Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

A call for 12 Good Persons

Are you willing to volunteer yourself as a Good person?

Guests cannot vote in polls
It hereby announced that 12 good persons are required for the trial of 2 bad persons, namely the bad person who identifies them self, on the Family Law Web Guide (www.familylawwebguide.com.au), with the user name of Peter Nolan and the bad person who identifies them self, again on the Family Law Web Guide (www.familylawwebguide.com.au), with the user name JohnRambo112.

Peter Nolan is to be tried, by those 12 good persons who volunteer, for his crimes against the society of the Family Law Web Guide, those crimes including the act of disowning of his children and the crime of discriminating against a gender, namely women.

JohnRambo112 is to be tried for act of aiding and abetting Peter Nolan in the crime of discriminating against a gender, namely women and also for the crime of actually discriminating against women.

The court so established by the 12 good persons who volunteer their services will also consider submissions for other crimes committed by these two so named people.  As such it is hereby announced that in addition to the request for 12 good persons to make themselves known and to then convene a court, that submissions be made for the court's consideration of other crimes against the society of the Family Law Web Guide, a society that these two persons have accepted as evidenced by their participation in that society.

If you accept that you are such a good person and wish to volunteer for the jury of 12 good persons then please take 2 actions to identify yourself. One of the two actions should be to indicate that you wish to volunteer for the jury by responding to the topic's poll. The other action should be to make a post in the topic that confirms your wish to volunteer for the jury of 12 good persons.

If you have submissions for other crimes, or have evidence that further establish the crimes currently being considered, then please make those submissions in this topic.

Hopefully, considering that both JohnRambo112 and Peter Nolan believe that this form of justice is the only and right and proper way, it is understood that they will fully cooperate with the trial of themselves. However the society of the Family Law Web Guide would be "blind fools" to not consider the prospect, as adopted by the said persons, namely JohnRambo112 and Peter Nolan, that there could be the need for Sheriffs. If you wish to volunteer as a sheriff for the society of the Family Law Web Guide, then please also reply to this topic indicating your wish to act as a sheriff for the society of the Family Law Web Guide.

The society of the Family Law Web Guide thank you for co-operation in this serious business.
Additionally insulting readers by constantly implying that only intelligent people can comprehend his meaningless rubbish and if you do not agree you are therefore not intelligent.

If a lack of Common Sense a crime?
Conan said
If a lack of Common Sense a crime?

I believe that an argument could be made, that by not using common sense, that it is a crime against all, bar the person or persons not applying common sense, as it is abusing the right of those people to not be harassed or unduly denied sensible argument. Obviously the court could make a judgement on this aspect. As such submissions for and against the requirement of the use of common sense are also hereby sought for the court's consideration.

Of course another option could be that another 12 good persons convene a separate court to pursue this allegation of wrong doing.
MikeT said
Conan said
If a lack of Common Sense a crime?
I believe that an argument could be made, that by not using common sense, that it is a crime against all, bar the person or persons not applying common sense, as it is abusing the right of those people to not be harassed or unduly denied sensible argument. Obviously the court could make a judgement on this aspect. As such submissions for and against the requirement of the use of common sense are also hereby sought for the court's consideration.

Of course another option could be that another 12 good persons convene a separate court to pursue this allegation of wrong doing.
 
I reckon that any good person would be too busy doing good to be bothered.

I'm happy to stick my hand up though…
Craigo said
I reckon that any good person would be too busy doing good to be bothered.

I'm happy to stick my hand up though…
me too.  But I will add to the already raised discrimination against woman, discrimination against men.  How dare those father's love their daughters so much they would support them…sort of like those evil people who support their children through addictions etc al

"Never, "for the sake of peace and quiet," deny your own experience or convictions". Dag Hammarskjold
I needed help with my case and couldn't afford a lawyer and found these guys invaluable  srl-resources.org
i wouldnt be good on the jury as i already hate men that walk away from their kids. theres no excuse how hard it can be to deal with the ex i cannot fathom walking away from my blood.

with the other guy disrimination against women if i cross examined this fella might find he is missunderstood then my vote in a "jury" system might seem out of place.

They are right!

Peter Nolan and John Rambo are 110% correct.  


First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.  M K Gandhi
I haven't been here for a bit but I would, although I don't know how impartial I would be considering my ex just got majority care heavily based on him saying to family reporter he would walk away and disown the kids if he didn't get majority care. so these "people" who do this and threaten this are (hhhmmmm won't swear on here) just bad persons/parents in general in my view.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets