The comedy court of Common Law

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Only three cases listed at Portsmouth for a 10am start.

Daniel Cross
Mark Burgess (really don't think it's this one, if it's what I think it is)
Joseph Tomney (Court number and start time not allocated so I don't think it's this one either)

Not heard of Daniel, so I'm in the dark.

[exiledscouser]

The CLC is on a recruitment drive travel.



They want you, they want you, they want you as a new recruit! Interested? Sign up for the intensive training and a fancy CLC uniform.

Wage? Well for now it’s somewhat less than the minimum wage but don’t let that put you off.

Kit? A DVD of TGBMS and a used copy of “How I Kept My House” by T Crawfraud.

Pension? That’s for the other guy and anyway, who needs ‘em baby?

Training? Couldn’t be more intensive. Over a whole two days under the watchful eye of Sgt Sproul you’ll learn how you’ll be regularly arrested for impersonating plod and roundly ridiculed or ignored by everyone else.

We will also provide an advanced travelling course where you’ll get turns behind the wheel of the CLC Lada Riva with no need for pesky insurance, licence, tax or MOT as you green-light between evictions (Note: the real police are kindly looking after the Lada in their high security pound just now).

Qualifications? An unquestioning believe in HHJ Smith’ singular view of the world and how things actually work. A willingness to suspend belief and work with unsociable colleagues will be required.

Before you all go rushing to sign yourselves up there is one further box to tick; you’ll need to have already signed up to (and paid for) the CLC Birth Certificate malarkey, cheques please to J Smith, Dunfiddlin, Scotland.

Once you’ve paid up then you’ll be good to go; the world’s your lobster.

I’m parodying obviously but, seriously, 48 hours is all it’ll take to churn out fully dysfunctional common law plods, you won’t get paid (ever) and you’ll run the risk of unwanted attention from the real McPlod.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I suspect they also have not read the Police Act 1996

Section 90 Impersonation, etc.

(1)Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

(2)Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

(3)Any person who, not being a member of a police force or special constable, has in his possession any article of police uniform shall, unless he proves that he obtained possession of that article lawfully and has possession of it for a lawful purpose, be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale.

(4)In this section—

(a)“article of police uniform” means any article of uniform or any distinctive badge or mark or document of identification usually issued to members of police forces or special constables, or anything having the appearance of such an article, badge, mark or document.

A member of a police force” includes a member of the staff of the National Policing Improvement Agency who is a constable, and

(b)“special constable” means a special constable appointed for a police area.

Inconveniently for the CLC it is not triable both ways

[exiledscouser]

Let’s not forget section 2 of the 1936 Public Order Act which appears to have been presciently written with the Crazy QC himself in mind;

(1)If the members or adherents of any association of persons, whether incorporated or not, are—

(a)organised or trained or equipped for the purpose of enabling them to be employed in usurping the functions of the police or of the armed forces of the Crown; or

(b)organised and trained or organised and equipped either for the purpose of enabling them to be employed for the use or display of physical force in promoting any political object, or in such manner as to arouse reasonable apprehension that they are organised and either trained or equipped for that purpose....

......then any person who takes part in the control or management of the association, or in so organising or training as aforesaid any members or adherents thereof, shall be guilty of an offence under this section.

This archaic bit of legislation is still live, even to the extent of the 40/ fine you can look forward to.

[SpearGrass]

No, time has marched on even for the Commissioner Smiths and Roderick Spodes of this world. The penalty was updated in 1977 and 1980 and is now up to six months or a fine not exceeding £5,000 or both in a magistrates' court and imprisonment for up to 2 years or a a fine of any amount or both in the Crown Court.
I think the chances of anyone taking Mr Smith up on his offer are slight, but just possible. If I were defending such a person I would run a "more to be pitied than blamed" mitigation.

[John Uskglass]

organised or trained or equipped for the purpose of enabling them to be employed in usurping the functions of the police

In Manchester recently there have been instances of 'street patrols' taking it into their hands to 'deter crime'.

As the Manchester Evening News reported on Thursday FSP, which describes itself as a 'community driven service' which aims to 'deter crime', has vowed to continue 'as long as we have the residents on our side'.

Greater Manchester Police say the group has been previously warned about their activities, 'but there have been further concerning incidents where they have placed themselves and others at risk'.

The incidents include FSP volunteers following and confronting members of the public, driving dangerously while following a vehicle they believed had been involved in a burglary and breaking Covid rules, police say.

Their actions, GMP say, 'hinder police response, and can create tensions in the community the groups are seeking to protect'.

In a statement GMP said: "We appreciate the community spirit that the group has displayed and their willingness to help their fellow neighbours in the area.

"For instance, in October 2020 they identified an insecure property that were able to attended and secure, preventing unlawful access being gained.

"While we're grateful for their co-operation we have recently become aware of instances where their passion to help their community has strayed into potential incidents of vigilantism, including where members drove in an unsafe manner to obtain vehicle details of a car they suspected of being involved in a burglary.

"There have also been reports where members of the public have been followed and confronted, including a moped rider who left feeling distressed and threatened after being approached.

