UKIP-vs-EUkip

<b>UKIP-vs-EUkip</b>
CLICK The Pic. for TRAVEL!
Showing posts with label Mark Croucher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Croucher. Show all posts

Wednesday, 15 December 2010

#Doc058* - Skeptyk, Filth, The Forum, contempt, cowardice. - UKIP, Farage & Anna Lindh!

#Doc058* - Skeptyk, Filth, The Forum, contempt, cowardice. - UKIP, Farage & Anna Lindh!
.
Clean EUkip up NOW make UKIP electable! 
.
The corruption of EUkip’s leadership, 
their anti UKIP claque in POWER & the NEC 
is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!
.
Skeptyk, Filth, Butcher, The Forum, Douglas Denny, Stuart Parr, Mike McGough, Mark Croucher - contempt, cowardice. 
- UKIP, Farage & Anna Lindh!!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
From: Greg Lance-Watkins
eMail: Greg_L-W (Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com)
Tel:      UK: 01291 – 62 65 62


Hi,

Is it any wonder that the cowards and pond life on Anthony Butcher’s squalid little Forum tend to hide behind false names or silly constructs to dissemble and lie!

Well now we KNOW that ex-member in Nigel Farage!

Thanks for the phone call to tell me the slime were making fools of themselves inventing fantasies about me, and spreading lies as ever – no wonder filth like Skeptyk, Baron, Independent UKIP and now quite clearly Farage masquerading as ex-member, because I KNOW ex-member isn’t me and so the only person who could KNOW Farage leaked FACTS to me was Farage is in fact FARAGE – quite clever really because my sources managed to hide that fact from me and even I didn’t KNOW!

Is it any wonder these low lifes and their mates are too ashamed to use their own names, understandably the likes of Denny, Croucher, McGough and those actually using their own names to lie, slander, libel and defame with their fantasies and deliberate dishonesty clearly have no reputation worth supporting or defending and are happy to be shown as dishonest and dishonourable.
 Today 03:45 PM #49
ex-member

Member 

Join Date
Mar 2007
Posts
458

It is a fact that the person who used to leak UKIP internal decisions to Greg Lance-Watkins was a MR.Nigel Farage. That was of course when he and Greg were bosom friends.
Reply With Quote
A measure of the general dishonesty of those writing as Skeptyk too ashamed to put their name to the pack of lies they so often publish is that yet again they dishonestly misrepresent the tragic death of the Swedish Minister Anna Lindh, and my comments on the subject at the time when clearly they will have read the facts they dishonestly choose to be selective to try to present a completely false picture.



Be assured that, as has been shown repeatedly, neither the award winning leading investigative journalist Daniel Foggo on the front page of The Sunday Telegraph, nor I, did anything but tell the truth based upon the facts available to us. 

That this nasty little worm skeptyk yet again chooses to lie is no surprise. They have NEVER been able to show a single instance where I misrepresented a single FACT in a dishonest way and unable to refute the truth they resort to the cowards solution of sheltering behind anonymity and attacking the messenger - just how low will they sink in their gutter!

UKIP leadership may well be weak, useless, incompetent drunkards of no morality or gravitas but in fact it is the filth they have gathered around them forming the dung heap from the top of which they crow that do the most damage and provide the most ammunition for The EU. Filth like those I have named – none of whom does one ever see letters, eMails, articles, blogs or even entries on reputable Forums addressing the EU – they are all but invisible in the battle against membership of The EU, as are the mouthy dishonest liars like Stuart Parr and wee Farage’s children’s club of childish fans, ranging in age from 15-75!

Is there anyone left in UKIP who is not so tainted by association with these filth and with membership of The EFD and the endless scrabbling for personal gain – whether as a liar like Bannerman or Andreasen, a thief and a fraud like Agnew or Bannerman, a spineless self server like Coleman or Buffton, a fool like Bloom or Legge, a self serving venal twerp like Nuttal or Clark,l or an insecure strutting barrow boy like Farage capitalising as a schpieler.

At least Nattrass & Sinclaire had the morality to disassociate themselves from the filth in the dung heap and the vile chums of those on it!

Full marks to Sinclaire who is the ONLY UKIP MEP not just filling her bank account and actually trying her best, whilst under attack from the filth left in UKIP, to serve both her electorate and her Country – more visible to the public than the rest put together as she tries to acquit her constituency duties – fronts the defence against the invasion of Gypsies and land grabbers who quite openly flout planning laws and her Petition for an IN/OUT EU Referendum has been a tremendous achievement as she has funded it herself and driven it forward and even this the filth in UKIP attack as they have absolutely no interest visible in leaving The EU but a huge interest in protecting their income stream and status.

I’m glad of the occasional phonecall to tell me when the vile fools on Butcher’s forum say something of note – they may say what they like about me as everyone knows they are liars and I am not remotely important – I am not asking them to vote for me, I have absolutely no intertest in being a politician or joining ANY party.

