Freeman Megamerge

whippet

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

As a non-legal observer it seems to me that they (and Ben) always do this thing of talking about how they have a wonderful slam-dunk case on a novel piece of law, their supporters then turn up and holler them on, facebook reports afterwards talk about how the stunned opposition barrister was torn a new arse by the cleverness of their argument, the clerk quoted as saying he'd never seen anything so well presented, lawyers came from others courts to see them in action (this last bit probably true but for reverse reasons).
Then 72 hours later the judgement goes against them, they express amazement and say anyone who was there will know is has to be corruption on the part of the judiciary and they mumble about arrests and lynchings.

Its a very entertaining circle really.

you forgot the bit about then Impeaching the judge .... but again that does not materialise.

What will be interesting is how these will suddenly argue in the court tomorrow about how they are not organisers and only Facebook followers of the Land League and Hub ... not having the courage of their convictions

Robbo

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/film-case-and-face-jail-judge-tells-court-306832.html

About time these nutters got the taste of the inside of a cell.

Best line "Garda Griffin said yesterday that he contacted the defendant’s wife who told him she went to work on Monday morning leaving him at home to mind their sick child but that he left the sick child at home alone."

According to posters on PIR, the Examiner is part of a sinister conspiracy run by the Jews, in classic tinfoil hat style.

Vin (recognising a Statute when it suits him) reckons it's data protection breach to report on matters which happened in open court

HamsterFace

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

As a non-legal observer it seems to me...

non-legal!?!?

You are sovereign, don't ever forget that lest thou art a legal fiction!

Robbo

Not a great day for the actual Freeman Freemen. Looks like they're now admitting that the debt is legitimate, just not as big as claimed.

I believe not much happened with the Hubsters et al today. It's all adjourned into next week to allow all of the defendants a chance to show up.

whippet

Robbo wrote: »

Not a great day for the actual Freeman Freemen. Looks like they're now admitting that the debt is legitimate, just not as big as claimed.

I believe not much happened with the Hubsters et al today. It's all adjourned into next week to allow all of the defendants a chance to show up.

I find the bits about how they went on a mad spending splurge and how they totally inflated the revenues of the window cleaning business to be the most important aspects .. it shows how all the arguing by the likes of Cullinane and Gilroy about how the banks are predatory is just nonsense .. this is a couple who played the game (cheated to get in to the game) .. danced around in a bed of cash and when the reality hit they decided to blame everyone else apart from themselves.

How any one can attempt to take the moral high ground against the banks using this couple as their platform is very much ill informed.

fxotoole

whippet wrote: »

How any one can attempt to take the moral high ground against the banks using this couple as their platform is very much ill informed.

Or just plain cynical.

For Forks Sake

Meanwhile, over at our old friends the Rodolphus Allen Trust , someone could probably do with a lie-down.

Losty Dublin

Some time ago we heard about a building in Merrion Square which was subject to court injunctions after the Rodolpus Allen Trust pretended to own the building.

Yesterday it was back in the news again with a rather bizarre twist and it's apparant tenant.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

whippet

with out knowing the ins and outs of this case ... i'd imagine the family member knowing the net was tightening as they didn't pay the mortgage on the building enlisted the help of charlie and his trust .. that went pear shaped so decided to sign a 15 year tenancy at a very favourable rent to try and subvent the receivers.

But I would imagine a lease like this that was signed with the knowledge of the receivers appointment and at a favourable rent could be challenged and made invalid fairly easily.

but this is only me being a hurler on the ditch ..

Losty Dublin

The lease seems to pre date the RATs (What a perfect acronym!) but that sort of logic sounds right in that the lease is there as some sort of deterrent. Alone its span isn't that of the typical residential property and is there to try and catch out somebody.

whippet wrote: »

with out knowing the ins and outs of this case ... i'd imagine the family member knowing the net was tightening as they didn't pay the mortgage on the building enlisted the help of charlie and his trust .. that went pear shaped so decided to sign a 15 year tenancy at a very favourable rent to try and subvent the receivers.

But I would imagine a lease like this that was signed with the knowledge of the receivers appointment and at a favourable rent could be challenged and made invalid fairly easily.

but this is only me being a hurler on the ditch ..

FreudianSlippers

Robbo wrote: »

Not a great day for the actual Freeman Freemen. Looks like they're now admitting that the debt is legitimate, just not as big as claimed.

