Tomorrow night

he flags bearing the word/s “RESPECT” are up and some broadcasting trucks are nearby (we ran past them today), probably in preparation for tomorrow’s match.

The Greek club is no PSG, so hopefully an easy 3 points for the locals. Too easy or too early to guess?

A decision was consciously made not to mention this

his morning or afternoon it seems like a trial (or hearing) was meant to take place, wherein the High Court would be discussing lies told by Farage’s paid spinners, trying to tackle this ‘debacle’, which is an understatement (a sort of fake election or political spectacle organised for and by a Fake Political Party – or foreign-owned business disguised as British political party – at the expense of taxpayers).

Based on Court submissions, Farage is spending well over 20,000 pounds on this, whereas the applicant (or petitioner) spent about 200 pounds and many hours. That means Farage spends about 100 times more money than the person whom he robbed (and who now tries to hold him accountable for this robbery).

Farage enjoy media silence (complicity). Why does the mainstream media write so many mindless puff pieces about a man who wears a trash can on his head? While turning a blind eye to the High Court of the country?

What does this teach us about the state of the press?

How much money spent by people whose constituents compare black politicians to monkeys? And does it matter that this money comes from oligarchs in America?

France has a history of social revolution

HE citizens of France want changes and they reckon that a bit of a mess (unrest if not localised chaos) can bring about those changes.

I am sceptical but supportive as I recognise that without modest disruption of some kind (not only criticism) no meaningful change will come about.

At the EPO, for example, there are industrial actions right now.

A few more days until Friday

HIS coming Friday Westlife performs here shortly after a Court’s deadline in London – it concerns something we plan to escalate to the Court of Appeal or something we had planned to do for a long time but did many months later. The aim is justice, not fame, and truth, not lawfare. The world needs to know what sorts of individuals we’ve been dealing with. The Court is coming to grips with that as well.

Don’t shoot the messenger

HIS weekend I published the seventh part of a series, a long series (lots more to come) which concerns swatting in the UK. Here are all the parts published thus far:

The more ‘beefy’ details will come later this week. I’m glad that the time has come to share this information. We have strong momentum because the public can nowadays see what really happened and who the culprits are (they’re connected).

An overlooked problem

S noted earlier on in passing, referencing this latest update, trying to compel Reform UK to pay the money it owes (or take the fake political party out of business) resulted in several revelations: the party isn’t really a party, it has financial difficulties, it relies on illegal financing, and it adopted stances that are giant own goals or contradictions (hence lies).

The article points out that the solicitors/reps chosen by Reform UK aren’t without folly:

Remember, Nigel Farage asked for the un-necessary by-election on the premise that he was a victim of the Establishment. The exercise cost British taxpayers at least £250,000. What we see in my exchanges with 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square is the behaviour of the Establishment and it feels a lot like they are doing a lot more work for Nigel’s than for any other candidate.

If the by-election wasn’t really about the Establishment then it must be about something else. Maybe there are other secret trials in progress that voters were never told about.

After observing the circumstances involving 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square, I immediately sent a letter to the judge in the case explaining I had lost confidence in the procedure.

The following morning, on 1 October 2026, I sent an email to the same clerk at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square asking them to “Please kindly explain why you did not run a conflict check before asking me to submit names and documents to 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square.”

4-5 Gray’s Inn Square never sent any response to this query. It is now radio silence.

I can not prove how many clerks and lawyers in the firm looked at the same attachments. I don’t know if the same lawyer assisting Reform UK was accidentally given the opportunity to see my documents. Nonetheless, looking at the transcript of my phone call with these people, their email response the next day and subsequent radio silence when challenged about the affair, I feel there is a real possibility they failed to maintain information barriers, also known as Chinese walls. Whether this breach of confidentiality happened deliberately or by accident doesn’t make a lot of difference.

On 7 October 2026, I took the next step and submitted a formal application to withdraw the secret legal document and put an end to the secret procedure.

The cost and potential side-effects of these incidents make the procedure uneconomical and result in an unacceptable risk of a judge making incorrect findings in a dispute.

This was not the first time somebody served one of these secret legal documents on Reform UK Party Limited. I doubt it will be the last time.

[...]

When I discovered that 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square had already done work for the other side in this dispute, the story of Father Baker and Father Pickering communicating behind the backs of abuse victims wasn’t the only thing that came to mind.

Take a moment to remember the Swiss JuristGate scandal, in particular, the greffiers who work like clerks in the court while simultaneously running businesses on the side.

In Australia, we had the notorious lawyer X, who was officially working for crime bosses while secretly working as a police informer. It was a scandal that went from the bar to the bedroom and back again. The Royal Commission into that affair made a point of asking police who slept with the lawyer (guilty as charged).

It didn’t take me long to find reports about other scandals around 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square. In one of the more minor cases, a lawyer was cleared in a disciplinary procedure after falling asleep during a trial. Then there was the lawyer Paul Cohen and the legendary $15 billion Sulu arbitration affair. An even darker affair involves Oliver Zachary White, banned from direct access work due to unauthorised handling of client funds.

I too saw conflicts like these in firms and chambers. They sometimes make a lot of money from “both sides”.

Does no rule apply here?

When sites fail to serve

oday we resumed the park visits. The birds were already waiting there (almost 70 of them), but it was cold and thus less pleasant than before.

Before departing and again upon returning we identified a public sector site that does not work with Firefox, Librewolf, and not even an old Chromebook.

Therein lies an opportunity. I’ll head over there in person with a notebook and pen and politely confront them over browser compatibility, then see if they can address the same need/service in person. I can make a good article out of this.