littleFred wrote:Oh dear. I feel saddened by Tom's video.
Me too, quite saddened. The video sounds almost like a kind of final will and testament a suicide might leave, let's all hope that he gets down safely at the conclusion whenever that might be. He can come down any time he likes, no-one is holding him up there against his will.It is however distressingly apparent that this man is ill; physically his speech seems stilted, almost automaton-like, he is pale and drawn and his eyes are glassy.
He also clearly remains entirely deluded, issuing empty demands and hollow threats, rehashing his same tired old entrenched grievances, wallowing in ennui and self-pity. Even though "
they" just changed the rules he's actually won every case he's ever been involved with (!),
Just to remind ourselves, the legal take on these sweeping achievements can be summarised;
Judge Godsmark, in a rousing endorsement said; "
None of the points raised by Mr Crawford have any substance in terms of potentially defending the possession claim. None of them can be described as a point with a real prospect of success on appeal"
Clearly a win.
Next up
Mr Justice Phillips described his claim was "
totally without merit".
A clearer victory I've yet to see. Judge Phillips was so impressed by Tom that he bestowed upon him the legalese title "vexatious litigant" which as we all know from Blacks rootin'est-tootin'est edition of 1886 means total triumph. It's also known in other circles as an "Ebert".
This latest depressing development is akin to the Shetland guy who wanted to be arrested so as to promote some issue of his own in a criminal court. Better pick an indictable offence Tom or you'll never see a jury and even if you do, the most that'll happen is that they will decide your innocence or guilt on the matter on the indictment, not rule on the merits of your eviction.
It looks cold and windy in Nottingham today and according to the forecast more wind and rain due tonight and a chilly low of 2 degrees.
The hangers-on seem to think this is a great move, that he's taken possession of his house.
Well I'm in possession of mine too. It's warm and dry and funnily enough I'm inside enjoying a cup of tea, not sat on the roof freezing my nuts off or in a shell of a building with all the amenities turned off with shit and piss still in the loft from the last brave occupiers.
The guy is almost 65 and as the annoying moron with the camera reminds us, he's 'suffering from cancer'. If it were my dad up there I'd be getting him safely down sharpish - the fact that they (his family and alleged "supporters") allow this circus and actively encourage it is appalling to my mind.
I wonder what the police will do? Probably leave him up there as there won't be many on duty given it's a Bank Holiday. The residents at numbers 1 and 5 Fearne Chase must be thoroughly overjoyed to see their former neighbour 'back home' once again; they might legitimately be expecting the police to move away the 'masses' milling about outside their properties, pissing in their bushes trampling the daffs, effing and jeffing & winding up the cops. No, the plods will probably be praying for 'PC Rain' to fall, come sort this out.
What next? I'm going to bet that Haining and others join him up there. After all, they've been there before and think themselves invincible after the last piss-pottical court case.
Haining is, as ever, the publicity whore and probably orchestrated this.
Finally is won't be burglary unless an intent to steal, injure someone or damage something once inside can be proven.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/9
Probably a low value criminal damage or perhaps Squatting in a Residential Building;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201 ... 44/enacted
Which are both summary only so no Crown Court hearing.
