A matter of trespass by way of harm and loss, in the private with a neighbour, has been stopped by police intervention. No-one I am dealing with will give L4M credence and I cannot get a trial by jury as the local magistrate does not recognise this route to justice and disallows the case. How does this outcome show that L4M sweeps all before it?

This question arises from rigorously and carefully putting the L4M training and process into practice and finding that no-one on the gameboard fears it and that there is no readily available process for redress / recompense for the harm without a trial by jury to determine restorative justice. There are no lawful bailiffs outside the legalese process to exact that restorative justice either. The trespass continues in spite of L4M.