‘Alanson’ pleads guilty to malicious communications

/ 10/05/2019

A Hampstead hoax believer who calls himself “Alan Alanson” yesterday faced charges of stalking in relation to protected witnesses, but pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of malicious communications at Newcastle Crown Court.

“Alanson”, whose real surname was revealed to be Colley, had previously attempted to claim on this blog that he had not been charged—a claim we knew to be untrue, as EC had been called to be a witness at his trial.

Posted on HR 08-02-2019

Colley’s sentencing date is set for 5 July, and during yesterday’s hearing a criminal behaviour order (CBO) was discussed. A CBO would require not only that Colley refrain from future posts about protected witnesses in the Hampstead case, but that he remove material previously posted.

© Copyright Alan Heardman 

Related posts

31 thoughts on “‘Alanson’ pleads guilty to malicious communications”

    • Yes, I’m sorry I didn’t flag it earlier, but I felt that as I’d been called as a witness it would be a conflict of interest, so I kept quiet about it. However, the verdict is now in the public domain, so I believe it’s appropriate to report.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Great news, EC. Thanks for sharing and for taking time to give a witness testimony. Good to see that the wheels of justice are still turning, slowly but surely. Shall we start taking bets on who’s next? There are four obvious candidates who spring to mind 🤐

    Liked by 2 people

    • Thanks, Tinribs. As I wasn’t able to get up to Newcastle for the trial, I actually spent most of yesterday on hold waiting to be called up by live-link. When the defendant decided to plead guilty, it meant I didn’t have to give evidence, after about six hours on hold.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Oh and I see that one of the four is trying to get a contract put out on me.
      Pardon me while I quake in my boots 😂

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Keep an eye on that blog counter, EC – it’s getting closer and closer to two million hits!
    It’s good to see that after four years you’re still going strong and that people know where to come for the truth.
    🙂 👍 🥇

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Hi EC. I had chicken goujons with low-sugar barbecue sauce for me tea but I’d much rather talk about the Alanson trial as it’s much more interesting. Good to see that nasty little neo-Nazi troll finally getting his comeuppance 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

      • They are old English for a part of the rabbit, and are considered a delicacy by we gentlemen of the road. It’s roughly the bit that keeps the pie crust up. You may scoff at such mean fare, but if you stew a rabbit’s goujans in an old tin can over an open fire, you can’t conceive what disgusting muck it is.

        Liked by 1 person

        • It’s mentioned in the old English folk song ‘Here’s your goo John, in a pie, this will make the ladies sigh, derry derry down me boys.’ It was one of the few folk songs Cecil Sharp tried to repress. We used to sing in primary school.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Hi Sam. I must admit I don’t get your question about suspending hunger pains. I can, however, show you my goujons. Phwoar…

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Great news, I couldn’t stand to read his posts on his page, they were more than sick. Glad you didn’t have to attend EC, hope you had plenty of Mars bars to nibble on, they’re my guilty sins, the tin in the cupboard is always calling out to me.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. So there is justice after all.
    This should put on notice all those who name protected witnesses. It probably won’t.
    Those fixated on this matter are strange: if they read about witnesses being officially “protected” in other cases, criminal, terrorist etc they would no doubt obey the law.
    There is something about the Hampstead matter that makes them think they can throw all caution to the wind as though court orders are not serious even though one person has been jailed for NINE years. Just odd.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Great news! Good to see this blog still has teeth.

    Great to see the HR YouTube channel doing so well too.

    Thanks to EC for keeping us updated on recent events 🙂

    PS: re. your previous post, I’m so glad you’ve steered clear of all that YT flame war crap. Christ knows what all that’s about and frankly I don’t care.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I can see the temptation to go into YT, slap people around in comment threads, and make one’s own videos to wind them up, for some people are lowlife gobshites who deserve it. OTOH, from my cats’ perspective we are all lowlife gobshites who deserve to be slapped around and ridiculed in YT uploads.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Full Law Pages listings

    11/12/2018
    Plea and Trial Preparation – Case Started – 10:33
    Plea and Trial Preparation – Case to be listed for Trial on 09-May-2019 – 11:09

    15/2/2019
    For Mention – Case to be listed on 22-Feb-2019 – 12:24

    22/2/2019
    For Mention – Case Started – 11:29
    For Mention – Hearing finished for ALAN COLLEY – 11:40

    9/5/2019
    For Trial (Floater) – Case Started – 15:21
    For Trial (Floater) – Case to be listed for Sentence on 05-Jul-2019 – 15:28
    For Trial (Floater) – Hearing finished for ALAN COLLEY – 15:37
    For Trial (Floater) – Trial Ineffective – 15:52

    (Trial Ineffective just means the trial cannot go ahead on this date but will be heard again at another time.)

    Liked by 1 person

  10. A certain troll is claiming that EC’s removed loads of videos from the HR channel. If said troll is reading this, no she hasn’t.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Technically a plea removes the requirement for a jury and judges are not deemed to be susceptible to influence. However, as a case is still live until sentencing I’m not taking any chances with the usual miscreants trying some whataboutery with the police so these are factual statements based on public domain information. I make no comment about the case in hand.

    Originally the Malicious Communications Act was a summary only offence with a sentence limit of 6 months. However, it was updated by Parliament in 2015 to be triable both ways. The maximum sentence in a Crown Court is two years imprisonment. I cannot find an updated crown court guidance for the offence on the sentencing council web site. A subsequent breach of any Criminal Behaviour Order handed down has a maximum sentence of five years.

    Like

    • There isn’t a guideline and because the sentence has only only recently been increased there aren’t likely to be any useful cases. The nearest offence is harassment but that carries 10 years so the guideline isn’t really apt to this offence.

      Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.