Friday, December 11, 2015

Windsor Claims that if His Trial is Allowed to Continue, it Will Cause "Insignificant Injustice"



Bill's latest sob story to the court in Montana contained this statement:



B.      The District Court (“DC”) is proceeding under mistakes of law that are causing a gross injustice.


 "Supervisory Control is appropriate in this matter because the DC’s orders [Exhibits-14-19] are clear mistakes of law and are in direct conflict with precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court, this Court, and MCA, and if uncorrected, will cause insignificant injustice."

I really couldn't agree with Bill more on this.  Bill goes on to set the stage of just how high the stakes are in his upcoming trial next month:

“Windsor is facing a televised trial in which he could be convicted of one or two crimes.  His conviction will be widely publicized." 

Never mind that he is the one doing the filming and the publicizing......it’s important that the court take these into consideration and just let him go.  Windsor goes on to complain that this trial has taken so long he hasn't been home in over a year (we could also point out that he doesn't actually have a home and he's the one that continues to delay the trial....but of course it’s this court's fault he hasn't been there).

"A gross injustice will occur if Windsor is wrongly required to defend against the
same criminal charges a second time."

You might ask....what the hell is he talking about? And yes that is what a sane person would ask, but let me try and translate the very much insane Bill Windsor for you. "If the jury convicts me I will be forced to appeal that decision which could result in another trial on the same charges.....I call that double jeopardy and I read where it’s illegal". Bill goes on to complain that a guilty verdict....along with the humiliation he will suffer may also result in making it hard for him to obtain handguns to protect himself against his stalking targets in the future. Again we can hear Jefferson rolling over in his grave in Columbia Missouri.

This trial has also forced Bill to work hard and endure stress. Never mind that he denied any public defender help, and let’s also try and forget that he denied all offers of settlement from the DA which would have dropped all charges.

As we have seen Bill take on the role of defendant, judge, DA and jury all at the same time, he now has employed a new, not so creative, writing tactic in his motions......he now suggests the answers

QUESTIONS PRESENTED
 I.       Is 40-15-201, MCA, which describes the relief available in an ex parte TOP, unconstitutionally overbroad or vague?   Suggested Answer: Yes.

 II.       Is 40-15-302, MCA, which automatically extends the term of a TOP during an appeal to a DC, unconstitutional because it results in deprivation of a Respondent’s right without a hearing for as long as 546 days?  Suggested Answer: Yes.


Ohhh this looks like fun.......can we play?

Question:  If Susan says my argument is legally sound can it actually stand up in a court of law?  Suggested answer is No

Question:  If I keep saying the TOP is void enough times despite what the courts have repeatedly ruled......can I make it so?  Suggested answer is please see a mental health professional immediately 

Basically we can sum up Bill's entire argument as this:  it’s unconstitutional to legally mandate that Bill Windsor does anything, and furthermore it’s also a pointless endeavor as Bill will not abide by the ruling anyway.  So judge Windsor has declared the whole thing moot as it’s a waste of taxpayer dollars and frivolous in nature.   Hmmmmm, I wonder where he came up with that type of verbiage?

39 comments:

  1. Frank Lee BillsadickDecember 12, 2015 at 11:00 AM

    Great catch on the Freudian slip. Never truer words typed by him. Also funny is his understanding now, about how the TOP was extended under the law, which he said was not before, but now would like to make unconstitutional. I believe that would have been the one code that Susan refused to acknowledge existed and kept trying to pretend didn't exist at all by diverting to other irrelevant statutes. Sigh...the void mind of a vexi.

    Also fun was once his teather was cut, he claimed he was headed out of dodge, to go meet with CA film people, but now admits he's still in MT like it's their fault. All going back to his absurdity of all things Windsor. How can he blame them for each and every single action he chose, stall he created, game he attempted to play, stalking he chose to commit, on and on.

    And what film company would be televising this widely again? His generic blanket statements are becoming very apparent at pointing out his lies. Tick tock...less than a month now, and the desperation is oozing faster now.

    One more question lingering...where the hell is his gun? He's bitching and whining about not being able to get more, but he never turned in the one he had. Why was that not a charge? Claiming he left it in GA doesn't release him from the laws and claiming he was getting permits for it in South Dakota prior to stalking Boushie doesn't seem logical for someone who didn't even have it on him to begin with. All things that are head scratching WTF statements he's never been held accountable for.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well ain't that another doozy of a woe-is-me rambling from America's most vexi paper-terrorist whackadoodle!

    Next will likely be an attempt for him to try to pull a repeat of his many made-up "medical emergencies".

    Such a total whine-y-ass excuse for a human being he is. He brought all this on himself, but as usual, he blames everyone but himself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Still wondering what excuse he will attempt on Jan 4, 2016. It seems his previous excuse of having to drive 13 hours to get to court didn't work...maybe there will be more ice. Or will it be a brain hernia?

    tic toc billie, tic toc

    ReplyDelete
  4. Believe me, there will not be a trial. No need to worry about any clock.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hilarious giggling :)



      Delete
    2. Those pesky nuances.

      Delete
    3. Snoozer the loser!! DOH!! Trial shall commence troll. Eat that order.
      Oh, and no, I shall not post the link to the order, nor shall I post my screen name because Anon is so much more fun. Muhahahahah

      Delete
  5. Susan you so sure about that lolololololol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Positive. Taking bets if anyone here is interested.

      Delete
    2. We've all read your predictions before, Scunt, and we all know how destitute you are. Unlike you, however, we just aren't that vengeful.
      You and Willy just keep repeating that and clicking your heels together and eventually, maybe, you'll both land near reality, hopefully together.

