bunt=straggle?

In the light of the straggle socks attacks against the person responsible
for putting an end to bunts crude attempt at fruad, it seems pretty certain
that the sock is bunt..............Why would anyone else bother?

k

 

You're obsessed and need to make your mind up. First I wsa Bunt, then
we had the lie that on Aug 23 you had good authority that I was a
teenager, then Bunt's mate now Bunt again.

Stil trying to big yourself up with your lies, I see.

 

I dont tell lies.................still smarting from my defeating you so
easily on the 27th July so easily, it would seem!

k

 

Thank you Chris. You genuinely made me laugh out loud this time.
I know it's wrong to laugh at the mentally disadvantaged, but I
couldn't help it.

Tiddy Ogg.
http://www.tiddyogg.co.uk

 

Anyone having a cursory look at your web pages might well think you are also
mentally disadvantaged!

k

 

Unfortunately Stevens, not a single soul believes a thing you say. Too
many lies, you see.

 

If that were the case it seems very strange that a high court judge seemed
quite comfortable with the "lies" that put paid to bunts/straggles
ridiculous attempt at fruad!

k

 

We are talking about YOU and your lies. You always twist the subject around
:-(((

Mike
The truth always prevails

 

the case was thrown out by the judge for procedural problems...and
advised that the papers properly presented could be re-submitted..

your part was to turn up and wipe the sweat from your brow.....

 

If only that had had anything to do with you, eh? You see, liars
always get caught out.

 

I take it then you were actually in court, and are able to explain why the
judge was wanting to impose injunctions on defendants, preventing them from
mentioning the fruadster/nonce that instigated the action?

k

 

Up until the time when I required the judge to denote in writing the reasons
for ignoring the 3 unless orders made in regard to the case prior to 27th
July, it was obvious the matter was going to trial................ask bunt
himself whether or not this is the case.

k

 

Yawn. Same tired old lies.

 

I wonder if you would be good enough to explain the reasons for the case
being struck out?

If I was mistaken as to what was contended by the judge on the 27th July,
perhaps you can put me right?

Finally as you are obviously a legal expert, and apparently also a mind
reader, then it seems very strange that your attempts at going to law, have
been so clumsy and amatuerish!

k

 

You only asked, because JARF told you to do so - if you had not the case
would no doubt gone to court!

 

Do you think from Daves posts on here he has an in depth grasp of legal
rules and protocols?

Finally like bunt do you actually believe everything you see posted here?

k

 

If you feel discussion of dirty dealings and fruad are stupid, than thats up
to you. Then again as someone who claims to be a mason, I would say you are
probably very familiar with such conduct.

k

 

Given that Dave gave you the key to having the case struck out,
I'd say he has a vastly greater grasp of legal rules and protocols than
yourself.

 

Given that not one person believes a single word you post, just who are
your trying to convince with your bleating?

 

Just a couple of simple questions which you dont seem able to answer! Maybe
questions on downloading kiddie porn are more your province?

k