|
Post by Administrator on May 29, 2019 14:29:36 GMT
It has not gone very well at all today..
District Judge Watson convicted me of Dangerous driving, today 29th May, after moving my hearing date of the 21st May to 18th April for (civil, bill of rights protection) at only 3 days notice and taking away all my prep time and finding the right solicitor..
Then i had to use money & borrow money for the standard dangerous driving defence today £1500 plus v.a.t.
It was £600 for the hearing on 28th which kind of went well, but i could have got a better more specialist solicitor if i had known who to get back then.
I still have a case for my protection being valid absolutely, but it will cost money. Apparently District Judges don't like this type of defence and its usually more successful even with MPs in the Crown courts.
In relation to the Dangerous driving charge..
Gordon Quean & Michael Pagella of Sandiacre Highways agency contractors unit lied about where i drove at the A42 junction 11, which wasn't properly signed as closed exit. Only one lane closure..
Actually i thought they gave away quite a bit in the words they spoke in support of my evidence and claim..
But the Judge didn't seem to pick up on that..
And i was very disappointed with my solicitor from Nottingham firm Stephen Burdons of Nottingham. I don't think she understood law theory completely and how it applies.
They were also using the older wording of the law and more in reference to the drivving without dure care and attention. Which is a completely different offence.
Dangerous driving has to and must but people in danger or property in serious danger of damage.. Which i couldn't possibly have done.
Anyway.. The Judge believed Gordon Quean and Michael pagellas statements even though they didn't both give exactly the same accounts of the event.. Which i though left considerable doubt about the authenticity of their statements..
I have been given 12 months driving ban and have to re-take my driving test..
Also 150 hours community service..
All of which is a lot for such a minor event which i performed truly with belief i had (and did) have the right to do..
The prosecutor and my defence solicitor were very low of intelligence and wider understanding not picking up on critical details and evidence and points throughout the trial or reflecting on its significance and application to the eventd..
Also.. I lot of relevant law i had with me and is important.. Was not entertained and completely disregarded.
I can still appeal...
But with the Seat belt fine court case and the Church Stretton speeding fine..
The characters and attitudes of these type of people is extremely defeating and evrn though the road signs were proved unlawful at Church Stretton.. And i have a good argument over the seat belt legislation being changed by the government in 2005 unlawfully..
I just don't think these people want to understand.. The fat that the police and CPS still even want to prosecute drivers at Church Stretton.. When people are being and have been misleas.. Just defeats your will power.. Because this is about people and power in these jobs.. And less about the truth, the facts and the law.
I hope North Yorkshire police are more positive over my complaint about the national speed limit... In light of the DVLA agreement with my complaints and me getting my endorsement changed to SP20 from SP10.. Even thought it wasn't removed.
Not certain what to do now.. As im not able to drive to work.. God knows how i will get to community service and pay fines from 3 charges as well...
Especially when the law says we shouldn't be punished from circumstances which are connected.. As all my investigations have been for the same body of work/purposes..
Not going very well then.. Even though it was quite promising when the DVLA helped get my endorsement changed..
Also, the huge new court building at Loughborough waa literally empty..
I think there was only one.. Or possibly 2 other cases there.
Also,
If there had only been one witness.. I wouldn't have been able to have been convicted.
I still don't believe a person should be able to be convicted by a still photo which doesn't show any evidence of what occured. When the evidence supports both sides of the arguments..
Especially when 2 persons who know each other can team up against someone.
If the witnesses had been independent from each other... I think it would have been fairer...
