Phil has to be sharing Jodie’s beef crisps, actually no, Jodie doesn’t share.it’s alright for Phil, he doesn’t have to live there and put up with it
Jodie Marsh #25 A video uploaded, neglect heavily features, Jodie considers herself a two legged Creature
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Jodie Marsh Threads Wiki
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
The appendices are very well written but that was a tough read. That poor bleeping dog.
---
Just watched the sheer gall of the bullying lecture. Sometimes I think it must be quite nice to be as thick as Jodie; the unwavering belief in yourself as perfect and right and good and just. Shame about the persecution complex though!
I know I keep going on about her teeth but every video I wonder why she only had the top done when it’s the bottom you see when she talks out of the big toad mouth. Old chomper down there might be white but it still looks like a smashed piano.
Stop the cruelty to animals you dirty old turd and we wouldn’t care!
---
Just watched the sheer gall of the bullying lecture. Sometimes I think it must be quite nice to be as thick as Jodie; the unwavering belief in yourself as perfect and right and good and just. Shame about the persecution complex though!
I know I keep going on about her teeth but every video I wonder why she only had the top done when it’s the bottom you see when she talks out of the big toad mouth. Old chomper down there might be white but it still looks like a smashed piano.
Stop the cruelty to animals you dirty old turd and we wouldn’t care!
Attachments
I just managed to watch all the videos
What those neighbours have to put up with is so unfair. The constant barking & howling alone would drive anyone demented!
Please can our clever Wiki keepers add all these files?
Why on earth does she have those puppy training pads in the fox houses??? Trying to save on bedding by getting them to
on the pads instead?
Let's hope what happened to Jodie's noncey idol happens to Jodie.
It annoys me why she overhandled the healthy fox cubs in her house to keep as pets (she knew exactly what she was doing) as she will have enough coming in that can’t be released (the blind one, the 3 legged one etc) to fulfil her need of having foxes permanently on site. Why tame the healthy ones? It’s so sad 
On the thread of someone feeding pork to pigs….this advert keeps popping up!
Attachments
I wonder if Phil is her very high up and important mate in the Policeit’s alright for Phil, he doesn’t have to live there and put up with it
When does she consider "Spring" to be? We are nearly in June and no sign of these BEST EVAHHHHHH rested fields yet. If they existed I would have thought Clover would get first dibs as she was in foal. Maybe then she wouldn't look so neglected. They don't exist.
She never said Spring of which year...
Clover has not been seen since earlier this week..I'm hoping her and the foal are ok. I've been thinking about her all week. It would be amazing if she was grazing on the spring pasture in the "rested fields"
Does she even have any green grass anywhere except where her swing set is? Or is it all a mud pitClover has not been seen since earlier this week..I'm hoping her and the foal are ok. I've been thinking about her all week. It would be amazing if she was grazing on the spring pasture in the "rested fields"
Trigger warning: Emu death mentioned in screenshot.
In the words of Jodie Marsh:
This you, Jack?
In the words of Jodie Marsh:
This you, Jack?
The whole place is a literal tit and piss filled quagmire.
I was guessing it must be jack
I was blocked by her because I asked where to buy realistic meat replacement!
These are the points that I think I would be most interested in, if I were one of the people on the adjudicating panel.
1. IANAL, but I assume that the responsibilities of those on the panel are to approve applications that are within the law and best practice, and reject those that are contrary to law or fail to maintain acceptable practices. Note that there is a little bit of a grey area in the middle. A panel that rejected a proper application would be doing a disservice to the public, and likely lay itself open to legal application from an aggrieved applicant. Similarly, an inappropriate granting of a licence could open the body to legal action from the opposing parties. To that extent, the adjudication is a box-ticking exercise, but absolutely not a token exercise; the issues must be determined and / or judged with full and proper facts.
2. On the face of it, there are some boxes that are ticked that support the application, albeit with some caveats, and there are some serious objections. Since the biggest problems in the application appear to be the objections, there must be a proper review of those objections.
On to the uh meat of the application ...
3. The application is in the name for Fripps Farm CIC. I would be asking for guidance from the council's legal officer / lawyers as to how to separate the suitability requirements of the business and the person. For example, The business operates from a residential dwelling. Is this correct? If, for example, animals "owned" by the CIC are kept inside the residence, this would imply that the continuing operation of the business depends upon access to the residence. If the residence is used for the CIC, then the check boxes in the application must be tested against the entire properteee. If the business operates away and entirely separately from the residence, then suitability requirements wouldn't entirely cover the residence (except perhaps for things such as fire break between house and business). But it certainly looks like the residence is a part of the business operation, in which case questions about employee access to business areas in the residence in the event of JM's absence become relevant. In addition, training plans, operational plans and the ability to provide animal welfare around the clock are critical.
4. What business plan does the CIC have to support the current animals and those proposed in the DAW application? What plan is there for a lack of income, to cover the business being wound up, taking into consideration employee / redundancy / proper disposal / dispersion of the animals? For how long can the business run without income; how much time would it need to rehome the animals safely in such an event, and does the business maintain reserves to cover this?
5. If the current noise complaints are subject to an ongoing investigation, I could not envisage granting the application. There is prima facie evidence that the complaints are valid, and if any consideration cannot be entirely objective, because decibel readings don't tell the entire story, the objections speak for themselves.
