Hello Mike,
Well, I didn't see anything from Bg about considering the court route - only
his refusal to deal with it when
JT was referring to it so I can't comment on more than that about what he said
(a lot of my emails seem
to be going back to my servers trash box for some reason?) but, it appears to
be that he disagrees with
that route - has he researched anything about it to lead him to that belief?,
if so, it would be helpful if
he could re-post it. Has he tried to do it himself and failed?
I think we need to find a list that we could store such research for all to
see, don't you?.
That can't be done on this list so, we need to find some way of doing this. I
suggested an online list like
Yahoo but there was zero interest from the list and there is a real inertia
here - and in most other places -
when beginning to actually do something.
So I'd suggest we need to find a semi-permanent file hosting service
specifically for that and which all
can visit at will...anyone any suggestions ? I believe I may have a large
cloud account that might be good
for this but I'd have to check again. Yes, it would probably be spied on but
all that would be there would
be our perfectly legal research.
It's true that the courts are corrupt - I've had experience of that myself! I
agree with John-T though that
if the higher ones are approached properly and with all proper court
procedures, they still have some legal
honour. If they don't then we'll at least know that the game is lost already -
and have proof
You said this avenue appears to be blocked but it does'nt appear to be so
according to the attached pdf?
It looks as though a claim can be started there, without a lawyer initially,
but there is a lot of reading to be
done concerning the correct forms and procedures which I'm too tired to start
to study but any budding
lawyers out there might be able to help? Would a barrister be necessary?
Preferable but is one required?
I think some like Ian R Crane could have the 'talk' for that if fully prepped?
I agree with you that it's most definitely worth researching so, how to start?
. Possibly by just
downloading forms to study as a start?. Page 23 and 24 of the pdf gives info
about procedures and fees for
taking a claim. It seems to be only £200 or so; free if disabled etc so maybe
a disabled person might
be the best to 'front' it as they are not likely to be chased for fees if the
case loses. Certainly worth looking
into further.
As to them incarcerating or killing us, I suppose it could happen but, if the
claim is made by an established
group, sharing all information to ALL members then I think it's not very likely
that they'd carry out a massacre,
No, I think at that point even a spook would baulk and refuse....jailing us all
under some legislative pretext
is more likely ('extremist' views or the like maybe?) but it would be a
difficult case for them to win............
or maybe not!
Regards
Ray
From: patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mike Green
Sent: 06 December 2015 16:20
To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [patriots] Re: Mantra
Hi Ray,
I agree with Brian on this one, in that I am of the view that it would not be
possible to bring a successful case against them using their own corrupt
system. I am not clear on what method John proposes to use to access the
courts. When I suggested taking a joint case against BHH for refusing to
investigate crimes that had been recorded as such by UK police forces, I was
proposing that we use the courts of Queens Bench Division. These courts were
designed to allow us to bring claims against individuals or organisations that
had done or were doing us harm. However access to these courts now appears to
have been blocked. It may still be possible to bring a private prosecution
against the police (Michael Doherty has had some success in this regard), but
such private prosecutions are allowed only very rarely. It might be worth
exploring, however I am of the view that they will incarcerate or kill us
before they will ever allow us to get the likes of BHH into a court, and I told
John that many months ago.
Mike.
On 06/12/15 15:58, Rays1 wrote:
Hello Judith,
Yes, 'Our man Flint' did indeed, drop a bit of a clanger with those, shall we
say, "Unwise"
remarks he made. What struck me particularly was his scathing sarcasm toward
John-T,
(Mon 30/11/2015 10:24)
"My goodness
I have read it all now. The courts are corrupt and do not make fair
judgements so lets crowd fund and use the courts.
Astonishing logic"
Bg
Of course, John said no such thing; he did in fact propose an admittedly
'roundabout' way
of a possibly very positive action that may turn out to be a successful route
to try in the upper courts -
if the money could be raised or legal aid obtained or whatever..
I agree now though that this does raise a serious question concerning Bg. Why
would he distort
John-T's words so much whilst determinedly avoiding the proposal at hand?
I'm not convinced he's been "exposed" as some sort of establishment plant and
provocateur or
"controlled opposition" and will just wait and see for now.
Regards
Ray
From: patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Judith Longman
Sent: 06 December 2015 14:35
To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [patriots] Re: Mantra
Jack & Mike
You are right. I have always made excuses for Brian in the past so thanks for
exposing him and opening my eyes.
Judith
On 06/12/15 13:43, Jack Lewis wrote:
When you look through all the emails Brian sends in reply to us he sounds like
a programmed automaton spouting out the same 'mantra' time after time without
any real reference the emails he is replying to. Its impossible to try and get
him to respond directly to the comments made against him. Its simply
frustrating and pointless in trying to dialogue with him.
Jack
--
Unless you are a subscriber to the UKPatriots list, all emails sent through
'Reply All' to UKPatriots will be bounced.
--
Judith Longman
Attachment:
queen-bench-guide.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
