Total Pageviews

Monday, 11 February 2013

Paul Barford and his partners in crime

                                  



Paul Barford serial blogger and saviour of world heritage, makes regular accusations about historic sites being pillaged throughout the western world. He cites on his blog the Staffordshire Hoard site being visited by nighthawks as unfilled holes have been found across the field, and criticises the security measures being taken.

 What he fails to tell his viewers, is that he is often the instigator of many of these visits as last year he published on his blog the site of the Poulton Hoard. He even ran a guessing game as to which field it was found, guiding them to the particular field. He then congratulates two local lads who were also known nighthawks at guessing the exact spot. Well done Mr. Barford aren't we a clever chappie.

Three months later these two nighthawks were caught by the gamekeeper on the hoard field detecting and digging holes. They were ordered off and the details passed onto the local police. Now what Paul Barford has done as aider and abettor of a crime is become liable himself, even though he didn't actually hawk the fields himself, his intention was to purposefully assist, or otherwise promote the commission of a crime or a tort.

In a criminal offence, a person who aids and abets in a crime, participates in the commission of the crime by performing some overt act or by giving advice or encouragement. The person should be sharing the criminal intent of the person who actually commits the crime. However, it is not necessary for the aider and abettor to be physically present at the scene of the crime, or take part in the actual criminal offence. Under criminal law, an aider and abettor party to a crime will be criminally liable as a principal, an accessory before the fact, or an accessory after the fact. Maybe we will see you in court soon Paul!


Everyone knows I forced Paul to closed his blog down last year for several weeks, after he infringed on my copyright of 120 photographs, which he stole off my net album, and hosted directly on his blog without payment of £500 per image, which he had previously acknowledged was the fee.

 

Which I believe works out at £60,000,  Plus the edition of several items of treasure he found on the web and added them to my images, because nothing  I had posted contravened the Treasure Act, so he thought he would add some himself just to make sure it did. Which is also a criminal act , planting evidence on an innocent man, tut tut I could probably get you extradited for that one.

 

Also the strange phenomena of how an image posted by Paul on his blog, ends up as my screen saver on my computer which is password protected. This sounds a bit like hacking software to me, can't you be extradited for that. 

 

  



Does it not seem strange how Paul felt it necessary to delete his blog history of what he wrote at the time, if he is innocent, as he never deletes anything unless absolutely necessary and now he bleats on 'I've done nothing wrong Guv, I'm the victim in all this'.
For someone who spends there life attacking others, isn't it nice to see Paul squirming as he bounces between justification of his actions and damage limitation to his blog.



 

Oh and another thing Paul, making up claims I threatened to kill you, is another criminal offence, especially when you re-wrote it, as I have the original email.

This is also a guy who say's only a coward writes under a assumed name, from a guy who has removed all his photographs  off the net, because he is frightened of showing his face.

 

If you were a dog turd Paul, I'd step on you!




Well all I can say Paul is your the lowest form of life, far worse than any nighthawker or looter of sites. There you are criticising heritage loss, when all along you are actively encouraging it behind our backs.

 

Are you so bitter and twisted that you need to invent problems that don't exist, but then cause them with your own ignorance and stupidity. Paul say's the information was already available in the public domain, which the video was, but what spastic would freeze frame the images on the video, counting the trees in the hedgerow to then cross reference it with Google maps,  then pass on the information to known nighthawks who were viewing his blog. 

The reason why Paul did this, was so he could highlight the nighthawking problem, which he himself caused.  






 

If you view Google maps on China you will see a large yellow streak going across the landscape this will be the Yellow river, if you view Poland you will see the same thing, but this will probably be Paul's underpants.
 
 
 

 

If you don't like what I have written then may I suggest you get yourself a good Solicitor and sue me for libel, which is slightly pointless as I have all the evidence I need.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment