Quatloos!

rosy wrote:I hope that aluminium foil hat is shiny side out - I'm told that is what makes all the difference when it comes to mind control rays.

Steve's a pro, he'll have done it according to specifications. Note the two antennae's, built-in redundancy.

Siegfried Shrink wrote:

SteveUK wrote:You lot will be first against the wall come the revolution!

A little study of history reveals that quite often, those who organised the revolution are second against the wall when the revolution comes.

Back on topic, any news of the stunning guaranteed victory, with 100% success rate I am sure the delay is only due to the ongoing celebration occuring at both #17 and 17a now that they are both here.

So far ExpertinSFA hasn't updated either the 'mortgage fraud' or the 'possession order' page on his websites. I assume that as his site is otherwise devoid of any evidence of his ever actually doing anything he'd rather have the out of date content than no content at all.

One thing is for certain... If there was any way he could paint the court hearing as even partly successful he would've done it by now.

longdog wrote:So far ExpertinSFA hasn't updated either the 'mortgage fraud' or the 'possession order' page on his websites. I assume that as his site is otherwise devoid of any evidence of his ever actually doing anything he'd rather have the out of date content than no content at all.

One thing is for certain... If there was any way he could paint the court hearing as even partly successful he would've done it by now.

He has been active on his Facebook page, but so far absolutely no mention of his legal victory.

https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100013248283194

longdog wrote: One thing is for certain... If there was any way he could paint the court hearing as even partly successful he would've done it by now.

Ye of little faith. How could you ever doubt the legal abilities, they are"Experts in all legal matters" after all, it says so right their in the web address. Only someone with Supreme intellect and a mastery of the law would be able to make such a claim on the internet. Obviously, with hundreds of hours of online education, direct from YouTube, their expertise is second to none, discounting the every on of the thousands of qualified legal persons. I am sure there is a perfectly valid reason why the courts don't let him represent directly, they obviously fear his unparalleled judicial mind. He is a very Special person.

So you should be ashamed for knocking a special person like that.
(hopefully not needed)

Well, you know what they say,

• • Silence equates to acquiescence

• • • • • of

• • • ABJECT FAIL!!!!!

He won't talk about it the case on Friday, due to wanting ''to wait for this one to progress, because there are a lot of legal entities involved with this one now, so we're just letting them do the process". Apparently we'll understand why later.

He then goes on about securitisation of NI number and Birth Certificates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YajYBGSnjw

Angolvagyok wrote:He won't talk about it the case on Friday, due to wanting ''to wait for this one to progress, because there are a lot of legal entities involved with this one now, so we're just letting them do the process". Apparently we'll understand why later.

We understand now... They lost... Bigly.

Our old friend, and wife of Jesus, Cilla Go Lightly rears her ugly head again.

Hi, rebutted councils claim to their legal dept few months ago, they didn't respond which makes my rebuttal truth, OK so now I get enforcement agent letter this morning despite rebuttal and medical evidence sent to council, also sent noroiroa to EAs some time ago, threatened council manager with misconduct in public office if he continued harassing me. What next? Court trial for misconduct in public office or something better? Ideas anyone?

sounds like anther hiding to nothing coming her way. Considering her husband's omnipotent powers, surely he could just make her council tax bill go away?

Angolvagyok wrote:He then goes on about securitisation of NI number and Birth Certificates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YajYBGSnjw

Without mentioning (1) that the exact information with that same web site was on Youtube last year, so definitely Old News. Or (2) that it's nonsense anyway, sure stick your NI number in and it gives a price, but it does the same for any combination of letters or numbers. It's not even a question of a bond happening to have the same number, it quotes prices for clearly non-existent references. God knows what the web site is supposed to be doing, I suppose it's doing a hypothetical calculation .. "IF there was a bond with number "Getoutofdebtf", issued in 1980, then it's value would be $33,148.00"

Someone's pointed this out on his post in Sovereign P.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkeK5JZYrw8

The latest video is more of the same, bundle everything up and send it to the Vatican. They are having a waste paper collection drive for the church roof fund.
It amounts to a cursory command to collect up a load of stuff of a magical nature that you have to get exactly right, and you only have one chance at, so I am wondering if any more specific and usable instructions are available only on payment of a modest fee?

Or it could be that he is getting a bit bored with this futile nonsense. I know I am.

Siegfried Shrink wrote:The latest video is more of the same, bundle everything up and send it to the Vatican. They are having a waste paper collection drive for the church roof fund.
It amounts to a cursory command to collect up a load of stuff of a magical nature that you have to get exactly right, and you only have one chance at, so I am wondering if any more specific and usable instructions are available only on payment of a modest fee?

That would be my guess, although I hear his charges are far from modest. He's punting this nonsense even when it's being clearly pointed out to him as nonsense, to me that elevates him to crook rather than just idiot (reserving his right to be both of course).

Going back a bit, I phoned the Bodmin County court, but they will not tell anyone not connected to the case how it came out. This seems a bit at odds with things like law reports and bailii, law journals, etc.

This line of enquiry is not something I know anything about, so if someone does have some magic keys to 'Data Protection' (an excuse used for practically any enquiry about anything) they might try using them.

It seems logically inconsistent that despite the court hearing being public, and despite the fact that someone present can report what happened, there is no way of confirming this account is at all accurate. How do the various legal journals manage with their case reporting?

Siegfried Shrink wrote:It seems logically inconsistent that despite the court hearing being public, and despite the fact that someone present can report what happened, there is no way of confirming this account is at all accurate. How do the various legal journals manage with their case reporting?

I don't know how it's done across the pond, but here in the U.S. most courts post their records on line, which would include any written order or decision by the judge. Some places (generally smaller counties) don't have on-line dockets, but, even there, any member of the public can go down to the courthouse and inspect the records, which are considered public information.

Come on now, sury that there has been enough time to cast this as a Win, why the radio silence, not good form, I would say.

One small flake in the blizzard of whacko nonsense, but where on earth do they get these ideas from?

Julie Watson
Not sure if this is true but I read a long while ago that if you own your property outright it isn't subject to council tax, would anyone know if this is true?

What on a dipshit. Back in the day when my life was a bit different, I owned a house (freehold) with no mortgage. Obviously I still had to pay council tax.

As a council tenant I don't see why I should have to pay council tax when it's the council that owns the place