A measure of the stupidity of the forum is that they make it very clear they can not refute a word I publish, they can not show a single solitary instance in 1,000s of blogs, 1,000s of forum postings and 1,000s of eMails plus 100s of pages of printed hand outs NOT ONE WORD can they show to be materially untrue, not one word is a lie, not one word is deliberately placed to mislead – they are so bereft of argument that they resort to attacking the messenger.

Yes I stated that I believe elected politicians who betray their Country are committing an act of treason and should face due provcess and even execution if the treason is grave. Yes I commented that I was glad to see someone standing up for their Country and its currency when the BBC announced that a Swedish politician had been attacked by a no campaigner in a shopping mall, in the belief that it was of the style of egg or tomato throwing.

YES I stood by my comment even when the BBC were still claiming it was a No Protester and the politician had died as morally violence in politics must accept the consequences of its action – I am tragicly sorry for her family and Swedish politics that she died and I do not accept murder by anyone be it a protester or the police.

I stood by my comment for several reasons – one that her death WAS a tragedy but an unexpected consequence of mild violence as the BBC was reporting it and I had unwisely endorsed that violence as reported and as I understood it – just as if you hit someone in self defence you MUST accept the consequences if you find they have an annurism of which neither you nor they know and it leads to a burst and death.

It being the run up to Christmas did someone in the US State department walk up to their old friend Richard Holbrook and give him a friendly bear hug that triggered his aeurtal annurism?

Finally as Skeptyk and all other informed individual NOW know the Swedish authorities and the BBC were seemingly deliberately misleading the public and it was not until AFTER the polls closed in Sweden that they let it be known that the unacceptable assault on Anna Lindh was NOT made by a NO Campaigner in their vote of destroying Swedish banking and The Kronner but was in fact a Sammi dissident in protest at the betrayal of The Sammi peoples by Anna Lindh.

I stood by the comment also based on the assurance that it would feature the fact of opposition to the EUro and loss of National identity, sovereignty and economic control on the front page of a major British broadsheet for the first time – which it did and there it has remained. If that means scum like Septic endlessly try to make their sad attacks frankly the damage done to The EU’s scams was well worth it – the issue was brought to the front page!

You may criticise the method but the sacrifice to achieve it was me and I consider my Country and liberty more important  and definitely more important than the views or opinions of cowards and filth like Skeptyk.

Keep shooting the messenger please it has no effect on me but it raises the profile of the FACTS I publish!

Regards,
Greg L-W.


ADDED 1815hrs.
PS.
My thanks to Niall Warry who has just put the following on The Forum, which is factually about right!:

Niall Warry's AvatarNiall Warry Niall Warry is online now Uber Member Niall Warry is a bit popular


Join Date
Feb 2006
Location
Somerset
Posts
6,328

Default

OK I've referred back to previous information and it is the time line that is all important in this story so pin back your ears skeptyk because I'll say this only once!

1.Day one Friday the BBC announce that while Anna Lindh was campaigning to scrap the Krona for the Euro she was attacked by a no campaigner. NO more deatils were given as at that stage none were known.

2. Based on this information alone GLW comments that it was good to hear that at last somebody was prepared to stand up for their currency and included this comment in a long e-mail about countries having to give up their currencies for the Euro.

3. Foggo reacts to GLW's e-mail and feels this would make a good story. He agrees for it to be on page 3 with a further supportive article near the middle of the paper by another jounalist. The article was to include a quote form GLW saying something like "Politicians who betray their country after DUE PROCESS should be executed."

4. Day two Saturday - Foggo informs GLW that she has died from a stab wound. GLW had no idea she had been stabbed and thought she had had an egg thrown at or something.

5.Day three Sunday the article is run but the sub-editor to 'spice it up' leaves out from GLW's quote the words DUE PROCESS.

6.Foggo rings GLW to offer an apology which he says will be printed next week but GLW declines this offer feeling an apology buried deep in the paper is hardly worth it. He now admits he stupidly made a mistake not to accept the apology.

7. Protestor turns out to be a Sami from Lapland and not a No campaigner who atacked Anna Lindh for her bretrayal of the Sami's for selling off their land to logging companies and mining interests.

So IMO not the best bit of PR GLW has ever had given people's abiltiy to only see or hear what they want to but the over riding issue still is not the man but his ball.

Has GLW ever said anything about UKIP which is not true?
Last edited by Niall Warry; Today at 05:08 PM.

http://NiallWarry.blogspot.com

FOR THE RECORD ADDED 23:57hrs.

here is the article from The Sunday Telegraph 7 years ago & for the record:

