Complaint to XR lawyer's
Dear XR Lawyer's
This David Icke video has absolutely got my point exactly. Especially the final conclusion at the end of the video.
Absolutely amazing awesome and fantastic video!!! Just published!
That point is EXACTLY why I believe that parliament is just ignoring my submitted petitions and is not even rejecting them..
Similarly to my previous petitions that had all the attached evidence of my website, videos, photos on illegal road signage from all around the UK. And the main matter those 2 current petitions address... the true, real right to petition protection from the courts (criminal, civil, high courts) previously knows as " the kings bench" travelling circuit of justices around England that completed the circuit at the tower of London)
If they reject my petitions they have to give a reason for rejecting them. Which they don't want to have to give. Also the petition will need to be published along with the full details, evidence links and so forth as part of the rejection.. which they also don't want to have to do...
They don't want us to have our rights.
The power to elect into parliament.. ministers... is accompanied by.. our power to remove them just as fast... to investigate them if they are corrupt and submit evidence to parliament without any challenge or intervention from "the courts"
Because in that situation WE are policing the people we elect. And judges and even police chief officers..
Or else we are powerless and under a Government regime. Not a voted democratic society.
When you understand that most people were armed anyway in the 1600s and 1700s and we still have that right, not just Americans who have it.. and that policing is a very public role. And provisions of law, regardless of a trained force... are inherited by "the people " for policing PURPOSES.
Citizen arrest powers, as example..
As long as the reason for acting is enforcement of the laws over other Citizens you act for that reason and purpose. Including investigations..
We do have legal right to all and any provision of law...
And the criminal damage act, lawful excuse and use of a right, interest, Privilege.. particularly the right to petition..
Covers any action you can think of. Using anything or while in control of anything.
Particularly if we have officially registered petitions in progress (acknowledgement of service with parliament) are using a enactment.. the right to petition on the basis that is clearly set out in that excerpt from the Peter Ackroyd book... Civil war..
Those investigation rights are re affirmed time and time again.
The Citizens rights to inherit all policing laws are from the Edward III 2nd great Charter.
Any Greivences and disputes with parliament are not for the courts to be involved. Not even the Royal Courts of Justice.
You may not like that premise..
But it's the truth. Fact.
Yes its POSSIBLE for matters to be heard there... as the human rights act 1998 section 7, 1b says that a right can be relied upon in any proceedings..
Just see the Lord Hanningfield case for example at Southwark Crown court..
This only makes it possible to be used in any proceedings.. if it needs to be...
Because of earlier failures of recognition and application..
Its shouldn't get that far.
We are engaged in proceedings when we are "on site" gathering evidence.
When we are on site promoting a cause or political campaign.. graffiti, stickers, printed material, public speaking,
When we are rallying for support and distribution of information..
And even parking to do those things.
Possibly even use of Government public transport free as police do.
Driving a vehicle to investigate illegal road signage, obtain evidence is essential to an investigation.
Even for example investigating sea pollution for a petition.. going on site...
You need to see that as "proceedings" a case. Political case. To parliament which is above the courts.
No criminal case can be heard without evidence obtained by police, on site.
It's part of proceedings. Criminal proceedings.
But if those proceedings are ongoing in a Crown court.. its above the Jurisdiction of a Magistrates court or county court. Because facts and circumstances related to a case are in connection already with a case. Acknowledgement of service with a higher authority.
When WE petition parliament.. WE are the ones bringing essentially "a case" freely.
But instead of a jury...
We gather the signatures of the public beforehand. The support, evidence, opinions...
Our elected advocates MPs.. And the Peers..
Then debate the matter... decide.
This is the order and form of political proceedings above the courts Jurisdiction.
But it has it's own official proceedings..
We initiate petition as we have the right to. And with the protection.. we start the case. Bring the cause, collect support, promote, inform and gather evidence. Those are proceedings that the right is relied upon in.
Therefore... the entire point is that there can be no intervention from the Authorities, police, cps, justices, courts staff.
They cannot "intervene" in the political proceedings and process.
Its above their Jurisdiction.
All facts, circumstances acts, are part of those political proceedings.
You cant get prosecuted and charged then appeal... and those go higher, higher, higher... because a criminal charge is initiated by another party (police) that encroaches into an existing proceedings.
You would traditionally appeal, crown, then high court, then you could petition the lords traditionally... (with a case against you)
WE AER ALREADY AT THAT LEVEL when we start the petition!! Straight in at the top.
And WE started the proceedings, we brought the case, Greivence, complaint, investigation or whatever... the political cause...
Therefore.. it was brought in immediately ABOVE all those courts.
That is the entire point of the Bill of Rights.
We are policing... policies. Policy making, political policing...
Police aren't to get involved in political disputes. Matters. With their work ..
If they want to... they can't use the courts.
They have to go by parliament themselves.
The CPS shouldn't try ministers or Lords by the courts. Those peers are judged by their equals.. which should be in parliament (currently the supreme court has peers sitting in it) but who would judge the supreme court judges if all accused?? It would have to be in the Lords. By their Peers.
