Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:32 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45673 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1092, 1093, 1094, 1095, 1096, 1097, 1098 ... 1142  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:18 am
Posts: 2962
Here's our next President. *taps nose*

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/enda-kenny-named-european-of-the-year-848102.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4289
JoeMangled wrote:


Has Pat Kenny had his say yet or is it going to be decided by the Indo this year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21271
camroc1 wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
nardol wrote:
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0611/969652-islandbridge-hijack-garda/

I don't know if crime is on the up but the perception of crime and the severity of it is off the chart



He will no doubt have 50 previous convictions but some judge will give him a 51st chance.

Mullet, we now have lawyers lying to judges on behalf of their clients. The entire charade is a mess.

Spoiler: show
Quote:
Judge demands explanation from lawyers he accuses of misleading court
Solicitor for Polish criminal ordered to personally reimburse the State’s legal costs
Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 09:51
Conor Gallagher

A High Court judge has demanded explanations from two lawyers who he has accused of misleading the court in an effort to stop the deportation of a Polish criminal they represented.

In a strongly worded judgment, Mr Justice David Keane also said the lawyers and their client, Thomas Bebenek, had used litigation as a “strategy or tactic” to delay the man’s deportation for long enough so that authorities would have to make a new deportation order which could again be challenged in the courts.

The judge said the lawyers, a solicitor and a barrister, failed to properly inform the court of the relevant law concerning the case as was their obligation as officers of the court, particularly in a complex area such as immigration law.

In a highly unusual move, Mr Justice Keane ordered the solicitor for Bebenek to personally reimburse the State’s legal costs. In normal circumstances Bebenek would have been responsible for the costs. In making the order the judge cited “gross negligence” on behalf of Bebenek’s legal team.

Mr Justice Keane noted concerns in the UK that some lawyers who have little or no specialist knowledge of immigration law are taking advantage of clients at risk of deportation and sometimes base their legal arguments on lengthy, irrelevant templates downloaded from the internet.

“The circumstances of this case cannot but contribute to a growing sense of unease that a similar problem may be emerging in this jurisdiction,” Mr Justice Keane remarked in the judgement released two weeks ago.

The main issues in the case relate to March 16th, 2016 when solicitor Tracey Horan made an emergency ex-parte (where only one side is represented) application to the High Court to prevent the deportation of Bebenek which was scheduled for the same day.

‘Profoundly misleading’
Bebenek had been informed by then Minister for Justice Frances Fitzgerald that he was to be deported because his 39 previous convictions, including for theft and misuse of drugs, “demonstrates the total disregard that he holds for the laws of this State.’


He received notification of his deportation in June 2015 while he was serving an 18 month sentence for theft. However Bebenek’s lawyers waited until March 16th, 2016, the same day he was due to be released from prison and deported, to apply for a stay on the order to Mr Justice Max Barrett.

In making the application, Ms Horan said the minister had failed to outline the reasons for the deportation as required by law. In fact the reasons had been sent to Bebenek at the same time as the order.

Ms Horan also failed to tell the court during the ex-parte application that Bebenek was serving an 18 month term and that he had 39 previous convictions.

She also failed to credibly explain why the application was being made nine months after the Minister’s order.

In a subsequent hearing the barrister representing Bebenek repeated that no reasons or arguments were included with the Minister’s order. “This was, of course, profoundly misleading,” Mr Justice Keane said.

Ms Horan told the court Bebenek failed to make the application earlier because he didn’t speak English, because he was in prison at the time and because he wasn’t legally represented at that time.

“None of those reasons stands up to the mildest scrutiny,” Mr Justice Keane said.

Mr Justice Barrett granted Ms Horan’s application for a stay. Mr Justice Keane suggested he would have made a different decision if he had been given the full facts.

Disappeared
Following the stay and his release from prison, Bebenek disappeared and could not be located by gardaí. Mr Justice Keane noted he was still instructing his legal team at this time and that gardaí had informed his solicitor that her client was evading immigration authorities.

Mr Justice Keane also noted the barrister instructed by Ms Horan was in his apprentice year at the time.

When the matter came before the court again in November 2017, the judge was told Bebenek had returned to Poland on his own, rendering the proceedings moot.

