Scottish Law Online Discussion Forum
http://www.scottishlaw.org.uk/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl
In Practice >> Lawyers >> Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
http://www.scottishlaw.org.uk/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1153740619

Message started by petrochelli on Sep 4th, 2006 at 8:20pm

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by petrochelli on Sep 4th, 2006 at 8:20pm
No-one is responding to your posts.

Take a hint.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Sep 7th, 2006 at 3:04pm
Dear Petrochelli,

How could one possibly refuse?

However, now that you have replied and put me back at the top of the Forum perhaps it will draw further attention & feedback to my cause. Thank you for your input.

Kind Regards, Craig John Tickell.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by petrochelli on Sep 7th, 2006 at 7:33pm
Dear Troll.

One could possibly refuse, nay, probably refuse as you are clearly posting the same incomprehensible drivel over and over again you multi forum posting spam monkey.

I couldn't give an iota where you are on this forum, as I post this in the knowledge that although I'm sure it will draw further feedback to your "cause" which I can only asume from a quick google is trolling thinly populated forums, it merely lends more weight to support your imminent IP banning.

And may I add

OMGWTFBBQ jooz |?  t34 7|?011z0|?z !!!!!!1!

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by simba on Sep 7th, 2006 at 8:47pm
lol ;D

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Sep 12th, 2006 at 8:10pm
Dear petrochelli and members,

I am a layman with absolutely no legal experience, and I have been very fortunate in receiving legal assistance from the Citizens Advice Bureau at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, who have helped me take numerous claims through the English Courts, with more pending, and most recently an action for Constructive Dismissal from the Employment Tribunal to the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg – this in itself will have alarm bells ringing loud and clear to ‘those-in-the-know’.

I do not regret a day of this six-year battle (and counting) nor the very strenuous legal work that I have put in to witness betterment of our lives.

My intention is not to argue but to have informed and well-mannered discussion on my topic, and if possible to do my bit to work towards this theme on this bulletin board. So please, let us not be distracted from the real issues here, and that is that this case is of the utmost significance. I do hope that the subject matter in itself will draw publicity and debate on a grander scale but for those subscribers of the Scottish Law Online Discussion Forum with experience in this field, I would be interested in their viewpoints.

Regards, Craig John Tickell.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by Norse_mann on Sep 12th, 2006 at 8:44pm
Well please then, for my benefit, can you explain the thrust of your above post. I see a big list of stuff purporting to refer to documents with no real questions raised or legal problems posed to facilitate dicussion only an offer to provide copies. In what way is this seeking out viewpoints?


Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by petrochelli on Sep 13th, 2006 at 2:37pm

Quote:
Area for lawyers to post queries and comments or even complain about their salary, firm, colleagues or the profession generally.



Quote:
I am a layman with absolutely no legal experience


You are posting in the wrong forum.
This topic should be moved.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Sep 14th, 2006 at 3:31pm
Dear Norse_mann,

I apologise. Due to the size of the topic I have had to post it in three parts. I would be grateful if you could please refer to all of the following:

Third part, you have seen.

Second part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR, 24.07.2006 at 12:29:05 by tickell

Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ (European Court Human Rt)24.07.2006 at 12:24:03 by tickell

URGENT ~ THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS;......03.04.2006 at 15:26:32 by tickell

Regards, Craig John Tickell.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Sep 14th, 2006 at 3:33pm
Hello petrochelli,

You have made a valid point, I accept that. Thank you, Craig John Tickell.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by Forum Admin on Jan 26th, 2007 at 4:16am
Okay, I've deleted some of these posts but left others.

The rest will probably be deleted too.  I'm not censoring the board but the text you're posting has clearly been cut and pasted from somewhere else which would give the impression you're spamming this community.

Please Craig, as a reply to this post, tell us what on earth it is that you're trying to tell us?

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by petrocelli on Jan 30th, 2007 at 6:24pm
I second that

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by petrocelli on Feb 2nd, 2007 at 8:01pm
Well FA, bet you're really glad you asked for an update now huh?

Yet again another bunch of nonsensical drivel.  Surprise Surprise.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Jan 29th, 2009 at 7:37pm

petrocelli wrote on Feb 2nd, 2007 at 8:01pm:
Well FA, bet you're really glad you asked for an update now huh?

Yet again another bunch of nonsensical drivel.  Surprise Surprise.


UPDATE 29/01/2009:

I had to post this in two Parts 15 & 15b(Synergy Employment Law) P & O Cruises, which was awkward. To view the whole text please do read both postings in this section: Scottish Law Online Discussion Forum › Help › Legal Advice and Questions.  

