Richard D Hall

[SoundOfSilence]

10 hours ago, Nemuri Kyoshiro said:

The jury is the finder of fact. They are not guided by a legal team but by instructions from the judge who briefs them on the law. Every judge, bar none, that I have known has always reminded the jury to use their common sense not abandon it. They must find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which does not mean any doubt at all.  Both the prosecution and the defence will offer persuasive arguments in closing but the jury has the ultimate say. There is no moral obligation for a jury. If they believe, after hearing the facts and using their common sense, that the accused tossed the weapon, they should so find.

I agree with this ^

 

As you know, these days Judges are using 'satisfied you are sure' more than 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Even though it is not meant to change the standard of proof. To me it does.

 

For example, yes, I am sure he threw the gun over the hedge but there is no DNA or fingerprints on the gun, the accused wasn't wearing gloves and had no powder marks on his hands. Therefore, there is a reasonable doubt. I think 'satisfied you are sure' lowers the standard. Even though it is not supposed to.

 

Eyewitness testimony tends to be the most unreliable. 

 

Also, a lot depends on the judge's directions to the jury.

 

I don't think this is used in the UK. Even judges in the US won't direct a jury on this point. But there is a concept of jury nullification. That is, even if the jury is satisfied the accused committed the offence they can still choose not to convict if they don't like the law.

 

For example, someone sitting in his hot tub smoking a joint. 

 

I think jury nullification should be brought back.

 

I wonder how many people would be convicted in the UK for unwelcome Facebook posts if it was.

[Nemuri Kyoshiro]

18 hours ago, SoundOfSilence said:

I think jury nullification should be brought back.

It never went away. I hear of it being used in Tax Court now and again to great effect. It usually attracts harrumph-type articles in law journals but no real push back.

[lobster]

16 minutes ago, Nemuri Kyoshiro said:

It never went away. I hear of it being used in Tax Court now and again to great effect. It usually attracts harrumph-type articles in law journals but no real push back.

It didnt The last big case im aware of was in the early 2000s when ben Dover pornogaphy producer, was aquited after jury nullification of charges under the extreme publications act, causing the entire law on pornogaphy to be redrafted 

Edited January 2 by lobster

[Occulus5]

Richard uploaded a new video to his site, first part about Manchester and second about the technocracy. I don't want to spoilt it for anyone who hasn't yet watched it, but I don't understand why Richard seems to think that if your bank goes bust you will lose all of your money. So what about the people who work at these high street banks who may have their own money in them?. There is going to be alot of very pissed of people if suddenly their money has gone after that bank has gone bust. What about the managers of that bank, or are they in on this?. Richard makes a point that it is best to take your money out of the bank. That's easier said than done. What if you have quite alot of money in your account? you're hardly likely to have 100 grand stashed away in a safe in your house. Plus there is the issue of paying for things through direct debit and wages. No legitimate employer is going to pay their employee their wages in cash directly to them, even if they want to I doubt they would be allowed to. 

[NeoScota]

23 minutes ago, Occulus5 said:

Richard uploaded a new video to his site, first part about Manchester and second about the technocracy. I don't want to spoilt it for anyone who hasn't yet watched it, but I don't understand why Richard seems to think that if your bank goes bust you will lose all of your money. So what about the people who work at these high street banks who may have their own money in them?. There is going to be alot of very pissed of people if suddenly their money has gone after that bank has gone bust. What about the managers of that bank, or are they in on this?. Richard makes a point that it is best to take your money out of the bank. That's easier said than done. What if you have quite alot of money in your account? you're hardly likely to have 100 grand stashed away in a safe in your house. Plus there is the issue of paying for things through direct debit and wages. No legitimate employer is going to pay their employee their wages in cash directly to them, even if they want to I doubt they would be allowed to. 

Good to hear he's posting.

 

Think at this stage of the game, they give zero fucks and if they crash and nab it to bring in digi, they will do it. They know what can Joe and Jane Blogs realistically do? 

 

Yeah we have direct debits, I have only rent and phone, the rest I can pay cash with. So I can pay DDs, any online purchases cos it's cheaper with better choice, and then I can withdraw the "oooodles of cash" to my name  

 

I keep saying this and meaning to do it, but end up buying spare stuff in, in case the supply chain goes down and whilst I have a spare something, then I know the necessities are sorted so I only have to think of food and coal. 