This is where the Jeremy Johnson QC paper is in error.. observations on behalf of the house of Lords Authorities.
The police shouldn't "TRY" any case that involves a political right claim. Neither should the CPS...
As soon as a legitimate claim is raised..
And without denial or delay...
1.1C should kick in. From the overriding objectives. The business of the political cause is not the interests of the police. We don't have to explain ourselves.. so much that.. if we produce a legitimate petition or existing website or organised demonstration.. it clearly has a legitimacy.
There is the acknowledgement of service to a political cause and reason to have acted.
And any acts associated and claimed under that cause... under that right are part of the facts and circumstances of the proceedings to parliament, to bring that cause.
Intervention by opposition proceedings in lower courts.. is illegal . Because they are intervening in existing proceedings.
My 2 new petitions are calling for parliament to acknowledge this and act to correct illegal prosecutions where the right has been claimed and there has been a failure to recognize and apply the right.
And parliament does not want to even reject the petitions.
It doesn't want to debate these rights.
Or people to know about them...
And the reasons for this are clearly set out in that David Icke video freshly published..
Particularly the final point.
And my main concern is that Lawyers for XR don't want people to have that full right either... because its actually takes away work and power from XR lawyer's and puts it in the rights alongside the sick note automatic recognition and application..
Without delay.
Without fee
Immediately and without being denied
When issued legitimately
The Police, CPS, Probation are supposed to recognize and act. Get cases discontinued, orders changed.
In cases that should never have been tried.
The problem with XR lawyer's is that the Police, CPS are not suffering consequences themselves for trying cases when its illegal to do so
Forget the human rights act...
Breaching that is not an offence itself..
But denying the right to petition.. IS illegal.
Unlawful.
So there is clearly a perversion of Justice going on there... making people suffer warrants, summons... forced to defend themselves...
The sick note is not a defence.
It's a right.
You can't force the use of a right into being a defence. It's not a defence, is it.
Sick note = right.
Not defence, not defence material, not mitigation. Its overriding intervention of proceedings and I say its jointly a right and a Jurisdiction dispute. Which isn't a defence either. And one that parliament should assist with, because when petitioning the government... parliament is the other party. Therefore the crown prosecution service, police, are the other party also... all HM Government departments. Who cannot use the lower courts to intervene in proceedings in the highest Jurisdiction..
Again we are in opposition to parliament, with protection from those courts.
And its about time there was legal action taken AGAINST police, AGAINST the Crown prosecution service, AGAINST the probation service for trying to take away, reduce, deny those rights. Delay those rights.
There needs to be consequences against the police... CPS... because it's a perversion of Justice.
Clearly.. in the right to petition.. 1688 bill of rights
ALL prosecutions are illegal. And all commitments (orders) there is no time limit to claim. The illegal orders are not lawful. Therefore there needs be no appeal. Because any of those courts you would appeal to.... crown court... high court...
Couldn't hear the case in the first place either.... the matter was from the start.. with parliament.. the traditionally highest appeal. Above all others..
Which is where the "matter" was already brought to, raised with in the first instance.. in relation to those facts and circumstances.. inseparable from the cause, political matter they are performed in connection with
And I have entered this complaint with the CPS, with Probation with the DVLA with the Courts, with Parliament.
My current order with probation I've been off sick with E00****** West Yorkshire community rehabilitation company limited
Martin Davies Chief Executive.
Leicester Magistrates court 33JA1******
Calderdale Magistrates court now closed down... SK1400******
Chorley magistrates now closed down 04ZV0******
Huddersfield magistrates C00******
Manchester Magistrates 1500******
Crewe Magistrates 07/SZ/26******
Northallerton Magistrates now closed down 121700******
Nottingham Magistrates 31NT5******
2 west Yorkshire police conditional endorsement... forgetting their criminal procedure rule 1.1C overriding objective.. when I was gathering evidence
0133050487****** & 0133050492******
Telford Magistrates court 22RS04*****
And the seat belt fine when I was investigating gathering evidence from speed camera operator Tony King
Preston Magistrates 0419001*****₩
All one ongoing investigation into illegal road signage my case to parliament through petitioning.... all connected facts and circumstances of ONE CASE.
My case that I AM CONDUCTING by petition... to the highest court parliament..
That the police could not and should not have intervention in.. because I am gathering evidence against police, judges, CPS.... of illegal road signage, police witness giving false evidence in courts...
All attached evidence to parliament of widespread corruption.
This is the proper original and exact point and purpose of the right to petition and why there is protection..
Not to mention the double Jeopardy of law I have been in multiple times. Further breech of rights.
Are you actually helping us with these rights???
Or hindering us?
Who's side are you on??
Who are you working for?
Who are you servants to???
Why are the CPS and Probation service not upholding these rights??
When we bring a greivence to parliament..
They can not use the courts, the CPS the police to hinder, obstruct those proceedings..
We are in opposition to parliament.
Lawfully using the law....
In legitimate proceedings of the highest authority.
Will you help or are you helping the Government and yourselves?