The Crawfords Keep Looking For A Unicorn

[rumpelstilzchen]

As the Crawfords have failed to produce any evidence whatsoever that their "troll" is a poster on Quatloos would it not be fair to assume at this stage that this was just another Crawfraud Lie?

[TheNewSaint]

Do we even know the basic facts of that case? What was the person charged with? What was the Crawford's involvement in the case (it's not clear to me if they were the victims)?

[letissier14]

Do we even know the basic facts of that case? What was the person charged with? What was the Crawford's involvement in the case (it's not clear to me if they were the victims)?

As far as I've been told, the so called "troll" attacked Colon and not any of the Crawfrauds

[notorial dissent]

How exactly did this alleged "troll" attack colon??? Was it a dirty look, a snide remark, an inappropriate wink?

[letissier14]

How exactly did this alleged "troll" attack colon??? Was it a dirty look, a snide remark, an inappropriate wink?

I think he pulled his pony tail lol

[TheNewSaint]

How exactly did this alleged "troll" attack colon??? Was it a dirty look, a snide remark, an inappropriate wink?

He used... sarcasm! He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, pathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious.

[LordEd]

Love that clip. I assume since this is the UK forum everyone here automatically knows all python quotes?

[hucknallred]

Love that clip. I assume since this is the UK forum everyone here automatically knows all python quotes?

ROMANES EUNT DOMUS ?

[Dr. Caligari]

Love that clip. I assume since this is the UK forum everyone here automatically knows all python quotes?

Most of the Americans here know them too. The show ran in the U.S. for a few years in the 1970s, and of course we got all the movies.

[TheNewSaint]

The show ran in the U.S. for a few years in the 1970s, and of course we got all the movies.

It also ran on MTV for awhile, when the channel was still fishing about for content (but long before The Real World and the subsequent atrocities it spawned).

Fawlty Towers and The Young Ones were also MTV staples around 1983-84, when there weren't quite enough music videos to play full-time yet. Absolutely Fabulous came later.

[Hercule Parrot]

TC's error is also in thinking that after losing a court case, he can appeal on the basis that "the other side didn't provide enough evidence to win".

Well, strictly speaking he can do that. Appeal routes are generally available on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to support conviction and the outcome was therefore irrational. However TC hasn't actually appealed, and may now have left it too late. And that's because he knows that an appeal court would find that the evidence actually was sufficient to support conviction.

[notorial dissent]

Isn't he past time at this point, and wouldn't he have to ask for leave to appeal?

[aesmith]

As far as I can determine you have to make an application to appeal, and this should be with 28 days of conviction. Again as far as I can see it's not impossible that an appeal out of time could be allowed if there was good reason for the delay, but whether in or out of time the appeal will only be allowed if there are valid grounds raised in the application.

[doublelong]

I think Crawford knows he is at the end of the line and he may be a fool but he is not stupid. I think he knows he will not progress any further with this case, but if he can stand up and call corruption due to not being granted an appeal he will. He will just leave out the bit that says he was out of time.

[littleFred]

Well, strictly speaking he can do that. Appeal routes are generally available on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to support conviction and the outcome was therefore irrational.

True. Tom would be arguing that the judge erred in concluding a fact (the ownership) from insufficient evidence to support that conclusion. As I mentioned a few pages ago, I don't know what evidence the CPS submitted about ownership. Perhaps none at all. Or, more likely, the Godsmark judgement.

But Tom is currently arguing that the CPS didn't present evidence that they didn't have (and had no reason to have), and that their failure to present that evidence sufficiently weakened their case that the judge should have believed Tom's claim that he owned the house.

[aesmith]

I still don't get what's behind their claim that the judge "ordered" those documents to be produced. I know that nothing the Crawfords say can be taken at face value, but that letter from the CPS is clearly in response to "something".

[AndyPandy]

I still don't get what's behind their claim that the judge "ordered" those documents to be produced. I know that nothing the Crawfords say can be taken at face value, but that letter from the CPS is clearly in response to "something".

If you look at the link it's in response to a list of questions / requests for documents Tom himself has asked for, possibly under Criminal Procedure Rule 15 - Disclosure, addessed to the Crown Court and the Judge in the case has asked the CPS to respond.

https://scontent.fman2-2.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=59551F7B

[TheNewSaint]

As far as I can determine you have to make an application to appeal, and this should be with 28 days of conviction. Again as far as I can see it's not impossible that an appeal out of time could be allowed if there was good reason for the delay, but whether in or out of time the appeal will only be allowed if there are valid grounds raised in the application.

This very distinction came up in an earlier proceeding, the one in which the suspension of the execution of the warrant was lifted. The judge allowed Crawford to appeal out of time, but refused the appeal on grounds that he didn't have a leg to stand on.

Permission to appeal is granted where an appeal has a real chance of success or there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard (CPR (52.3(6)).

The points raised by Mr Crawford are either without foundation or legally misconceived.

The order that I make is that permission to appeal out of time is granted but permission to appeal is refused.

http://www.nottinghampost.com/tom-crawf ... story.html

Edit: quoted wrong post

[TheNewSaint]

that letter from the CPS is clearly in response to "something".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

The Crawfords think the CPS should have documents pertaining to the warrant.
The CPS has no reason to have documents pertaining to the warrant.
The Crawfords write the CPS a letter asking which documents pertaining to the warrant they have.
CPS responds, correctly, that they have no documents pertaining to the warrant.
The Crawfords present this answer as proof of corruption, because the CPS should have documents pertaining to the warrant.

[longdog]

If Tom's argument that the CPS should've had a copy of the warrant were to succeed it would open an enormous can of worms.

Let's say a burglar, we'll call him Tim Cranford, broke into my home and stole my mobile phone. I see him running away, phone the rozzers, and he's arrested and charged. When it comes to court he claims the phone was really his and the CPS has to produce the reciept I have long since lost. Is the judge going to denand the CPS produce the reciept or he'll throw the case out? Is he fuck as like.