Claim to Interserve
Medical injury claim of 2 months leave from unpaid work until 03 January 2020
Injury supported by GP NHS Doctors document
Injury of stress, anxiety and sleep deprivation, and phobias hindering reading of letters and emails due to damages from illegal prosecution by CPS.
What is the evidence that CPS would prosecute illegally and cause injury to the service user?
Supporting evidence is recently hundreds of protesters (Extinction Rebellion group) have been found to have been prosecuted, arrested illegally by police and CPS resulting in similar injurys .
Therefore this is recently example and evidence that makes my claim valid and that it must be taken seriously as legitimate.
Those protesters used solicitors.
Though Human Rights are supposed to be free. And recognized automatically. There should be no doubt or question about them being claimed.
Thus providing the law on this is legal material of the rights and application of rights already in use. That the Probation service regularly process and make representations concerning themselves with courts, on behalf of service users . And Political rights should be and in fact are supposed to fall in beside employment and medical claim rights... and representations
The fact that there is intrinsically a shared fact of an Injury having a cause. And that the injury and cause are one (matter) the situation is that because probation are to report and make representations to the court in relation to the service user, and the order.. particularly when there is a change in employment or medical situation.. and the (reason) is attached and inseparable.. for the court to be informed of...
This means that because the provision of the NHS/GP claim of Injury.. it represented to the court, Informed and presented by interserve/the probation service..
The Material of the cause of the injury and its legal definitions (injury by illegal prosecution) being provided to support and prove the injury documents (GP form) is without question part of the same claim...
In this case..
The first Amendment right to a remedy - Benjamin Plener Cover is the documentation prescribed that defines and verifies the injury and cause... in law.
It sets out injury by illegal prosecution, being a valid claim.
" The 1688 Bill of Rights, the right to Petition " being authenticated in modern law. And applicable as a Human Rights claim. Reliable upon in any proceedings. Which the other party's (Interserve included) must recognize and report back to the court concerning) especially when Interserve/The probation service are laid with the claim material.
As with all injury and employment claims.. it IS Interserve that recognize, apply and report to the court concerning these claims applied to the unpaid work..
And there should in principle be no difference between a temporary claim for relief from the unpaid work order.... and a permanent claim for relief from the unpaid work order...
Because the application and processing are the same.
The only difference is that the particular right.. claimed for this type of injury is that the injury is caused by the prosecution and court itself. The unpaid work order is the actual cause of injury and the remedy... is obtained by permanent relief from the order, by the court. Not merely temporary relief as usually is the case.
Informing the court of the full details of the injury and reason for temporary leave from the order (IS)* the remedy for the permanent leave from the order.
Because it is inevitable that the recognition of the injury and understanding its cause and validation of that... is in fact the remedy to the entire claim.
" The prosecution was injurious" and has caused injury. Which has been validated by the GP and the Associate professor has provided the diagnostics of the law and framework of the injury "illegal prosecution"
"It is the Right of the Subjects to Petition Her Majestys Government and all commitments and prosecutions for doing so are illegal "
DJ Watson already verified that there can be no doubt about my actions being performed for the petitioning. So there is no matter to question my actions. Ms Gutteridge and CPS Leicester Mr. Dowsett were present on 18th April at Leicester.
My actions are covered.
My Injury has been confirmed
The law and Right has been confirmed
And the law states this is part of your existing framework for dealing with medical injury and employment rights claims concerning unpaid work orders..
That you must recognize.
So it's new.
It's old law, but has not been in use.
It's been " refreshed"
And should be applied in relation to all future political rights claims. Including the Extinction Rebellion illegal prosecutions as well, if any of them involved community service orders..
The probation service could and should have recognized injury claims for those unpaid work orders as well.
What IS a RIGHT?
?
It means a person is correct in their actions. Is right. Not wrong in a claim or statement or action.
And have legal permission to do something or have done something.
A right is not a defence to Criminal charges. It is not mitigating circumstances it is not a legal defence,
Because rights are readily accept and processed and acted on by the public authority's, police, cps, probation, courts.
These public authority's are required to deal with, accept, recognize, apply these rights to proceedings.
They are not to oppose the rights or try to deny them...
Because with presentation of (a valid) right.. to the other party...
(Obviously with proof confirming the right, the law, and authority exercised) particularly if it is a rare or less known right to the more commonly accepted and applied rights...
The party (probation service) must apply that right to the unpaid work order and inform fully to the court.
What about the opinion of the probation service party?
Why should the probation service DO anything??
The reason they should favour the Claimant is this.....
When a person has a fall and injures their leg.. the probation service recognise an injury. They are validated it is legitimate and they recieve a claim.
The injured party is CORRECT to make a claim, CORRECT they have been injured and CORRECT to claim and have applied time away from the order (temporarily) to recover.
