|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 8:55:03 GMT
Never on time stop the traffic line! The future meaning is all tricks and scheming?#! Here we go again... :/
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 9:22:28 GMT
This is the thing though...
The receptionist at Chorley magistrates court seemed nice and appeared to believe that that every photo, video and document that was submitted to the court would be ..evaluated by the magistrates.
Although, now i am not certain if the legal team of the courts "audit' your files beforehand.. Especially if they are friends with the chief crown prosecutors and police prosecutors and local duty Solicitors. Notably female colleagues. Its all a bit too "Theresa May" for my liking. Which is ironic taking into account that it was her making the police corruption speech.
And who is the Clerk and who is the police prosecutor?! Which is which? She hangs out in the office where your evidence is sent to..so she is the clerk, right? Or? What? Police prosecutor? Im confused.
Is the girl who came to get me and introduce me to talk to steve gallaghan in the booth.. Was she the clerk or the police prosecutor? Who was going through all my documents on her desk with the mr sweetman-like legal advisor telephone receptionist style desk? And silent witness magistrates sat behind him who never speak, while steve watches the kill being streched out to another tax payers hearing at burnley..
Why never not guilty first hearing? The prosecution dont need to re-evaluate any evidence because you have been sending it to the police and complaining like fury already? Right? So no new police investigation required? They are blatantly fenying it..right?
All After steve works for road safety support as well..checking road signs (if requested)..but didnt check them the day he executed me with his laser gun.. As he was being payed for a different job then on that occasion... Speed camera operator who is.. Trying to help you...not working with Steve Finnegans ex police chief friends un-independent police scaffolding network. As Frank Garratt has already been found NOT to be an independent witness sililarly to james boothby.
By providing a Ā£2000 sign check service the month AFTER the execution..if requested by the CPS or 'police' that you have already reported the signs to...
Now pose your child for a warning sign photo next to Mr.Callaghan at your local primary school... And be proud to know he is here to help the police chief and police legal services conduct their buisiness.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 12:23:56 GMT
We the road safety partnership, will not find you guilty in our court, unless you have accepted a automatic fine or contest the evidence which we have gathere which we are more than likely to find you guilty with. ? Or intend to find you guilty with, without permission from the Chief police officer. Unless we ask his permission for alternative punnishments
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 14:55:00 GMT
So...
I got a letter yesterday from the DVLA, but it turned out to be a letter regarding one of my complaints. (just found out)
Then, (today) 10th September...I get A second letter from the DVLA... My dad opens it and I am waiting for the bad news... But he has no answer after reading the letter!? Of any ban length... Only that I have to check online...on the website!? He didn't say if I had been banned or not.. So if I have I will have to check the website now!
No letter from the court yet on 10th September 3 days after sentancing trial. :/
I will update as soon as I have felt like checking the website....
I am just about to place an advert in the Daily Mail for the petitions!
I have emails that they are ready to fit it in and can do it... Just that they haven't rung me yet to book it! I tried calling them but there is no answer from either number!! But in the email they are keen to do it and fit it in the Motors section!
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 15:10:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 23:13:38 GMT
Watch "The Forest Of Doom. #1: "Bigleg's Quest." [HD]" on YouTube
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 10, 2016 23:46:32 GMT
10 september 2016 - No failure to give driver details or name yourself as the driver can exist for an offence that does not exist!You will not believe this, but I have been Disqualified from Driving for 6 Months, but it cannot be enforceable as there is no Offence on my driving licence, and there is an offence for failing to provide driver details, but instead of 6 points it says ZERO! 0! And instead of 15 Points on my driving licence until I get it back, it says ZERO points! A disqualification cannot be valid if there is no offence that caused it!? And to fail to provide driver details cannot be for a non existing offence?! especially one that carries 0 points! Also no court is named only a code number!? I am going to have to ring up the D.V.L.A. on Monday Morning to check if points are to be put on later or if there is an error! The Disqualification cannot be valid, just like a parking ticket with the wrong vehicle registration plate on it! Also its either Police, Court of DVLA fraud for giving incorrect details on my driving licence! regardless of if they refuse to accept I have been prosecuted Illegally and the traffic light set is not within court Jurisdiction! Also I need to get Steve Finnegan and Dee Collins (D.Stickley) to remove the unlawfully applied Ossett bypass & Haslingden bypass points as well! Also what happened to those 6 points i was Given by Huddersfield magistrates Court that never appeared?! Thats 21 penalty points! They dont seem to care! So why are they even doing it anyway? the court are just going through the motions! If the DVLA did it, then it isnt fraud if the Disqualification is not valid! because they are not causing a loss to me of my driving licence! when i was not convicted lawfully in the first place! They must have intent to cause me a detrimental loss or make a personal gain from their actions. usually a financial gain. also I canot find a court code with 1721! Doesnt seem to exist. It has to be the convicting Court... ! Why do Warrington and Runcorn show the same number?! courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/courts/ Macclesfield Magistrates' Court (#1178) Warrington Magistrates' Court (#1722) Runcorn (Halton) Magistrates' Court (#1722) Crewe (South Cheshire) Magistrates' Court (#1187) Crewe County Court and Family Court (#181, CCI: 181) Chester Civil and Family Justice Centre (#170, CCI: 170) Chester Crown Court (#415) So the Endorsements cannot possibly be valid!
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 11, 2016 18:59:15 GMT
The peizo files 2011 speed camera photo my mum just randomly found it. I never knew we had this photo from 2011. 37mph fine. actual speed 33.7mph? Under 35mph CPS ACPO prosecution threshold. Dad is not bothered. Done & dusted in the past. Its ok for police to rip us off., Its just a government cash mover like the Banks scandal. money saving expert.com hussle. gets money circulating.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 12, 2016 6:49:00 GMT
Regarding the Theft/Stealing of votes and signatures from my petition.
I have had 2 adverts in London newspapers now for my petition.
But before that I placed my own notices on the fixed speed cameras.. enough that should have resulted in at least a good number of signatures.
It is likely that some people might have informed radio stations about the petition.
Seeing as it would concern all UK drivers ( )
The main Radio station radio 2 gets supposedly ( ) listeners.
I did send that radio station a large poster and stickers informing them of the petition.
I did hear at least one time a DJ named with initials C. E. Say live on air around that time "Dont sign "THE" petition"
If a petition was being promoted nationally on speed cameras and in a London newspaper that potentially concerned all UK drivers... And a radio station had the power to influence that by telling people NOT to sign it..
It would be Theft with intent to deprive someone of signatures on their petition. And be politically motivated theft. Contrary to employment policy as well.
There is a large petition site called 38 degrees who have had large newspaper adverts...
But the circumstances of 1. The number of driving listeners to the Main UK radio station
2. The number of drivers seeing the speed camera petition stickers and London newspaper adverts.
3. The fact I sent that radio station the petition promotional materials
4. The number of drivers the petition concerned
I believe that the mention of "The petition" and a message to not sign it..from a national main Radio station is enough evidence to within reason consider it strong enough influence and directive reference to my petition - at the time being promoted on fixed speed cameras nationally.
The radio station knew about my petition.
Thus it is within reason I believe to consider that a radio presenter who at that time was without doubt aware of my petition.. could and did without doubt say "dont sign the petition" and have large effect and influence over my petition getting signatures.
And that could and would be depriving my petition of signatures. And would be thus theft. And against employment policy. Also even if it was not proved to be regarding my petition...
A Radio DJ even mentioning ANY petition in relation to "not to sign it" is against employment policy. Because the context what specific to "A political petition" and "telling a high number of persons at one time" not to sign a political petition.
So even if it could be found to be a 38 degrees or any at all. Or all petitions ..
It would have a reduced influence on all petitions at the time.
The BBC employment policy states that employes cannot have a political biased. If someone someone requests a mention in an interactive program then there is no reason a petition cannot be mentioned. But in a biased context opposing a petition. Or even petitions, it is against employment policy.
Unless it was my petition being hacked and assumed to be originating from the same source responsible for the strange activitys on my driving licence?
