Resolving legal drama through a final settlement

January 28th, 2024

During the 2017-2019 legal drama, there were 7 hearings in total and 3 of them were scheduled as “final”. That was a proper drama, I still remember (and relive) loads of traumatic events from the past

PTSD is real, it makes you feel as if you were still there.

One of the many realisations: frameworks of the law.

International Law
Maritime Law
Civil Law
Family Law
Criminal Law

Achieving criminal framework of the law = loads of benefits.

And then the judge Silas Reid happened:

Not being able to tell why certain action was taken is a pretty major blow.

Going to jail to prove the point would be selfish

Getting a conviction would simplify my life, here is why:

Resolving “toxic trio” dillema, one way or enother. Mental health, domestic abuse, drug abuse. Genuine kafkaesque catch-22:

1️⃣ Part of mental illness is denying mental ilness.

2️⃣ Perpetrators portray them themselves as vicitms:

3️⃣ “even though drug tests are negative, there is no guarantee”

Since I saw "no guarantee" I decided to live forever.

Example how removing uncertainty is good for business:

But it would be selfish and (among other things) would reduce my ability to participate in the AI transition, the technological revolution unfolding in front of our eyes.

Terrorism in order to land in HMP Belmarsh

As long as Assange is there, the terrrorism feels like the most intuitive choice.

https://www.reuters.com/world/julian-assanges-final-appeal-against-us-extradition-be-held-february-2023-12-19/

Britain has given the go-ahead for his extradition, but he has been trying to overturn that decision. Campaigners said a public hearing would take place at the High Court on Feb. 20-21 when two judges will review an earlier ruling which had refused Assange permission to appeal.

But here there are multiple potential issues with terrorism approach:

Assange might be soon out
Goverment apparatus is slow to move
Not sure if they would take me seriously (would need to become more crazy in order to be taken more seriously)

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cs0T0uuKgrg/ - I'm not blowing up the parliament

So maybe not terrorism but this law?

(referring myself to Attorney General)

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/04/un-human-rights-chief-urges-uk-reverse-deeply-troubling-public-order-bill

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651077

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-prosecutions/private-prosecutions

Definitely plausible. Borderline believable.

Yet another option: complete removal myself from the UK jurisdiction.

Out of sight, out of mind.

Buy my assets are here:

Toxic system ☣️

The situtation I’m in = symptom of a toxic system.

Double jeopardy, cannot go be convicted twice for the same thing, proactively getting a conviction would be “get out out of jail free card”.

In the meanwhile still trying to resolve the problem on the level of truth, facts, evidence… But will anyone look into evidence? That’s why criminal framework of the ⚖️

Still waiting for some paperwork, more than a month beyond regulatory deadline...

Peaceful (R)evolution

Changing the system might be a better way:

WEF in Davos was pretty epic, high energy, influential people. For the moment I was hoping that successful resolution is possible:

Just because I contacted you about solving my problem because you know it better than I do doesn't mean I want to have any contact with you or that you have a better chance of seeing the children. This is for you and only you to solve, and I will comply with the provisions of the mediators and the contact center. If they find out that you pose a threat to children, I will respect that

(even though I understand word by word meaning, as well as entire sentence, in this particular context there is a factual error, logical fallacy: mediators and contact center are impartial and they follow the instructions of the parties)