IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
The whole thing shows how infantile our culture has become. One bloke, a failed local radio presenter, resorts to making cheeky videos on YouTube about z-list celebrities. One such z-lister, a man who has ridden and fallen off a penny farthing, takes offence and goes to court. Another set of people who actually find z-list celebs interesting watch the whole thing unfold. Kittens chasing light beams probably make more of their time than any of this lot.
Walter Cronkrite wrote: The whole thing shows how infantile our culture has become. One bloke, a failed local radio presenter, resorts to making cheeky videos on YouTube about z-list celebrities. One such z-lister, a man who has ridden and fallen off a penny farthing, takes offence and goes to court. Another set of people who actually find z-list celebs interesting watch the whole thing unfold. Kittens chasing light beams probably make more of their time than any of this lot.
You said that beautifully. I never heard of Alex until he was mentioned on this site. I agree with what says sometimes other times I think he speaks utter bollocks.
However he exposed the state broadcaster of what it I'd and he knew ins and out of it. Hence they tried to stich him up with a bomb tactic, which was done by a BBC lawyer.
I think Alex Belfield has got the wrong end of the stick.
When Jeremy Vine (who was assisted by Mark Williams Thomas's false evidence) said that AB was "the Jimmy Savile of trolling" he was not insulting him.
He was clearly stating that he was to be the next victim of a co-ordinated witch hunt.
Walter Cronkrite wrote: The whole thing shows how infantile our culture has become. One bloke, a failed local radio presenter, resorts to making cheeky videos on YouTube about z-list celebrities. One such z-lister, a man who has ridden and fallen off a penny farthing, takes offence and goes to court. Another set of people who actually find z-list celebs interesting watch the whole thing unfold. Kittens chasing light beams probably make more of their time than any of this lot.
Sorry, I have to disagree. It is not "infantile" to be outraged about false accusations and that men who are respected as (ex) police officers/crime investigators manufacture false evidence to be used in court.
It doesn't matter who the victim is. It is Alex Belfield at the moment, but before that it was Mr King and goodness knows how many others to come. Any one of us could be next.
It is not trivial to have a police force who are minions of the BBC, who arrest people without doing any investigation, and ignore correct procedure and falsify evidence. (this has all been established regardless of the outcome of the trial)
The whole thing is a farce. Don't people have a backbone these days, Jeremy Vine gives it all large on the MSM but hates it when the tables are turned.
I have never heard of Bernie Keith Philip Dehaney and Ben Hewis. So I'm on the fence.
The Mirror article has this captioned "The ex-BBC presenter arriving in court ahead of the verdict being delivered". Seems an odd outfit for going to court, let alone representing yourself in court. Maybe he's a bit unhinged.
I am absolutely astonished. I thought there was no case to answer. Even accounting for Belfield's stupidity in representing himself, and then not giving evidence, I just cant see what the jury convicted on?
I must say, I thought it was wrong of the judge to define "it" as a new form of stalking, therefore establishing that "it" had indeed happened, and the constant references to the THOUSANDS of emails, when there was no evidence of them at all.
Jo wrote: The Mirror article has this captioned "The ex-BBC presenter arriving in court ahead of the verdict being delivered". Seems an odd outfit for going to court, let alone representing yourself in court. Maybe he's a bit unhinged.
He appears to have an over inflated sense of his own importance, at the very least.
This video from April 2020 where he mentions 2 of the people he
was convicted of "stalking"
hardly stalking IMHO sounds like he was responding to something
they had done
Although no call for the C word.
He got intoxicated by his own ego. Representing himself in court was a sign of that. Lack of money is no excuse - there is help. But if he genuinely thought he could run his own case he was seriously deluded.
Rick wrote: He got intoxicated by his own ego. Representing himself in court was a sign of that. Lack of money is no excuse - there is help. But if he genuinely thought he could run his own case he was seriously deluded.
If he is suing Nottingham police also you won't get any legal aid.
Green Man wrote: Rick wrote: He got intoxicated by his own ego. Representing himself in court was a sign of that. Lack of money is no excuse - there is help. But if he genuinely thought he could run his own case he was seriously deluded.
If he is suing Nottingham police also you won't get any legal aid.
For all his threats of suing people, as far as I know he isn't. Quite where his thousands of pounds of donations have gone is a mystery.
But one of the broader issues floating around this and other related cases concerns the strange failure, legally, of anyone to get to grips with the imprecision of language, and meaning, concerning so-called 'hate crimes'. The word 'hate' has been allowed to be stretched so far that it now includes anyone merely being critical of anything or anyone else. Which is obviously absurd. A pop star, for example, might say a bad review is the reviewer 'hating on me' when it's just the reviewer saying they don't like their record. The whole area needs serious revision before everyone who is simply giving an opinion is branded a 'hater'.
Rick wrote: Green Man wrote: Rick wrote: He got intoxicated by his own ego. Representing himself in court was a sign of that. Lack of money is no excuse - there is help. But if he genuinely thought he could run his own case he was seriously deluded.
If he is suing Nottingham police also you won't get any legal aid.
For all his threats of suing people, as far as I know he isn't. Quite where his thousands of pounds of donations have gone is a mystery.
But one of the broader issues floating around this and other related cases concerns the strange failure, legally, of anyone to get to grips with the imprecision of language, and meaning, concerning so-called 'hate crimes'. The word 'hate' has been allowed to be stretched so far that it now includes anyone merely being critical of anything or anyone else. Which is obviously absurd. A pop star, for example, might say a bad review is the reviewer 'hating on me' when it's just the reviewer saying they don't like their record. The whole area needs serious revision before everyone who is simply giving an opinion is branded a 'hater'.
You also summed Kenneth Williams in his diaries he loathed the critics who wrote a poor review some actors aren't good in every performance. However he was extremely eccentric and he might of been on the spectrum but it's still debateable. He was lonely despite having a company and friends.
Alex says his donations went to his lawyers and barrister. However near the same time he was jet setting to Las Vegas he might know the right people who gave him free tickets for the theatre or concessions. He boasted on all the shows and theatre's he went to.
He did mention a website he goes on that gives away free tickets to shows with a lot of empty seats he would still bitch about the free show.
Money does go quickly in Vegas even if you don't gamble the restaurant's, bars, attractions are all pretty much expensive and tourist traps it's hard to avoid them.
Forums 
