This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester <defamation_victim@Coimbra.Pt> uploaded:
"On 09/08/2016 I sent to news:uk.legal.moderated following text that did
not get through a moderator . . .

On 07/08/2016, Big Les Wade sent: |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester <defamation_victim@Coimbra.Pt> posted |
|[. . .] |
| |
| |
|Unlawful defamation includes ridicule and therefore can include |
|embarrassment. |
| |
|No it does not. The test is that the publication must not only be false and have|
|a tendency to adversely affect the attitude of other people towards the |
|claimant, but it must also have caused or be likely to cause "serious harm" to |
|the claimant's reputation (s.1 Defamation Act 2013). Embarassment is completely |
|irrelevant" |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|


Dear Big Les Wade,

Thou art mistaken as to what the tests are.

This is news:uk.legal.moderated instead of news:england.legal -
Defamation Act 2013 does not apply throughout the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

If embarrassment would be irrelevant, then why is the distress of
hurt feelings not part of a cause of action for companies? Malicious
falsehood against me made stockists refuse to sell me a copy of
"Gatley on Libel and Slander" (e.g. see below). The Book Depository
Limited agreed to sell me a copy at a higher price. How much of a
refund dost thou propose that should I get for paragraphs of this book
about ridicule (e.g. 2.10 Hatred, contempt or ridicule.)?

