It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Until recently, I’d been a follower and supporter of David Icke for a few years now. That is until issues regarding a lack of transparency were raised by Sonia Poulton in relation to not-really-David’s new TV station The People’s Voice, which, on paper, is run by David’s webmaster, namely Sean Adl-Tabatabai. As an initial supporter of the project, I was quick to allay fears of a lack of transparency from the donation funded project, but as stories of allegations of racism started to emerge along with a complete lack of professionalism and zero communication from the station to its supporters and funders I began to have doubts.
This debacle saw my donation to TPV cancelled, and a colossal ban hammer smiting of supporters on DIF who were now asking questions. ’The People’s Voice Indeed. One quote in particular seemed to cause quite a stir: "There are some right proper mongs out there. Most of them Truthers. Get more sense out of my bellend" Gareth Icke. Rightfully so too. Definitely not the sort of voice I want speaking for me.
By the way David, Ian Kelly wants to know where the £10K went which was paid to David Icke Books Ltd for TPV rather than sent through the Indiegogo site? Is THAT the money you don’t account for in the “financial report” you provided your followers (there’s no accounting showing ANY donations in that table Davey) and is it then the money you say you put into TPV “out of my own pocket”? I’d guess it probably is!
Well, if you've actually listened to ANY of David Icke's talks, you'd know that at the beginning of every talk, David Icke says "I'm here to show you one possibility, but you should make up your own minds as to how to interpret what I'm going to tell you", or some version of the same thing.
Basically, he's saying that you should approach his ideas with an open mind, but do your own research on the subjects that he's presenting and form your own theories.
Obviously, you missed Step 1 "open mind".
Conspiracy to defraud
[icon] (May 2013)
Further information: conspiracy to defraud
Section 5(2) Criminal Law Act 1977  preserved the common law offence of conspiracy to defraud.
Conspiracy to defraud was defined in Scott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis  UKHL 4;  AC 819, 839, per Viscount Dilhorne:
"to defraud" ordinarily means … to deprive a person dishonestly of something which is his or of something to which he is or would or might but for the perpetration of the fraud be entitled.
"....an agreement by two or more [persons] by dishonesty to deprive a person of something which is his or to which he is or would be or might be entitled [or] an agreement by two or more by dishonesty to injure some proprietary right of his suffices to constitute the offence...."
Elements of the offence
There must be a real agreement with the parties having agreed all the major details of the "crime" or "crimes" (not including other inchoate offences) to be committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, and the parties must "intend" or "know" the facts which make the conduct criminal even where the full offence is strict. Thus, the mens rea of conspiracy is a completely separate issue from the mens rea required of the substantive crime; where the issue of corruption in public office was complicated by the presence of the presumption of corruption in section 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1916 unless the contrary is proved in respect of payments to persons in public employment (a provision that probably breaches the human rights requirement as to a presumption of innocence).