"Bishop" <The Bishop@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:oitQe.68921$gB.38918@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> By "service providers" (more UK lingo?) do you
> mean utilities? Like electric, gas, water, etc.??
Internet Connection Provider and web site hosts, Lycos and DZiner
Solutions.
> Injunction against living???? Have you thought about
> taking this to the newspapers? Exposing them?
Yes. Got an advert published, and then they were stopped. At first, in
the mid 1990s, I thought it was funny, this landlord complaining a UK
newspaper article was biased. We probably have the most prostituted
press in the world. But these people win, and the press will not print
serious criticism of them, neither will the BBC.
> S Branson
> Yep, it's there alright. And she says
> this is not public information???!!!!
Yes, because as a lawyer and part of case, she is an Officer of the
Court. That gives her privileges, but it also means she is not allowed
to mislead the Court. When that injunction was obtained, she was obliged
to object to it, as the injunction is nonsense.
The purpose of injunctions is to enforce people's rights in civil law
(roughly). Were her home address private, she might have a right to have
that privacy protected by the Courts, although (not free) 192.com give
you access to the public electoral register, in which we are all supposed
to register.
English Courts do not issue Orders that cannot be enforced, neither do
they issue Orders that make no difference. Or they should not. That
Judge was obeying orders, and lying.
> Looks like her head is up her ass. If I can find
> it from the U.S., I am SURE anyone else can.
Her head should be, but she is winning, and I cannot defend myself. That
is my problem, much more in other areas of my life, where I cannot get
the nocturnal breathing aids I need, and no one is allowed to employ me
in a country with a labour shortage.
I am distressed by Miss Sarah Branson's claims to be a human rights
lawyer. In my case - and I make no judgement of her - she has been and
is the opposite. Barrister Sarah Branson has trampled over my human
rights, and for all of her commitment to "pro bono" (free) work, will not
ensure someone represents me.
Albeit, if she did, this claim against me, would collapse.
Sarah Branson will get to see this. So I ask her to help me, and I will
do my best to get her and anyone else who helps me, properly remunerated,
and the work for me off the pro bono caseload as soon as possible. We
would have no need to meet, all work could be done by email and letters.
Again, the moment anyone of her standing were to say no to Broomleigh
Housing Association, and help me, the need for it would probably stop
within a few days. Broomleigh Housing Association does not want to even
risk the poor publicity.
Notice, when they obtained the permanent injunctions (permanency is
unlawful in England, presumably not in Scotland), Broomleigh Housing
Association issued press releases, for example,
http://www.sarahbranson.com/harassment/ic24/default.htm
and
http://www.sarahbranson.com/harassment/scotsmn/default.htm
because the
site was all but off line.
This time http://www.sarahbranson.com/harassment/aug04/order01.htm
it was
not, and there was no press releases to my knowledge. Perhaps because
people might check?
--
T Moore
N E Manchester, England
http://sitemenu.tom-moore.com/
|