Mr Justice Keane has put ten questions to the two lawyers about their conduct which they must answer within 14 days, including why the solicitor instructed a trainee barrister and why the barrister accepted the case.

He said the lawyers must “show cause why each should not be found by the court to have conducted these proceedings in breach of proper standards of professional behaviour and in breach of the duty that each of them owes to the court.”


I suspect there's considerably more to that case than is immediately apparent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:37 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12308
I love that one.

"We don't know the full facts of the case"

We know enough thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21271
Well I've read the judgment and the judge himself asks for an explanation rather than making specific findings about their conduct, so I'm not sure why you think you know more than the judge. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
Mullet 2 wrote:
I love that one.

"We don't know the full facts of the case"

We know enough thanks

As does the judge.

Serious question, does any officer of the court found deliberately lying to a judge in court lose their licence to practice ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:50 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12308
anonymous_joe wrote:
Well I've read the judgment and the judge himself asks for an explanation rather than making specific findings about their conduct, so I'm not sure why you think you know more than the judge. :lol:



So why has he made a finding for costs?

Shits and gigs?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
Mullet 2 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:
Well I've read the judgment and the judge himself asks for an explanation rather than making specific findings about their conduct, so I'm not sure why you think you know more than the judge. :lol:



So why has he made a finding for costs?

Shits and gigs?


No, in order for the court to discipline a solicitor by, for example, imposing liability for costs on them, he/she will have to have failed in their duty to the court.

But then I suspect that AJ already knows this and is engaging in some deflection on behalf of the legal profession.

I note the solicitor involved earned a very nice 6 figure sum from the state in legal aid in the last published stats. Surely this should disbar her from this sort of work.



Quote:
The superior courts have an inherent supervisory role over solicitors who are officers of the court due to the nature of solicitors’ positions, which gives certain rights and privileges. This is to ensure that solicitors comply with their ethical obligations and act with the highest standards of conduct. The purpose of the court’s jurisdiction is to enforce honourable conduct by an officer of the court. The supervisory role of the court is separate to that of the Law Society or the Legal Services Regulator, and allows the court to discipline or penalise solicitors who have failed in their duty to the court...........................
..............................
Imposing liability for costs on solicitors,


https://www.lawsociety.ie/Solicitors/Pr ... x6pHYpKjIU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21271
Because they made a complete bollox of their case.

The question that arises is really whether:-

a) They deliberately took a dodgy application to the High Court on incorrect grounds;
b) They did a shít job of presenting the case; or,
c) The client didn't give them all the appropriate documentation and they erroneously brought a case on foot of a misapprehension.

My own suspicions are that it's most likely to be b), but there you go.

Cam - Deliberately lying to a court as a lawyer can get you struck off in extremis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
Sounds a lot more than simple incompetence. From the IT report already posted :

Quote:
A High Court judge has demanded explanations from two lawyers who he has accused of misleading the court in an effort to stop the deportation of a Polish criminal they represented.

In a strongly worded judgment, Mr Justice David Keane also said the lawyers and their client, Thomas Bebenek, had used litigation as a “strategy or tactic” to delay the man’s deportation for long enough so that authorities would have to make a new deportation order which could again be challenged in the courts.

The judge said the lawyers, a solicitor and a barrister, failed to properly inform the court of the relevant law concerning the case as was their obligation as officers of the court, particularly in a complex area such as immigration law.

In a highly unusual move, Mr Justice Keane ordered the solicitor for Bebenek to personally reimburse the State’s legal costs. In normal circumstances Bebenek would have been responsible for the costs. In making the order the judge cited “gross negligence” on behalf of Bebenek’s legal team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21271
You'll note he has only demanded explanations. We know their conduct was incompetent, the question is whether it went further than that.

Nobody has a clue what the answer is yet and everybody's been wildly gossiping about it since Friday.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1546
Has anyone seen the security video that allegedly is of Peter Taylor , so supposedly it's from a week before the shooting. He's working the door of a club in Bray some lad walks up with his hands up and is talking, person who is allegedly Taylor, stabs him with a pen, hits him the nastiest flying head-butt I've ever seen and then ko's him with one punch. If it is him he f**ked with the wrong guy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6486
anonymous_joe wrote:
You'll note he has only demanded explanations. We know their conduct was incompetent, the question is whether it went further than that.

