ON THE EXACTING NATURE OF PROOF BY EXHAUSTION OF ALL REMEDY.

BY THE TIME I HAD APPEALED FOR REMEDY OF THE DAMAGE DONE TO MY PROPERTY AT OTTER POINT TO EVERY AGENCY, MINISTRY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITY I COULD THINK OF, I BEGAN TO REALIZE THAT THE ONLY THING I MIGHT PROVE WOULD BE THAT THERE WAS NO AVAILABILITY OF REMEDY.

I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN FROM MY EXPERIENCE AS A DISABLED AND NOT COMPENSATED FORMER FEDERAL CIVIL SERVANT AT THE CNR AND FROM MY EXPERIENCE TRYING TO HANG ON TO MY PERMANENT RENTAL OF BURRVILLA.

BY THE TIME, IN 2000, THAT I FILED MY COLLARD vs PINCOMBE SUIT OVER "PREVARICATION" WITH AN IMPORTANT PRECEDENT ABOUT "COLLUSION" AND "CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY" I KNEW I WAS ONLY GOING TO PROVE THAT REMEDY AND THE ADJUDICATION WHICH WOULD REPLACE THE LOSS I HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO BY BEING INJURED IN A MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH I DID NOT CAUSE, AGAIN, WAS NOT POSSIBLE. 

I WAS GOING TO PLEAD THAT THE FRAUD INTIMIDATION AND EXCLUSION I EXPERIENCED ONCE AGAIN HAD EXACERBATED MY INJURY AND THAT THAT AND CRONY LAW MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE WRONGDOING.