Thy sincerely,
Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester



On 11/12/2015, Paul Colin Gloster emailed: |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Dear Professor Alastair Mullis; Mr. Godwin John Antoine Busuttil; |
|Mr. Adam Speker; Dr. Andrew Scott; Miss Chloe Emma Strong and |
|Sir/Madam of Thomson Reuters, |
| |
|Unfortunately I am still waiting for an answer though I have been |
|saving money to buy a book from you by not paying the landlord. I do |
|not know how much longer he shall tolerate this. |
| |
|Furthermore, according to |
| WWW.SweetAndMaxwell.co.UK/Catalogue/Results.aspx?keyword=%22Gatley+on+Libel+and+Slander%22&pagesize=20&type=KEYWORD-SEARCH |
|today, a paperback of the first supplement to the twelfth edition and |
|a hardback of the "Mainwork & Supplement" were published yesterday and |
|other versions shall be "Published by Sweet & Maxwell, 31 Dec 2015". |
| |
|You do not seem to still sell the twelfth edition on its own, |
|therefore if I would pay the landlord some of his money and initially |
|buy only the first supplement to the twelfth edition from you, how |
|would I be able to buy the twelfth edition later after saving up more |
|money? When shall the thirteenth edition be published? |
| |
|Yours sincerely, |
|Paul Colin Gloster |
| |
| |
|On 13th August 2015, Ticketing user for outbound email |
|<[. . .]> emailed: |
||---------------------------------------------------------------------------| |
||"Thank you for contacting Thomson Reuters Customer Support. | |
|| | |
||This is an automated response and we will contact you as soon as possible. | |
|| | |
||Your reference number regarding this communication is 212544445. Please | |
||quote this number on any correspondence relating to this matter. | |
|| | |
||Responding to this email rather than sending us a new one will enable us to| |
||locate your communication and resolve any questions you have more quickly. | |
|| | |
||Yours sincerely | |
|| | |
||Customer Support | |
||Thomson Reuters | |
|| | |
|| | |
||This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient and contains | |
||information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under | |
||applicable law. Any distribution, use or printing by anyone else is | |
||prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender | |
||by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your | |
||system. | |
|| | |
||Thomson Reuters (Professional) UK Limited - Legal Business (Company No. | |
||1679046) 160 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8EZ. Registered in England and | |
||Wales. Registered office: 2nd Floor, 1 Mark Square, Leonard Street, London | |
||EC2A 4EG, Trades using various names, a list of which is posted on its | |
||website sweetandmaxwell.co.uk | |
|| | |
|| | |
|| | |
||Your email is quoted below: | |
||<<<->>> | |
||Dear Professor Alastair Mullis; Thy Honour Judge Parkes QC; Mr. Godwin | |
||John Antoine Busuttil; Mr. Adam Speker; Dr. Andrew Scott; Miss Chloe | |
||Emma Strong and Sir/Madam of Thomson Reuters, | |
|| | |
||Please excuse me for the intrusion, but I am bankrupt because I am a | |
||victim of defamation because I am a whistleblower. As I am too poor to | |
||pay for legal representation, Georgina Gills and others of 5RB | |
||suggested contacting the Bar Pro Bono Unit during July 2015. The Bar | |
||Pro Bono Unit informed me that it is considering me, but that gratis | |
||legal representation would be for fewer than one week. | |
|| | |
||Therefore I would be a litigant in person for much of the time, | |
||therefore it might be essential for me to acquire a copy of the latest | |
||edition of "Gatley on Libel and Slander" (and perhaps other works) but | |
||it unfortunately costs far too much for me. E.g. I owe the landlord | |
||[. . .]€300 (partially for last month and for all of this month) which I do| |
||not have. | |
|| | |
||I appreciate that you are not charities and I do not want to be a | |
||parasite, but could I somehow, please, obtain a copy without needing | |
||to pay £370 (+ postage & packing?) in advance? | |
|| | |
||With best regards, | |
||Paul Colin Gloster" | |
||---------------------------------------------------------------------------|" |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester emailed on 21/04/2016: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|" Department of Physics, |
| University of Coimbra, |
| 3004-516 Coimbra, |
| Portugal. |
| |
|Staff of Browns Books for Students including Frances Murphy - |
| |
|You continue to withhold a book needed for a court case. This |
|withholding is very unsatisfactory. |
| |
|I need this book for ongoing litigation. Lack of this book thus far is |
|not convenient, therefore I also require witness statements de every |
|member of staff which handled interaction between me and you, |
|including Frances Murphy. |
| |
|I am the claimant against a number of examples of unfair reporting; |
|defamation; and malicious falsehood. |
| |
|Webpages hyperlinked to by |
| HTTPS://CivilLitigationBrief.WordPress.com/2013/12/30/can-the-court-cut-down-the-number-of-witness-statements-maclennan-v-morgan-sindall-considered |
|or books sold by you might be helpful for writing witness |
| statements. Webpages with |
|relevant rules etc. include: |
| www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32 and |
| www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32 |
|and |
| www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part34 and |
| www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part34/pd_part34a |
| |
|Though the bodies of witness statements might be the same, these two |
|bundles require witness statements with different headings. For one |
|bundle, it is necessary to have its heading like: |
| |
|" Number: |
|HQ15D04769 |
| |
|Elizabeth Gibney |
|Springer Nature / Macmillan Publishers Limited |
|David Reay Applicants |
| |
|Nicholas Collin Paul de Glouceſter (Colin Paul Gloster) Respondent" |
| |
|and for another bundle it is necessary to instead have its heading |
|like: |
| |
|" Number: |
|HQ15D04937 |
|Martin Weinel |
|Cardiff University |
|Nicky Priaulx Applicants |
| |
|Emily Dory |
|Emily Elizabeth Dory |
|Molly Lindsey |
|Journal of Law, Technology & Policy |
|University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Other |
|Defendants |
| |
|Nicholas Collin Paul de Glouceſter Respondent" |
| |
|I quote de |
| www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32/pd_part32#19.1 |
| - |
|"[. . .] |
| |
|Format of witness statement |
| |
|19.1 A witness statement should: |
| |
|(1) be produced on durable quality A4 paper with a 3.5cm margin, |
| |
| |
|(2) be fully legible and should normally be typed on one side of the |
|paper only, |
| |
|(3) where possible, be bound securely in a manner which would not |
|hamper filing, or otherwise each page should be endorsed with the case |
|number and should bear the initials of the witness, |
| |
|(4) have the pages numbered consecutively as a separate statement (or |
|as one of several statements contained in a file), |
| |
|(5) be divided into numbered paragraphs, |
| |
|(6) have all numbers, including dates, expressed in figures, and |
| |
|(7) give the reference to any document or documents mentioned either |
|in the margin or in bold text in the body of the statement. |
| |
|19.2 It is usually convenient for a witness statement to follow the |
|chronological sequence of the events or matters dealt with, each |
|paragraph of a witness statement should as far as possible be confined |
|to a distinct portion of the subject. |
| |
|Back to top |
| |
|Statement of Truth |
| |
|20.1 A witness statement is the equivalent of the oral evidence which |
|that witness would, if called, give in evidence; it must include a |
|statement by the intended witness that he believes the facts in it are |
|true13. |
| |
|20.2 To verify a witness statement the statement of truth is as |
|follows: |
| |
|‘I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true’. |
| |
|20.3 Attention is drawn to rule 32.14 which sets out the consequences |
|of verifying a witness statement containing a false statement without |
|an honest belief in its truth. |
| |
|(Paragraph 3A of Practice Direction 22 sets out the procedure to be |
|followed where the person who should sign a document which is verified |
|by a statement of truth is unable to read or sign the document.) |
| |
|[. . .]" |
| |
|I am not kidding, |
|Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester |

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)