Eurosceptic hails Lindh murder

A prominent British Eurosceptic has described the murder of the Swedish foreign minister Anna Lindh as the act of a "patriot" and called upon other anti-euro campaigners to be prepared to take similar action against government figures here.
Police are investigating whether Greg Lance-Watkins, who runs EuroRealist, an internet site which is virulently against Britain's membership of the EU, has acted illegally.
Ms Lindh, 46, a leading proponent of the pro-euro campaign in Sweden which culminates today in a referendum on whether to join the currency, was stabbed by an unknown assailant four days ago. Mr Lance-Watkins has issued a statement welcoming the attack on Ms Lindh.
He calls British ministers "traitors" for signing away the UK's sovereignty and says they should be tried for treason.
In e-mails sent to a variety of organisations, he said: "I do hope there will be patriots in Britain with the courage to deal with traitors that has been shown in Sweden.
"If our corrupt politicians force us to take the same route to defend our economy and country . . . then I suggest the first patriot to take direct action is remembered by putting his or her statue on the remaining plinth in Trafalgar Square." A spokesman for Gwent Police said: "We will look at these e-mails to see if there is anything of a criminal nature."
Last night Mr Lance-Watkins stood by his comments. "Yes, I do support the execution of elected politicians when they seek to betray the electorate and their country," he said.

To view the original article CLICK HERE
NOW STUDY THE FACTS:

Eurosceptic hails Lindh murder

Title written NOT by Daniel Foggo but by sub editor for front page attention. AFTER DF had left for the weekend.
Do NOTE the time & date DF filed HIS story - one minute past midnight on Saturday morning. (sorry correction - an obvious error this was the Sunday morning. Clearly it could not in fact be 12:01hrs. on the 14th! Fortunately a simple error that alters nothing but actually shows the facts as I remember them to be MORE accurate as DF had long left the building! There is bound to be some duplicitous low life try and score points on this detail relative to 7 years ago. Would that they would put the effort into addressing the issues not preening over the mere messenger but then it is clear they lack the integrity or ability to address the message.)
A prominent British Eurosceptic has described the murder of the Swedish foreign minister Anna Lindh as the act of a "patriot" and called upon other anti-euro campaigners to be prepared to take similar action against government figures here.
My statement to DF was regarding the attack as reported by the BBC as I had received the information originally - The BBC stated the Minister had been attacked by a No Campaigner on the Wednesday evening with no further relevant details.
Police are investigating whether Greg Lance-Watkins, who runs EuroRealist, an internet site which is virulently against Britain's membership of the EU, has acted illegally.
As was obvious to them some low life mischief maker had phoned the Police relative to my eMail - of course no meaningful investigation took place and the malicious phonecall was ignored - I personally checked with the police at the time.
Ms Lindh, 46, a leading proponent of the pro-euro campaign in Sweden which culminates today in a referendum on whether to join the currency, was stabbed by an unknown assailant four days ago.
The assailant was I understand known to the police in Sweden as a Sammi dissident and was I understand arrested on the day of the attack.

Interestingly neither Daniel Foggo nor I were aware of any mention of any other culprit until AFTER the polls closed in the surrender referendum and the line was maintained by the Swedish Government and I understand The BBC that the attack was by a No Campaigner seemingly for the sympathy vote for the betrayal of Sweden.
Mr Lance-Watkins has issued a statement welcoming the attack on Ms Lindh.
CORRECT - when aware that an attack had taken place I was under the impression from the BBC reports that the equivalent of someone throwing an egg at her had occurred and it was not until Daniel phoned me, on, as I recall, the Friday that I became aware of the severity of the assault.
He calls British ministers "traitors" for signing away the UK's sovereignty and says they should be tried for treason.
CORRECT - I stand by this statement and British politicians and their political class and apparatchiks have dishonestly and unlawfully betrayed the peoples and Country of Britain in clear and irrefutable betrayal of The British Constitution as in Magna Carta and every single amendment allowable or made to it since.
In e-mails sent to a variety of organisations, he said: "I do hope there will be patriots in Britain with the courage to deal with traitors that has been shown in Sweden.
CORRECT - And so I do to this day in the context of the severity of the attack as and when I made the comment based upon the reporting and style of report of the BBC radio at the time (I do not have a TV nor have I had for 15 years). 
"If our corrupt politicians force us to take the same route to defend our economy and country . . . then I suggest the first patriot to take direct action is remembered by putting his or her statue on the remaining plinth in Trafalgar Square."
I believe this to be a good and effective use of the 4th. plinth most other statuary in London is of honourable men and women who defended these United Kingdoms, minded that no serious crime was involved in the defence of our currency and peoples.
A spokesman for Gwent Police said: "We will look at these e-mails to see if there is anything of a criminal nature."
You will note the comment 'IF' and the fact that he is commenting relative to 'e'Mails written in the clear belief that no injury of note had been caused as per the BBC reports at the time.
Last night Mr Lance-Watkins stood by his comments. "Yes, I do support the execution of elected politicians when they seek to betray the electorate and their country," he said.
CORRECT - Minded of the use of the word 'execution' which would clearly have a legal connotation and be the outcome of due process for treason which was unlawfully set aside by politicians to prevent them from this risk of due process - it will be noted the majority of the public believe it is the duty of the state to protect the innocent mebers of the state and the country by Judicious use of a death penalty.

Anna Lindh was, with the benefit of hindsight, fatally stabbed during the afternoon of Wednesday 10-Sep-2010.