Nobody has a clue what the answer is yet and everybody's been wildly gossiping about it since Friday.


Was the crim receiving free legal aid to bring his case ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27350
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 12824
EverReady wrote:
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.

You could at least offer him a handjob.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21271
EverReady wrote:
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.

Not really my beat, but I've been told Sean Costello & Co are good by a few people.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27350
paddyor wrote:
EverReady wrote:
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.

You could at least offer him a handjob.


I gave him one when he recommended I discuss it with the union. He owes me this. Thanks anon- my uncle just recommended some lad Padraic Lyons so I'll have a chat with both. Simple enough matter that should see €48,672 down the shitter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:39 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13466
goose81 wrote:
Has anyone seen the security video that allegedly is of Peter Taylor , so supposedly it's from a week before the shooting. He's working the door of a club in Bray some lad walks up with his hands up and is talking, person who is allegedly Taylor, stabs him with a pen, hits him the nastiest flying head-butt I've ever seen and then ko's him with one punch. If it is him he f**ked with the wrong guy


Thats some nice moves, not much good against a handgun though


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1546
sewa wrote:
goose81 wrote:
Has anyone seen the security video that allegedly is of Peter Taylor , so supposedly it's from a week before the shooting. He's working the door of a club in Bray some lad walks up with his hands up and is talking, person who is allegedly Taylor, stabs him with a pen, hits him the nastiest flying head-butt I've ever seen and then ko's him with one punch. If it is him he f**ked with the wrong guy


Thats some nice moves, not much good against a handgun though


Exactly :? Your man obviously either shot him himself or had a hit out on him for it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:53 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15638
EverReady wrote:
paddyor wrote:
EverReady wrote:
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.

You could at least offer him a handjob.


I gave him one when he recommended I discuss it with the union. He owes me this. Thanks anon- my uncle just recommended some lad Padraic Lyons so I'll have a chat with both. Simple enough matter that should see €48,672 down the shitter.


given wealth only starts when you drive a bentley and bentleys are 150k one third of a bentley is no money at all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27350
nardol wrote:
EverReady wrote:
paddyor wrote:
EverReady wrote:
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.

You could at least offer him a handjob.


I gave him one when he recommended I discuss it with the union. He owes me this. Thanks anon- my uncle just recommended some lad Padraic Lyons so I'll have a chat with both. Simple enough matter that should see €48,672 down the shitter.


given wealth only starts when you drive a bentley and bentleys are 150k one third of a bentley is no money at all


I am presuming they will do it for free when they see how poorly I am being treated. I am like Erin Brockovich


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:44 pm
Posts: 4342
The bus connects project could lead to compulsory purchase of part of up to 1,500 homes / gardens.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/p ... 00500.html

Is this gonna happen in a reasonable timeframe? or will it be tied up in red tape forever?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
Macsimus wrote:
The bus connects project could lead to compulsory purchase of part of up to 1,500 homes / gardens.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/p ... 00500.html

Is this gonna happen in a reasonable timeframe? or will it be tied up in red tape forever?

The CPOing will take forever, and if it involves houses/gardens in the leafy southern suburbs, no doubt all kinds of court/legal reviews as well.
The works obviously, whilst not as onerous as building the LUAS (I'm assuming that underground services can remain as is) will still involve making segregated busways & cycle lanes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:05 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12308
Good to see they have finally realised taking more and more road space isn't sustainable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15548
Crazy shit.

Chop down lots of trees, ruin lots of homes and bring the city to a standstill.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16351
Location: #68
EverReady wrote:
Anon do you know an employment solicitor/BL? Been dealing with the union on an issue and they are worse than useless. I may add I followed the advice on here against my better judgement and because I was being cheap. Cheap like a whore.


I have names but what cost are you looking at?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20300
Macsimus wrote:
The bus connects project could lead to compulsory purchase of part of up to 1,500 homes / gardens.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/p ... 00500.html

Is this gonna happen in a reasonable timeframe? or will it be tied up in red tape forever?


