[Alan Thomas]

not their victim, on 01 March 2016 - 08:48 AM, said:

Bonner the psycophant

Please do not use that type of language on my thread

[not their victim]

I will utilise the TRUTH whenever I please...

You have sanctioned the sycophants behaviour by approving another vile filthy thread, which, if the wording wasn't bad enough, YOU expanded the meaning

So much for caring about the vulnerable within this forum

I will continue to expose the truth

[Alan Thomas]

Not their victim you seem to be under the delusional thinking that I have some form of control of the site and allow or disallow postings. Such delusional thinking reinforces my previous concerns about your mental state of mind.

[Tomcat]

REX, on 01 March 2016 - 01:47 AM, said:

Hi admin

What I claim to have... I do have.

I'm offended that this career criminal slanders my good name in public.
I am not announcing ANY intent to break the law.

I stated fact. !
I possess irrefutable evidence of Tomcat/Kenneth Miller using this forums message system to SELL website domains
There was a selection of acc related domains offered at a price/scam.

I suggest a life Banning would be appropriate for slander and using the accforums message system for scamming, as this site does NOT promote lies of criminal intent by its members.

Regards
REX the innocent.

/>/>. LIAR - ACCFORUM TROLL
B.BANDIT REX = Alan Thomas;s partner in crime. = Criminal Harassment.

B.BANDIT REX is now announcing IT's intent to commit the crimes of fraud / perjury / falsify documents,
to back up its lies. re things that have never happened or ever existed.

BRING IT ON FOOL. />.

[not their victim]

you have spent nearly a whole tree informing all and sundry that Ken Miller and others were ripping off your site!!!

the young admin disappeared at least 3 years ago

so the COLLECTIVE "WE", know exactly how this place is being manipulated as whomever admin is, refuses to ban rex for vile, filthy behaviour and in fact you defended him by your write up....

if what David has stated is true, and the forum is under intense scrutiny because of YOUR POSTINGS and terrorist ideology, then you may be getting a knock on the door sooner than later...

[RedFox]

REX, on 01 March 2016 - 01:47 AM, said:

Hi admin

What I claim to have... I do have.

I'm offended that this career criminal slanders my good name in public.
I am not announcing ANY intent to break the law.

I stated fact. !
I possess irrefutable evidence of Tomcat/Kenneth Miller using this forums message system to SELL website domains
There was a selection of acc related domains offered at a price/scam.

I suggest a life Banning would be appropriate for slander and using the accforums message system for scamming, as this site does NOT promote lies of criminal intent by its members.

Regards
REX the innocenttroll

You claim many things REX but never support your claims with any solid evidence!

The dribble that you publish is just that, dribble, which is far from being supporting evidence!

Do you by any chance live on the same deluded fantasy island as where Alan Thomas and David Butler live?

[not their victim]

certain documents should NEVER have been removed from a courtroom

given to someone else

then plastered all over the internet

the fact that REX keeps referencing a legally privileged document means he is breaking the law....

[REX]

not their victim, on 01 March 2016 - 04:55 PM, said:

certain documents should NEVER have been removed from a courtroom

given to someone else

then plastered all over the internet

the fact that REX keeps referencing a legally privileged document means he is breaking the law....

You really are a bit more than a bit detatched from reality arnt you.

Any documents I post are either authentic copies researched or sourced from the reliable sources, archives, libraries and sometimes from the internet.
The ones from the internet are released into public by their publisher who you are welcome to show evidence released illegaly.
If a person removed their published content because of deluded surfers like yourself, the information available for reading would simply be manipulated resources.
You can complain to police and if there was a court order to remove content I publish then so be it,it would be removed..

Until then suck it up and take your medication on inhale.

[Tomcat]

not their victim, on 01 March 2016 - 04:55 PM, said:

certain documents should NEVER have been removed from a courtroom

given to someone else

then plastered all over the internet

the fact that REX keeps referencing a legally privileged document means he is breaking the law....

/>/>.

Fact is Thomas would have had to acquire the disclosure documents from the court or his lawyer.

Or given an advocate or ?, written permission to uplift them, from either.