The Judge’s evaluation of the statements was really terrible.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 29, 2019 15:37:31 GMT
So, Basically, District Judge Watson has taken my driving licence away fro9m be, obstructing and hindering, albeit removing my ability to drive around the UK to actually gather evidence for official, genuine political purpose of petitioning parliament to get the road signage corrected.. and also for police purposes of reporting to police as well. Complete and total disregard for my rights and freedoms.. Even for the Parliamentary & Health service ombudsman as well. He also in the previous hearing agreed with the findings of my Road signage investigations, which is contrary to today.. Why did Sally Fudge arrange a separate Hearing with Judge Watson for Civil matters, when he was the same judge hearing the Trial for the dangerous driving charge itself? When the Human rights act section 7 (1) (2) says you can rely on a Right, in any proceedings of law whatsoever. If its a valid claim. These people do not understand law or read the law or even want to acknowledge it correctly & fully at all.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 31, 2019 1:18:36 GMT
Ok so... Gordon Quean and Michael Pagella both already have criminal records.. My paperwork is at the solicitors still.. But i think it was Quean who has been convicted of Assault. Pagella has Criminal Damage and Class C drug possession i think. Judging by the appearance of Quean at court, i suspect he is a heavy steroid user. That would explain his deep voice which i noticed as well (another side effect of steroids) also it makes people aggressive which may account for his past Assault charge and his reaction of reporting me to the police. www.nhs.uk/conditions/anabolic-steroid-misuse/Plus as he is unit management i propose that he likes to feel physically superior to his work colleagues. His overweight body fat around his muscles is likely to what they call "bulking up" When i was on-site at the A42 J11, there was nothing wrong with the road surface at all. Also motorcycles do more dangerous moves on a daily basis.. They work for some Bronze unit or something. I am starting to wonder where all these lorry fires originate from why they need to resurface a road.. Im starting to wonder if its some sort of set up to give them work to do.. Difficult to prove, though. I do know the VMS signs did not say the junction was closed. Also, the FOI request figuresfrom Norfolk police and Suffolk police and Humberside police don't seem right to me.. Because only 1,200 speeding offences for goods vehicles over 5 years divided by 360 days a year x 5 is only 1 or 2 a day. You aren't telling me that an entire Constabulary having 3 or 4 speed camera vans only gets 1 or 2 speeding goods vehicles per day or so between them.. It doesn't add up. I believe in the same manner VMS signs exhibit strange behaviour.. That the police computer records are showing strange figures. Especially when they delete records after 5 years. There is no trace left. I might be wrong but i think its dubious. Also, after court.. When i went back to the van.. Before i got a taxi.. I had the door open and the key kept opening and closing the locks quite a few times.. When i didn't even have hold of them. As if someone was having a joke.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 31, 2019 2:15:59 GMT
So, the trial itself was a shambles.. Very unprofessional and old fashioned. Even in a new modern building. It was like American congress or something..
I think Courts should be reserved for Politicians who enjoy such ceremonial stages and sets.
Modern law could do a lot better with simply a proper meeting / discussion or else more like a doctors appointment where you go in give recorded evidence and such and they evaluate it and give a response and if you need to give more evidence you go back in.
More like civil disputes really..
I think if Quean & Pagella had a problem with my driving they should have seen me about it myself or else they should have to take me to court.
The prosecutor is a waste of money time and space and the ridiculous court procedures and etiquette is more a hinderance now adays.
I have wasted literally months of technical argument, paper, ink research.. Which was a waste of time..
It gets all omitted and bottle necked into a very poor and too basic presentation. Important points aren't pickedup on and the prosecutor is a very cheap suit "police station representation" standard joke of a guy.. Who literally only uses simpleton tactics to get you to admit you did something..
And all very important facts, points and what we know as important factors we read about in law and see on TV programmes.. Is completely missing.
Plus the Judge i don't believe is really capable of understanding common sense and general knowledge of dynamics of situational knowledge of the world and just.. "things".. Its a very retarded understanding of the actually legislation itself as well.
Plus.. With all the new Roadworks cameras around..
And taking into account they will be putting speed limiters on all new cars soon.. The only way they can keep the fines coming in and courts going is to come up with new offences like mobile phone use, and the more Roadworks they set up for longer distances.. They can use this teamwork.. Highways staff - police - CPS and even defence lawyers to literally make a set-up so they have a business out of us..
Its like some sort of power trip Money strip.
Like bondage or something..
Instead of McClaren in the torture chamber its the Prosecutor and Judge Watson in the court room with your own defence solicitor being payed to give you a beating. At their leisure. Your paying for it. Then they go give you 150 hours work and actually steal your driving skills which you will loose over 12 months and never get back again.. Even after a re-test.
Ive never ever got back to being as good driver as i used to be.
I think the Green man would steal your eyeballs if he could do it.. To get one over on you..
Never mind your driving licence or talents...
The truth of the fact is.. In a level fair playing field we would wipe the floor in law and truth and reason with the entire Crown prosecution service, Judges and Solicitors...
But they blackmail us with ridiculous fees and refuse truth, reason and fact...
They "dont allow" us. Because if they did they wouldn't make any money.
And our rightful legal understanding and arguments would win every time.
The fact that the CPS present themselves on television as mature caring, understanding professionals.. Yet the Cps ive encountered are 90% of the time very childish characters or like used car salesmen. Who drink their sorrows in pubs.