I would be very skeptical that this will ever happen. It's a bold idea, and something the city needs, but yeah probably won't happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24892
Never going to happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
danthefan wrote:
Never going to happen.

These are the roads departments of DCC, Fingal, SDCC and DLRCC. All have ample experience of buying properties and parts of front gardens for various roads schemes around the city. If the political will is there it will happen. If nimbyism is allowed reign we may as well forget about public transport in our city.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:29 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15638
In a normal country it would happen because it is badly badly needed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:31 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12308
nardol wrote:
In a normal country it would happen because it is badly badly needed.



We have these mad ideas about property rights


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:36 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15638
Like all rights they are a balancing act.

I have the right to free speech but if I use that the incite violence.. not so much.

No such thing as a supreme omnipresent right. Except maybe the right to life.... Although the death sentence in some cases I would be ok with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20300
nardol wrote:
In a normal country it would happen because it is badly badly needed.


Ah we're not really that normal. We're a laughing stock when it comes to public transport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:43 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15638
Would more one way roads not be a cheaper way of solving this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:49 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12308
nardol wrote:
Like all rights they are a balancing act.

I have the right to free speech but if I use that the incite violence.. not so much.

No such thing as a supreme omnipresent right. Except maybe the right to life.... Although the death sentence in some cases I would be ok with.



Not even that one anymore chief


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
The constitution allows for CPOing, in the common good, if there is a specific plan (ie drawings etc) showing that the specific land is needed, and that there will not be undue delay in implementing that plan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6486
Still not addressing the real problem.
People feeling entitled to drive into the city centre.

It is time that a congestion charge was introduced for going between the canals.
Use the pretext as gathering the dosh to fund this proposed project, and for further investment in public transport, but before spending it analyse new traffic patterns.
In outlying places with reasonable links identify where large multi-story car parks can be built, i.e. Cherrywood, Blackrock station carpark and baths, (build a 25 story carpark over the station). Dun Laoghaire ferryport, maybe 10 stories. Is Baldoyle racecourse still available ? There is land not too far north there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42132
Leinster in London wrote:
Still not addressing the real problem.
People feeling entitled to drive into the city centre.

It is time that a congestion charge was introduced for going between the canals.
Use the pretext as gathering the dosh to fund this proposed project, and for further investment in public transport, but before spending it analyse new traffic patterns.
In outlying places with reasonable links identify where large multi-story car parks can be built, i.e. Cherrywood, Blackrock station carpark and baths, (build a 25 story carpark over the station). Dun Laoghaire ferryport, maybe 10 stories. Is Baldoyle racecourse still available ? There is land not too far north there.

That, right there is the problem.

Our problem is not with road space, but with car space.

Back in the late 80s early 90s I was involved in some parking work for the then Dublin Corporation and the Dept. of the Environment. We surveyed off street parking spaces made available for employee parking in the traditional CBD, and discovered that more than half of them were reserved for public sector workers. Outline plans to tax off street car spaces as a benefit in kind were very quickly shelved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6486
Another very large car park can be built west of Houston.
There may now be plans in place for the old cattleyards in the area, but above the rail infrastructure (including the station itself) is still available. Maybe half a mile long.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:02 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12308
Yeah just what we need.

More taxes and charges on the people going to work to pay for everybody else.

Just the shot in the arm City retailers need to really finish them off too.

i mean do you people want an actual city or a museum that is pleasant for you to stroll around on Sundays. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45673 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1092, 1093, 1094, 1095, 1096, 1097, 1098 ... 1142  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], danny_fitz, earl the beaver, Edinburgh01, Fangle, geordie_6, Google Adsense [Bot], guy smiley, happyhooker, hermie, IBWT, Jay Cee Gee, Leffe, Lenny, lorcanoworms, Luciano, Margin_Walker, Mullet 2, obelixtim, Olo, Podge, Rossco, RuggaBugga, Saint, Sandstorm, Sards, sewa, Smutley, sunnybanana, Taranaki Snapper, Toro, Ulsters Red Hand, Wilson's Toffee, Working Class Rugger and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group