vaughanwilliams wrote:Malapapa wrote:How else do you propose people who've been usurped from their land get it back? Through force?
I don't know, but it won't be through the UK courts, as things stand. The IPC maybe?
What's the IPC?
vaughanwilliams wrote:Mr. Apostolides always knew, in his own mind, that "his" land was "his" and always had been. He didn't need the court to tell him that.
No, he needed the court to tell the trespassers to get off his land. Because if outlaws are going to prevent him from enjoying it, then he sure doesn't want anyone else to, or gangsters to profit from swindle on the back of it. Have you never been wronged, vaughanwilliams? Have you never wanted justice? Or have you just spent your whole life benefitting from the misery of others?
vaughanwilliams wrote:He also knew that under the present circumstances he would never get it physically back. i.e. He would never be allowed to occupy/live in/on it, irrespective of whatever the courts found.
Only because ruthless outlaws prevent him by force. What reason is this not to pursue justice? Maybe in your cowardly world you give up in the face of nasty aggression and threats. But certain brave people see such obstacles as a challenge. Unless you've been wronged and lost something dear to you, you wouldn't understand.
vaughanwilliams wrote:Therefore this was only ever a case of causing disruption and not an attempt to regain occupation of his property.
Let's not pretend it was anything else.
Let's not pretend, if gangsters are disrupted from committing more crime, then this is a very good thing. Unless, of course, you're a gangster.