That makes Thomas responsible for the intentionally illegal use of that info,
which was used as a threat / intimidation / blackmail / criminal harassment, of a crown witness.

And with just a few postings made by Thomas and his trolls, are evidence to support,
Any action I intend to take, that will be successful.
(wont be long now, for the first one)

Will Tomo take the blame alone? NO.
He will no doubt will blame everyone else, = mainly his trolls.

[not their victim]

Exactly Tomcat

Rex is in possession of/references documents that were withdrawn from a courtroom to commit crinal harassment

He adds no value to the forum

And should be banned for outright filth

[Brucey]

not their victim, on 02 March 2016 - 09:06 AM, said:

Exactly Tomcat

Rex is in possession of/references documents that were withdrawn from a courtroom to commit criminal harassment

He adds no value to the forum

And should be banned for outright filth

Are you allowed to remove confidential documents from a courtroom and publish them?

[not their victim]

no, you are not




even worse, these documents were handed to people of a certain disposition, who have utilized the nature of a long distant teenage past, to continue with criminal harassment.

there is only one area these could have come from

there is only one person who had had access..

and that one person must have made these available to be used for nefarious purposes.....

crime upon crime.....plus abuse....

[Alan Thomas]

Tomcat, on 02 March 2016 - 08:22 AM, said:

[/b]



Fact is Thomas would have had to acquire the disclosure documents from the court or his lawyer.

Or given an advocate or ?, written permission to uplift them, from either.

That makes Thomas responsible for the intentionally illegal use of that info,
which was used as a threat / intimidation / blackmail / criminal harassment, of a crown witness.

And with just a few postings made by Thomas and his trolls, are evidence to support,
Any action I intend to take, that will be successful.
(wont be long now, for the first one)

Will Tomo take the blame alone? NO.
He will no doubt will blame everyone else, = mainly his trolls.

Guesses and speculation are not the same as conclusions and conclusions are not fact.
I have not had any part in publicising your criminal records so I would like you to apologise for making false allegations which are clearly designed to harass me.

[Tomcat]

Alan Thomas, on 02 March 2016 - 12:15 PM, said:

Guesses and speculation are not the same as conclusions and conclusions are not fact.
I have not had any part in publicising your criminal records so I would like you to apologise for making false allegations which are clearly designed to harass me.

/>/>. LIAR.
To obtain court (criminal) disclosure documents
there has to be a formal permission given.
In this case, by you Thomas.
No point in lying about it.There is no hiding from this one.
I have been thru the process once for myself,
and 3 other times for others, re appeals.

It is very clear what your intent was / is,
as your and your troll tag team,
have used it to criminally harass / threaten / blackmail / intimidate, me.

I am waiting for " another case to be heard", in May?, you will then find out just how serious I am FOOL.

[REX]

Tomcat, on 02 March 2016 - 01:31 PM, said:

/>/> LIAR.
To obtain court (criminal) disclosure documents
there has to be a formal permission given.
In this case, by you Thomas.
No point in lying about it.There is no hiding from this one.
I have been thru the process once for myself,
and 3 other times for others, re appeals.

It is very clear what your intent was / is,
as your and your troll tag team,
have used it to criminally harass / threaten / blackmail / intimidate, me.

I am waiting for " another case to be heard", in May?, you will then find out just how serious I am FOOL.

Bullshite.. !


If you are whinging about your criminal scroll that LF made available to the public as open public information published via LF wordpress, you can't do diddly squat about it.
Read section 49 (2) which covers my right to COPY and distribute since when copied... its THEN MY information.
I guess that is YOUR fault felcha, for placing yourself on the stand in Alan Thomas' TBP case.
Once you appear in the DOCK in a public case the public have a right to all the evidence and disclosure made available publicly for the consideration of the court.
When the information / testomony / presented evidence is restricted, this has to be ruled on by the residing judge,
IF YOU didn't ask for your HUGE CRIMINAL record / rapsheet be gagged Its a matter of public record.....LMFAO


"You have the right to fight for openness in courts, and oppose gag orders on parties."

