POTTY TRAINING - Using a potty correctly may be a new skill for your planning team to learn if they keep missing the bowl or forgetting to flush, or maybe even fumble the paperwork. Being patient and firm with them will help them get it right eventually, even if they sometimes feel frustrated. They should be taught that every person is entitled to a toilet no matter how much their legal team are out to harm a challenging member of the public - and yes we know how irritating it is to be caught out consistently by some members of the public - and yes of course that makes you hate that/those members of the public more - leading you into trying another dirty trick. But will that lead to more spillages?
So, if you are going to plan a vendetta, hoping to harass someone to vacate Wealden land for the benefit of someone else locally, be sure that you don't get caught with your trousers down, forget to flush, or even pull your trousers up too soon. Be careful to stay in the groove by following statute to the letter and don't hope that all Judges or Inspectors will turn a blink eye with a funny handshake - there are many who are not members and these are the airings that are sure to come back to haunt you to reveal what you did and why you did it. Sleep safe at night by doing the right thing. Do not try to deprive anyone of their state granted rights and put the lid down.
Michael or Malcolm John Wakeford works for Wealden District Council. He is part of what looks to be an attempted fraud on the part of this local authority, working with Andrew Corkish and the Valuation Office to obtain monies for premises that cannot be legally occupied for the use they are saying the present occupiers must adopt, even though they wish to operate the buildings as a museum and shrine to Nazism in the United Kingdom.
For over 35 years Wealden have been persecuting the former occupier, continuing to the present day in trying to force him to pay for a use that he is not prepared to entertain while this council refuse to comply with the law of the land.
Wealden have an extant Enforcement Notice that was obtained by deception between 1986 and 1987. The ugly truth confirming the deception borne out of bias (institutionalised discrimination), was revealed in 1999 by a survey commissioned by East Sussex County Council. Unfortunately, this report was a couple of years too late to prevent Inspector Raymond Michael from being duped.
Malcolm Wakeford was concerned with this matter in December of 2018 and January of 2019, along with barrister, Jeremy Cooke, of Pallant Chambers. Both legal representatives are potentially accessories in what amounts to a joint enterprise, aiding and abetting Wealden Council in seeking to obtain rates taxes that will cause their victim loss, simply because he is being charged a property tax for a use that this Council have an Enforcement Notice that prohibits residential use.
Both officers of the Court appear to have fallen foul of the Accessories and Abettors Act of 1861. The alleged offences should be read in conjunction with the history of the matter, when you might agree that perceived bias is an underlying thread that unravels the deception of George Morham White and Thomas William Hoy in 1987, coupled with the joint enterprise of J Douglas Moss, Victorio Scarpa, Ashley Brown and Ian Kay through 1997 to 1998 - also involving various chief executives. All being officers of Wealden District Council involved in what amounts to a vendetta, then cover up of the deception of the Secretary of State on several occasions, also involving Sussex Police in the cover up in 1997, during a Petition that turned into 12 complaints of a criminal nature, that Sussex police failed to investigate.
Instead of investigating the matter, recording the crimes with a number and interviewing the complainants, Sussex police, then also involved the Crown Prosecution Service in the frauds and other criminal allegations, when this police force allowed the officers of Wealden Council to use headed police note paper to draft what they wanted the police to say, such that it could be read out at a full council meeting, to exonerate the officers who were accused.
It is also true, that on the 19th of August 2019, the Magistrates Court confirmed an Order, in the full knowledge that they had issued an earlier Order - and that the earlier matter was/is a matter for criminal investigation at the time of issue on the 19th of August. It is yet to be confirmed if the Crown Prosecution Service can deal with the matter, or if it should be given to the Serious Fraud Office, the Department of Public Prosecutions, the Attorney General or Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth under the provision of the 1689 Bill of Rights.
Victorio Scarpa, David Whibley, Julian Black, Daniel Goodwin, Christine Arnold
Christine Nuttall, David Phillips, Douglas Moss, Ian Kay, Charles Lant
MISFEASANCE & MALFEASANCE
When an officer of the courts omits to include evidence that he knows is relevant to a hearing, that is termed misfeasance in public office. Where an officer then tries to cover up his or her misfeasance (as did Ian Kay in the Stream Farm matter), that becomes malfeasance. The difference is that misfeasance is a civil wrong, whereas malfeasance is a criminal offence. The leading case precedent on malfeasance is: R. v Bowden 1995 Court of Appeal (98 1 WLR), where police constable Bowden failed in his duty to protect a member of the public.
LINKS & REFERENCE
Vicarage Lane, Hailsham, East Sussex, BN27 2AX T: 01323 443322
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.