Univocal Interests of A Witness & Victim
In rescinding illegal eviction on the grounds of illegal technicalities misrepresentation of contract in inchoate offences fraud, while no court nor judicial conduct investigations office protected my rights nor enforced my rights in the summary of any section to the Eviction Act 1977, although I complained about fraud whilst the crimes were in progress without fear of reprisals corruption.
The unambiguous concept of language that is clear, and use of dialogue without misreading information, and misunderstanding data, the vague ambiguity when describing the ambiguous, uncertainty, confusing speech or writing lacking understandable terms and definitions is the interesting differences of reality between the equivocal, ontological, and univocal.
In independence, inhuman ingenuity declares dissent from values and principles regulated by the rule of law, and the enforcement of governance. The influence of rhetoric through irony for ubiquitous paradox.
False exhort is the argument, troublemaking. Taking up a waiting interest in under-determinacy, and the semantics of what it will underdo.
Is there any such thing as a legal contradiction as the cause in business with the right to disagree although disapproval has underwritten the rule of law in disallowing it?
As incitements mens rea is the commissioning of the actus reus in the discourses of ideology that is the external pressures of inter-directed inchoate offences in the context of power in frauds corruption to disrupt relevant supply with disproportionate demand corruption, and disrupt irrelevant supply with proportionate demand corruption, to disrupt relevant grand corruption with disproportionate petty corruption, and irrelevant grand corruption with proportionate petty corruption, and disrupt relevant conventional corruption with disproportionate unconventional corruption as they attempt relevant conventional corruption in attempts to equivocate the cancellation of it and or conceal it with proportionate unconventional corruption and disruptively corrupt relevant public matters of serious concern with disproportionate private corruption for irrelevant public matters of subjection with proportionate private corruption in deceit, neglect, and non-disclosure of insurance, taxes, and inheritance embezzlement plus other expenses, benefits and income corruptions via dishonest confusion, convenience, and complacency for implausible deniability’s misrepresentation of the contract in impersonators fraud of court without the official capacity to represent the local authority in misguidances and misinformation while procrastination detains no serious organised crime to be objective disloyalty that undervalues crime reports while in progress to understate, underestimate and undermine accountability and transparency because of wanting to be rude, arrogant and incorrigible non-compliance fearfully hating more complaints about the situation that has been ongoing and the issues surrounding the facts of all them for years in fraud that these so called honest professionals of integrity have given disinterest for the disagreements aggravating in immodesty’s overconfidence as well as all these seriously culpable wrongs of the denials criticisms that misunderstood to manipulate so each pompous perfidy pervades callusing disclaimers negatively for discrimination that’s unreasonable.
Scrutinising public sector local governance in Bath and North East Somerset with two official Home Office obligatory disabuse public enquiry references granted credence by former Secretary’s of State Rt Hon Theresa May & Rt Hon Sajid Javid for its fraud in regards to its conspiracy to corrupt, injure and murder while it’s 5 Billion pounds debt is almost on target for Parliaments 40% exit.
Presupposition in discourse is of dependent changes and independent changes that are conditions and circumstances of cause-and-effect relationships in any activities of confounding variables, that influences the supposition of spurious associations as a confirmation of guilt in biases of careless motives, and in contrast to this the hindsight of this is of motivation and caring in the validity of innocence that selectively averts risks to prevent the doubtfulness of unreasonable expectations taking advantage unfairly in the abuses of misrepresentation.
Why should a summary of offences for fraud or indictable fouls for fraud that are prohibited recertify certified public sector frauds in the impact of assurances that does not assure professionalism is assured in being motivated and caring because of the guarantee for use in fraud?
Post a Comment