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 12, 2016 8:53:17 GMT
Ok, so I have read the Reply from Calderdale Magistrates Court regarding my "Acknowledgement of service" form and the N510 Form for automatic exemption from Court Jurisdiction. They have returned my documents. Calderdale Magistrates Court Claim that "It is not an application I can Make to a Magistrates Court - Get legal advice". I have obtained Legal advice from "The House Of Lords". Who have informed me that all I need to do is contact any court to make a "Representation" to them to invoke my Parliamentary Exclusive Cognisance and the Right to petition - Bill of Rights based Legislation, to have Court Jurisdiction removed. The Courts dont seem to want to do this. I will have another look at Lord Hanningfields Document. www.bentcop.biz/91881-Treas-Lord-Hanningfield-Observations.pdfOk.. so no matter if we agree on if Lord Hanningfield was or was not doing parliamentary work.. The Document from the House of Lords by - Jeremy Johnson QC 13th July 2016 15.Exclusive cognizance is a broader concept than the narrow form of Parliamentary privilege that is enshrined in Article 9 of the Bill of Rights. It is the right of the House of Lords (and, for that matter, the House of Commons) āto be the sole judge of the lawfulness of their own proceedings, and to settleāor depart fromātheir own codes of procedure.ā (see Erskine May, th 24 edition, at p227 ā copy attached). It is for the Courts (not Parliament) to determine whether a particular issue comes within the scope of Article 9 of the Bill of Rights. It was therefore entirely for the Court to determine on the dismissal application (and will, if necessary, be for the Court to determine in the course of the trial) whether Article 9 is engaged. The House Authorities do not seek in any way to question the Courtās conclusion on that narrow issue. Where, however, a matter concerns the internal procedures of Parliament, then that falls within the exclusive cognizance of Parliament which it is for Parliament alone (not the Courts) to determine and regulate. Such matters may not be reviewed by the Courts ā see Bradlaugh v Gosset (1884) 12 QBD 271, R v Graham Campbell ex. parte Herbert [1935] 1 KB 594, McGuiness v United Kingdom 1999 (Application 39511/98). So... The Bill of rights 1688 Article under the Rights of the Subjects, the Right to Petition The Crown (Parliament) concerns all petitioning activities AGAINST parliament (And the courts themselves) in relation to the fact that ALL prosecutions are in fact Illegal. nd thus criminal. So it can be impossible to find oneself in a situation where any authority of Law is in the process of a Trial to determine such matters without the trial itself being Illegal. And Criminal to decide either way. And It must be Null & Void. Parliament do not decide what Subject matter or Cause any Citizen or Subject can petition about. Thus if it cannot make that decision (A right of the subjects to choose their cause. And them alone) then how can it be for the Court or any court for that matter to decide what Work they themselves are required to undertake on behalf of that cause? If a Cause subject has clearly been defines and stated.. such as Protecting the environmental well being of Birds, stated in the petition title.. them matters concerning Birds have clearly been exempted from the Jurisdiction of the Court in such Matters. If The Clearly stated Cause of the Petitioning work was concerning speed cameras and road traffic enforcement devices or roads.. then that subject and related matters would naturally be covered by the Bill of Rights, Right to petition work - as stated. In addition to any work that has clearly been identified as being specific to the petition campaign cause of involvement with the work.. there are also the basic core functionality procedures of any Petitioning or similar political campaign type work. And this is clearly defined and represented by the every day processes and practicalities of "Campaigning" for Ballot, vote and signature from the Public to be presented to Parliament. The Research, Investigations, Gathering of evidence on-site at locations. So as to present the information concerning the cause to any public person for their evaluation and decision making as if to add their signature to the cause Ballot. Also the Promotional, public notification, and travel to visit the public and place notification in public of the cause and how and where to sign up to the cause. These are widely accepted normal functions of any political campaign.. either by a Political registed Party, or Written or Registed Petition. And as it is the Subject. The Citizen themselves who draw up their own petitions, it is for the person themselves to make any "Representation" to any other person - including Parliament or any Court or Council regarding the Petition. And state and make claim to any legal authority or exemption which may apply to them, or be applied to them or their work in matters concerning the work. Thus To Make any Legal representation to any Court concerning invokation of any Right of the Subject themselves, that they are in Lawfull possession of. It is only for the Subject him/herself to make writen representation to any Court, even Parliament regarding the Petition, or any Lawfull automatic exemption from the Jurisdiction of that Court (And Parliament) concerning their Petition work. Which By the Law and Legislation of the United Kingdom must be upholded under legal obligation.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 12, 2016 11:16:26 GMT
Calderdale Magistrates court have sent back my Bill of Rights and petitions committe evidence. And refuse to process a exemption from Jurisdiction for the Ossett bypass under the Civil Proceedings rule 11.