I issued my 'e'Mail based upon the BBC news report that gave absolutely no indication it was a severe attack on the evening of 10-Sep-2010

I became aware that Anna Lindh had tragically died on Friday the 12-Sept-2010 when Daniel Foggo phoned to tell me and offered to pull the article. I understand the BBC announced the tragic death of Anna Lindh late on Thursday 11-Sept-2010 long after strenuous efforts were made, involving near constant transfussion and well over 9 hours of surgery time. There had been a period when they thought they had saved her life and she rallied only subsequently to require further surgery and I understand she died in surgery.

These details were given to me by two of the 3 Swedish Newspapers that phoned me 2 on the Sunday and one on the Monday - All three journalists considered, in the light of the facts, that it was an understandable error leading to a non story. They also informed me that even most of the media in Sweden were led to believe that the assailant was a No Campaigner until deadlines had passed for the closing of the ballot!

Two of the journalists said they knew and were in touch with the family and when asked to pass on my condollences personally assured me they would. On the Monday a phone call was made by an official from Sweden who thanked me for the condollences as they had been passed on to the family and explained the Swedish authorities had no interest in the report and understood the time lines.

The outcome and reasoning was as published above. Daniel Foggo brought the article up to date with wording he read to me on Saturday afternoon 13-Sep-2010.

The sub editor appended the sensationalist headline beyond the control of Daniel Foggo and made what he considered suitable minor alterations.

I have heard absolutely nothing further of this matter other than when the corrupt and dishonest seek to make capital out of selective representation in what is clearly a dishonest and cowardly way - all too often sheltering their dishonourable behaviour behind anonymity knowing that their reprehensible behaviour at the time, let alone seven years later brings shame on their identity which they thus hide.

I expect filth who can not honourably deal with the truth I publish on this and utter matters will seek out any filth they can concoct to try to defame the messenger - they seem not to be bright enough to realise the harm it does them each time as they wriggle and wheedle to make an issue of an event with absolutely no relevance to the facts they can not dispel.

Any individual of any morality or integrity will be aware that to attack the messenger in default of the message - the man instead of the ball - demeans the attacker and strenthens the message - those witjh an ability to lead evidence to overturn information are in the main respected but those who lead no consequential material in an attack on the man rather than the ball are rightly held in contempt by honourable men and women.

Failure to show that I have EVER deliberately and wittingly lied or misled whilst too cowardly to put their name to their attacks shows the depths to which such filth will sink in defence of their income or status.
More Details of Anna Lindh's life can be found at CLICK HERE

A speculative theory on the death of Anna Lindh CLICK HERE

In memory of Bo Holmberg widower of Anna Lindh CLICK HERE

The Anna Lindh Foundation (a part of EUROMED) CLICK HERE

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
 
 INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance
&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
(IF You Have No INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance Candidate) .
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, 21 March 2010

#Doc018* > CARDIFF COUNTY COURT - 18-March-2010

#Doc018* >  CARDIFF COUNTY COURT - 18-March-2010
Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!
The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership, their anti UKIP claque & the NEC is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!
CARDIFF COUNTY COURT - Court #05 - 18-March-2010!
Mark Christopher CROUCHER vs. Greg LANCE-WATKINS

