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 7:06 am**

rumpelstilzchen wrote:From the article:......I am trying to get my head around this. This is an angle I have never seen before.

That is because they consistently talk out of their contradictory arse`s,rumpel

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 8:13 am**

rumpelstilzchen wrote:From the article:
Angell was then brought up in custody. He was arraigned and told the judge he would only attend a common law trial as laid down in statute.
I am trying to get my head around this. He is saying the "common law courts" that the footles are always harping on about are a product of statute law? Would that not mean the common law court obtains its authority from statute?
This is an angle I have never seen before.

Just one more sovrunidjit parroting something he neither understands nor originated. They didn't say, but was bail denied? I think it should have been on grounds of stupid alone, that and he's already proved himself a no show.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 8:33 am**

notorial dissent wrote:They didn't say, but was bail denied?

No... "Angell, aged 41, of Newport Road, Barnstaple, denied possessing cannabis on November 7 last year and was bailed pending a trial next month."

I do wonder why he's being tried in crown court for a possession charge. In any event he's already shown the judge he thinks he's above the law which should 'enhance' his sentence more than somewhat.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 8:36 am**

I can't help wondering what makes them think he will show up when he has shown before he won't?

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 10:13 am**

wanglepin wrote:
rumpelstilzchen wrote:From the article:......I am trying to get my head around this. This is an angle I have never seen before.
That is because they consistently talk out of their contradictory arse`s,rumpel

But it would make a great argument. Demand a hearing in a common law court as per statute and when appearing in the common law court argue that statute is not law therefore the common law court is nul and void.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 11:00 am**

Sounds like sovcit argelbargle logic to me.

Posted: **Wed May 24, 2017 11:10 am**

And the tinfoil hat brigade are going wild today!!!

The start of Agenda 21! Reminders again of the UNs plan to er, plant more trees?

https://m.facebook.com/groups/193082005 ... 0226829494

And taken from the UN-

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/c ... enda21.pdf

Posted: **Thu May 25, 2017 7:32 am**

littleFred wrote:"A man accused of possessing cannabis refused to enter the dock at Exeter Crown Court because he says it would make him subject to maritime law."

The man, Mark Angell, also charged the CPS £2million.

A man who illegally filmed proceedings in a Devon courtroom has been fined more than £1,300.
http://www.devonlive.com/man-filmed-cou ... story.html

Posted: **Thu May 25, 2017 8:49 am**

Hercule Parrot wrote:
littleFred wrote:"A man accused of possessing cannabis refused to enter the dock at Exeter Crown Court because he says it would make him subject to maritime law."

The man, Mark Angell, also charged the CPS £2million.
A man who illegally filmed proceedings in a Devon courtroom has been fined more than £1,300.
http://www.devonlive.com/man-filmed-cou ... story.html

Stupidity, the gift that just keeps on giving.

Is it just me or is that not the strangest looking suit I've seen in ages. it looks like he borrowed his father's clown costume or something.

Posted: **Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:56 pm**

Dim 'East Coast Resistance' thug Colin Johnson tries to help someone fight the corrupt courts with the expected outcome....

https://youtu.be/qpZhzku67mw

Posted: **Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:25 pm**

getoutofdebtfools wrote:Dim 'East Coast Resistance' thug Colin Johnson tries to help someone fight the corrupt courts with the expected outcome....

https://youtu.be/qpZhzku67mw

Sorry but they are way too annoying to watch for more than a few seconds. Can you give a summary?

Quatloos!

Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread