Dale Farm

19 Oct 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
We're talking criminal breaches of planning law. Again, people routinely go to prison for that, do they?

i never said they did.
Yes, you did :

Quote by Starlight
funny how mr smith and mr jones of normal avenue out there, would get fined or the threat of prison or actual prison for simply building a wall or going six inches over with there garden shed.

Quote by Starlight
Moving on, do those special circumstances you listed apply here as regards Dale Farm?

did i say they did neil?
Yes. It is implied. You quite clearly stated that the threat of prison should properly be somehow held over the heads of Dale Farm residents, and quite clearly implied that the fact that they were not being threatened with prison was somehow evidence of special treatment that you or I would not enjoy. I assume you were therefore asserting that this particular breach of planning law is both criminal and imprisonable, as otherwise your post makes no sense.

Quote by Starlight
In the most serious cases, serving an injunction is a more appropriate course of action than an Enforcement Notice. Failure to comply with an Injunction is a contempt of court for which there are serious penalties.
so whilst building a wall may not be the first reeson to jail someone they could be jailed if they break a court order so would be in contempt of court. " A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine or jail for someone found guilty of contempt of court" :thumbup:

Well done, you got there in the end. So it's the breach of a court order / contempt of court that's imprisonable, as previously stated. A new offence entirely. We are agreed then that you go to prison for the contempt of court, not for breaching planning law, except in very specific circumstances that do not apply at all to events at Dale Farm. ((( Specifically, offences under Section 9, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. ))) The prison sentence in cases that do not fall under that particular piece of legislation is entirely unrelated to the original planning offence, criminal or otherwise, except insofar as the court order follows from it.
HTH?
N x x x ;)

19 Oct 2011

Quote by neilinleeds
Well done, you got there in the end. So it's the breach of a court order / contempt of court that's imprisonable, as previously stated. A new offence entirely. We are agreed then that you go to prison for the contempt of court, not for breaching planning law. The prison sentence in that case is entirely unrelated to the original planning offence, criminal or otherwise, except insofar as the court order follows from it.
HTH?
N x x x ;)

neil.
let us take a little example eh?
a person does not pay there rates and gets taken to court. the court orders that person to pay the arrears and then adds costs to that persons bill. IF that person refuses to pay the court then have the power to ether impose more fines or sometimes jail that person.
now that person was not jailed for the original offence which was non payment of rates, buit was jailed for contempt of court a different thing entirely.
no different to building a brick wall neil on the side of a listed building. they build the wall and the council tells them to take it down. they refuse. after being taken to court the court orders the person to remove the wall, and they then refuse further. the judge then jails that person for contempt of court, NOT because of the wall.
you are having a bit of truble there neil understanding the debate. no worries my friend sometimes even i find simple things hard to grasp at times. wink

anyway no worries as this thred will now die a very gracious death as at long last the " travellers " have been moved from dale farm and the land which is green belt land can be returned to that. here is hoping anyway.
nice chatting with you though neil :thumbup:

20 Oct 2011

An interesting throw-away comment made on SkyNews this morning about some of the 'protesters' throwing their weight into the ring...
Would these protesters have been just as vocal and prominent had the boot been on the other foot and Basildon District Council had been trying to remove the green belt status of this land to grant a housing permission on it?
Makes you think, doesn't it.
... and what about that 'Minty' character standing in front of a burning caravan wielding a crucifix as if she was Joan of Arc?
Well done Basildon; you have certainly provided some quality entertainment this week :thumbup:

20 Oct 2011

Imagine just for argument if the residents of Dale Farm would have been Black rather than those with Irish heritage.
I think it would have been dealt with let's say a lot quicker & possibly more aggressive than what has happened. Forget about this High Court stuff, as it wouldn't have occurred.
Even the liberal sympathy from the likes of the BBC has been amazing even after commenting that such communities are a financial burden on local authorities...
Schools, GP's & Police.
I simply don't understand in this 21st Century existence what's the deal with travelling constantly?
Another point how many of these Adult Females within these Irish Travelling Communities have qualifications, are in employment & if any are still unmarried?
Some might disagree with my views but a group settled near my neighbourhood & created total havoc then left leaving rubbish cleaned by the local authority.
The amount of care & attention they get from my own local authority is amazing...
particularly designated Family Support Workers & Youth Workers.
Whilst normal working class people / communities that live in Houses within neighbourhoods don't get nothing.
Let's say from my own personal experience, am not a fan.