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 09:50hrs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 20-Mar-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED  21-Mar-2010 01:40hrs.
A very sad reflection on UKIP! 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 25-Mar-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 29-Mar-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 07-Oct-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi,
I had intended NOT to comment on yesterdays events in Cardiff Crown Court - however I note Junius has commented CLICK HERE
The Junius write up came about as one of them called my home before I had returned, and I had on leaving the Court phoned Lee to say that we had effectively won the case. That Croucher's claim for some £8K had not stood as 3 examples given by the Judge of similar cases were for C£600 which all involved National Newspapers and commercial organisations and that a not for profit blog as run by the defendant commanded a fractional comparison. It was noted that a further claim for a per diem charge was completely out of order (UKIP's Croucher was claiming £75/day/picture x 3 as a punitive rate as no permission had been granted, about £90,000!).
It was also made clear that Croucher had failed to establish Copyright and as Paul Nuttall chairman of UKIP and Clive Page also of UKIP had put their name to the copyright ownership it was clear that this was a UKIP action.
Croucher has been ordered to pay my full costs, as 'accounted' item by item by the Judge in Court, within 28 days.
The above is a reasonable outline, I believe, however I was rather embroiled in the proceedings and may have misunderstood the niceties of the legalise.
As stated it was not my intent to publish until I had the full public judgement to hand, which I will publish.
Present in the Court was my solicitor who took a legal note and will provide a report - I shall seek his advice and if he approves I shall also publish his report.
Also in Court was a freelance journalist who I believe has or will be seeking to write up the story for a commissioning paper - should this third party report come to hand I shall similarly post same.
It is not my intent to 'crow' about this outcome as it does seem more a tragic tale as it seems to me that a particularly weak and venal little man, having failed at much that he has touched in life, has been, in his greed or desperation, manipulated by his employers UKIP, for whom he clearly either works or is some kind of agent, to act/front an attempt to silence my blog and the facts it publishes, by a very personal financial attack on Lee and I.
I take no pleasure in having won the case and obviously as Croucher has been acting in the interest of UKIP and his current employers the Racist, anti Jewish pro EU EFD, which would seem to be little more than a vehicle for Nigel Farage's personal career in the EU, it would seem to be a tragic reflection of just how debased UKIP would seem to have become - willingly using its staff, their sock puppets and their misguided supporters to seek to attack private individuals who take an unpaid role of conviction in opposition to membership of The EU, the dishonesty and corruption, bullying and abuse by UKIP & their staff would seem to know no limits!
I note there has been reflection on the situation pertinent to the BNP, I can throw very little light on this beyond the fact that Croucher gave mention of some pyricc victory prior to Christmas in his submissions to the Court. We understand from the Court in Welshpool that the case was in some manner set aside to be heard again in May, I would submit based on my understandings of costs that Croucher/UKIP could well be facing a bill that makes the £8,000+ payable to my lawyers seem paltry in extricating themselves from the BNP case.
I have portrayed these details in accord with my honest beliefs and understandings of this matter and would ask that others do not SPECULATE in the clear understanding that I will post the legal report if authorised, the journalist's report if obtained and the judgement when received.
Thank you to the many who have so clearly supported me throughout, particularly Lee (others left out to avoid them becoming victims of any attack by UKIP &/or its agents.)
I now call on Mark Croucher, UKIP & The EFD to ensure a rapid settlement of their respective debts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 09:50hrs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Case Number: 9DA01429
HEARD BEFORE: The Hon. W. GASKELL
DEFENCE BARISTER: Ms. Isabel JAMAL
8, NEW STREET CHAMBERS Intellectual Property Specialists
DEFENCE SOLICITORS: Mssrs. HUGH JAMES Solicitors
Acting : Richard LOCKE & Rhodri JONES
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I also call on UKIP to disassociate itself from The EFD as violence, personal attacks, racism, xenophobia, anti Judaism and a pro EU stance as are the views of some in the EFD - a position which is reprehensible, distasteful, un British and clearly at variance with the principles and aims of UKIP electorate and grass roots members.
I further call on UKIP and its agents to cease smearing and attacking those with honestly held beliefs at variance with the personal ambitions of UKIP's leadership and the largely parasitic staff and funded praise singers.
As you will know I have been a dedicated supporter of UKIP for many years and have devoted much of the last 10 years at least to activities opposing membership of The EU, I had hoped it was possible to clean up EUkip to reinstate a cleaned up UKIP electable by vision, values and example rather than fluke, opportunism and spin!
Since that has to date failed I am now an active supporter of:
INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance
Details of which can be found at http://www.Leave-the-EU.org.UK
I hope and believe that this new organisation can deliver what genuine supporters of UKIP have wished for all along - I appreciate the dishonest of EUkip in an attempt to keep their snouts in the troughs on the EU gravy train may well seek to smear and defame this new organisation as some sort of spoiler party - this is clearly not the case though I fear the EUkip wrecker claque will do all they can to suppress the truth - we have seen many of their sad efforts to date!
I trust this posting helps clarification of my position - I wish UKIP every success in seeking to Leave-the-EU and would welcome the genuine members standing and supporting INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance & I look forward to hearing of the demise of the malevolent claque that has seized control of the Party for their own gain forming as I have called it EUkip coming to an abrupt end (ever the optimist).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED  21-Mar-2019 01:40hrs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I have noticed this afternoon that Niall Warry has kindly opened a defence fund to assist me - much as I would like to reject the kindness I can not reasonably do so financially (any little helps). When in my position there is no longer pride or ego having so far faced down cancer those matters become utterly irrelevant.