There does seem to be some professional characters in the CPS but i don't believe that they have a proper deeper knowledge and understanding of what they have learned and studied. I think they learn procedure and really then seem to do what they want with it, not what is actually righteous.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 31, 2019 2:41:25 GMT
I propose an experiment to repeat the events of the day of the alledged offence and repeat the driving maneuver 100 times do test if accident or injury or damage occurs or would have occured. Also the point about Highways Workers running across live traffic travelling at 70mph to move signs of their oen free will went down like a ton of bricks... Literally there is no reasoning with them. They control the power. The law and reasoning does not win with these people. They do as they will. The interesting thing was, that after swearing on the bible to tell the truth.. On almighty god.. Pagella actually did tell the truth which came out. Proving (to me) that their statements were indeed false and i was correct.. Unfortunately the corrupt Judge Watson and Prosecution ignored this. And my solicitor didn't pull them up on it.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 31, 2019 2:49:11 GMT
I also sort of forgot to or didn't realise to say that i was actually going to complaint on site about the fact they had supposedly closed the junction yet people hadn't been properly given notification.
I actually did say i was thinking about getting out and speaking to them but decided not to.
The prosecutor basically just claimed i only wanted to get to Nuneaton and use the junction..
Yet why have i a 5 year archive of unlawful road signage and proven signage corrected?? Is this prosecutor for real or what? I would be interested to hear his thoughts on the entire proven signage corrections if i dumped it on his desk.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 31, 2019 11:52:11 GMT
I am not posting the link as it is very upsetting.. But there was a story from last month i think of a baby dolphin pulled out of the water on a beach in Argentina.. And tourists took selfies with it and it died of dehydration... I don't know if its false or propaganda to upset people or not. But i think something needs to be done about it.. They should be prosecuted for something though i don't know what the laws are over there. I don't know why someone didn't order them to put ot back into the water immediately. I don't get why a story like this has not been heard of by me before.. If it was a tourist beach that was known for dolphins you would expect the beach patrol/lifeguards to be watching for commotion like that..
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 1, 2019 11:01:38 GMT
Ive just been visited by North Yorkshire police Professional Standards..
Ive put across my investigations about the road signage..
And also concerning the speed limits of the vans.
I don't think the police really want to help us..
He is saying that it should all be resolved by the courts..
But before he left, he was saying that he doesn't understand courts much himself and believes they are a game..
So literally just writing off the entire point of the police..
He does ageee with and commend my work and investigations into road signage. But i don't know if he is going to be able to do anything about it or not.
He understands my points about the van speed limit and is going to look into it further.. But he is saying its something that should be corrected by the courts not police..
So really after his last statement its all ridiculous really..
Especially with very expensive court fees and legal costs..
Its a complete power thing.
And i don't think they are going to prosecute the Magistrates over it.. Even though he claims magistrates do get prosecuted sometimes..
I think the police are doing what they want to do. And not really bothered too much about the government being corrupt and misleading people..
He agrees that its more or less just the way it is..
So i am not too optimistic.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 1, 2019 11:17:51 GMT
I also had all my documents and paperwork ready. But when you get into conversation it doesn't always go as planned and some of my paper work got mixed up or not even read.. Some things he didn't want to go into Or said were not Professional Standards area.. I just don't think its easy to communicate everything you need to. Also there is definitely an attitude of the acknowledgement that what the police do is sort ofva game.. And the courts as well. The police don't seem to want to do anything to put things right. It just seems they think its for people to take back to courts.. Yet ive found its the courts that are the problem. I definitely think he understands my points and complaint now. There is some disagreements over the speed limit of the vans, and it seems that is to be looked into. The Government are withholding information from us.. So they can manipulate us an obstruct us finding out the truth.. And the police just go by the government information pages a lot which are misleading.. There's definitely some lack of understanding on the polices part.. But the fact that he said the courts are a game has really just made me wonder if there is any point trying.. Im a bit disappointed that he did really see why the police should offer me and legal protection from the driving charges.. But he does think that if i want to validate my bill of rights protection fully i should get a solicitor.. I didn't get to put my Civil argument across either.. I think its certainly a people issue more than law or legislation. I think its the entire issue really. The Officer did "commend" me for my work investigating the road signage, though. So at least he accepts there is a problem and that i have been investigating it legitimately. It seems to be that he either doesn't think he can do anything about it, or else its not the polices responsibility to. I put in the connection with the police traffic management officers as well then.. And possibly of offences which can be associated with putting the signs wrong on purpose. I didn't get to go though all the details though and forgot a lot of what a needed to say..
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 2, 2019 21:07:05 GMT
I still can't believe a person can get convicted of Dangerous driving for 10-20mph speed even in Roadworks with a clear path...