20 Oct 2011

Quote by GnV
... and what about that 'Minty' character standing in front of a burning caravan wielding a crucifix as if she was Joan of Arc?

what this woman??

" She is actually an agitprop activist who hurries to join anarchist groups wherever they are gathered.".
i bet she is not working and the taxpayers are paying her benefits. what a mad state of she is found to be on benefits she surely is not actively seeking work so stop any money the taxpayer is paying her.
the comments at the bottom of the newspaper link spout some truth i am sure.

Quote by GnV
Well done Basildon;

many other councils i am sure mr gnv would have given up the fight long ago, so i would also like to say well done to the leeder of basildon council.:thumbup::thumbup:

21 Oct 2011

Quote by NaughtyPharaoh
Imagine just for argument if the residents of Dale Farm would have been Black rather than those with Irish heritage.

The law applies the same for traveller, business, black, inuit, white, or any other person. In my opinion the arguement does not stand
Dave_Notts

16 Nov 2011

I heard on the news this morning on Radio 2 that the travelers are surrounding Dale Farm waiting for the council to clear off so they can re-occupy the site....

16 Nov 2011

Quote by Steve
I heard on the news this morning on Radio 2 that the travelers are surrounding Dale Farm waiting for the council to clear off so they can re-occupy the site....

and so the merry go round of legal fees starts all over again.

16 Nov 2011

Oh, have a heart.
They've been given the push from outside St Pauls. They've nowhere else to go in the run up to Christmas.
Bloody typical British anti traveller attitude.
Heartless bastards. :grin:
bolt

16 Nov 2011

14 Jun 2012

It's from The Daily Wail but if reported correctly, what the fuck is going wrong with British society?
How can it be that the Police defend the rights of the people who illegally occupy land but talk of arresting the land owner who has just suffered £500 damage to his gate by these lawless herberts illegally entering his land?
Surely, this just beggars belief.
And as if to add insult to injury, they helpfully guide the bandits off the land in, presumably, unlicensed and uninsured vehicles without a by-your-leave when other people would have their vehicles seized and crushed!
Dave Dawson should be thanked by the local community for saving the local tax payers a considerable sum not treated like a criminal by the so called forces of law and order.
After all, if someone dumps a whole load of rubbish on your land, are you not under an obligation to 'clean it up'?

14 Jun 2012

Quote by GnV

It's from The Daily Wail but if reported correctly, what the fuck is going wrong with British society?
How can it be that the Police defend the rights of the people who illegally occupy land but talk of arresting the land owner who has just suffered £500 damage to his gate by these lawless herberts illegally entering his land?
Surely, this just beggars belief.
And as if to add insult to injury, they helpfully guide the bandits off the land in, presumably, unlicensed and uninsured vehicles without a by-your-leave when other people would have their vehicles seized and crushed!
Dave Dawson should be thanked by the local community for saving the local tax payers a considerable sum not treated like a criminal by the so called forces of law and order.
After all, if someone dumps a whole load of rubbish on your land, are you not under an obligation to 'clean it up'?

well lucky for you GNV you are not having to fund the taxes of these peeple anymore, as you live in France now.
i have not read the story (yet) as being the daily mail is it indeed true i ask? lol

i will return when i have read the paper at some point this morning

:rotflmao:

15 Jun 2012

Anyone with half a brain knew they'd be back...............

15 Jun 2012

Quote by browning
Anyone with half a brain knew they'd be back...............