[Grumpy Owl]

2 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

Richard uploaded a new video to his site, first part about Manchester and second about the technocracy. I don't want to spoilt it for anyone who hasn't yet watched it, but I don't understand why Richard seems to think that if your bank goes bust you will lose all of your money. So what about the people who work at these high street banks who may have their own money in them?. There is going to be alot of very pissed of people if suddenly their money has gone after that bank has gone bust. What about the managers of that bank, or are they in on this?. Richard makes a point that it is best to take your money out of the bank. That's easier said than done. What if you have quite alot of money in your account? you're hardly likely to have 100 grand stashed away in a safe in your house. Plus there is the issue of paying for things through direct debit and wages. No legitimate employer is going to pay their employee their wages in cash directly to them, even if they want to I doubt they would be allowed to. 

 

It depends on how much you have in your bank account. For most bank accounts, your deposit is only guaranteed up to £85,000 through financial services authority protection (or something along those lines).

 

If you have more than that saved away, then you could be at risk if your bank ends up in trouble.

 

I don't have that kind of money stashed away anyway, but I did recently move all my savings out of my Barclays account and into a new NS&I (National Savings & Investments) account. Mainly because it paid a much higher rate of interest than Barclays do to be honest. But I did note that because NS&I is backed by HM Treasury, there isn't that £85k guarantee limit as with other banks.

 

Of course, my money would then only be at risk if HM Treasury (ie the UK Government) ended up going bust.

[Occulus5]

On 1/17/2025 at 7:33 PM, Grumpy Owl said:

 

It depends on how much you have in your bank account. For most bank accounts, your deposit is only guaranteed up to £85,000 through financial services authority protection (or something along those lines).

 

If you have more than that saved away, then you could be at risk if your bank ends up in trouble.

 

I don't have that kind of money stashed away anyway, but I did recently move all my savings out of my Barclays account and into a new NS&I (National Savings & Investments) account. Mainly because it paid a much higher rate of interest than Barclays do to be honest. But I did note that because NS&I is backed by HM Treasury, there isn't that £85k guarantee limit as with other banks.

 

Of course, my money would then only be at risk if HM Treasury (ie the UK Government) ended up going bust.

Well I am moving house soon so I need to transfer over about £180,000. Now how would one do this without a bank account? noone is silly enough to walk around with that kind of money in pound notes are they lol, and I doubt it's even possible. My bank, which is TSB, have been utterly useless recently as when I lost my bank card a month ago it has taken them over 4 weeks to get a new card (even though it normally takes 3-5 days), and even when I finally got the new card last week my old pin number (that didn't need changing) wouldn't work on the machines, so I'm now waiting for a new pin number to be sent. You can't telephone the branch on the number because staff don't answer, but they can call out to you, so you then have to ring the main TSB number and go through all the different numbers to speak to someone. From what you are saying I think I am best changing to a different bank.

 

I don't think I could ever do what Richard has done and withdraw most of my savings out, my family commitments and circumstances just wouldn't allow that. I doubt I'm ever going to be off grid like Richard (I would love to have my new home the way he has done but I don't have the know-how and skills to do such a thing nor do I have anyone who will help me), I have kids and I'm single and the kids mum will expect me to provide for things for them, often I have to use my account to pay for things online,  but thankfully that's not very often. Not to sound too personal here, but I'm guessing Richard's son isn't spoilt and doesn't use a mobile phone and wants mummy and daddy to pay for those stupid V Bucks on Fortnite games. Where does Richard get his income from for council tax, car insurance etc? even if he's no gas and electric to pay for he still has to pay council tax, how does he afford these things when he's basically earning nothing?. I was listening to a podcast with John Hamer yesterday and he was basically "gloating" about the fact that his income comes from his talks and book sales but was almost on the bread line before that. John has never been in employment since the early 2000s having retired from his IT job. He's either on a very nice cushy pension from his last job, or he's earning a ridiculous amount of money from selling his books. I have no problem with that but the way he talks about it's like he's bragging about. Some of the things Hamer talks about is complete bollocks like flat earth. I never get that big headed, bragging vibe from Richard, everything he does is done because he passionately wants to get to the truth of a particular subject.  

[Nemuri Kyoshiro]

I received an email from Richard today about his upcoming video hearing. The proceedings are to determine whether a charging order will be put on his property. I guess Hibbert is going after his pound of flesh.

[Observations]

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/brother-of-manchester-arena-bomber-attacks-prison-officers-union-says-13347487

 

Counter terror police investigating after brother of Manchester Arena bomber attacks prison officers

 

 

 

[Occulus5]

Anyone know what has happened to Richard?. I really miss his shows. Wish we had more researchers like him. 

[Malbec]

On 5/5/2025 at 3:19 PM, Occulus5 said:

Anyone know what has happened to Richard?. I really miss his shows. Wish we had more researchers like him. 

https://www.richplanet.net/

 

Hes put a new episode on today. 

[Occulus5]

On 5/10/2025 at 9:56 PM, Malbec said:

https://www.richplanet.net/

 

Hes put a new episode on today. 

Yeah I noticed his new episode, was a very interesting episode about free energy. I hope Richard achieves something from that machine he built, he seems to know what he is doing and is very skilled at things like that (his off grid project he I don't know how he did it, but he's obviously got people to help him). If it turns out that those kinds of devices can generate some kind of free energy I'm doubtful it will ever get out into the public. I agree with Richard about not patenting such a machine as it will just end up being covered up or confiscated. IMO I don't see how having free energy to run something like a car is going to solve anything. If people were able to run their car off of some limitless energy or from water all it's going to do is put more vehicles on the road.

[Mitochondrial Eve]

This morning Richard D. Hall released his latest legal update and sadly has been refused leave to appeal to the Supreme Court which was the last domestic remedy open to him.

 

Hall has now submitted an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on the basis that the judgment made against him was a breach of his human rights - namely, article 10 which concerns freedom of expression and article 6 which provides a right to a fair trial. Such human rights are provided for under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which was incorporated into domestic law under the Human Rights Act 1998.

 

Worse still, a statutory demand has been issued to Hall which is a precursor to bankruptcy proceedings. Given that he has an asset by way of the home he owns and lives in, he could potentially lose the roof over his head. I truly hope Hall is successful in persuading the court to stay the bankruptcy proceedings whilst the ECtHR considers his application.

 

https://www.richplanet.net/legal.php

 

Quote

CURRENT SITUATION - Updated 6/8/2025

 

On 27th May 2025 I received notice from the Court of Appeal, that my appeal had been refused by Lord Justice Stuart-Smith. This means that I cannot appeal to the Supreme Court which in turn means I have exhausted all domestic remedies to get justice.

Having exhausted all domestic remedies, I have the right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg whose role is to ensure that states are upholding human rights standards, and it does so by reviewing decisions of domestic courts in cases where a human right has allegedly been violated.

In my case, I believe the judgment was a clear violation of ECHR article 10, the right to freedom of expression and of article 6, the right to a fair trial.

From 27th May 2025, I have 4 months in which to submit an application to the ECHR, and on 1st July 2025 I instructed my legal team to produce an appropriate written application for consideration by the ECHR. The application is nearly completed.

The cost of the preparation of the application has been paid up front, and this was afforded by using the kind donations that are still continuing to come in from members of the public.

In the mean time, on 16th July 2025, the claimant’s solicitors served a statutory demand, which seeks a court hearing to make me bankrupt, which could then result in the selling of my home and removal of assets. A directions court hearing is to be heard, which I will be attending at Merthyr Tydfil Law Courts on Monday 18th August 2025. After this court hearing I expect there will be another court hearing at Merthyr Tydfil Law Courts to determine whether or not bankruptcy proceedings will be allowed to go ahead.

I will be arguing that the case being presented to the ECHR has at least a realistic chance of success, and therefore that all bankruptcy proceedings should be set aside until the case has been heard by the ECHR.

Thank you for the kind donations so far, the legal fund just about paid for the cost of preparing the ECHR appeal, but further funds would assist in paying for representation by my barrister at the up coming bankruptcy hearings.

If anyone wishes to support me at the Court Hearings in Merthyr I would be grateful for that too.