It has been humbling how many people have shown their support and their revulsion at UKIP's behaviour and Croucher's action. All of this is a bit petty when you think I spoke to two people for the last time this week and I expect to possibly be present when a friend dies in a week or so, it puts the squalid behaviour of the likes of UKIP and some of its more despicable supporters in perspective when decent men and women die too soon and some of the filth and parasites we see in UKIP and on Anthony Butcher's nasty little gathering malinger on assuming that everyone like they are dishonest and corrupt.
Many lack even the basic morality to put their names to their vile spin such as Skeptyk, Independent UKIP and their ilk.
Thank you Niall for the risk you expose yourself to of smear and innuendo, abuse and dishonesty that you have exposed yourself to from some of the most unpleasant low lifes and vermin I have ever noted - their behaviour is inexcusable and cowardly!
With regard to any monies I am fortunate enough to receive I will personally phone each person and thank them and provide them with such accounting as they may reasonably request - if they are unsatisfied even at that stage I shall refund their donation.
The current situation is I have in place borrowings to cover my costs to an expected figure of about £12,000+.
The figures are hazey as yet since I have not received a full accounting schedule from my solicitors - I expect that within the next week or so but I shall not risk yet more costs by pestering them.
Part of the reason that the costs were so high was that had I lost I would have been liable for a sum in excess of £100,000 for the use of 3 publicity snaps on a blog!
I had little choice but to seek out the best legal advice that I could NOT afford, since that would prove cheaper and more survivable than the ignominy and problems of bankruptcy. You may not be aware that I have had cancer since November 1998 and had a radical nephrectomy in September 2001. Unfortunately my wound was infected with MRSA or similar a type of necrotising facaeitis (please accept the spelling - I am no doctor!) - this gave rise to a volume around the size of a fist literally rotting ajoining the muscles of the spinal column - to cut a long story short I was fortunate to survive but it left me without stomach muscles or normal peristalsis - thus although Lee struggled on we eventually had to shut our shop.
We managed to pay ALL our creditors and now no longer work living on not a lot but adamantly resisting state assistance.
We do occasionally receive money from media but there again I refuse to receive any money relative to any story pertaining to EUkip or the Freedom Struggle - I act out of duty and patriotism - working to save my Country and the future of its peoples is NOT about money! No amount of money justifies one drip of British blood nor one fraction of prostitution of principles.
To return to the Costs forced upon me by UKIP & Mark Croucher as I have said they amount to some £12K - I have not as yet received my Barristers account nor further sums.
O will post the sum total here and together with the Judgement when it is received the figure work will become more intelligible.
Please accept my apologies but I am myself somewhat hazey at the actual situation but as I understand it some time ago my legal team advised I should make an offer to try to bring the matter to a rapid close to save on expenses - which I did, not because I believed it would deliver justice for me but because it seemed the cheapest way out!
You will understand I had absolutely no knowledge of copyright law and as with virtually all other bloggers I acted in good faith assured by those I asked that use of pictures was OK on not for profit blogs and the like and as long as copyright was shown where known, credit was given where identified and removal effected if asked failing the choice to then buy. Had the matter been handled ethically I would I understand have received a phone call, eMail or letter showing copyright and a request that I either pay a fee, place a credit or remove the item timeously.
Up to the stage at which my offer was made (settling what I perceived to be a blackmail demand by UKIP through their agent Mark Croucher) - (it was in fact the Judge who defined Croucher as an agent of UKIP, though he seemed to me to intimate he saw it more as extortion!). To that stage my costs were, I understand about £4,000.
The offer was rejected and I gather the costs then are split. I continue to pay them but IF at Court the Court awards the same or a lower sum than the offer made (I think it is called a part 33 offer!!) then the plintiff is liable for the subsequent costs - subsequent to the offer. IF the Court awards a higher amount as defendent one is liable for those additional costs. The plaintiff is liable for their own costs throughout UNLESS they are awarded by the court against either the defendant or in some unusual cases the Court.
I have been asked why I did not defend the action myself but incurred lawyers and costs.
Firstly the enormity of the claim made against me.
Secondly the complexity of copyright law when involving virtual reality images freely available uncopyrightED on the internet. Thirdly the complexity of documentation and nomenclature
Fourthly the fact that had I sent a wrong document or been late it would have been exploited without any moral humanity or tollerance as had been proven.
I trust this helps clarify the situation and once again my sincere thanks for even the smallest of contributions - it WILL help.
My particular thanks to Niall for having the courage to face the twisters and dissemblers who are so much a part of EUkip and so undermine the possibilities of UKIP's success - who would want such dishonest and vicious cowards in any position of authority in any Country. Patriotic achievement is a matter of inclusivity, generosity and care taking people with you not battering them into submission and fear, exploitation and abuse.
If EUkip can not be cleaned up then its demise should be welcome as it represents no Patriotic values any decent people would accept!
Thank you again and as I have nothing to hide and have ALWAYS made a point of rigid honesty please be assured, even for the bullies, liars, cheats and cowards of EUkip I will publish all that I reasonably can regarding my costs and records thereof.
O shall not openly publish totals but will account to any donor making a contribution of 5% or more of the oal due. I will ask Niall to contact the 10 largest donors should it be required to decide how best any sum over the amount I have directly outlayed may be spent. I would ask that IF there is any excess sum it could go towards:
INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance
Clearly if UKIP was honourable it would settle the full amount of my expenses not the bare minimum awarded by the Court. I fail to see the morality of a political party seeking to destroy a member of the public however much their views may differ.
A very sad reflection on UKIP!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Saturday, 20 March 2010