Same Shit Different Day browning.
This one is near Shoreham not Basildon and no evidence they are the same people. I re-used the Dale Farm thread just to highlight how wrong this one could have turned out given the Police attitude towards it (arrest the victim, not the offender).
Thankfully, the farmer wasn't having any of it and common sense, distinctly lacking in the case of the 'without fear and favour the criminal' brigade, prevailed.

15 Jun 2012

Quote by GnV

It's from The Daily Wail but if reported correctly, what the fuck is going wrong with British society?
How can it be that the Police defend the rights of the people who illegally occupy land but talk of arresting the land owner who has just suffered £500 damage to his gate by these lawless herberts illegally entering his land?
Surely, this just beggars belief.
And as if to add insult to injury, they helpfully guide the bandits off the land in, presumably, unlicensed and uninsured vehicles without a by-your-leave when other people would have their vehicles seized and crushed!
Dave Dawson should be thanked by the local community for saving the local tax payers a considerable sum not treated like a criminal by the so called forces of law and order.
After all, if someone dumps a whole load of rubbish on your land, are you not under an obligation to 'clean it up'?

I know and you know they broke the lock GnV...........but the police cannot prove they broke the lock.
Travellers have to have tax and insurance and licenses........do the police turn a blind eye? I think not.
Dave Dawson did not save the taxpayer a penny. It was his land, his bill. Not the Local Authority. He saved himself money.
Just so a few misconceptions are not repeated wink

Dave_Notts

16 Jun 2012

Quote by Dave__Notts
I know and you know they broke the lock GnV...........but the police cannot prove they broke the lock.

the point of that is? the law can prove cases on a " balance of probability". A person was convicted of murder only yesterday where no body has ever been found. so i would think that on the balance of probability they could say they broke the lock and kick them off. a person can also be arrested and charged and convicted for "going equipped" to burgle without entering a house, so it can and does happen. if they had the balls and just like on many other cases, the travellers get away with things like this through intimidation and fear.

Quote by Dave__Notts
Travellers have to have tax and insurance and licenses........do the police turn a blind eye? I think not.

:rotflmao::rotflmao:
that is like saying does the tax man turn a blind eye to these peeple not paying there taxes when doing jobs for cash? come on mr notts we all know that the police on many occasions turn a blind eye as on many occasions it would be pointless doing anything. remember dale farm mr notts? ten years it took but mr smith who has built an extension a bit high or has put a fence up without planning permission, would be met with the full force of the law issued by the council. "travellers" do get away with blue murder for many reasons, just like for many reasons they get away with tax avoidance and not paying insurance to drive there cars.

Quote by Dave__Notts
Dave Dawson did not save the taxpayer a penny. It was his land, his bill. Not the Local Authority. He saved himself money.

so who payed for the police when they firstly tuned up? the taxpayer i believe. he may not have had to pay through the courts for there removal from his land, but the many police who turned up, that bill was not charged to him but the poor old taxpayer as usual. the travellers are in many cases a law amongst themselves. they get away with things that mr and mrs jolly average in the street, would be arrested for without question. one law for us and another law for the p's sorry travellers.

Quote by Dave__Notts
Just so a few misconceptions are not repeated
Dave_Notts

a wink indeed mr notts.:notes:

16 Jun 2012

Quote by Dave__Notts
Dave Dawson did not save the taxpayer a penny. It was his land, his bill. Not the Local Authority. He saved himself money.
Dave_Notts

17 Jun 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
the point of that is? the law can prove cases on a " balance of probability". A person was convicted of murder only yesterday where no body has ever been found. so i would think that on the balance of probability they could say they broke the lock and kick them off. a person can also be arrested and charged and convicted for "going equipped" to burgle without entering a house, so it can and does happen. if they had the balls and just like on many other cases, the travellers get away with things like this through intimidation and fear.

Are you really sure that criminal law can be proved on the balance of probability and not beyond all reasonable doubt?
Have a look at your example. Going equipped to burgle a house. The beyond all reasonable doubt would be that the person had on them something that could be used to break into a house..............not that they may break into a house. The evidence to prove beyond all reasonable doubt would be the equipment.......hence going equipped.

