Factor-Fiction Or Barmaid Cricticaly Important !!

[notnutnut]

Help please,quick,FINAL DAY of case tomorrow (WED) and I learn that our legal team,although being acquainted with a series of photographic images that destroy the claimants nonsense claim against my mother last Thursday at least when we saw him at 'Hogwarts' (Lincolns Inn) last,suggests I don't make the 'app. to amend case particulars' myself (says he'll do it late Thursday) and after our solicitor failing to respond to my repeat requests to confirm this had been done we find out today it has not.(2nd trial day)This matter is so important to us because our home/farm is at risk i feel the only way to remedy this seems an application to the RCJ to adjourn/adduce the evidence or what ? I was expecting another piece of evidence would also be used to sink the claimants joke case,this being the use of evidence (photographic) they've taken of a structure that only was built in 12/12 and including it in a signed witness statement referring to it and relying on it as the reason they discover 'the historical fence' (not) but display their intelligence by back dating it to 31/3/12, I did suggest time travel may be the reason. Two expert witnesses,one who acts for the claimant and one for us confirm this I believe,but I'm told today the trial judge wouldn't really be interested,WHAT ? Is this not attempting to pervert the course of justice ? Anyway RCJ tomorrow to try my luck and their evidence to stop this nonsense. If anyone knows what I should ask the judge to decide it would be greatly appreciated.No 'blackberry' me so answers by 7.30-8.00 am if you can please. Thanks all !!!!!!!!

[FredPuli43]

Don't buy a dog and then bark yourself !

[notnutnut]

Noted ! Thanks Fred,but my dog may not be barking as instructed,thanks anyway for the input.

[factor-fiction]

Sorry- it's Barmaid you need as I can't help. My only contribution to your issues has been to say 'let your solicitor deal with it' but if at this very late stage you want to dump your advisers and plough your own furrow then a legal expert such as Barmaid is needed

[notnutnut]

factor-fiction,as always, thank for your help.Tell me please if I'm missing something in my perception of the way this case has been portrayed to the court and which facts (map lines or reality in terms of original and continued possession that exactly match both ours and claimant's deeds) should be used to judge this case,but to me the denial of the ariel set of images that make nonsense of the claimant's fictitious claim and need adducing and particulars of claim amended to include possession adverse or otherwise,i sent some info to barmaid via email asking how much detail was OK and if required whatever was requested I'd send.Have I dumped my legal advisers,I didn't think so,update later,thanks.

[factor-fiction]

I'm just bumping this onto the Latest Posts list as Barmaid was around a few minutes ago and may see this.

[Barmaid]

I've seen it factor and email nnn.

I don't really feel I can help - this is one of those cases where the devil is in the detail and I would probably need to read ALL the case to be able to advise. In any event, given that it is now clear that NNN has counsel and solicitors acting for him, I don't feel it right to comment on a professional basis. All I can say is that his legal team will undoubtedly know what evidence is required to prove a particular point.

I was going to the CLCC tomorrow, but that is now adjourned so it sounds as if I won't ever get to the bottom of this (last day tomorrow, according to the list). unless it overruns, in which case I shall be sticking my head round the door on Friday.

[tonywiltshire]

I would follow the advice given by Fred to not buy a dog and bark yourself. If you believe your professional advisers are barking in the wrong direction you will have the option of taking action against them.

[FredPuli43]

It may be no consolation, but professional experience soon teaches that what the lay client thinks is a good point in evidence is often not, but the point he almost forgets to mention in evidence is often a winner; that's why counsel seems to be asking a lot of irrelevant questions in conference, hoping to stumble upon this ignored detail. And, I may say,that applies to professional clients,the solicitors, too with the bonus that they think weak points of law are winners and vice versa.

You are,in the end, the least qualified to judge what is significant and how to use any bit of evidence. It's not what you do for a living. So don't worry.

[Peter Pedant]

Yeah I agree with Freddie - go with the lawyers after all you are paying enough for this.

[notnutnut]

OK I'm back but barely awake,I'll start posting the bulk of my interpretation of today's events around 23.00 hours,are you sitting comfortably,then,should I delete the expletives 'cause it would half the file size,as a quickie,'till I get back,judgement not 'till tomorrow,so, if the judgement is flawed in any way and considered to our detriment what would be the most expedient method/legal challenge prevent it's application we could use ? Back soon.

[bednobs]

any news? despute the fact i have no idea what it's about, i am interested

[notnutnut]

BEDNOBS UPDATE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Have you heard the one about the defendant whose counsel says 'he's not allowed to give evidence from the 'stand' or when suggested,from the public gallery,in fact not at all,even though he points out,'but I'm the defendant,surely I can defend myself '( thank god for voice activated digital Dictaphones ) even if it is not allowed in theory I think it's still admissible evidence,and,the signs saying not to do say 'in the court',so not 'just outside the court' I'm confused (not) Updates coming next week on part two !!!!!!!!