#913* - re Mark CROUCHER, UKIP, Cardiff County Court Verdict - My thanks.

#913* - re Mark CROUCHER, UKIP, Cardiff County Court Verdict - My thanks.
Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!
The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership, their anti UKIP claque & the NEC is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!
re: Mark CROUCHER, UKIP, Cardiff County Court Verdict, 18-Mar-2010 - My thanks!
Hi,
I have been amazed at howmany people have clearly been following this case for a long time and have realised its huge significance to Lee and I and also to Bloggers and the internet in general.
When one realises, as many who have contacted me seem to have done, the incredible significance that in a Court of Law under a law of 1988 which has had very little realistic amendment except by the seat of the pants in various relatively minor cases and Courts by usage.
In 1988 there were in real terms no common usage of electronic transfer of photographic images.
It was not until December 1997 almost 10 years after the act that the first realistic blog was written and transmitted for 'common' consumption on the internet though there had been some experimentation within web sites and on Intra Nets starting in late 1994.
The first meaningful usage of a blog was December 1997 however I have been unable to ascertain when the first pictures were posted on a blog.
The most up to date figure I could find for the number of blogs world wide was somewhere over 200,000,000!
Astonishingly the law in use was designed for paper printed copy now with a quite reasonable guestimate running to Billions of pictures on the internet amongst the blogs etc. (I have just noted ONE individual with 15,400+ photos).
We are now talking of many millions of bloggers each day posting blogs with pictures in the virtual reality format in a transient nature where I have failed to identify a single solitary not for profit private blog who pays for readily available pictures.
Further I was unable this afternoon after the case had ended to locate any way in which copyright can be established of the many versions of the pictures for which I was taken to Court being sourced to UKIP or even to Mark Croucher.
I am not attempting to deny UKIP holds the copyright and was unable to afford to front the battle over the claim that Croucher owned the copyright though I am relieved to note his Hon. W. Gaskell specifically stated that Croucher had failed to establish his right of copyright to the Court's satisfaction despite UKIP having made themselves party to the Court Case by encouraging Croucher with documents put before the Court.
It is an incredibly messy business as it seems copyright is something of a movable feast and not just many facetted but many layered which is why we opted to obtain the best advice I could not afford!
There are after all only 4 Chambers in Britain which specialise in IP, clearly Intellectual Property is a complex and very specific area of law - that my Barrister's first qualification was Phys.Phil. at St. Hildas and a couple of years measuring the distance between binnary stars before moving on to further qualifications and Law is a measure of her chambers which I understand demands a top level scientific qualification before considering a new associate! The rigor of the discipline denoting the complexity of future cases.
The entire area of law is fascinating but the staggering ramifications of this case were clearly not lost on the legal team as had the quantum endorsed by UKIP and claimed by their agent Croucher been endorsed then it could have led to £1,000s of millions of claims and the shut down of the internet as we know it - thus clearly the case was unlikely to succeed IN MY OPINION - that is not to say that Croucher acting as UKIP's agent was not in a position to act in a reasonable manner and request removal of the pictures having shown reasonable provenance of copyright beyond reasonable usage and that he had made electronic efforts to show copyright to be retained.
The internet functions on the basis of reasonable trust whereby we the bloggers use pictures on the understanding that we show copyright where displayed, provide credit where it is attributable and use pictures to a greater or lesser extent in the clear understanding that IF a picture's author having shown right of copyright request the specific removal then of course we (by and large) honour the request whether for credit of for removal.
That UKIP's agent as their EFD group Media Manager has acted in the manner in which they have does little for the credibility of UKIP and would seem to be something of a monumental own goal for the Party, for it was THEIR staff member with THEIR Chairman's encouragement that has led to this unhappy affair when a phone call and some polite banter would have solved the entire matter at no cost to UKIP or their agent some 15 months ago.
I am happy to unreservedly apologise to UKIP for using a picture it would seem the Court has deemed to be their copyright, all be it shakily, and will be only too happy to acceded to any reasonable request of removal in the future should I accidentally infringe their copyright over pictures, other than of course pictures which are deemed to be common usage publicity photographs which are by deffinition for publicity, as I would of course for any other individual or organisation whose pictures I have used.
I trust now that UKIP will act expeditiously to ensure the payment ordered by the Court is made rather than further damage their reputation as it would seem in this instance.
There is I understand a photograph of Roger Knapman used somewhere on one of my 40 or so blogs and if UKIP would be so good as to identify the specific picture and show it is not merely a common usage picture for publicity and that they are deemed to hold the copyright I will be only too happy to oblige by removing same, in a spirit of co-operation and conciliation.
May I again thank the humbling number of people who have written articles on the internet or infringed copyright by reproducing articles on the matter!!!!! all over the internet I am truly humbled by the sense of fair play that has been shown by so many thoroughly decent people. Sadly we note the unpleasant remarks or obvious silence from some of the EUkip supporters who are even yet determined to bring EUkip into further disrepute.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 25-Mar-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi,

as promised here is the 'Note of Judgement' received from my solicitor today which supplements and clarifies my earlier postings on the matter at #912* & also #913*


Note of Judgment
His Honour Judge W Gaskell stated that this was an application by the defendant to strike out the claim.  He stated that today was the trial date and that the claimant was not in attendance. 

The first question which the Judge had to address was whether he could be confident that the claimant was aware of the hearing date.

He stated that the matter had previously been listed for trial on 27th January 2010.  This had been vacated and directions were given, including a new trial window.  Notice was given on 15th February 2010 stating that the trial had been listed on 18th March 2010.

The Judge had also heard that the defendant’s solicitor had spoken to the claimant the previous Friday and mention was made of today's hearing date during the call.  The Judge stated that an email had also been sent to the claimant setting out the various matters which needed to be resolved prior to the trial.