Quote by starlightcouple
:rotflmao::rotflmao:
that is like saying does the tax man turn a blind eye to these peeple not paying there taxes when doing jobs for cash? come on mr notts we all know that the police on many occasions turn a blind eye as on many occasions it would be pointless doing anything. remember dale farm mr notts? ten years it took but mr smith who has built an extension a bit high or has put a fence up without planning permission, would be met with the full force of the law issued by the council. "travellers" do get away with blue murder for many reasons, just like for many reasons they get away with tax avoidance and not paying insurance to drive there cars.

So the police do not seize travellers cars that have no insurance, MOT or tax? Never? God knows what I am watching on the UK police TV shows when you see them detaining the cars and getting them recovered.
It is not just my opinion, it is on TV.

Quote by starlightcouple
so who payed for the police when they firstly tuned up? the taxpayer i believe. he may not have had to pay through the courts for there removal from his land, but the many police who turned up, that bill was not charged to him but the poor old taxpayer as usual. the travellers are in many cases a law amongst themselves. they get away with things that mr and mrs jolly average in the street, would be arrested for without question. one law for us and another law for the p's sorry travellers.

The police were not there to remove anyone. They were there to prevent someone getting hurt, either Mr Dawson or a traveller.
The travellers never got away with nothing this time and they didn't at Dale Farm.........they were evicted. Looks like the law applied to them as it would to anybody else

Quote by starlightcouple
a wink indeed mr notts.:notes:

Notes are helpful to remember
Dave_Notts

17 Jun 2012

Quote by GnV
Dave Dawson did not save the taxpayer a penny. It was his land, his bill. Not the Local Authority. He saved himself money.
Dave_Notts

So who in the end paid the £millions to evict the people from Dale Farm?
If this had gone the distance (heaven forbid) it would have cost the public purse a considerable amount of money, so I stand my my original assertion that Dave Dawson saved his local taxpayers a tidy sum.
If it went the distance G them Mr Dawson would have to pay. His land, his costs.
Why would the Local Authority get involved?
Dave_Notts

17 Jun 2012

I'm not going to spend too much time on this point Dave because I now have better things to do but I do write from direct experience here.
A couple of years before we sold up and came to France, local 'gypsies' dumped an old minibus on my land on Christmas Eve (apparently not recognising that our house lay back from the road out of sight). The security lights alerted us to the fact someone was there. To cut a long story short, we eventually called the Police when the urchins returned and took the number plates off it (by which time we already had the details anyway). The vehicle was full of items no doubt the proceeds of crime - including jemmies and the such like. The police were just not interested one little bit. I outlined the electrical equipment etc stashed in the vehicle but they said that as it was now on my property, it was my responsibility and I could do what I liked with the vehicle and its contents.
Staggered, I reminded him that our conversation was on tape and that I would call it in evidence if later, the police decided to prosecute me for handling stolen goods. He responded that it wasn't a problem; they had better things to do. The items were now mine to dispose of.
I removed said items from the vehicle and disposed of them at my will. The vehicle similarly was removed at my will. My land, my problem as you say. As it happened, I probably came out in profit in the end (but don't tell the taxman!).
As far as I am aware, the urchins never came back for their 'booty' or their vehicle. If I had chosen to smash it to smithereens with a claw hammer - or a JCB for that matter, why would the Police be interested?
So why did they have some much interest in this incident if the vehicles were on private land and it was the land owners problem? If he chose to smash them up and otherwise dispose of them,then by your account, it was in his gift to do so!
So tell me; why did they intervene?