Take your medication and stop crying./>


http://www.legislati.../DLM345777.html


47 Public inspection of open access records

• Unless this Act provides otherwise, an open access record must be made available for inspection by members of the public free of charge as soon as is reasonably practicable after a request to inspect the record is made to the public office, the local authority, the approved repository, or Archives New Zealand, whichever has possession of the open access record.

http://www.legislati.../DLM345779.html


49 Prohibition on public access or copying

• (1) The Chief Archivist may prohibit the public from accessing or copying a public archive or protected record in his or her control for any period that he or she thinks necessary—
  • (a) in the interest of preserving the public archive or protected record; or
  • (b.)pending the classification, repair, or other treatment of the public archive or protected record.
  /> (2) A prohibition on public access must be noted in the public access register, in accordance with section 19(1)(d)./>
  
  (3) The administrative head of a local authority may prohibit the public from accessing or copying a local authority archive for any period that he or she thinks necessary—
  
  
  • (a) in the interest of preserving the local authority archive; or
  • (b.)pending the classification, repair, or other treatment of the local authority archive.

[Tomcat]

REX, on 02 March 2016 - 09:26 PM, said:

Bullshite.. !

If you are whinging about your criminal scroll that LF wordpress made available to the public, you can't do diddly squat about it.

I guess that is YOUR fault for placing yourself on the stand in Alan Thomas' TBP case.
Once you appear in the DOCK in a public case the public have a right to all the evidence and disclosure made available for the consideration of the court.
When the information / testomony / presented evidence is restricted, this has to be ruled on by the residing judge,
IF YOU didn't ask for your HUGE CRIMINAL record / rapsheet be gagged Its a matter of public record.....LMFAO


"You have the right to fight for openness in courts, and oppose gag orders on parties."

Take your medication and stop crying.

47 Public inspection of open access records

• Unless this Act provides otherwise, an open access record must be made available for inspection by members of the public free of charge as soon as is reasonably practicable after a request to inspect the record is made to the public office, the local authority, the approved repository, or Archives New Zealand, whichever has possession of the open access record.
• (the above does not apply due to the disclosure info being used with intent to criminally harass / intimidate / blackmail / threaten)

/>/>. Tomo and his delusional tag team, have committed numerous offenses with the disclosure info.
Especially you WANKER REX. You are not Immune FOOL.
When Tomo is in the "Hot Seat" he will dob you lot in to try and save his butt./>

[REX]

Tomcat, on 02 March 2016 - 10:29 PM, said:

/>/>. Tomo and his delusional tag team, have committed numerous offenses with the disclosure info.
Especially you WANKER REX. You are not Immune FOOL.
When Tomo is in the "Hot Seat" he will dob you lot in to try and save his butt./>

Please note :

Tomcat the career criminal has place by later "edit" his own bullet point and added an amendment to my quote of legislation under section 47 to appear as if it is legislation

(What a freak) />

Tomcat, on 02 March 2016 - 10:29 PM, said:

Bullshite.. !

If you are whinging about your criminal scroll that LF wordpress made available to the public, you can't do diddly squat about it.

I guess that is YOUR fault for placing yourself on the stand in Alan Thomas' TBP case.
Once you appear in the DOCK in a public case the public have a right to all the evidence and disclosure made available for the consideration of the court.
When the information / testomony / presented evidence is restricted, this has to be ruled on by the residing judge,
IF YOU didn't ask for your HUGE CRIMINAL record / rapsheet be gagged Its a matter of public record.....LMFAO


"You have the right to fight for openness in courts, and oppose gag orders on parties."

Take your medication and stop crying.

47 Public inspection of open access records

• Unless this Act provides otherwise, an open access record must be made available for inspection by members of the public free of charge as soon as is reasonably practicable after a request to inspect the record is made to the public office, the local authority, the approved repository, or Archives New Zealand, whichever has possession of the open access record.
• (the above does not apply due to the disclosure info being used with intent to criminally harass / intimidate / blackmail / threaten)

[Tomcat]

REX, on 02 March 2016 - 10:34 PM, said:

Please note :

Tomcat the career criminal has place by later "edit" his own bullet point and added an amendment to my quote of legislation under section 47 to appear as if it is legislation (What a freak)

/> POOR OLD B.BANDIT. grubbing at anything to score points.
my comment came out like that. no intent FOOL.