That email was in the bundle at page 139 and carried the date 15th March 2010.

The Judge had also heard evidence that the claimant was currently active on the internet and clearly there was an overwhelming likelihood that he had access to his emails.

The Judge then set out the background to the claim.  He stated that the claimant alleged that monies were due to him in respect of the use of 3 photographs used by the defendant on his internet blog.

The 3 photos were of head and shoulders of UKIP members (IJ later corrected the fact that one of the photos was a full body photograph of Nigel Ferrage).

The first issue was whether the claimant was the owner of the copyright and the photographs.  The Judge noted that Mr Croucher would have to overcome the fact that it seemed that the photographs had been taken by him in his capacity as an employee or at least as an agent employed by UKIP.

The Judge then turned to the issue of quantum.  If the claimant managed to overcome the issue of appropriate ownership the issue of quantum arises.  The Judge noted that the claimant claims £8,000.  On the material provided to the Judge, and he noted that he had not heard evidence from the claimant, he stated that it appeared to be grossly excessive. 

The Judge referred to the freelance fee guides and specifically to the online prices. 

The Judge noted that newspapers charge £625 for one year's use and that business use was £850 for one year. 

However, he noted that the use in question was by a not for profit website and stated that he was entitled on the basis of the material before him to conclude that it was highly unlikely that the claimant would achieve anything near that which he claimed.  However, the Judge noted that those issues could be put to one side for the moment.

The Judge stated that the fact was that the claimant had failed to file a pre trial checklist and the filing fee.  He had also failed to pay the hearing fee.  In accordance with the previous order made on 24th February 2010, the claim should be struck out due to this. 

The claimant had now failed to attend Court also.

The Judge stated that he was wholly satisfied that the claimant was aware of proceedings and had failed to take necessary steps in proceedings.  He had also failed to attend Court.  Had he attended Court and paid the money the Court would have heard the claimant's claim.

The Judge stated that taking in to consideration the claimant's breach of procedural requirements and his failure to attend Court and the difficulties he faced in relation to proving liability and quantum, it seemed appropriate to strike out the claim.  The Judge therefore struck out the claim.

Having heard submissions by the defendant’s counsel on costs, the Judge ordered the claimant to pay the defendant's costs assessed at £8,448.50 within 28 days.

Rhodri Jones (Solicitor),
Messrs. Hugh James Solicitors,
Cardiff.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 29-Mar-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Greg
I trust you received my email last week attaching the note of the judgment.  I today received a copy of the order from the court, a copy of which is enclosed.
I have already sent a letter to Mr Croucher by email enclosing the order and stating that payment is indeed expected within 28 days.  A copy will also go out by recorded post to avoid any difficulties.
I will, of course, update you with any response I receive from him.
Kind regards
Rhodri



Rhodri Jones
Solicitor
Commercial Litigation
Hugh James



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ADDITIONAL FACTS ADDED 07-Oct-2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Greg
 
I hope that you are keeping well.
 
I am pleased to confirm that our process server has served Mark Croucher on 29th September 2010.  If payment is not received within 21 days, we can issue a bankruptcy petition against him if those are your instructions.
 
I will update you with any news in the interim.
 
Kind regards
 
Rhodri

   

Rhodri Jones
Solicitor
Commercial Litigation
Hugh James
  
Insider Property Law Firm of the Year 2010
I have today thus instructed.

Currently Mark Croucher has an unresolved debt to me by order of The British Courts of C£8.5K + any additional costs I may accrue.


Currently UKIP have an unresolved debt to me of £12.5K
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


To View Further Details On This Issue:
#912* > CARDIFF COUNTY COURT - 18-March-2010  

#913* - re Mark CROUCHER, UKIP, Cardiff County Court Verdict - My thanks. 
TO LEAVE THE EU
What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples - they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.
NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.
Politicians are failing to tell the truth, but so are almost all wanabe Politicians, the MSM and Snivil Cervants.
The fact is that even if EVERY British MEP wanted change in The EU it would achieve NOTHING.
Every single British Politician, of EVERY Party, elected since before we joined the EUropean Common Market, has promised to change The EU's CAP - In 40 Years they have achieved absolutely NOTHING!
To try to put a value on OUR Freedom is as futile as floccipaucinihilipilification and as odious as the metissage of our societies, as we rummage in the ashes of our ancestors dreams, sacrifices and achievements, the flotsam of our hopes and the jetsam of our lives, consider the Country and Anglosphere which we thus leave our children and the future, with shame!
Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62
PLEASE POST THIS TAG AS FOLLOWS:ON YOUR eMAILS & BLOGS, FORUM POSTINGS & MAILINGS - GET THE MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE IT IS OUR BEST HOPE AS WHOEVER IS APPOINTED WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE AS PROVED!
I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country.
Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


to
Reclaim YOUR Future
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
IF You Have No INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance Candidate
LEAVE THE EU
to Reclaim YOUR Future
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Enhanced by Zemanta