17 Jun 2012

So it isn't the responsibility of the Loacal Authority after all then. Thats one cleared up.
Now why were the police there? In the story it said that Mr Dawson called them. It also states that the gate lock was broken. Perhaps they went to investigate that. When they got there, nobody saw anyone breaking the lock they had no witnesses. After that I have no idea why they stayed. I can only go off the paper article supplied
Dave_Notts

18 Jun 2012

Quote by Dave__Notts
So it isn't the responsibility of the Loacal Authority after all then. Thats one cleared up.
Dave_Notts

On that basis then Dave, why wasn't the bill for the removal of the gypsies at Dale Farm passed to the owners?
Oh yeah... silly me, It was owned by the gypsies :doh:
So who picked up the tab? The public purse dunno

So it is as star said; one rule for the p... sorry, gypsies and another for the long suffering honest hardworking tax payer who gets shafted by the system set up (and paid for by them) to offer protection to them for nothing other than 'political' expediency and shear fright of ever doing anything to offend the travelling community.
Another one cleared up :lol2:

18 Jun 2012

Quote by Dave__Notts
Are you really sure that criminal law can be proved on the balance of probability and not beyond all reasonable doubt?

nope but it looks that way from things i have read, and if it is not that way then goes to prove to me the lunacy of the justice system in this country,,,,,again.

Quote by Dave__Notts
So the police do not seize travellers cars that have no insurance, MOT or tax? Never? God knows what I am watching on the UK police TV shows when you see them detaining the cars and getting them recovered.

never? ok then once in one of those blue moon thingys. we all know as do the police of there untaxed and un insured vehicles, and there tax avoidance jobs with cash in hand. that has also been on tv in one of the Donal MacIntyre programmes, and then he was threatened with death if his show reported the going on's of p's sorry gypsies.

Quote by Dave__Notts
It is not just my opinion, it is on TV.

as i have just stated mr notts, very observant of you :giggle:

Quote by Dave__Notts
The police were not there to remove anyone. They were there to prevent someone getting hurt, either Mr Dawson or a traveller.

were they not there as the allegation was that the p's sorry gypsies had broken onto his land? were the police there for the reason you have stated and only that reason mr notts? with the way our laws are at the moment he thought it best as we all remember what happened to that other land owner who shot a gypsy after breaking into his house. maybe the landowner here did not want a repeat of the innocent house/land owner being once again finding themselves on the wrong side of the law, while those law abiding p's sorry gypsies get away scott free,,,again. just a thought and an observation of how things usually go for mr public when they dare to challenge the p's sorry gypsies.

Quote by Dave__Notts
The travellers never got away with nothing this time and they didn't at Dale Farm.........they were evicted. Looks like the law applied to them as it would to anybody else

no not this time mr notts as they came across someone who was not prepared to let these peeple get away with things. they took the much easier option and no doubt found an easier mug to walk over. as for dale farm you seriously expecting anyone here to agree with you mr notts? as i have said before if that had happened to mr public there is no way it would have taken basildon council ten weeks to get them off, let alone ten years and i believe 20 million pounds of basildon councils tax monies in doing so.
by saying the law applied the same to them as it would to me is laughable and you know it. i watched a programme that was shown in 2006 where the p's sorry gypsies went along to a public meeting held by basildon council over the dale farm problem. the intimidation local residents and members of basildon council faced was alarming and frightening. the dale farm residents used every trick in the book to stay there and even when basildon council won and they started to evict, basildon council not only knew from the start about the cost they faced and the intimidation they would face, but also the possibilty that someone as the dale farm residents predicted, would lose there life. thankfully that did not happen but it could have.
the p's sorry gypsies have clever lawyers and one wonders where the p's sorry gypsies get the money from to pay these expensive lawyers, silly me we already know that one. :doh:
my friend lives near a traveller lol

:lol: sorry static gypsy site near to orpington in kent. the police do not even go in that place unless there are over 100 of them. the police know that it is a no go area and on the rare occasion when they do go in it takes many offices and a lot of taxpayers money to do. fear and intimidation are what they use, oh and there untaxed money to fight anyone who dares to confront them. just like on dale farm and other places up and down the land.

18 Jun 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
nope but it looks that way from things i have read, and if it is not that way then goes to prove to me the lunacy of the justice system in this country,,,,,again.

