Swearing and the law

Section 5 Of The Public Order Act 1986: The Impact Of Harvey v DPP The broad scope and low threshold of the offence under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 makes it frequently prosecuted and familiar to practitioners. The recent case of Harvey v Director of Public Prosecutions [2011] All ER (D) 143 (Nov) required the High Court to re-examine the not uncommon situation where a person has been charged with a section 5 offence after swearing at a police officer. The fairly short and ex-tempore judgment provides some fresh guidance on determining whether words will be considered “abusive” under section 5, and when evidence of their impact upon individuals will be required. Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 A section 5 offence comprises two elements: A person must (a) use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or (b) display any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting; and The words or behaviour, or writing, sign of other visible representation must be within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. Unique amongst the public order offences in the […] → Full article Swearing and the law

Challenge court jurastiction

POST FOR AUSTRALIA NUMBER 131 THIS IS HOW YOU CHALLENGED THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT In relation to the matter before this court being an Application to sell abandoned goods held by the City of Greater Geraldton. I formally challenge your ability firstly to constitute a Lawful Court under State Acts and Statutes. There is no authority for you to sit in Admiralty Law in Our Court nor have we given you any authority. Our authority is We Are The Commonwealth as established under the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1900 UK and the Commonwealth Constitution 1901 which we accepted by Referendum. The State of Western Australia, like every other State did not exist before Federation, they were Colonies and ceased to exist on the proclamation of the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1900 UK by way of Clause 7. In the High Court HCA 48 of 1996 the case of James Andrew McGinty v The State of Western Australia states clearly that the states did not exist prior to Federation they were as I have said Colonies that ceased to exist on the proclamation of the Commonwealth Constitution by Clause 7 of that constitution. The states were established by 107, 108 and 109 […] → Full article Challenge court jurastiction

Credit agreements

CREDIT AGREEMENTS When you sign a credit agreement your the only one that signs it, ever noticed that then they take a photocopy and give you the photocopy or the carbon copy, it’s never the other way around where you keep the copy with your wet ink signature on it, ever wondered why ? Well they need your copy with the wet ink signature to apply for the money they claim their loaning you, the carbon copy you get is worthless, in effect they sell that credit agreement you signed, it’s what called securitising the debt by selling it on, Now the minute they do that the loan / debt is paid for, they just end up getting paid twice by getting you to repay and add interest, their basically charging you for the credit you created with your signature, tut tut ! Now what i do is demand proof their is a valid deb owed in the firm of that wet ink signature contract you signed we demand to see the original not the carbon copy because that’s worthless, now trust me when I say they kick up a stink about this and try everything to avoid supplying the […] → Full article Credit agreements

Legalese and pig Latin v the people

Legalese and Pig Latin v The people who are made Sovereign by Our Constitution v The Parliament who are Neither Sovereign nor Supreme. I and many others have entered Our Courts and have been slapped in the face with first, Your name in Pig Latin. Second the case is conducted in Legalese. We have never consented to any of the Criminal Rubbish. We have stated No Contract, No Liability which is correct except for one issue – the issue of consent without your knowledge. Do Not think about how they do it because it is in their Acts and Statutes. I have been involved in the court system for 43 years and have seen our system move from Our Rule of Law to their rule of law, meaning the presumption of innocence has been replaced Unlawfully with the Roman system of guilty until you prove you are Not. The relentless attack on my person and my friends over the last couple of weeks by Government Trolls has led me to read all of my previous cases before and after I worked in the Police Force. We have always had the answer to all of their Nonsense. There are Two very […] → Full article Legalese and pig Latin v the people

reasonable force against intruders

Using reasonable force against intruders You can use reasonable force to protect yourself or others if a crime is taking place inside your home This means you can: Home Crime, justice and the law Your rights and the law Using reasonable force against intruders Home Crime, justice and the law Your rights and the law Using reasonable force against intruders Home Crime, justice and the law Your rights and the law Using reasonable force against intruders You can use reasonable force to protect yourself or others if a crime is taking place inside your home. This means you can: protect yourself ‘in the heat of the moment’ – this includes using an object as a weapon stop an intruder running off – eg tackle them to the ground There’s no specific definition of ‘reasonable force’ – it depends on the circumstances. If you only did what you honestly thought was necessary at the time, this would provide strong evidence that you acted within the law. Read guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service. You don’t have to wait to be attacked before defending yourself in your home. However, you could be prosecuted if, for example, you: carry on attacking the intruder […] → Full article reasonable force against intruders

Frequently used words and phrases in the court room

FEQUENTLY USED WORDS AND PHRASES IN THE COURTROOM Affidavit A written statement made on oath, given in the place of verbal evidence Affirmation A declaration made instead of taking an oath Appellate Court/Jurisdiction Court or Jurisdiction which has the power to hear appeals Application A request made to a Court, eg., application for bail, application for an adjournment Arraign/ Arraignment The reading of the charges to the accused in a criminal matter and the recording of the accused’s answers as to whether he/she pleads guilty or not guilty Balance of probabilities The onus or standard of proof required in civil matters Beyond reasonable doubt The onus of proof required in criminal cases. Burden of proof The obligation to prove what is alleged. In a criminal trial the burden of proof is upon the prosecution, the accused does not have to prove anything. In a civil trial it is the plaintiff or claiming party which has the onus of proof Case Conference A pre-trial hearing which initiates the hearing of the case in Court. Under the guidance of the Judge (in Crime) parties attempt to resolve issues prior to the formal trial commencing Charge (to jury) Directions given to the Jury […] → Full article Frequently used words and phrases in the court room

Understanding not guilty

  “Not Guilty” – Do you know what you’re actually saying when uttering these words? Many do not think twice when pleading “Not Guilty” in a court. However, do you truly understand what this means and the impact it has on the matter at hand? The mere fact that a “defendant” is attending court is an admission of guilt as an unresolved controversy exists and the accuser eg the plaintiff believes a wrong exists and requires resolution or compensation from the defendant. Hence, by the act of turning up, the defendant is already guilty. First of all, what is “court”? Simply put, you’re already in court when interacting with the opposite party…you’re there to make law/contract. Hence, the first court appearance has already been held with the opposite party and the reason for a Court appearance in a State/Federal Court is to adjudicate on the controversy created by the defendant according to the plaintiff. Pleading not Guilty. Where does the word “guilty” come from? From Canon Law here Canon 3147 The word Guilty originates from 14th Century English / Dutch gilde, from 13th Century Venetian / Italian gilda meaning “guild, payment (in gold), debt or fine owed to the guild”. […] → Full article Understanding not guilty

Common law v statutes

Common Law vs Statutes Living by the Rule of Law by Roger Hayes Few of us would disagree that the world would be a better place if we all lived by the rule-of-law – but can the same be said about living by the rule of statute? The writer thinks not. In making the case that ‘the law’ benefits our society as a whole but ‘statutes’ benefit special interest groups and have become a negative factor in our lives let me first put forward my views as to what the differences between laws and statutes are. Here follows a summary of my interpretation of the differences (not necessarily in order of importance, sometimes repeated and definitely not exhaustive) – please feel free to challenge me if you disagree. Warning: My assumptions are based on my own logic and reasoning – I have the benefit of not having been ‘trained’ to think like a barrister or a solicitor – in fact I have not been ‘trained’ to think like anybody – I tend to think for myself, which it appears very few people do these days… most preferring it seems to being ‘guided’ conveniently to the same conclusions as the ruling […] → Full article Common law v statutes

CANCELING contracts

CANCELING CONTRACTS You can cancel that CONTRACT however by rescinding your CONSENT. The Federal Truth in Lending Act provides that any party to a CONTRACT may rescind his CONSENT, within three business days of entering into such a CONTRACT. So across the face of the CITATION you should print or type in large print, the following words: I DO NOT ACCEPT THIS OFFER TO CONTRACT and I DO NOT CONSENT TO THESE PROCEEDINGS. Use blue ink [for admiralty] or purple ink [for royalty]. Admiralty is the Court and Royalty represents your Sovereignty. Either way is appropriate. Sign your signature underneath in blue or purple ink and in front of a Notary and under your signature type: Without prejudice, UCC 1-308. This is another way to declare that you may not be held responsible for this Contract pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code.Serve Cancelled Citation back it on the Clerk / Court, along with a Certificate of Service, CV-Certificate of Service (Service of Papers Other than Citation) Instructions: Every notice, pleading, plea, motion, or request made to the court must be served on all other parties in person, by mail or courier, by fax, by e-mail with consent, or in another […] → Full article CANCELING contracts

Letters if schools try to fine you

LETTER IF SCHOOL FINES YOU? Dear Headmaster, I had no idea you consider yourself to be higher ranking than, Her Majesty the Queen, and free to ignore the laws and usages of this realm, she swore upon her Coronation Oath, she would govern us by. Here are you defying her, Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, and acting unlawfully, as my accuser, judge and jury, a petty dictator, ignorant of the Constitutional Laws of Australia, which state, only a jury in a court of law, can convict me of a crime, or amerce me by imposing an unlawful fine? I will not be publishing this reply to you, on the following condition. You cease unlawfully fining anyone, immediately. Theft by deception is a criminal offence, Criminal Law Act 1968. Dear Headmaster, May I remind you of the constitutional law that is the Bill of Rights 1689 which goes something like this ” That no one is to be judged unless by a lawful jury of there peers .” With this in mind may I know the name of the judge that has presided in this matter with regards the court order required to legitimise your actions ? Or are you a […] → Full article Letters if schools try to fine you

Privacy Notice

Warning - any person and/or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any governmental structure including but not limited to the United States Federal Government and/or the Government of the British Isles also using or monitoring/using this website or any of its associated websites, you do NOT have my permission to utilise any of my profile information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not limited to my photos, and/or the comments made about my photos or any other "picture" art posted on my profile. You are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, disseminating, or taking any other action against me with regard to this profile and the contents herein. The foregoing prohibitions also apply to your employee , agent , student or any persons under your direction or control. The contents of this profile are private and legally privileged and confidential information, and the violation of my personal privacy is punishable by United Sates law. UCC 1-103 1-308 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. And by United Kingdom (British) Law. The Human Rights Act 1998 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents) Human Rights Act 1998 www.legislation.gov.uk An Act to give further effect to rights and freedoms guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights; to make provision with respect to holders of certain judicial offices who become judges of the European Court of Human Rights; and for connected purposes.

Valuable links

Use the links below for valuable information on rights and law.
Know your Rights
I am some dude
Wayne Glew