I really cannot see how this has become so serious. He made a grave error of judgement in choosing such an emotive mountain, however, it was not reckless. Indeed, if it had been anywhere else in the world it would have been seen as impressive adventurous spirit! His 4x4 seems fairly well prepared, from the outside at least.

This is a mountain up which thousands of people trudge with no preparation and very little in the way of protective clothing or equipment - not every walker fits this bill, but it does attract an unfair number of these day-trippers by virtue of the huge paths installed across its slopes. The 4x4 is surely no worse than the train that ascends and descends the installed slope ... not to mention the atrocity that is the cafe (new or not!) on the summit.

Dangerous driving? With noone else around?? Would a trials bike on Sarn Helen get the same penalty? I rest my case

This case was a farce, it was all decided by the National Park authority who met up in Gurkha Corner in Brecon one evening about 4 weeks ago (a little research into the expenses claims of the heads of the nation parks will reveal this to be true) and they carved out the profits for themselves - o was there, i overheard teh whole chat. It's disgusting that he is still on trial because it was all decided before it went to court, they valued everything, from the "wheels and tyres" of the 4x4 to the parts for scrap, and it was all discussed and agreed before it got to court - to profit the farmer whose field he went through and the authority itself. They said outright the guy was "mental" and that the police had told they they thought so too.

It is people like this that should be in court - for destroying our justice system while pigging out on paid for curry.

It's jsut a sham, don't believe a thing. The courts are the criminals here for shamming a case.

I thank TJ & Alun for your comments on this issue. It is a crying shame that such a 'justice' system has been decided before my trial! Interestingly you may also like to hear that as we speak now, my multi-purpose 4x4 'Trusty' is now in the siezed hands of the National Parks who plan on dissmantling it for that very sole reason that has been mentioned by yourself - revenue for them!
The Police have charged me for the second time (when parked behind the summit cafe) and yet have no proof or evidence of this account - to the point of asking the general public for help! oh dear... a charge without proof or evidence suggests incorrect procedures of investigation, and I think this is a case for the IPCC.
The Civil Action is yet another court case which is going to be taken by 'Heritage Atractions' whilst in the meantime I admitted to the 1st drive up near the summit, but not to the 2nd time..... to be continued.

I'm gald my message got through to you of all people, i really am. I feel that they have seized our heritage - the ability to share our land freely. Under law, someone has a "hereditary right" over land when 3 or more generations of a family have excersised a right over it, can they prove that every generation of your family have not exercised the right to go up there any way they wish to when they wish to? No.

Also, it was on the 2nd of October, about 8pm, in Gurkha Corner Restaurant, there was a female concillor, and 3 guys, 2 of them were heads of the national parks, and yes, as i could have told you that night, it was decided to make a profit from it, and they branded about claims that you were mental - my girldfriend and i, and the staff heard it. The Police had told them so apparently, i didn't know the police were medically trained.. So i suggest you ask for the accounts of these leaders to be checked for expenses claimed for a meal there - i bet you it will be paid by one of them - it was quiet there than night, maybe the staff can tell you whose card was used? (generous portions for 4 people, lead me to believe they were pigging out on expenses and that it would be reclaimed..). Tell your court that it has come to light that these people did not try you in as court of law, they tried you over a curry, as masons, no doubt in my mind. Makes my blood boil it really does, because that injustice happens every day.

Hello Alun, Thankyou again for your comment, and I will certainly research into this matter as it seems correct at the moment. I have spoken with the National Parks head office and am currently awaiting a letter from their legal team, to which they intent to constitute action under civil law. in the meantime (without any notification from anyone where the vehicle is/has been by Police, National Parks or other) they have told me the storage charges have been in place since the beginning of the month?) Surely a person needs to be notified instantly about this rather than a month later. So as they all keep on racking the profits up (very deceptively I might add) this poses a question? The vehicle itself is a business vehicle and the longer they keep it the more controversion this becomes in a civil action case.
The total figure is yet to be relayed to me, so just awaiting a legal letter stateing this.
Regards.
Craig Williams.

Ha, don't get me started about all that. The Police compunded my girlfriend's car for many weeks after we crashed due to brake failure - just 40 miles after replacing the brake fluid. So did we get to inspect the car? No, the Police sent it to be fixed, billed her insurance and fined her for dangerous driving! Someone knew that garage owner or something. The court ordeal was a farce, to profit for them, simple as.

When asked to take oath, simply don't. If you take the religious one, it discloses that you are religious, if you don't it discloses that you're not, therefore opening you up to alsorts of prejudice that comes from having potentially religious peope (deluded and paranoidly obsessed that you are going to hell and so on, work of the devil, that sort of delusion that can never allow a fair trial) judge your fate. Masonic judges are required to believe in a God, so by disclosing that you don't, you are opening yourself up to prejudice. Just a thought. They can't seem to go far without that oath..

And they all know and deal with each other all the time, just entertaining them will open you up for unfairness, it can do no other.

Sorry to hear your girlfriend had this injustice produced on her. It does sound very corrupt! I also have dealt with 'other' cases the police use to their advantage unfairly also. Don't get me wrong a 'police system' is required for civilisation and order but alas, this system has gone to their heads! A friend once told me their are 2 types of officers.... the one's that are straight forward and easy without prejudice and are happy to assess and be on their way with everyone happy as a result....and then the 'other type' - who believe they can act as judge & jury and lecture for 30mins before producing all sorts of tickets/arrests because they feel an enourmous sense of enpowerment! (maybe they didn't get cuddled when a baby? lol) Investigators are no longer investigators...they just conclude instantly you have done wrong and pass it on to the cps. Good idea about the oath. but ofcourse they will suggest that not taking an oth is purging the courts of the justices and hay ho what do you know.... yet another offence for capital gain. Anyway, I will have to counter-claim against national parks within the civil matter.

Yeah, sometimes i feel that going through a trial you know is set against you should be considered torture, psychologically, it's a form of bullying, and yeah they may get you again, but if we don't stand for justice, the courts will not, that's for sure. I mean, the judge asks you to swear on a bible, a falsified document that is so full of evil and tripe, you just know that the trial will be unfair, corrupt, chaired by people actually insane, deluded and childish enough to ask you to take an oath upon their imaginary friend.

I mean if a judge believes in that thing, they are proving right there that they ca be tricked and are not fit to judge.

And also if it's a case of R v. You, maybe ask to be tried by people not employed by R, for they have a financial interest in not dismantling their employer's status. Ask to be tried by the state itself, or by the Assembly, who look after heritage.

Go to the top of the mountain mate.

phucken do gooders