So in short, you were wrong...............and you do not want the law that protects you, to apply to travellers. Now I get it :thumbup:

Quote by starlightcouple
never? ok then once in one of those blue moon thingys.

Wrong again, thanks for admitting it.

Quote by starlightcouple
we all know as do the police of there untaxed and un insured vehicles, and there tax avoidance jobs with cash in hand. that has also been on tv in one of the Donal MacIntyre programmes, and then he was threatened with death if his show reported the going on's of p's sorry gypsies.

Untaxed and uninsured vehicles are stopped by the police and removed from the road. There is no exemption for travellers and the police would find it laughable that it is suggested.
All travellers avoid tax? I wonder if Shane Wards and Cheryl Lloyds tax bill is slightly higher than yours Star?

Quote by starlightcouple
were they not there as the allegation was that the p's sorry gypsies had broken onto his land? were the police there for the reason you have stated and only that reason mr notts?

They were there to oversee the actions of Mr Dawson. States that in the initial story.

Quote by starlightcouple
with the way our laws are at the moment he thought it best as we all remember what happened to that other land owner who shot a gypsy after breaking into his house. maybe the landowner here did not want a repeat of the innocent house/land owner being once again finding themselves on the wrong side of the law, while those law abiding p's sorry gypsies get away scott free,,,again. just a thought and an observation of how things usually go for mr public when they dare to challenge the p's sorry gypsies.

Barras was shot dead. If that is getting away with it………..I would hate to think what punishment you want dispensed.
Fearon was jailed for burglary……..once again he got away with it.

Quote by starlightcouple
no not this time mr notts as they came across someone who was not prepared to let these peeple get away with things.

Wrong again. Thanks for admitting it

Quote by starlightcouple
they took the much easier option and no doubt found an easier mug to walk over. as for dale farm you seriously expecting anyone here to agree with you mr notts? as i have said before if that had happened to mr public there is no way it would have taken basildon council ten weeks to get them off, let alone ten years and i believe 20 million pounds of basildon councils tax monies in doing so.

This is an old argument that I disproved earlier in this thread. Read it over and over again does not make it become true.

Quote by starlightcouple
by saying the law applied the same to them as it would to me is laughable and you know it.

Why? You have not shown me one law that exempts Travellers.

Quote by starlightcouple
i watched a programme that was shown in 2006 where the p's sorry gypsies went along to a public meeting held by basildon council over the dale farm problem. the intimidation local residents and members of basildon council faced was alarming and frightening.

Somebody was evicting you from your home………you would not use the full extent of the law?

Quote by starlightcouple
the dale farm residents used every trick in the book to stay there and even when basildon council won and they started to evict, basildon council not only knew from the start about the cost they faced and the intimidation they would face, but also the possibilty that someone as the dale farm residents predicted, would lose there life. thankfully that did not happen but it could have.

It could have, but didn’t. I could have been hit with a meteorite today………but I didn’t.

Quote by starlightcouple
the p's sorry gypsies have clever lawyers

They wouldn’t hire stupid ones

Quote by starlightcouple
and one wonders where the p's sorry gypsies get the money from to pay these expensive lawyers, silly me we already know that one. :doh:

I know Cher Lloyd and Shane Ward get their money from people buying their products. Business usually earns money from selling a product or service……………so I’ll take a guess, selling something or offering a service.

Quote by starlightcouple
my friend lives near a traveller :lol: sorry static gypsy site near to orpington in kent. the police do not even go in that place unless there are over 100 of them. the police know that it is a no go area and on the rare occasion when they do go in it takes many offices and a lot of taxpayers money to do. fear and intimidation are what they use, oh and there untaxed money to fight anyone who dares to confront them. just like on dale farm and other places up and down the land.

