Anda di halaman 1dari 3

Since March 2012 We* have played with the local constaburglars and just recently the judiciary

(the maggots circus). Since Our first case of speeding in July 2010 which was passed to bayleafs with charges rising to 900, We have learned a great deal. The lessons are as follows: 1. Its all a game and it can be FUN. We have sometimes likened it to poker, snakes & ladders or tennis. I say poker because you really shouldnt sit down to play unless you know the rules and know how much you are prepared to lose. (You will lose occasionally). In snakes & ladders you can expect to slide down some significant snakes. In tennis, players do not worry if they lose the first game or even the first set. You can be at love-40 and five games down in the final set and still win the match. 2. A little knowledge goes a long way. Section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 declares that no prosecution may begin where the notice of intention to prosecute is not delivered to the registered keeper of the car within fourteen days of the date of alleged offence. The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties Act) 1999 advises that unless a third party (debt collection agency) is NAMED in the original contract, he has no rights to enforce the contract. We have tested this (and won) in a contract with a national chain of fitness centres. (Think tennis). 3. Know who you are. If you can learn how to separate yourself (the wo/man) from the legal fiction (the MISTER) you will win every encounter. Even when you lose the first hand (poker) or game (tennis). 4. Theres no need to be belligerent. When you can speak in knowledge from a position of (your own) authority, you can be the Master in any encounter with public servants. In March 2012 We received three reminders of Notices of Intention to Prosecute (NIP) from Herts constaburglars. There were two addressed to a certain MISTER we know and there was one for a MRS with a name like my Sweethearts. Heres the KEY issue: The dates for the alleged offences were in January/February (some 60 days earlier). We pushed them to one side. In late May, Sweety said: Have you dealt with those speeding tickets yet? I said: No. Sweety said: Do it. We have been told that when the HMS Ship of State sails by and casts some papers on the water near your little vessel and if you read those papers and see something like your name and if you pick up those papers, there is a fishing line attached to those papers and a mariner will reel you in. You have lost. The NIPs addressed to a certain MISTER we know went through the shredder never to be considered again. For Sweety s NIP We began a correspondence (15-love) which resulted in a summons to court in August (30-love) which was deferred to September (30-15) which was deferred to October (30-30) which was deferred to November (30-40). In November We went to the maggots circus. Deuce. But Ill grant them the first game because we were at the circus. Sweety entered with fear and trembling. We entered with purpose and a bundle of papers. There was:

1. A limited Power of Attorney (LPOA) Which authorises another to speak on behalf of the Accused. Ref Powers of Attorney Act 1971 2. An Affidavit of Truth. (NIP arrived too late). 3. A copy of Sections 1 & 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 and 4. A copy of a report on Royal Mails deliveries against target for the period Jan Apr 2012. The brief was very simple. They had failed by their own rules. We only needed to point out the facts of an open and shut case. We expected to win. However. There were complications. Sweety is not fully up to speed on the freeman position. She is the client and We take her concerns into account. There was no need to stand at the door and claim/ask for our unalienable rights. We had those and We didnt want to give the maggots a heads up on the Authority that had just entered the room. The plan was: 1. Present the paperwork. 2. Let them read it. 3. Direct them to discharge the case. However, on entering the room (We do not call it a court) Sweety was directed to SIT THERE and was told that the maggots needed to choose between her case and another (criminal) case. What did she have to say? Eventually in her fear and trembling Sweety ran out of answers so I stepped forward to instruct them to read the papers, make a decision and discharge the case. Then the second game of the first set began. Clerky served the first ball (question): Who are you? You may call me Sovereign [second name: family name]. Love fifteen. First Maggot asked: Are you married to MRS FAMILY NAME? We did not answer that question but simply said: I hear and acknowledge your question. Love thirty. Clerky said: If you are not a barrista or a solis-ista you may not speak. MRS FAMILY NAME may represent herself or have a MacKenzie friend. Fifteen thirty. MRS FAMILY NAME has granted me the authority to speak on her behalf by the LPOA. You only need to read the documents make a decision and discharge the case. First Maggot said: Let us see the LPOA. Thirty thirty. Three maggots all leaned in very closely to examine the document as though they were looking for the tiniest mistake. There was none. Clerky said: The legislation is clear, you may not represent MRS FAMILY NAME. By what authority do you claim to represent her? We replied: The first legislation dates from the early fourteenth century. I stand in Common Law which predates parliament and all its decisions by a thousand years. (Forgot about the Powers of Attorney Act). Clerky was silent for a few seconds. Clerky said: The legislation is clear, you may not represent MRS FAMILY NAME. She then turned to counsel the maggots and as she was speaking I told her that she had not yet

rebutted my standing in Common Law. Clerky turned and made her first Error. She addressed me as MISTER FAMILY NAME. Madame Clerk! How dare you address me as MISTER FAMILY NAME? If you MUST use my name, you may address me as Master [Family Name]. Do you understand? Forty thirty. In the following conversation she addressed me as Master once then forgot herself and called me MISTER. Madame Clerk! How dare you address me as MISTER FAMILY NAME? I have told you that if you must address me by my name, you may call me Master Sovereign [Family Name]. Second game to Sovereign. After a little consultation across the bench, the maggots decided that they needed to withdraw to make a legal consideration. They all rose, walked to the door then in unison they turned, faced me and all of them BOWED THEIR HEADS to Sovereign. THEY ALL BOWED THEIR HEADS to Sovereign. We couldnt believe what we had seen. A friend in the public gallery sat there with his mouth open. However, this is a practical confirmation that all courts operate in Admiralty Law and all cases are contract. We may all learn how to stand as Master of the vessel. Our standing in any court has been confirmed. When they returned, We could have/should have directed them to discharge the case but We accepted their invitation to return in January. Sweety has another chance visit to the circus. She now sees it for the charade it is and no longer fears them. By the bye, We finished that 900 claim from Bayleafs with a phone call. We called them as the Occupant of The Office of The Executor of The Estate of the MISTER to advise them that the MISTER was dead. There was one more in-bound call by an auto-dialler. We stopped all further calls by BTs choose to refuse service (other services are available). The Distress Warrant and the bayleafs authority to collect died on 1st Feb 2012. *We use the second person pronoun We in the manner of all Sovereigns.