http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/node/2794
October 27 Teleconference
As a result of the teleconference of 27 October, the Parker - Purkiss defence team have been requested to rewrite their Defence yet again, due to supposed breaches of High Court Rules. The Second Amended Defence is due to be submitted mid December and another conference is scheduled for 16 February 2011. On the agenda for that conference is the setting of a trial date. Given that the waiting list in the High Court, which is typically 6 months in most districts, is likely to be most of a year in Auckland, a trial date is not going to happen any time soon.
The more that the Plaintiff draws out the pre-trial proceedings the more expensive it becomes for him. At present, the plaintiff has neither furnished a response to the defence nor an explanation of supposed problems with it.
Poor campymother, can't get his defence right. Poor campymother is struggling to understand that it is really all over for him, that he can't defend his position with accusations against Joe Karam, or claims about David's guilt. Poor campymother is a woeful soul, a woeful soul is he.
Dear sisters, twisted friends all, imagine what Kent's not telling you when he so easily spouts the peril he faces, that you face likewise. He can't even grasp that his defence is in peril of being struck out and that Joe Karam it seems has asked for that, not been willing to engage with documentation that has no place in a Court and which is certainly not a genuine defence. Poor campymother, and victoria, they can't even get the job as orange boys in their own demise. They're working against themselves and don't even know.
Wink wink nudge nudge who's kidding who here?
ReplyDelete"the Parker - Purkiss defence team have been requested to rewrite their Defence yet again, due to supposed breaches of High Court Rules". The Second Amended Defence is due to be submitted mid December.......
The more that the Plaintiff draws out the pre-trial proceedings the more expensive it becomes for him. At present, the plaintiff has neither furnished a response to the defence nor an explanation of supposed problems with it.
Why should the Plaintiff respond to something that breaches of High Court Rules and why is it that the defence expect the Plaintiff to explain how the defence have breached of High Court Rules.
I know I'm well appreciated for my benevolence and kind nature, willingness to forgive the damned, Morons and Retards alike, to take a holistic view of the world of Mice and Men so I shouldn't really mention a confidential message from the front lines that says 'Off with their heads.' Poor kentybaby, he's lost his scone and it was a date one as well.
ReplyDelete"the Parker - Purkiss defence team have been requested to rewrite their Defence yet again, due to supposed breaches of High Court Rules".
ReplyDeleteAfter all this time Kent doesn't understand what contempt of court is, according to him the Judge is breaching the law. Oh dear. I think he was warned about contempt and that his position as a defendant was in the dock and not on the bench.
Nevertheless, a resounding defeat for the sisters. Who could have predicted such a thing?
Does superkent know what a strike-out is? Somehow I suspect he doesn't. Either that or he is a liar extroadinaire.
ReplyDeleteI hope there will be a PS on their 'submission'
"oh, by the way, we are the ones who wasted the time of the courts at great expense. We are the ones who thought it reasonable to expect the defence to give us advice. We are the ones who defamed people and continued to do so after being requested to stop. We are the ones who brought TradeMe into the courts, causing expense to a commercial entity at a time of economic downturn. We are the ones who have demonstrated our ignorance of the justice system and justice itself time and time again. We think you should listen to our submission because...um...er..."
Yes, it's pathetic to see how they lack common sense, let alone awareness of the laws they've so freely broken. Now, it is them that are broken, broken and cast out as stalkers and hate merchants no more.
ReplyDeleteBe away with you Parker, creep back to the dark with your attendant mangy dogs.
I think an extra P.S. should also have, 'we are the ones that claimed the Judge in the retrial was our friend and looking after our interests'. I'm sure the Court would love to know about that particular statment.
ReplyDeleteYa have to hand to him, old kentybaby - he sure knows how to come up with a complete loss. I feel an award coming on. How about, 'Life Time Loser and Tosser Award?'
ReplyDeleteNow, I don't want to be nice to him. Or even to show any inclination that I could enjoy eating his chips while gazing at his 1952 thrupeence. Thrupeences in those days, they were just worth three pennys with silver bits. I hope Kenty has got more than silver bits to pay his bills or he might off to the knacker's yard. He'll be right knacked off with that, just when he thought it was a conspiracy.