I believe not much happened with the Hubsters et al today. It's all adjourned into next week to allow all of the defendants a chance to show up.

A part of me actually feels quite sorry for them

whippet

here's a little snippet from one of Mr Gilroy's masterclasses in how to torment the courts ..... seems like total waffle to me but gives an insight as to how he operates. Remember he is charging for this advise now !!

Courtesy Debt Solutions Waterford (a sort of illegitimate child of DebtOptions born out of Claire Cullinanes flight with the swans to Cork Co. Co.)

The start of the clip seems to miss out on some one who Ben claims received payment to change legislation .. it's a pity the camera man decided not to include that part

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=396450590516879

moyners

whippet wrote: »

here's a little snippet from one of Mr Gilroy's masterclasses in how to torment the courts ..... seems like total waffle to me but gives an insight as to how he operates. Remember he is charging for this advise now !!

Courtesy Debt Solutions Waterford (a sort of illegitimate child of DebtOptions born out of Claire Cullinanes flight with the swans to Cork Co. Co.)

The start of the clip seems to miss out on some one who Ben claims received payment to change legislation .. it's a pity the camera man decided not to include that part

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=396450590516879

They forgot to blur out the mobile phone number on the whiteboard too

Thargor

Robbo wrote: »

Not a great day for the actual Freeman Freemen. Looks like they're now admitting that the debt is legitimate, just not as big as claimed.

I believe not much happened with the Hubsters et al today. It's all adjourned into next week to allow all of the defendants a chance to show up.

Ms Freeman, who represented herself and her husband in court, said her health had deteriorated and she had been unable to complete an application for legal aid.

Thats the best she could come up with?

Robbo

Thargor wrote: »

Thats the best she could come up with?

Same as the rest. Make a big noise on Facebook that you're going to shake the banking system to the core, take down the whole house of cards and walk away with no debt and millions in damages....use the same story as all the rest and get the usual 3-6 month adjournment.

littlemac1980

So did Billy turn the Seal or what? Or did we miss the deadline and let the Country lapse?

Little CuChulainn

littlemac1980 wrote: »

So did Billy turn the Seal or what? Or did we miss the deadline and let the Country lapse?

We did. Please hand in your passport at the local constabulary where you will take an oath of allegiance to the High King of Ireland.

jd

Some commentary on twitter (overheard: "we're drenched in microwaves")

https://twitter.com/hashtag/sealturning?f=realtime&src=hash

SpaceSasqwatch

jd wrote: »

Some commentary on twitter (overheard: "we're drenched in microwaves")

https://twitter.com/hashtag/sealturning?f=realtime&src=hash

Favourite tweet lol
"Not taking a picture of him but the guard has the greatest "this is bat****" face on him #sealturning"

For Forks Sake

Grolschevik

Now that's a sovereign seal I can get on board with.

Losty Dublin

jd wrote: »

Some commentary on twitter (overheard: "we're drenched in microwaves")

https://twitter.com/hashtag/sealturning?f=realtime&src=hash

Is that the seal which he makes all this fuss about? Because it looks more like a cheap ass Oirish souvenir that he bought from Carroll's on Westmoreland Street.

Losty Dublin

Stumbled across this gentleman on Youtube this morning. Can you spot anything odd about the logo on the wall?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ELHruY7hg

Little CuChulainn

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Stumbled across this gentleman on Youtube this morning. Can you spot anything odd about the logo on the wall?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ELHruY7hg

In his previous video, linked on AH, he said he was charged with obstructing a warrant. He seems to have gone back on that now because he realised that would be something he could provide evidence of and not something he could just claim.

His previous video is just full of inconsistencies too.

littlemac1980

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

In his previous video, linked on AH, he said he was charged with obstructing a warrant. He seems to have gone back on that now because he realised that would be something he could provide evidence of and not something he could just claim.

His previous video is just full of inconsistencies too.

I must say at the outset I've only watched a couple minutes of this video and of another video (re open letter to judges).

From what I've seen, at least at this stage, I wouldn't bundle this group in with the maritime law of the family loons.

The statement at the start of the video is to the effect that the group seek to promote greater transparency of processes involving the Gardai, Judiciary and Legal Professions.

I can't see that that isn't a worthwhile and sincere objective.

There's certainly merit to the argument that there isn't enough transparency in certain legal matters. I think this is even one of the core objectives of current reforms around the area of the legal professions.

Similarly it appears to be quite a legitimate position to advocate for open criticism of Gardai in specific circumstances where a person believes that they have been wronged.

