Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Does this mean then, that we are legally obliged to give our details to an accredited CEO? And that by not doing so we commit a criminal offence?

Unfortunately, Mio, Andy58 has caused confusion by his argumentative nature. The temptation to shake him warmly by the throat is becoming irresistible.

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Thanks MissFM for reviewing the videos honestly. What may not be immediately obvious from the videos is that when Mr Khan approached me, he was a considerable distance from the area where he says he saw my dog assume a squatting position.

Either Citizen Khan has telescopic vision or neither he or Tower Hamlets Council understand or have even a basic grasp of the rules of evidence. Do they honestly believe a court would swallow a statement that Citizen Khan saw your dog take a dump at some considerable distance when, in reality, it would not have been possible to see what the dog was doing? Of course they wouldn't. What Citizen Khan claims he saw is stretching the truth as it defies the laws of physics.

And when he got my attention, he was still some considerable distance still from me. This tells me that at the time he supposedly saw my dog squat, he was at a some distance from us. Which would also explain why neither I or my dog had noticed him. At a distance from us, I would say it was quite likely that he had mistaken my dog squatting to wee (which she does often) for my dog squatting to perform another necessary bodily function! My dog does not generally defecate in public at all, and one per walk is as much as she would ever do, so I was really quite sure that he was mistaken.

See above comment.

The other reason I am considering a claim against TH is because even after I had provided my details and picked up and disposed of the disputed poo, Mr Khan, joined by two of his CEO colleagues, continued to follow me at close range demanding details and telling me I was committing an offence. They followed me out of the park and around the adjacent street, until the Police arrived.

That sort of behaviour is totally unacceptable. It is almost certainly a breach of the Public Order Act 1986.

Now, I understand what you are saying in your post, but do you honestly think that kind of behaviour is acceptable and should go unchallenged?

Definitely not. The question that comes to mind is "How many others has Citizen Khan done this to and how many others are he and his colleagues likely to do it to if they are not stopped?"

Also, the entire fiasco took about an hour. That's an hour of trying to communicate with that guy, who I could not understand, who followed me even after I had done everything he asked, and who seemed to be trying to have me arrested.

Further evidence of unacceptable conduct.

There are also several posts over on my YouTube channel by people who have had similar incidents with CEOs - one of them even with Khan and one of his colleagues. That particular poster alleges she/he was knocked to the ground by him. This, and the council's backing up of Khan, leads me to believe that this is a deliberate approach being used by local authorities to extort money from people and hand out FPNs. Do you think this is a possibility?

It sounds deliberate to me. If you go on the UK Column website at www.ukcolumn.org you will find a link to check their Common Purpose database. If it comes up with any at London Borough of Tower Hamlets, it is a pretty good indication they have an infestation of their "graduates". Common Purpose is a Marxist organisation that masquerades as an educational charity. They have been linked to some pretty nasty incidents and fraud.

To be honest, Mio, I would strongly advise you to seek advice and guidance from a legal professional. They will be in a better position to advise as to what options are available to you.

I am of the view that your Convention rights under Article 6 of ECHR were breached and that Khan, his colleagues and London Borough of Tower Hamlets have probably breached Articles 17 and 18 also. However, you do need to confirm this with a legal professional. That is most important.

As for Common Purpose, the organisation and its "graduates" are terrified of exposure. That is their Achille's Heel. You might like to contact Brian Gerrish at UK Column. He is an authority on Common Purpose and the sort of agenda Citizen Khan appears to be following.

Hope this and the comments in red text helps.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I am not going to repeat myself as to what Public Law is. If you are so pig-headed and argumentative to understand what I am trying to explain to you, I am not going to waste what energy I have repeating myself.

Sorry I must have missed your explanation, I remember seeing some unsubstantiated nonsense relating to council tax which was proven to be complete rubbish, is that what you mean.

I am still awaiting some link to this. When ever you are ready.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Unfortunately, Mio, Andy58 has caused confusion by his argumentative nature. The temptation to shake him warmly by the throat is becoming irresistible.

Lats not get carried away BB, someone has to correct your factual errors, anyway you seem to have gotten back into rhetoric mode now,
I see your conspiracy theories are coming out as well, much better than trying to quote actual law, especially in your case.
This is your strength I would work with that,

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I am of the view that your Convention rights under Article 6 of ECHR were breached and that Khan, his colleagues and London Borough of Tower Hamlets have probably breached Articles 17 and 18 also. However, you do need to confirm this with a legal professional. That is most important.

As for Common Purpose, the organisation and its "graduates" are terrified of exposure. That is their Achille's Heel. You might like to contact Brian Gerrish at UK Column. He is an authority on Common Purpose and the sort of agenda Citizen Khan appears to be following.

Hope this and the comments in red text helps.

Yes I would contact the UN task-force and see if they will send a cruiser,

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Sorry I must have missed your explanation, I remember seeing some unsubstantiated nonsense relating to council tax which was proven to be complete rubbish, is that what you mean.

I am still awaiting some link to this. When ever you are ready.