6. What is the truth of the allegations concerning escaped animals in the past? What remedial action, if any, has been taken to prevent repeat episodes?
7. How many animals are currently held at Fripps Farm and what records does the business have regarding upkeep and welfare of the animals currently there?
8. What plans does the business have to vary the number of animals kept at this location? What is the appropriate maximum number of animals that the business has determined to be appropriate, for the sake of animal welfare, and for the sake of concerned third parties, ie neighbours, environment etc?
9. In the light of the objections, and caveats raised in the boxes that have been ticked, I would consider it wise not to grant any application until after the improvements had been made (and of course even then only in the event of all objections being quashed). ie the increase in size of the enclosure, and contraceptive measures of the animals, before and not after the granting of any licence.
10. The inability of the panel to contact the existing owner is a red flag. The application should not be granted so long as this line of communication is being withheld.
11. What is the legal status of the animal enclosures regarding building / planning regulations and any covenants?
12. What outstanding investigations are there that relate to the CIC and JM?
I assume that if she has the opportunity to do so, she'll pipe up at the meeting and complain that the objectors are all VJBs that dislike her. The objections do state that neighbours were welcoming to begin with, until her activities turned their lives upside down. I'd certainly like to make the point that it doesn't matter if the objectors are vile, or jellus, or bullies; any neighbour, be they a person of high or low character, has a right to object on the facts. And facts / nuisances described speak for themselves.
For those that missed it, there is a paragraph in the Agenda that says that exceptionally (due to the forthcoming General Election), that the meeting will not be broadcast online ... but a recording will be made available after the election.
1. IANAL, but I assume that the responsibilities of those on the panel are to approve applications that are within the law and best practice, and reject those that are contrary to law or fail to maintain acceptable practices. Note that there is a little bit of a grey area in the middle. A panel that rejected a proper application would be doing a disservice to the public, and likely lay itself open to legal application from an aggrieved applicant. Similarly, an inappropriate granting of a licence could open the body to legal action from the opposing parties. To that extent, the adjudication is a box-ticking exercise, but absolutely not a token exercise; the issues must be determined and / or judged with full and proper facts.
2. On the face of it, there are some boxes that are ticked that support the application, albeit with some caveats, and there are some serious objections. Since the biggest problems in the application appear to be the objections, there must be a proper review of those objections.
On to the uh meat of the application ...
3. The application is in the name for Fripps Farm CIC. I would be asking for guidance from the council's legal officer / lawyers as to how to separate the suitability requirements of the business and the person. For example, The business operates from a residential dwelling. Is this correct? If, for example, animals "owned" by the CIC are kept inside the residence, this would imply that the continuing operation of the business depends upon access to the residence. If the residence is used for the CIC, then the check boxes in the application must be tested against the entire properteee. If the business operates away and entirely separately from the residence, then suitability requirements wouldn't entirely cover the residence (except perhaps for things such as fire break between house and business). But it certainly looks like the residence is a part of the business operation, in which case questions about employee access to business areas in the residence in the event of JM's absence become relevant. In addition, training plans, operational plans and the ability to provide animal welfare around the clock are critical.
4. What business plan does the CIC have to support the current animals and those proposed in the DAW application? What plan is there for a lack of income, to cover the business being wound up, taking into consideration employee / redundancy / proper disposal / dispersion of the animals? For how long can the business run without income; how much time would it need to rehome the animals safely in such an event, and does the business maintain reserves to cover this?
5. If the current noise complaints are subject to an ongoing investigation, I could not envisage granting the application. There is prima facie evidence that the complaints are valid, and if any consideration cannot be entirely objective, because decibel readings don't tell the entire story, the objections speak for themselves.
6. What is the truth of the allegations concerning escaped animals in the past? What remedial action, if any, has been taken to prevent repeat episodes?
7. How many animals are currently held at Fripps Farm and what records does the business have regarding upkeep and welfare of the animals currently there?
8. What plans does the business have to vary the number of animals kept at this location? What is the appropriate maximum number of animals that the business has determined to be appropriate, for the sake of animal welfare, and for the sake of concerned third parties, ie neighbours, environment etc?
9. In the light of the objections, and caveats raised in the boxes that have been ticked, I would consider it wise not to grant any application until after the improvements had been made (and of course even then only in the event of all objections being quashed). ie the increase in size of the enclosure, and contraceptive measures of the animals, before and not after the granting of any licence.
10. The inability of the panel to contact the existing owner is a red flag. The application should not be granted so long as this line of communication is being withheld.
11. What is the legal status of the animal enclosures regarding building / planning regulations and any covenants?
12. What outstanding investigations are there that relate to the CIC and JM?
I assume that if she has the opportunity to do so, she'll pipe up at the meeting and complain that the objectors are all VJBs that dislike her. The objections do state that neighbours were welcoming to begin with, until her activities turned their lives upside down. I'd certainly like to make the point that it doesn't matter if the objectors are vile, or jellus, or bullies; any neighbour, be they a person of high or low character, has a right to object on the facts. And facts / nuisances described speak for themselves.
For those that missed it, there is a paragraph in the Agenda that says that exceptionally (due to the forthcoming General Election), that the meeting will not be broadcast online ... but a recording will be made available after the election.
I've managed to watch the video, Jodie has been hoisted by her own Petard. I hope the planning department get their act together about the building too! It's so horrific for those poor animals and I have massive sympathy for her neighbours.
- Status