NSW Charged with acting as solicitor unqualified

[Jaywoo220]

Thanks Rod.

I agree the concerns notice was poorly worded.

There was no intent on my part to do what was allege, just naviety and as you say standing up for my rights.

All I will say is that people may want to realise they are closing the gap to a police state.

I believe they falsified the arrest warrant to include false bail conditions to get the judicial officer to sign off on it.

They included things like my bail conditions in the arrest warrant to judicial officer were that I was not allowed to contact witnesses etc. and heaps else when my only bail conditions were to 1 reside at address and 2 be of good behaviour.

They then had 6-8 officers attend my 71 yr old parents house 6 times just to intimidate and harrass them. 71 year old? It is disgusting. Non stop banging on doors and breaking in when I was not their.

 

[sammy01]

"Always an expert in hindsight"
No mate when you go inside for intimidating a witness you will be the expert in hindsight.

Respectfully, you seem to come here after every fcuk up in your life (hindsight) looking for someone to tell you that it will be ok. So I'll help you... Write a letter to santa asking him to make it all good.

So, understand this. Sending a letter to someone who is a witness in a criminal trial where you are the accused is intimidation. Pretending you're a solicitor is stupid.

So, understand this. Sending a letter to someone who is a witness in a criminal trial where you are the accused is intimidation. Pretending you're a solicitor is stupid. Yup wrote it twice because you're a slow learner.

I agree with Rod, probably not breaching the pretending to be a solicitor stuff. But definately an idiot trying to intimidate a witness in a criminal case and being an idiot trying to intimidate a witness in a criminal case is stupid.

Mate get back to us when you prove me wrong. You know when the magisrate says to you that you are innocent.... But make sure you get back to me when the judge says "guilty"....

 

[Rod]

Sending a letter to someone who is a witness in a criminal trial where you are the accused is intimidation

That has to be proven. A person is allowed to protect their reputation.

The question of timing is important and it would have been better to served the defamation notice after the criminal matter, however the statute of limitations means that is not always possible if you want to maintain a cause of action. There can be a lengthy delay between filing charges and a court trial so the 12 months limitation for defamation is solved by filing within the 12 months window and explaining the actions to the judge and hope they understand.

 

[Jaywoo220]

Hi Sammy,

There are serious allegations. They are upsetting and they have created a lot of stress in my life for the past month , especially when you have a target on your back by Nsw Police.

The perception that you seem to enjoy me, or anyone for that matter, being charged with these offences, says a lot about yourself and there is no need to gloat or mock. Some of us are just doing the best we can and asking for advice from decent people. Unfortunately, I had to put you on ignore a long time ago due to your abrasive and demeaning nature.

I have already pleaded not guilty and will fight the charges to the best of my ability.

Best wishes.

 

[Jaywoo220]

That has to be proven. A person is allowed to protect their reputation.

The question of timing is important and it would have been better to served the defamation notice after the criminal matter, however the statute of limitations means that is not always possible if you want to maintain a cause of action. There can be a lengthy delay between filing charges and a court trial so the 12 months limitation for defamation is solved by filing within the 12 months window and explaining the actions to the judge and hope they understand.

Good points Rod. I will just have to hope I get an understanding judge and explain it in the manner you stated which is the truth and there being two competing factors at play.

It is like a AVO does not stop you starting legal action against the protected person, otherwise everyone would be filing frivolous Avo's to stop legal proceedings against them from other parties they had wronged.

I think the key point is there was a lack of INTENT to influence and to get them to either withhold true evidence or provide false evidence.

 

[sammy01]

Slow down pony... this alleged defamation is simply reporting something to the police? They didn't take out a half page ad in the local paper calling u a pedophile? Just made a complaint to the cops? That is not defamation.

 

[Rod]

That is not defamation.

It can be if it is a false report. And it can have more serious consequences when made to the police than if it was something said to a relative in another State.

 

[sammy01]

defamation = harms the reputation. So the need for the false information to be dispersed and consequently damage the reputation of the person that the false information is about.



Look there isn’t enough information here. What are you accused of and what has this person claimed to have witnessed?



Common sense would tell you that once the ‘witness’ is charged and convicted of giving false info to the cops, THEN you would have a case. BUT writing to them threatening legal action simply for communicating to the cops and pretending to be a solicitor, because you like writing in the third person is dumb.


Regardless- Jaywoo reckons he wasn't intending to cause the person who he wrote to to feel threatened or intimidated. As Jaywoo wrote "there was no intent on my part to do what was allege, just naivety and as you say standing up for my rights". There may not have been intent. But if the result was for the other person to feel threatened then they felt threatened. Equally putting it down to 'naivety'. Sorry champ the expectations you hold of others is well higher than the expectation you hold of yourself. Naivety is a nice way of saying ignorance and ignorance is never a defence.


You wrote to a witness and applied pressure for them to stop being a witness and your defence is naivety? But that is ok? Because you are innocent. How do we know you’re innocent? Because YOU say you’re innocent?



And no champ, I don’t like seeing innocent people charged or convicted. But I do stick by my advice. Why not ask the good folk here if it is a good idea BEFORE. Sure you can ignore all the advice you’re given (you tend to) and clearly you don’t think much of my advice, but there are other wise men and women here whose advice is worth at least considering prior to …. Rather than after ….

 

[sammy01]

Ok, so just reading through this again. Can you clarify "They also charged me with 3 * influence witness, under s323(a)."

So 3 charges of influence witness? So i'm thinking are there 3 letters? Why 3X charges?

 

[Jaywoo220]

Sammy01 please keep out of it. I have had you on ignore for a long time due to the trolling.

Thanks.