This is exercising a right. Right is the word both for a "legal right" lawfully permission and Privilege.. and the word for being right in being correct in their actions and the way to proceed.
Therefore they have done no wrong.
They are not acting wrongfully in the claim or proceedings to remedy. The probation service therefore is to recognize this and their view should be that the service user is correct and right and so is their claim when validation is provided..
It is therefore the right thing to do for the probation service to apply the claim and inform fully the court of the claim when it is made..
Not only because it is the right thing to do, but because there is a legal right being relied upon. A legal right being exercised.. the service user is correct to act and it is correct, right to recognize, apply and inform the court of the right claimed to it's full legal effect.
This is usually temporary effect on the unpaid work order.
Employment change or injury..
But nothing says that there cannot be permanent remedy of the unpaid work order... if the particular right being exercised requires that as part of it's legal effect..
The injury caused by illegal prosecution requires that it be acknowledged that there is an injury and that it has been caused by illegal prosecution.. and in recognition of that the court inevitably cannot fail to be informed by applicable merit of the attached cause of the injury that the cause IS ILLEGAL prosecution and it is set out fully validated as part of the Documentary that sets out the Injury itself...
The first Amendment right to a remedy
The very title of the document provided for both the Claimant and the public authority's...
Reflects the exact application of the "sickness" or "physical leg injury" remedy being recognised and applied to an unpaid work order...
The Right a Claimant has to a remedy of the situation... by the probation service dealing with the right claim. In that situation..
Therefore.. similarly with injury caused... harm caused by illegal prosecution.. the damage.. and right to relief from the unpaid work order.... the remedy is not merely temporary removal from the unpaid work order. It is permanent removal.. and the order being revoked completely...
Because.. it is a " right" it is the right thing for the probation service to do. It is the " Correct " way to proceed...
It's no consequence that on the court order itself... the statement is printed... as part of the act court order...
" Either you (the service user) OR* YOUR RESPONSIBLE OFFICER can ask the court to look again at this order. (This must be a claim as well, such as chang of employment or injury claims) The court can then CHANGE IT. (Its possible to have the order completely revoked) if it feels it is the RIGHT THING TO DO.
The correct thing to do (in light of the claim. The injury, the circumstances) in light of the fact the order itself is injurious to the service user. The right of law, sets out the service user acted lawfully and was right in their actions. Had legal right.. and was correct.
The probation service are under obligation to recognize that, and that it is the correct thing to do to ask the court to look again at the order and change it. Revoke it even.. if the law of the right, if the injury caused by the illegal order... tells us that it is the right thing to do, the lawful thing to do to remedy the injury of the sentence and conviction by changing it. On merit of the documents of the claim. On merit of the GP, NHS Doctors advise and diagnosis and the prescribed remedy provided by Associate professor Benjamin Plener cover.. and the confirmation of the legal fact driving is covered by rights and Privileges.. as we have proved in the case " Anne Sacoolas and Northamptonshire police "
There is no doubt that the service user has already proved to the court his actions were being undertaken for purpose of petitioning work in relation to the charges.
The only reason the [claim] was not made earlier is because the claim material setting out the remedy and the injury was not available to the Claimant at the time. And Mr Dowsett Crown prosecutor had failed to prepare for, research or recognize the right. Therefore the CPS had failed their legal responsibility to apply the claim of the right to the case.
When it was the right thing to do, to themselves provide they recognize the right. As it is the major and first overriding objective of the Public services..
Similarly... if someone falls over in custody... the public services should not ignore the injury and fail to pro5a remedy because that would not be the right thing to do.
Therefore...
In making any claim of a right...
I again quote the original order from the court and the note...
" If you wish to do this, (enter a claim) you should get in touch with your responsible officer...
Therefore... contacting Ashleigh Hopkins AND the Chief executive IS the right thing to do. The correct thing to do... and the responsible officer and the Chief Executive must recognize that it is correct and right for them to put themselves these matters before the court, and ask for the order to be changed by having it revoked completely..
And the defendant should not be required to attend...
No differently from if the order was completed early due to " Good progress " the probation service attend court and present the case for having it resolved.
Also if it needs to be extended because of injury or if a service user fails to attend with no right or reason for not attending..
It is completely right, completely correct and it is the law, that the right is recognised, it is the law and it is right and correct for the injury to be recognized and the reason and cause to be recognized and the court to be presented with the attached information provided concerning that injury and cause and apply it in relation to its legal effect on the order by the law itself making the order illegal and a compulsory requirement for the order to be changed and completely revoked.
Therefore, when it is the right thing to do, the correct thing to do the lawful thing to do....
It's part of the existing framework for the right to be relied upon through proceedings provided for by the probation service with the court. And understand the full capacity which they exist to facilitate in all possible situations of legitimate rights being claimed and relied upon. Particularly where there is injury and a right to a remedy from the responsible party