The Guards aren't infallible, and shouldn't be considered so. There have been genuine controversies (even very recently) concerning the Gardai, and citizens may feel aggrieved and unfairly treated from time to time.

It's important, from a general societal perspective that people aren't ridiculed for expressing their concerns, particularly in relation to state services or entities which exercise specific legislative powers, in situations where their concerns are genuine, notwithstanding that their complaints ultimately may or may not be substantiated.

While of course there are, in certain circumstances, bodies set up to deal with complaints, such as the GSOC and the general Ombudsman, there will always be people who don't view such bodies as independent, and likewise, I believe there is value in allowing such people to express their concerns in that regard.

Little CuChulainn

littlemac1980 wrote: »

I must say at the outset I've only watched a couple minutes of this video and of another video (re open letter to judges).

From what I've seen, at least at this stage, I wouldn't bundle this group in with the maritime law of the family loons.

The statement at the start of the video is to the effect that the group seek to promote greater transparency of processes involving the Gardai, Judiciary and Legal Professions.

I can't see that that isn't a worthwhile and sincere objective.

There's certainly merit to the argument that there isn't enough transparency in certain legal matters. I think this is even one of the core objectives of current reforms around the area of the legal professions.

Similarly it appears to be quite a legitimate position to advocate for open criticism of Gardai in specific circumstances where a person believes that they have been wronged.

The Guards aren't infallible, and shouldn't be considered so. There have been genuine controversies (even very recently) concerning the Gardai, and citizens may feel aggrieved and unfairly treated from time to time.

It's important, from a general societal perspective that people aren't ridiculed for expressing their concerns, particularly in relation to state services or entities which exercise specific legislative powers, in situations where their concerns are genuine, notwithstanding that their complaints ultimately may or may not be substantiated.

While of course there are, in certain circumstances, bodies set up to deal with complaints, such as the GSOC and the general Ombudsman, there will always be people who don't view such bodies as independent, and likewise, I believe there is value in allowing such people to express their concerns in that regard.

I suppose it depends on how you interpret what he says. For example, you can believe that he went to England to work and came home and there happened to be a warrant for his arrest in relation to Revenue matters he knew nothing about. Or you can believe he went to England to avoid existing issues with the revenue and that's why there was a warrant waiting for him when he came home for Xmas and the Gardaí executed it before he could flee back to England. To me he sounds more like a Freeman than a victim of harassment. I feel sorry for his solicitor, unless of course he is as useless as the guy makes him out to be and he can't get him off a stalking charge when the only evidence is a dodgy confession, the explanation for which is inventive at best.

Or maybe I'm wrong and this is a combined effort on behalf of the Gardaí, Courts, DPP, HSA and Revenue to harass a man because he went out with a Gardas ex.

Robbo

The stars of Irish Country and Western music can rest easy, for The Hub are injuncted from droppping any truth bombs upon them within a 2km radius of a slide guitar.

Naturally they're bemused by all of this and think that they have certain absolute rights which are being trampled on by the rhinestone heeled cowboy boot of injustice. Of course their report of the day includes the usual **** of "giving barristers a run for their money".

I see from the pictures that Tom D'arcy has run out of Just For Men of late...

whippet

Robbo wrote: »

The stars of Irish Country and Western music can rest easy, for The Hub are injuncted from droppping any truth bombs upon them within a 2km radius of a slide guitar.

Naturally they're bemused by all of this and think that they have certain absolute rights which are being trampled on by the rhinestone heeled cowboy boot of injustice. Of course their report of the day includes the usual **** of "giving barristers a run for their money".

I see from the pictures that Tom D'arcy has run out of Just For Men of late...

If you look at there backslapping on Facebook they seem to be claiming this as a victory .. do they just love court? and any appearance in court is a personal victory?

More interestingly the mention of Ktech looking for damages .. that should be fun ...

G3467

Robbo wrote: »

The stars of Irish Country and Western music can rest easy, for The Hub are injuncted from droppping any truth bombs upon them within a 2km radius of a slide guitar.

Naturally they're bemused by all of this and think that they have certain absolute rights which are being trampled on by the rhinestone heeled cowboy boot of injustice. Of course their report of the day includes the usual **** of "giving barristers a run for their money".

I see from the pictures that Tom D'arcy has run out of Just For Men of late...

Perhaps he switched to Just For Freemen and it's not working