[url]https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.u ... d-19962867[/url]

IANAL, but wouldn't this activity be caught by the legislation?

[CrankyBoomer]

Not sure how true this is :-

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Not sure how true this is :-

She's been banned from Twitter before, so I suspect there is some truth in it.

However, since she appears to have been given warning, I suspect she has been told to remove something and the journalist liar is weighing up whether martyrdom is worth it.

[CrankyBoomer]

If this is the wrong thread please let me know but I thought this might provide a little light relief. I don't know why an American is standing for Mayor of London but the attached is hilarious (to me at least) - some queries regarding a GoFundMe I think.

[longdog]

I don't know why an American is standing for Mayor of London...

He's a British citizen now I think. Also a complete cretin and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he goes Full Trump when he inevitably loses and claims victory was stolen from him by a cabal of something, something, something.

[grixit]

In a statement GMP said: "We appreciate the community spirit that the group has displayed and their willingness to help their fellow neighbours in the area.

"For instance, in October 2020 they identified an insecure property that were able to attended and secure, preventing unlawful access being gained.

Wow, noticed an unlocked gate and informed the owner. No one would have been able to do that without all that training and organization!

[Gregg]

According to this...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22214728

Bullshit.

I also seriously doubt that Scottish common law ever had a general requirement to show hospitality "to all guests".

I'm pretty sure if there was, it had an exception for Edward I, Malleus Scotorum

[exiledscouser]

Greg.

I do wish you wouldn’t bring up these matters from recent history when they are still raw in the minds of the average Scot and Edward still warm in the ground.

[exiledscouser]

If this is the wrong thread please let me know but I thought this might provide a little light relief. I don't know why an American is standing for Mayor of London but the attached is hilarious (to me at least) - some queries regarding a GoFundMe I think.

Mr Rose gets the full support of the Plaistow Princess herself, no greater endorsement can I find;

Well I do hope Brian Rose wins the London Mayoral elections on May 5th...He is the change we desperately need. He is a normal human just like any one of us, and he is an anti-corruption whistleblower...not a corporate slave...he totally rips apart the greed of the ULEZ & Congestion charge increases during lock-down and got banned on social media for his truths about Covid-19 & 5G with David Icke:- plus

1. He is not a script reader
2. He did banking in USA and GAVE IT UP because it made him ill - to come to UK and start a NEW LIFE
3. He is sporty - makes you laugh
4. A vegan
5. Like Gandhi (drinks his own urine for health reasons)
6. Mainstream Media libel him all the time

He’s taking the piss - or drinking it at least.

[longdog]

2. He did banking in USA and GAVE IT UP because it made him ill - to come to UK and start a NEW LIFE was sacked for being permanently pissed and whacked out of his head on heroin and other substances.

Fixed that for her.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Mr Rose gets the full support of the Plaistow Princess herself, no greater endorsement can I find;

5. Like Gandhi (drinks his own urine for health reasons)

Ah. another of Neelu's proclamations slain by an inconvenient fact!

https://www.newsweek.com/explain-your-l ... pee-375339

[Hercule Parrot]

Interesting developments at the Comedy Court of Common Law. They have been joined by a renowned and eminent scientist -

Prof.Dr Dolores Cahill is a world-wide renowned expert in high-throughput proteomics technology development and automation, high content protein arrays and their biomedical applications, including in biomarker discovery and diagnostics. - (https://people.ucd.ie/dolores.cahill)



This does have an element of human tragedy, as it appears that this eminently respected boffin has gone Radio Rental. Her own Telegraph posts are a diary of decline into conspiracy nonsense (https://t.me/s/dolorescahill/240).

Conor Anderson, President of UCD Students’ Union said Prof Cahill, who chairs the far-right Irish Freedom Party, has propagated a number of “medically-inaccurate conspiracy theories in service of a far-right political agenda throughout the Covid-19 pandemic”. He said she is not an expert in virology, epidemiology, or public health. - (
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40247363.html)

[The Observer]

It's the motto that she is standing by that baffles me. If this is indeed the motto of common law courts, then it is contradictory. The whole point of any court is to render a judgment that is going to cause harm, loss and injury to one of the parties in some form or manner.

[Wakeman52]

Seems like the Prof's views are too extreme, even for an avowed far-right party....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Fre ... d_lockdown

[longdog]

It's the motto that she is standing by that baffles me. If this is indeed the motto of common law courts, then it is contradictory. The whole point of any court is to render a judgment that is going to cause harm, loss and injury to one of the parties in some form or manner.

It's the last one on the list that has broken my irony meter. Half of their "cases" are people looking to avoid having to honour contracts they freely entered into.

Of course it's entirely pointless trying to get them to understand that, as often as not, their actions are causing harm or loss to others as they just flat out deny the obvious.

They'll happily ignore the fact that their refusal to pay for public services and state benefits means others have to pay their share. But then they have such laughably wrong ideas about how money works I suppose they might genuinely believe the shortfall will just be magicked into existence. There's nothing like a pigheaded refusal to accept reality when it comes to justifying your own actions.