Have to say this was an AWESOME speech. Can't knock Claire Farrell really as she was bang on with that except for this Supreme Court buisness..
As the entire legal sector, QCs and Government advisors and Ministry of Justice are legitimising an illegal Court.
The Supreme Court is illegal since 2009 for political matters.
Political matters can ONLY be decided, debated, thought of in Parliament.
Its not the Lords, Ministers, Barons themselves as in the Magna Carta.. because since 1688 it can only be done in Parliament and the Supreme Court is NOT the Parliament of England acting in connection with direct petition above the Kings bench and all other courts.. regardless of the peers.
But apart from that, the rest of the Speech was great!
1688 Bill of Rights - The right to Petition - It is the Right of the Subjects to petition the Queen & all Commitments & Prosecutions for doing so are illegal.
I had patience and by the end they just about got through OK, but at least Roger said that he admits they might not have got it all right..
Therefore I really wish we could go over the stuff they didn't get right.. Because I think Crosland is missing a lot and getting some important stuff wrong..
Which literally dumps a big pile of shit on protesters.. but ultimately they were generally just staying on track though.
Its clear to see where the Government themselves are going wrong.. when you hear these people... Crosland and Russell Brand.. and so forth.. Literally the Government are a carbon copy.. but for the opposition with similar lack of understanding and gaps...
I mean you can watch people going to Volcano in Iceland or surfing Hawaii or whatever.. then you have a few teens concrete themselves to a barrel in a lane in England to stop an entire construction 🚧 traffic 😆 🤣
Post by Administrator on Apr 13, 2021 20:53:04 GMT
The police are now in a critical position. They are Blatantly breaking the law, Engaging in illegal & Unlawful (Criminal) acts against peoples rights & Civil Liberties. The absolute ignorance, denial & refusal to recognise & uphold the rights of citizens, who are officialy engaged in opposition actions against the Government.. Where the government is refusing to or stalling on debate of the HS2 petitions... The Citizens who Oppose HS2 have a lawful right to Intervene in construction, and halt the destruction of what they are acting to defend... forests & woodlands that they have vested & stated interest in. The Ministty of justice is acting to "own" & possess these peoples.. and the Police are now not acting in the public interest. Instead they are now working for "A party" have taken a side unlawfully in a matter that is neither criminal, or civil. It is political.
The Justices will never admit this, because they are acting to hold onto evil power that they are imposing criminaly. The Justives & Ministers have now forefited their authority, are not right or honorable & can & should be arrested by "The public". The Police should be arrested & Detained by the public.
The thing with this.. is this, right...
Under British law if the defendant truly believes they are innocent 😇 then they cannot be committed as guilty.
Often laughed out of the court room, but true fact.
Now... by the Criminal procedure rules 1.1c the police have a Lawful requirement to recognise a right where a claimant claims it to effect. And a rights claim is not a defence against a criminal charge. Its intervention in proceedings with (a claim).
In this video the suspect is clearly 1. Of the clear belief they are innocent 😇 and 2. Clearly stating they are claiming a right.
So they can't be resisting arrest. If a suspect has no right to claim, then they aren't claiming a right. Or if there is not even any potential right they are likely to even possible have.
In this situation though its clearly in relation to a political action. And being on land, access to land is covered by the criminal damage act 1971 as you are well aware, where a right and interests are being pursued.
Therefore the suspect is clearly within their rights and is in fact not acting to resist an arrest but acting to physically enforce the political rights that are clearly voiced and have belief in.
I would suggest everyone enter a complaint to Thames Valley police professional standards department.
As officers are poorly trained. Of poor knowledge and understanding and have abused this person potentially leaving long lasting psychological scars.
I believe the police are politically opposed to the right being used and are perverting the course of justice by intentionally ignoring as completely disregarding section 1.1c of the Criminal procedure rules. Also.. By those rules police provide a doctor in exercising medical (rights) i don't see and politicians provided to attend to the suspects political rights and I believe duty solicitors are neither competent nor trained in political rights.
I would prosecute the police for illegal arrest and detention.
You can't "resist arrest" when you are entering a rights claim because its an overriding objective. The police may ignore the right and continue, but the suspect cannot be resisting arrest as long as they believe they have a right and have claimed it. Because a claim exists. So resisting arrest is impossible.
You can only resist arrest if there is no right claim.
What the policec are doing is resisting the overriding object of the right. Which is a perversion of the course of justice.
And as Thames Valley police are being paid by the opposition (HS2, Parliament project) the police are not acting unbiased in the interests of public who are for or against the project.. But are acting under employment of HM Government by a buisness partnership interest.. the contractors are not independent of government therefore are not the general public in this dispute they effectively are the party the petition of Chris Packham is against.
The police are not permitted to arrest anyone only to keep the peace. In fact HS2 can be detained and halted pending Chris Packhams petition being debated..
The citizens are defending and protecting and officialy identified interest.