It cannot be right in comparison to when Highways England Roadworkers run across live traffic themselves carrying signs even at night time as they fancy.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 3, 2019 22:39:15 GMT
Hmmm, just by chance found the BBC have done a programme about the A1 www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0005pzf/a1-britains-longest-road-series-4-episode-6I guess they re wanting to put propaganda out to try to get rid of it or upgrade it... That road has some great character... Why don't they do a programme about keeping there cocks in their pockets the BBC? I only noticed this because I was watching Death in Paradise just this evening
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 4, 2019 19:26:15 GMT
In Life, As creatures.. it is natural to be angry. especially if somebody is doing something bad to us. It is the natural reaction. True, that as Humans we are humane & have evolved. Our Laws & culture are supposed to make us behave and get along in peace. But some people do not follow the law & I have come to learn that on a large part those people are ones who work in Law. Particularly at Courts - Such as Judges & magistrates. We cannot do anything to "make these people" behave according to the truth & law. We could prosecute them, but we don't have enough money & their peers are unlikely to do this, as are the police. We cannot give the natural reaction to "tell these people straight" because they use their laws to stop us saying or doing certain things... which in nature would result in a correction of their behaviour (giving them a bollocking) Thus... Problems get out of control and we get "corruption" in the system.. because as creatures we cannot "give certain people a bollocking"
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 7, 2019 19:00:13 GMT
Not really certain what is going on.. but more political stunts & at £300,000 to bring a prosecution its ridiculous. It should not even be £5,000 unless it has an extensive investigation attached. I do support the parliamentary privilege's, and believe that Ministers should be accountable to punishment under the Jurisdiction of parliament possibly not by prosecution, but by public vote or opinion of what should happen to them. seeing as the public vote for them in the first place. www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/07/boris-johnson-wins-court-challenge-over-350m-brexit-claimsIt seems like they are just showing off their immunity more and more, after I have had mine refused.. Taking power from the people and giving more to themselves... It will be interesting to see what reasons are given in due course.. I wonder if this is the "high profile case" I heard of from a solicitor who was working on a case I spoke to in London concerning an "injunction" ? as this would appear to be it? 29th was my court date at Loughborough. Its good that people can get an injunction concerning a "right". If they can get the funding or money... But I still think the "right" itself should not leave a person in need of finding "fees" for legal costs. However, the Royal courts of Justice website says that people are entitled to free legal aid when a "Human Right" matter/defence is brought into a case. www.rcjadvice.org.uk/legal-aid/The kind of cases you might get legal aid for are you’re adding legal arguments or bringing a case under the Human Rights Act It was a criminal charge, which was intervened through a civil injunction by the Royal courts of justice? Right? www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-justice-system/jurisdictions/civil-jurisdiction/
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 7, 2019 23:50:27 GMT
Ok, so i read another version of that story.. (the newspapers clearly using misleading tactics) And as they report it, its a case of them claiming the private prosecution had no basis and even though a summons was issued by the Magistrates court. The high court ruled it was issued in error. Apparently Johnson never went to court. I believe it was still civil/injunction type of action. Firstly the stunt is to falsely make the premise a private prosecution would cost so much. This propaganda prevents private people with money from having access to prosecution services. I was quoted about £5,000 for a basic prosecution a couple of years ago. I don't see why it would cost more without a lot of investigation work. The next thing, is that in my Telford magistrates court case i have entered legal request for the other drivers as witnesses critical as giving evidence of the unlawful road signs effects on their driving.. Getting their details could raise a large amount of money for defence legal costs. And strong evidence from all the drivers. The previous cases would have to be re-opened and combined under section 142 magistrates court act 1980. And live cases re-scheduled to one single trial. Once large numbers of drivers start doing legal things like that with illegal road signs.. They will question why they weren't right in the first place and turn attention to the council, police and government.. And could prosecute privately.. So Theresa May standing down is good but a distraction of the Boris Johnson stunt being a warning to deter people from combining funds to get justice by prosecuting ministers... Who are likely behind the road signage corruption. Even if we could get justice.. They just keep changing the law to get themselves out of trouble. Currently they are actively taking legislation down and obstructing access to it. Such as with my seatbelt complaint over legislation being changed unlawfully Hmmmm Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 This was showing up in a search on the government legislation site in a seat belt word search in legislation results but doesn't seem to be now.. But it wasn't showing up at all the other day.. And now it is again.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jun 8, 2019 0:17:51 GMT
Anyway..
In relation to the Boris Johnson story.. I guess you can't have groups of people just going around prosecuting ministers on every mistake they make in public speaking.. Even on the streets.. Or they wouldn't be able to do their jobs.. But they should still be accountable if they have been lying.. But i would say accountable to parliament via complaints from the public.. Not by prosecution.
This is in line with my requisitions of Petitioning i sent parliament to review where i included public speaking as something which is included as petitioning work under protection.. Even on the streets..
|
|