|
Post by Administrator on Apr 15, 2021 18:05:29 GMT
In the courtroom...
Do we have the right to "bear arms" for defence?
We are searched and stripped of all objects and we are limited in our speech...
So what exactly do wile have left to defend ourselves WITH??
If we are a defendant??
One thing is the dictionary... language.
And law. But I feel we should and do have the full capacity of language IE the full dictionary
After all its sold to children of all and any age.
I believe we can make use of the full dictionary to bear as our arms.. in defence from attack
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 16, 2021 0:02:26 GMT
😆🤣😂 lol.
Man, these news reports from Iceland 🇮🇸events sound like a computer bot voice. Why don't they have a proper news reader?
It's starting to look and sound like a scene from Terminator Judgment day 😆🤣
At least they could have defeated the T2000 with that lava field 😆 think about that!
But the fumes, fire and brimstone is all very theatrical I think this is pushing the climate envelope ✉ everyone will panic and vote green now 😆🤣
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 17, 2021 0:38:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 21, 2021 23:39:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 21, 2021 23:47:05 GMT
Well, I was really behind The Green Party..
But it turns out they are right up the Highways Departments Ass.. And the Police too.
The Police and Highways have got a hold over all of the Political parties..
The Entire Council Highways and police need completely new staff.
The Green Party Can NOT be behind Extinction Rebellion when they are in cahoots with the Police and contractors that Extinction Rebellion are in opposition to..
Because the Contractors that inform the Green Party are actually the enemy of Extinction Rebellion
Iys just not going to work.
This is why Extinction Rebellion are getting arrested and their rights not upheld, because the Green party are not truly behind Extinction Rebellion at all...
They have not defended the rights IN PARLIAMENT properly which is WHY the police are winning ..
And KIER will never be beaten on HS2 when the Green Party are right up its ass hole on roads and highways...
Being advised even by these contractors AKA the council.
Literally Kier is running this country with the Police Chief officers.
We need some SERIOUS changes.
They have taken our rights and even the better parties are being influenced by these organisations..
All the Green Party care about is the Environment. They Don't truly care about corruption.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 23, 2021 22:56:01 GMT
It's amazing that these Extinction Rebellion activists have been acquitted.
By a Jury in a crown court...
Not guilty..https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=836805253849490
But the Judge and legal people are just lying. By saying there is no defence..
Well technically its NOT a defence but there is no ple.
You claim a right.
There is no charge and no defence. The case /prosecution should not have been allowed.
Basically the Jury believed they had the right to do it and not be criminal..
So... as everyone must be treated equally in law.. This means that other people who did similar acts for Extinction Rebellion have to be discharged and acquitted also..
Basically... from now on the public have recognised that people do have a right to do acts like this in connection with a political action and campaign...
So the Police and CPS will have to cease any further prosecutions for this type of act...
Which Basically equates to the right to do it being recognised...
It never was a defence against a criminal charge though...
It's using the right to petition.
This means that people who have painted logos and other less serious stuff really now must have their sentences overturned..
My own Criminal damage charge as well.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 24, 2021 1:19:29 GMT
This is another thing....
The Jury likely had already heard and knew about the Extinction Rebellion window smashing actions.
In law criminal cases are supposed to be kept out of the media until the case is over.
People aren't supposed to know about it.
But because the Jury DID know about it outside of the context of proceedings.. They therefore had political opinions and knowledge..
Which goes to show that political matters cannot be heard in a criminal court..
As demonstrated by the outcome.
The newspapers have gradually over time totally perverted the rules of informing on live or ongoing court cases because the government uses them as a tool anyway for propaganda..
They break all the rules themselves.
Anyway...
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 24, 2021 10:40:27 GMT
Here im trying to explain it to these people here.. lol. Explaining this to the average extinction Rebellion people is futile. Its as futile as trying to explain to the Judges DJ Watson or CPS This new Case.. the Not Guilty Verdict.. It is amazing.. But really its a Miracle.. Im not saying the Decision was wrong or Not.. But its the FUNDAMENTAL DYNAMICS that these people do not get.. You just cannot explain it to them.. They dont have the cognative capacity to understand even when they win a case...
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 24, 2021 22:56:43 GMT
also, just remembered (know that particular act well as it was mandatory study)
It's only an offence IF done "with out lawful excuse" *
If the actions in relation to the allegations are performed "with lawful excuse" then it's actually not an offence.