      Delete
    3. I can hear her chirping "I told you so" when the trial is cancelled because Willy doesn't show up. That's the only way she'll be right about this. We're all still waiting for the judge to declare the TOP void. Pretty sure she was looking to wager on that as well.

      Delete
    4. Yes, indeed, she chirped off how she'd wager it was void.
      #chirp

      Delete
    5. Do I hear some Irrelevant Intermittent Chirping? (copyright Judge Haynes)

      Delete
    6. But will ANY of you sign a screen name to your opinion that there WILL be a trial?

      Oh, I see THE HOPPER had to go back to allowing anons here, because that is the only way most of you will post. How sad.

      Delete
    7. Well not really sad, more pathetic.

      Delete
    8. Almost as pathetic as your complete and total obsession with some anonymous posters on a blog. Or your utter stupidity with all of your failed legal predictions. I take that back, the pathetic level is nowhere close to yours.

      Delete
    9. Susan i should refer you to Martys son who tried to get out of his charges but they went thru. I am positive as you are that unless bill doesnt show up the trial will occur. Bill filing a writ for the same exact thing twice will get tossed and will not stop a trial.

      Delete
    10. I agree that the writ won't stop the trial. It wasn't really filed for that reason.

      Delete
    11. Hey susan i guess your positive just became negative. That trial is going on after all bill and yours billlschitting around. BTW hes vexatious. LMAO.

      Delete
    12. Susan... seems to be silent now....Sean

      Delete
  6. Hi, girls: I learned recently that our little chats had landed me in the lawsuit in some kind f strange way. Of course, I never directed any insults at Bill Windsor and Lawless America, but I guess my big mouth got me involved anyway. I understand I posted more than 500 comments. Oh, well. I'll worry about that next year. I'm leaving the states for the holidays. Just wanted to wish all of you Happy Hollidays!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You posted comments on this blog, that makes you a co-conspirator.......Bill doesnt have time to worry about nuances like who said what or when, just sue the world and sort it out from there.

      Delete
    2. Bill has stated more than once that he was going to sue every person who had ever posted a comment on this blog. It would be hilarious if he sued you Webb, since you tried to help him.

      Delete
    3. I did refer one of his representatives who contacted me to a published report by Joey Dauben that was cited in a blog post on JIALK. And I referred him to widespread media coverage of the death of someone he planned to sue, which made that person judgment proof. I was also courteous to two anonymous members of JIALK who called me from blocked phone numbers and identified themselves only by screen names. I've never known for a fact the true identities of the various screen names used on this blog so there is no way I could have helped him. I understand from reading a legal document that my being a Texas resident and having commented on the blog helped substantiate the claim that the blog was a Texas-based publication and subject to the jurisdiction of Texas courts. A large part of the time I was blocked from commenting on JIALK because I was so despised by JIALK's inner group, whomever they may be.

      Delete
    4. exactly, so as you just admitted you are a co-conspirator in the "largest defamation case in American history". When should Bill expect his $1 million defamation check from you?

      Delete
  7. Here we go again, Civil case #28 against Booshay. How come he didn't get approval from a District court Judge like he's supposed to?
    https://supremecourtdocket.mt.gov/search/case?case=18302

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. he's claiming he's too poor to pay the filing fee. He's unemployed, only has $700 in his checking account and since no one asked the question about his multimillion dollar trust he's just gonna pretend like that doesnt exist in this case

      Delete
    2. Must be in his fanny pack, ya know the one that'll hold approximately $11,000 in cash.

      Delete
    3. LMAO and...wait for it...D.E.N.I.E.D.

      Windsor's excuses will no longer be accepted on face value. Seems when he says something now, he'll be needing to pony up the evidence and not the "Because I said so evidence."

      Nope, pony up the dough, dough boy.

      Also fun is his attempt to respond to Hayes' request for direction. M.O.O.T. Late to the game, regardless it's another meritless woe is me filing.

      I also like the point in Ginger's article about the whole Double Jeopardy thing. This is clearly like his "Must appeal everything before order" game. Must claim unconstitutional to defend twice before convicted once.

      He admitted he is desperate, and it's showing. His current spin in the court filings is so far out there it's head spinning.

      Delete
    4. never fear, when he calls crystal cox to the stand everything will finally make sense to the jury.

      Delete
  8. I wish I never met Bill W. or was involved in Lawless America. I was one of the dummies who was filmed for the 'movie' and/or 'congressional testimony', which ever lie to believed first. I was labeled one of the 'haters' after I spent my own money to travel from CT with several other victims/witnesses and somehow landed on the Joeyisalittlekidgang that Bill W. created.
    I believe we were all set up as intentional targets for our participation and that it is not the truth and justice that we seek that will be our greatest fame to claim. It is a lifetime of continued victimization of intentional gang stalking/mobbing by the true criminals in this world and I now believe Bill W. to be one of them. I hope all have a better life than this. Happy Holidays, Sincerely, Mary Bagnaschi

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *Traveled to Washington D.C. to deliver 'Congressional testimonies', mine was pulled off you tube and from the movie. darn!

      Delete
    2. Mary! You rocked the podium in DC, just sayin. A lot of us were the dummies, but at least we figured it out and told the truth....while running like the wind away from Old Windbag. Merry Christmas, Mary B.

      ~Allie Overstreet

      Delete
  9. Hail Hail the gangs all here! Wow, just three years ago I think almost to the day this billschit started. Merry x-mas Dees, Dem and Does 1-1000, the Anons, pretty princess webby, Bangladeshi and like!
    FU Scunt
    I sign anon because I can

    ReplyDelete