[REX]

Tomcat, on 02 March 2016 - 10:56 PM, said:

/>POOR OLD B.BANDIT. grubbing at anything to score points.
my comment came out like that. no intent FOOL.

Yeah right.../>

Tomcat lied and only idiots like NTV are sucked in

Tomcat, on 02 March 2016 - 01:31 PM, said:

To obtain court (criminal) disclosure documents
there has to be a formal permission given.
<SNIPPED>.

THE TRUTH AND FACT


47 Public inspection of open access records

• Unless this Act provides otherwise, an open access record must be made available for inspection by members of the public free of charge as soon as is reasonably practicable after a request to inspect the record is made to the public office, the local authority, the approved repository, or Archives New Zealand, whichever has possession of the open access record.
  Thats why you cut out section 49 from my quote without using a <SNIP>
  
  Section 49 (2) clearly states I have right to copy public record
  
  When public have right to copy public record "NON registered as restricted" (access on demand) that means you can post your copy and share it, even if that share is to enlighten the reader to the TRUTH about your obvious LACK of integrity ! />

49 Prohibition on public access or copying

• (1) The Chief Archivist may prohibit the public from accessing or copying a public archive or protected record in his or her control for any period that he or she thinks necessary—
  • (a) in the interest of preserving the public archive or protected record; or
  • (b.)pending the classification, repair, or other treatment of the public archive or protected record.
  (2) A prohibition on public access must be noted in the public access register, in accordance with section 19(1)(d)./>

Enjoy the rest of your night as I have a great day ahead of me tomorrow />

[Tomcat]

REX, on 02 March 2016 - 11:06 PM, said:

Yeah right...

Tomcat lied and only idiots like NTV are sucked in



THE TRUTH AND FACT


47 Public inspection of open access records

• Unless this Act provides otherwise, an open access record must be made available for inspection by members of the public free of charge as soon as is reasonably practicable after a request to inspect the record is made to the public office, the local authority, the approved repository, or Archives New Zealand, whichever has possession of the open access record.
  Thats why you cut out section 49 from my quote without using a <SNIP>
  
  Section 49 (2) clearly states I have right to copy public record
  
  When public have right to copy public record "NON registered as restricted" (access on demand) that means you can post your copy and share it, even if that share is to enlighten the reader to the TRUTH about your obvious LACK of integrity !

49 Prohibition on public access or copying

• (1) The Chief Archivist may prohibit the public from accessing or copying a public archive or protected record in his or her control for any period that he or she thinks necessary—
  • (a) in the interest of preserving the public archive or protected record; or
  • (b.)pending the classification, repair, or other treatment of the public archive or protected record.
  (2) A prohibition on public access must be noted in the public access register, in accordance with section 19(1)(d).

Enjoy the rest of your night as I have a great day ahead of me tomorrow

/>/>.


What is “harassment”?
Harassment Act 1997, ss 3, 4

A person “harasses” you if they do any of the following things at least twice within 12 months:

• watching, hanging around, or blocking access to or from your home or workplace, or any other place you regularly or often visit
• following, stopping or confronting you
• entering or interfering with your home or other property
• contacting you – either by phone, letter, email or text, or through social media such as Facebook, or in any other way
• giving you offensive material, or leaving it where you’ll find it or where someone else will give it to you or bring it to your attention

Criminal harassment
Harassment Act 1997, s 8

The Harassment Act makes the most serious kinds of harassment a criminal offence. If you complain to the Police and they believe the harassment is criminal, they can arrest and charge the harasser.


When does behaviour amount to criminal harassment?
Harassment Act 1997, s 8(1)

First, the behaviour must amount to “harassment” as that word is defined in the Harassment Act – which means that within a 12-month period the other person must have done (or encouraged someone else to do) two or more of the types of acts specified in the Act (see “The meaning of ‘harassment’” above in this chapter).

Next, the harassment must amount to “criminal harassment”, which depends on the harasser’s intention and state of mind, not on the effect the behaviour has on you.