 

[Occulus5]

I've mentioned Richard a few times to regular normie type and mentioned his research, but all I get back is the usual slagging off and name calling, some who have never heard of him and others who have, but they don't actually bother to watch his investigation or read his book.

[Grumpy Owl]

On 8/6/2025 at 5:02 PM, Mitochondrial Eve said:

Hall has now submitted an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on the basis that the judgment made against him was a breach of his human rights - namely, article 10 which concerns freedom of expression and article 6 which provides a right to a fair trial. Such human rights are provided for under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which was incorporated into domestic law under the Human Rights Act 1998.

 

It makes you think - there are certain individuals who have been actively calling for the UK to 'leave' the ECHR, on the basis that it will allow us to 'remove asylum seekers more easily'. But there is a lot more to the ECHR than that, as this case is now showing.

[Occulus5]

So, according to the update on Richard's website, he is now facing now facing losing his home and his son, Lewis aged 10, may be homeless if he doesn't receive donations. Now I don't want to get too personal here, but where is his son's mother?. You'd have thought she would try and help. And why would Hall lose his home when he has no mortgage and bought the house?. Why use a photo of his son sat on a doorstep as he looks homeless?. 

[Grumpy Owl]

33 minutes ago, Occulus5 said:

And why would Hall lose his home when he has no mortgage and bought the house?

 

Because that is presumably the most valuable asset he owns, which he'll have to sell in order to pay damages/costs.

[Occulus5]

52 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Because that is presumably the most valuable asset he owns, which he'll have to sell in order to pay damages/costs.

He wouldn't be able to sell his home considering the alterations he made to it when he went off grid. Estate agents cannot sell a home unless it has got a certified boiler and heating appliance installed. 

[k_j_evans]

2 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

He wouldn't be able to sell his home considering the alterations he made to it when he went off grid. Estate agents cannot sell a home unless it has got a certified boiler and heating appliance installed. 

I don't think that is true/ It can't be rented out, but an estate agent here was recently advertising an off-grid property (locally described as a "shed") for 160 thousand, now redfuced to 125. https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/164160731#/?channel=RES_BUY. Not freehold, though.

[Occulus5]

On 9/6/2025 at 5:22 PM, k_j_evans said:

I don't think that is true/ It can't be rented out, but an estate agent here was recently advertising an off-grid property (locally described as a "shed") for 160 thousand, now redfuced to 125. https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/164160731#/?channel=RES_BUY. Not freehold, though.

I'm not sure how. According to the estate agent I sold my house through, every home needs to have one of those EPC energy rating certificates, and if it doesn't have one then the house can't be sold. Ridiculous I know we all know it's all about getting more money out of people. It cost me nearly a grand before I sold my house because of things like surveyors reports, plus solicitors fees. 

[k_j_evans]

3 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

I'm not sure how. According to the estate agent I sold my house through, every home needs to have one of those EPC energy rating certificates, and if it doesn't have one then the house can't be sold. Ridiculous I know we all know it's all about getting more money out of people. It cost me nearly a grand before I sold my house because of things like surveyors reports, plus solicitors fees. 

Well, it can probably get an EPC and still be off grid. I think gas safety (aka CP12) for a boiler only apples to rentals with gas, and if it has an electic boiler run from batteries and solar panels, that would do. They really are complete nonsense (EPCs) as assessors refuse to look in loft for insulation and just "assume" what there is or isn't by age of property (which is crazy) and often won't accept invoices etc as proof of things like cavity wall insulation - so basically pointless.

[Mitochondrial Eve]

1 hour ago, k_j_evans said:

Well, it can probably get an EPC and still be off grid. I think gas safety (aka CP12) for a boiler only apples to rentals with gas, and if it has an electic boiler run from batteries and solar panels, that would do. They really are complete nonsense (EPCs) as assessors refuse to look in loft for insulation and just "assume" what there is or isn't by age of property (which is crazy) and often won't accept invoices etc as proof of things like cavity wall insulation - so basically pointless.

 

Yes a lot of assumptions were made about my house concerning its EPC rating when I bought it.

 

It was assumed that it had cavity wall insulation as you say which, to be fair, it no doubt does.