Police do not enter my house. That’s because I have not broken the law…………Is my house a “no-go area”? If I did break the law then they would turn up mob handed as it is the safest way, for them and me, to detain me.
Anyway, the thousands of gypsy servicemen who served in World War One & Two (including two Victoria Cross (VC) holders), and those that didn’t return, would feel proud to see that the freedom they fought and died for was being used to disgrace their honour.
Dave_Notts

19 Jun 2012

Then I look forward to your comments on this one Dave.
The ever-so-helpful forces of gipsy lawlessness will definitely be costing the local taxpayer purse on this one....

Perhaps Dave Dawson might be employed by the local council as a consultant....

19 Jun 2012

Quote by GnV
Then I look forward to your comments on this one Dave.
The ever-so-helpful forces of gipsy lawlessness will definitely be costing the local taxpayer purse on this one....

Perhaps Dave Dawson might be employed by the local council as a consultant....

19 Jun 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
Then I look forward to your comments on this one Dave.
The ever-so-helpful forces of gipsy lawlessness will definitely be costing the local taxpayer purse on this one....

Perhaps Dave Dawson might be employed by the local council as a consultant....

i really would not bother GNV.
mr notts seems to be an expert in nit picking and takes one per cent out a 100 to prove a point, and disregards the relevant 99 per cent :sleeping:. the majority of peeple in this country know that gypsies in many cases are above the law, because in those cases the police and authorities are to scared to do anything about it. the gypsies in most cases use intimidation, fear and force to get there way, and when there are many it becomes even harder to stop them, even with the law. For us GNV and mr average public, we cannot use those same practises to get our way, and so have to fall in line with the law of the land.
I would like Mr notts to go onto that gypsy site near orpington, and try and take back say a stolen car. even if he had another six peeple he would not dare so it takes a horde of police and bailiffs to act, unlike mr public. fear, intimidation and scare tactics is the only thing they are good at in many cases. oh yes and avoiding tax and wanting to be part of there community. :doh:
if you stop a person who has comitted an offense for us we would have to give an address GNV, but when you travel from a to b at anytime it is almost impossible to catch up with these peeple.
sometimes peeple see the truth GNV but will bend over backwards to make excuses for these peeple, and we wonder why they are in many cases exempt from the same laws that we have to comply with.
I would have to agree with the above for the majority of the Gypsy population the world over, but it is not really the Police that do not want to do anything about the problem, it is often those higher up in the CPS and Home Office that dictate the lack of action, added to this what you quite rightly say about movement, we all know how closed door the Gypsy community is and trying to find a wanted person in that community is so difficult, even if you get the right site that the person is using at the time nobody on the site is going to point them out or admit that they are there and they will quickly disapear to another site, they don't even have to rely on family to house them, the whole community will do that.
The CPS and Home Office know that (in thier opinion) the cost of chasing the person down and trying to get them into court is far too costly for the end result.
Perhaps a case towards the compulsory ID card but for that to work you would need to have some form of enforceable punishment for those that do not get them and that won't just be the Gypsy community many people who don't believe in them will not apply for one either.

19 Jun 2012

Quote by GnV
Then I look forward to your comments on this one Dave.
The ever-so-helpful forces of gipsy lawlessness will definitely be costing the local taxpayer purse on this one....

Perhaps Dave Dawson might be employed by the local council as a consultant....

Comment on what G?
This one would cost the tax payer money as it is public/council land..........i.e. the council are the landowner so they have to remove them.
Dave Dawsons land so he had to remove them.
This seems quite straight forward to me and I can't see why you don't grasp that the Council would not have been liable for the civil case involving Dave Dawson.
Dave_Notts

19 Jun 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
i really would not bother GNV.

You didn't. Your claims are countered and you show nothing to disprove what I said.
Thanks :thumbup:

19 Jun 2012

Quote by MidsCouple24
I would have to agree with the above for the majority of the Gypsy population the world over

25% of Gypsies/Travellers are on the road. That means 75% of the rest are not and 50% are in houses............paying council tax, rent, mortages, utilities, etc
Generalisations are flying thick and fast in this thread
Dave_Notts