You haven't broken the law.
The Lawful excuse can be any right, or privilege or interest.
Use of any of the above is not to be confused with and is not "a defence against the charge"
Instead it means that merely "no offence was committed" because the claimant thereby sue to the valid claim.. had a right to act.
Now.. because the Jury decided not guilty.. they did so agree no offence was committed.
And the Judge thereby made an order in a crown court that now is valid over other crown court and the magic courts and county courts..
For the reasons the claimant stated (a political campaign) the act of breaking a glass windows. To raise awareness of environment political issues.. is not considered to be criminal..
It is indeed a lawful excuse.
And because now it has been ordered that was a lawful excuse (which is not a defence to the charge, because with kawfull excuse there has been no offence committed)
It's now accepted in law.. that IS a lawful excuse. And must be so unless proved otherwise in a higher court.
I believe I am exact correct on that. And it builds on the Angela Ditchfield case for painting walls.
I'm not certain about those other activists who drew around themselves on the road...
Because the Cambridge Street painting was accepted doing the bike lanes.. so will need to look into that one.
But myself and Banksy have painted streets without and police involvement they just ignored it. I've heard the police mostly are ignoring political art work on streets in most places..
London being a hot spot might be difficult though and Thames Valley police as they are being paid to take a side in a political matter
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 24, 2021 23:18:35 GMT
lol, one more thing.. In law particularly acts that invoke rights or are associated with either a right, or something not constituting as an offence...
The law needs to be clear to people before they commit an act, as a guide.
Magic court cases aren't archived records.. but Crown court cases are. And they are used as sited cases and references..
Moreover.. people who may consider doing the same thing, can obtain a copy of the case and use it as evidence that act and actions for the same or similar reasons did not constitute an offence.
It's with Crown court cases that have a Jury where things are defined such as Frank Garratte of Tele traffic UK "being confirmed as not independent from the police"
Therefore from then on businesses that involved ex police providing services to the police were no longer independent.
Which raised a lot of questions over buisness interests and fines and prosecution figures as its not allowed to have a buisness interest if you are a road traffic authority. ..
Stuff like that..
But the Angela Ditchfield case was significant so this will also add to that..
I wonder what's going to happen to the new Bill proposal now that the general public represented by the Jury are in clear support of protest rights..
Won't be popular for Priti Patel.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 25, 2021 0:32:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 25, 2021 12:19:47 GMT
JUDGE GREGORY PERRINS & THE EXTINCTION REBELLION CASE CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY PROSECUTION NOT ALLOWED
Simon BramWell, Ian Bray, Jane Augsburger, Senan Clifford, David Lambert, James "Sid" Saunders V Crown - Trial - at Southwark Crown court Friday 23rd April 2021 Judge Gregory Perrins
Perrins found it a rather "peculiar case" after claiming there was no legal basis for defence.
I explain why Section 6 of the Human Rights act 1998, The Right to petition parlisment without being prosecuted and the fundamental dynamics of the Crown Court Framework is defective when a case is brought in connection with Political Matters brought to the parliament.
This case is classic example of why such cases ultimately will fail. Because of the Public having an engagement in the matters, facts & circumstanves, which renders it not a standard criminal case.. Politically charged & why these rights & laws exist, that the Police, CPS & Judge failed to identify.
Therefore serious lessons need to be learned.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Apr 29, 2021 14:08:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 1, 2021 17:14:50 GMT
What IS it with Extinction Rebellion??
Their leaders just are clueless about law and rights.
There ring leaders include Geography lecturer's
Of whom are renowned for multiple jokes and puns
How has Extinction Rebellion come so far and achieved so much following??
Is it literally by the blind leading the blind??
All I see is the perfect model for what is happening in the Government..
Every Government problem can be identified similarly within Extinction Rebellion itself..
Is the entire issue not about parties or groups but purely about people?
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on May 3, 2021 1:13:33 GMT
The thing with Extinction Rebellion now, is 2 things..
1. They like the CPS don't quite fully und the law
And 2. I don't think they actually really care about law and rights in fact I Blatantly defy them
But what if they get their own demands met... who will enforce the demands?? If they don't believe in following the law??
Because other fractions and groups could just oppose them using similar ideology and conflict could lead to violence 🤔
|
|