Perhaps you would like to elaborate and qualify your statement as to what is "unsubstantiated nonsense relating to Council Tax which was proven to be complete rubbish".

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

You're clutching at straws, Andy58. Council Tax falls under the scope of Public Law, not Civil Law. It was Parliament who decided to deem magistrates courts the venue for hearing such cases. Incidentally, a court can be held almost anywhere. It doesn't have to be held in a court building. Courts have been held in public halls.

Here you go,

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

There again the Magistrates courts themselves seem to dissagree with you

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-...headingAnchor3

Magistrates - Civil

Although most magistrates deal with criminal work, they also decide many civil matters, particularly in relation to family work. Magistrates' civil roles include dealing with cases such as non-payment of council tax.

Did they teach you anything at bobby school

Here was my reply in case you missed it

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

To the OP

If it were me I would have a word with my Councillor, perhaps attend his/her next surgery, he will be aware of the arrangements for community policing and will be in a position to make a complaint on your behalf.

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Here was my reply in case you missed it

You seem to have conveniently-overlooked the fact that the text of the website page you have provided a link for has been written so that those who are not legally-trained or work in allied fields, e.g. law enforcement, can understand it. However, it is also known that there are factions within government agencies and departments who disseminate false or misleading information to the public. Although it may say "Civil" in the text on the website, anything relating to the administration of government and public services would come under the general heading of Public Law.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

You seem to have conveniently-overlooked the fact that the text of the website page you have provided a link for has been written so that those who are not legally-trained or work in allied fields, e.g. law enforcement, can understand it. However, it is also known that there are factions within government agencies and departments who disseminate false or misleading information to the public. Although it may say "Civil" in the text on the website, anything relating to the administration of government and public services would come under the general heading of Public Law.

So the government website is wrong BB, not you. I see.( this is a government website)

Just to cut the blarney BB, I do not accept that you have any special knowledge in any area of law, so please support any contentions with authority as I do, "because I say so", will not do.

This is way off topic. But i do find it unsettling that someone who purports to advise on bailiff matters does not know why liability orders for council tax are heard in the magistrates court, instead of the county court as you would expect of a CIVIL debt.

This as the subject of an action By Reverend Paul Nicholson and back in 2002, in which i took a minor part.

The reason, is so that criminal penalties can be applied to a civil debt(the liability order), this allows a bailiff or court officer not only to levy goods but also to commit to prison an offender for failing to pay a bill.


This is why the magistrates court is used the county court has no such power, at the time the idea that a CIVIL debt can be enforced by a penalty like this caused quite a stir and made many think of the old days where people were put into the workhouse or arrested for debt.

So there you are, a little more factual information for you to ignore.

[wales01man]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

All this legal or not talk rather detracts from the OPs situation. Could we have here a uniformed wanna be policemen throwing his weight about?would think mthat part of the job training is to be satisfied that the OP in this case is the guilty party from what I read this should be 50/50 so maybe training would be give a polite warning,
Instead we have this Khan character turning the episode into a farce, whether or not there is anything criminal hear talk of human rights laws Etc. just elevates the farce.
one question I have is what does the OP want the outcome of this to be? we have rogue Bailiffs overstepping the mark with their powers and many others including no doubt some CEOs remember no amount of training can turn someone perfect. Here we have such a trained fool thinking they have powers that they have not.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

However, it is also known that there are factions within government agencies and departments who disseminate false or misleading information to the public.

Just had to comment on this ridiculous statement, this really shows the level of your delusions.

A do you really think that the "government" would conspire to mislead the public by giving factually incorrect information in this manner, and

B If they did do you really think that they would do so on something as minor as saying something was a civil case instead of a "public law offence" (whatever that may be.)

Seriously delusional IMO

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

All this legal or not talk rather detracts from the OPs situation. Could we have here a uniformed wanna be policemen throwing his weight about?would think mthat part of the job training is to be satisfied that the OP in this case is the guilty party from what I read this should be 50/50 so maybe training would be give a polite warning,
Instead we have this Khan character turning the episode into a farce, whether or not there is anything criminal hear talk of human rights laws Etc. just elevates the farce.
one question I have is what does the OP want the outcome of this to be? we have rogue Bailiffs overstepping the mark with their powers and many others including no doubt some CEOs remember no amount of training can turn someone perfect. Here we have such a trained fool thinking they have powers that they have not.

Yes the problem is the behavior of the "officer" involved, the local community police are funded in a joint collaboration between the police force and the local authority. I was involved in the creation of such a facility for Tameside council in 2002.

The best course for a complaint would be via the council and if there is one, a question raised in the district assembly. IMO

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Just had to comment on this ridiculous statement, this really shows the level of your delusions.

A do you really think that the "government" would conspire to mislead the public by giving factually incorrect information in this manner, and

B If they did do you really think that they would do so on something as minor as saying something was a civil case instead of a "public law offence" (whatever that may be.)

Seriously delusional IMO

I'm afraid this post just goes to show how little you really know. I won't make any comment about your mental state as I am sure you know yourself there is something "not right" about the way in which you perceive what others say and do.