Please read the whole posts before responding, if you wish.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Jan 29th, 2009 at 7:38pm

wrote on Jan 26th, 2007 at 4:16am:
Okay, I've deleted some of these posts but left others.

The rest will probably be deleted too.  I'm not censoring the board but the text you're posting has clearly been cut and pasted from somewhere else which would give the impression you're spamming this community.

Please Craig, as a reply to this post, tell us what on earth it is that you're trying to tell us?


UPDATE 29/01/2009:

I had to post this in two Parts 15 & 15b(Synergy Employment Law) P & O Cruises, which was awkward. To view the whole text please do read both postings in this section: Scottish Law Online Discussion Forum › Help › Legal Advice and Questions.  

Please read the whole posts before responding, if you wish.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by grumpy on Jan 30th, 2009 at 8:55am
It is very difficult to tell if your posts have any merit given the way you have presented things. It can come across as mad, paranoid rantings when you don't say clearly and succinctly what it is you want help with.Remember that those who post are doing so voluntarily and it is too much to expect them to spend a lot of time reading lengthy docs to try and unravel what you are saying and tends to turn people off. I suggest that you post something that is a summary of your case keeping it short, to the point and without allegations of corruption etc. Conspiracy theorists are seldom listened to when they come across as bitter and paranoid. That can cloud judgement and divert attention away from what might be a real concern that is actually based on fact. Just a thought! Some conspiracies are real and some are in the mind of the complainer. It can be hard to tell the difference and the responses you are getting tell you that you are not getting your point across in a rational way that would allow objective views to be aired. This can then lead you to believe that we are all closing ranks and are then part of the conspiracy to silence you. It's not what you say but how you say it that is the problem and if you keep posting as you have you will get no help.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Jan 30th, 2009 at 3:33pm

grumpy wrote on Jan 30th, 2009 at 8:55am:
It is very difficult to tell if your posts have any merit given the way you have presented things. It can come across as mad, paranoid rantings when you don't say clearly and succinctly what it is you want help with.Remember that those who post are doing so voluntarily and it is too much to expect them to spend a lot of time reading lengthy docs to try and unravel what you are saying and tends to turn people off. I suggest that you post something that is a summary of your case keeping it short, to the point and without allegations of corruption etc. Conspiracy theorists are seldom listened to when they come across as bitter and paranoid. That can cloud judgement and divert attention away from what might be a real concern that is actually based on fact. Just a thought! Some conspiracies are real and some are in the mind of the complainer. It can be hard to tell the difference and the responses you are getting tell you that you are not getting your point across in a rational way that would allow objective views to be aired. This can then lead you to believe that we are all closing ranks and are then part of the conspiracy to silence you. It's not what you say but how you say it that is the problem and if you keep posting as you have you will get no help.


Hi grumpy, I noted your comment.

This particular post originated way back in September 2006. In January of 2007, it was deleted but the comments remained after some 7791 views! It is therefore difficult to assess, and no wonder that you struggled to find the initial question as it also is simply not there any longer. My post Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR was put in the right area, In Practice>Lawyers>Area for lawyers to post queries and comments or even complain about their salary, firm, colleagues or the profession generally. This is none other than a deadly serious & scandalous case. I stated the facts.

You will see that as a follow on to Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR I posted just before you,

“UPDATE 29/01/2009: I had to post this in two Parts 15 & 15b(Synergy Employment Law) P & O Cruises, which was awkward. To view the whole text please do read both postings in this section: Scottish Law Online Discussion Forum › Help › Legal Advice and Questions. Please read the whole posts before responding, if you wish.”

I am receiving useful PM’s to these threads from members.

Succinctly, The question posed now is:

I am a litigant in person who has to ask what is the fastest way to beat & expose appalling liars, perjurers, and criminals when the legal system itself is corrupt. I took a claim singlehandedly from the Employment Tribunal, Employment Appeal Tribunal, High Court, Court of Appeal, House of Lords, and to the European Court of Human Rights, thus far to no avail - for constructive dismissal. What can one do?” “This was huge undertaking, and as such would be difficult to summarise, but I can email you the statements and then you may wish to make a more informed comment.

Many thanks.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by stu1985 on Jan 30th, 2009 at 3:38pm
*sniggers at the stupidity*

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by tickell on Jan 31st, 2009 at 11:12pm

everyonesfavouriteposter wrote on Jan 30th, 2009 at 3:38pm:
*sniggers at the stupidity*


Perhaps grumpy simply did not have the time to trace back the thread before writing.

Title: Re: Third part of Part 12 – ‘The Decision’ ECHR
Post by merlia on Feb 4th, 2009 at 5:08pm
Nice work offya, it shows you're working them HARD!

_________________________
Miami Lawyers

Scottish Law Online Discussion Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.