They said get legal help. The House of Lords have informed me that I only need to submit a "Representation" in writing to the court. Which i have now done. But also I have mentioned that...
You can not get legal help from solicitors who do not want to put all the road signage correct and who are friends and colleagues with the police led prosecution, court staff and local duty solicitors social peers
Also please note that....
1. Unlawfull, illegal Road signage was taken to Huddersfield Police station. To report. The Police stated that - (quote) IT IS A CIVIL MATTER.
Thus when challenging a court over the Illegal road signs, section .85 of the road traffic act. It can be presented to a Court through the Civil proceedings & defence rules, of which exemption from Jurisdiction falls within. And The Police have stated in Direct quote that the road signage IS a "Civil matter" thus court Jurisdiction can be contested under Civil procedure rules. Because any matter relating to The Road & Signage is a civil matter. And if this is raised as issue with the Court - no "Defence" in relation to the Criminal prosecution charges is required to be submitted. The case is "set aside" and there is no time limit for defence or prosecution objections to the evidence being allowed. Thus it has become entirely a matter of proving to the court, with no immediate time limit, the unlawfull road signage, rendering the jurisdiction of the court over the road not in effect. And this will apply for multiple drivers for however so long the road has not been enforceable. And that it would be a matter for the Court as member of the road safety partnership to under obligation of LAW and Road safety partnership contract - have the local or national Highways department evaluate the road, and the Police led prosecutions would require re-evaluation. Either by the acting Chief constable, the Court or the Prosecution. None being so independently unrelated to the Chief police officer themself. To whom the Court answer to non independently from the Chief constable.
Calderdale magistrates court claims it does not provide service for these listed documents. Related documents Acknowledgement of service - Exemption from Court jurisdiction - defence rule 11. submitted evidence N510 form - when permission from the Court is not required
So i have sent a "Representation" to them as advised by the House of Lords.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 12, 2016 18:38:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 12, 2016 18:43:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 13, 2016 11:08:09 GMT
Ok.. this doesnt make sense unlss they have changed it. I got a 6 month driving ban when i was in my early 20's about 5 years later or so i was banned for 2 years! Now I have been banned for 6 months again. according to this information on the government website it doesnt make sense at all. Why was I banned for 2 years for a regular few mph over the limit speeding offence? when it was about 5 years after my first 6 month ban? I was going out with a girlfriend who lived on a remote farm and it was really difficult to visit her. Sam Goozee? Roy the prosecutor from the Pub in Town? Police contacts? I think i was "Set-up" to be banned for 2 years.. stitched up by the police. unless the government have changed the policy? www.gov.uk/driving-disqualifications/overviewIt was either Sam Goozee, Clerk of the justices or the Police led Prosecutor who pulled my driving licence out and read i had still got a ban listed from previously.. but it was at least 3-5 years old! so should not have counted towards a 2 year ban just for totting up. See.. further example of Police/CPS/Court corruption.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Sept 13, 2016 12:56:20 GMT
I just missed the TNT guy. Because i was on the computer. I didnt know it was him. He put 1:20 on the card..i rang TNT up straight away and they said they would try get him to come back. But this was at 1:17! So the TNT van driver has obviously written the wrong time on the card..or his phone was the wrong time! False accounting?!
Anyway.. My mum was on the computer this morning writing an email. Apparently she went to the door to speak to somebody and when she got back to the computer.. All her email writing she had been typing had vanished from the screen! The email field was open in the send box.. But the content she was entering was gone! Ooo dear!
And still no letter from South Cheshire magistrates court since the hearing on the 07th September.. And it is now the 13th September!
Just put a full complaint in to the DVLA regarding errors on my driving licence of the MS90 that can only be 6 and no other number or not a number
|
|