 

However, it was also assumed that it didn't have underfloor insulation but I have since discovered, on renovating the kitchen, it does. I took photos to prove its existence but it sounds as though EPC assessors may ignore this!

 

Another recommendation for improving the EPC rating was to have a solar hot water system installed - I would've thought that the solar panels on the roof would have been a bit of a giveaway that it already had this but hey ho...

[Grumpy Owl]

On 9/8/2025 at 4:19 PM, k_j_evans said:

They really are complete nonsense (EPCs) as assessors refuse to look in loft for insulation and just "assume" what there is or isn't by age of property (which is crazy) and often won't accept invoices etc as proof of things like cavity wall insulation - so basically pointless.

 

On 9/8/2025 at 5:38 PM, Mitochondrial Eve said:

 

Yes a lot of assumptions were made about my house concerning its EPC rating when I bought it.

 

It was assumed that it had cavity wall insulation as you say which, to be fair, it no doubt does.

 

However, it was also assumed that it didn't have underfloor insulation but I have since discovered, on renovating the kitchen, it does. I took photos to prove its existence but it sounds as though EPC assessors may ignore this!

 

Another recommendation for improving the EPC rating was to have a solar hot water system installed - I would've thought that the solar panels on the roof would have been a bit of a giveaway that it already had this but hey ho...

 

I was present when I had an EPC assessor visit last year, and yes they do make assumptions! This is from my property's current EPC certificate:

 

The guy doing the assessment went around taking measurements, but didn't ask me any questions, apart from asking to see the boiler.

 

Now I know for a fact that his 'assumption' regarding the lighting was incorrect, because 4 out of the 6 'fixed ceiling lamps' in my flat have LED lightbulbs fitted.

 

I know this, because I bought and fitted them myself!  (The kitchen has a fluorescent strip lamp, and the bathroom has some fluorescent ring lamp, both of which are not that easy to replace, so I just left them, don't use them that often anyway)

 

Did the guy ask me, or ask to see inside the ceiling lights to confirm this? Nope, he didn't even ask me to turn them on! 

 

OK, granted in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't have made much difference to the overall EPC rating of the property, which scored 'C' anyway. But this is just a small trivial example of these EPC assessors making incorrect assumptions while making their assessments. 

 

 

 

[Occulus5]

I think alot of these assessors just cut corners and don't really do what the say they will do, probably because it was take too much time. Just a money making thing to get home owners to fork out more money on something that probably doesn't need doing.

 

Regarding when Richard started to modify his home, I know he said in his video the electric company kept wanting him to have a smart meter, which he obvious refused to have. I know this should be for a different thread, but what is everyone's views on smart meters, are they really harmful to your health and do they really snoop on your home, or this just disinfo by people who simply don't know what they are talking about?. The reason I ask is a friend of my had one installed today and I asked the bloke installing it (to which I sounded like a right arrogant git) that I won't be having one in my house and I said to him they are controversial and some people I know won't have one because they aren't good for your health (I really couldn't be bothered mentioning the surveillance side of them). He told me that he's installed thousands of them and he's never had any health issues. You don't have to be a tin foiled hatter to be concerned about them, as I've know regular people over the years who said they too won't have one, but they never told me why. I suppose the engineer would say they aren't harmful otherwise noone would have one, and he'd probably be out of a job if he said that. It is curious though why energy companies are so keen to want people to have them installed in their homes. 

 

 

Edited September 15 by Occulus5

[Observations]

A few years ago when I double checked that a new meter was not a smart meter, I mentioned to the engineer that there was a lot of uncertainty about ‘them’, and he said a lot of people say things like that to him but he couldn’t see the problem. Or words to that effect. 
 

As you can imagine, I wanted to ask him what people had been saying but at the time I let it go, but I expect he’d heard some interesting opinions. Those on the ground have much to share when we get a chance to ask and hear them out, but sure it’s luck of the draw like everything else. 
 

About ten years ago I spoke to a meter reader and I said they’re doing you out of a job aren’t they? So we had a chat about what was to come. 

 

So, we read our own meters now, but the fuel’s not getting any cheaper is it. 
 

Sorry for any de-rail … 

 

We can always ‘chat’ again a sexoleo on another (meter) thread.