Page 1 of 1

Received a letter for Notice for Intended Prosection. Help

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 5:51 pm
by greenelephant150
Hi there everyone

I am at bursting point with the authorities!!!! I have received a letter for Notice of Intended Prosecution from Bedfordshire Police. I shall explain why I am rightful to be angry

OK a few years ago (July 2016). I had a ford escort van that had broken down by a petrol station. I pushed the vehicle to the back of the forecourt, with the intent to remove it when I had found a friend with a vehicle that could tow it to a garage. I left it at the station for 3 days. When I returned I was shocked to not find it there!!!!
So I spoke to to the manager of petrol station who said that the day previous he saw two people approach it wearing hi vis clothing. They had a large breakdown van with orange/amber hazard lights on the van.
Therefore the manager assumed they were legitimate breakdown personnel.
The manager saw their faces and the vehicle reg plate of the van they were using. The manager also told me the van has been passing to and fro on the road adjacent to the petrol station all day long yesterday and today and that the van comes to a rest 200 mteres down the road of a right turning off the main road which the petrol station is next to. BASICALLY THEY DONE ALL THE INVESTIGATION WORK!!!! However he couldnt release CCTV pictures of the two men as legally only the police could request it.

Anyways I went to the cop shop in Cambridge where I live. Gave them all the details they needed (And they had enough to secure an arrest!!!!!) Anyway 3 weeks went passed and heard nothing from the police. So I contacted the petrol station to enquire if the police came to obtain CCTV evidence of my vehicle theft. to my shock the police had failed. I was told that I only had 4 days till the footage would be erased as it would be written over with up to date footage of security CCTV on their HDD. I contacted the police urgently and got the same bullshit response from the police. "Yes, we will investigate"

2 months later painting a house of an affluent house in the same area, the houseowner disclosed to me that indeed he suffered the same (his BMW was nicked!!) but he is from a family of barristers and so his brother put loadsa legal pressure on Cambridge Police to disclose why it wasnt been investigated. Being the fucking high-horsed barstards they are they felt at first like they didnt need to disclose, but this was a competent barrister and knew how to corner them,. So eventually the police were forced to put their tail between their legs and disclose why. and the reason was ........................ the police intentionally assigned an officer who was on holiday at the time of the crime with the intent that it wouldnt be investigated.
The barrister threatened to sue the daylights out of the superintendant and all of a sudden the police were acting like good little errand boys!!!!!! I WAS LIVID WHEN I FOUND THIS OUT!!!! I didnt have fully comp so counldnt claim a new car!!!

I was lucky that a friend sold me his car at a stupid rate for me to get back on my feet. I paid for fully comp insurance with esure on monthly payments. Now my bank didnt set up my direct debit properly so no money could come out into my insurers. My insurers however failed to notify me propely. They simply sent me an email that my stupid email account put into spam so I missed the email telling me to resolve the issue with my bank in 5 days or your policy is terminated. As I knew nothing about this I was driving around after a week or so with no insurance. A police officer in an unmarked car pulls me over and seizes my vehicle, and though he promised me that I would only pay a £100 fine I would receive no points. turns out he is a lying BARSTARD!!!! I got 7 points on my licence. Now that I am on my feet again I was caught out by a speeding camera placed obscurely on a bedfordshire road and the PIGS are now declaring that they will prosecute ME!!!!! TWO FACE LIARS, never bothered to catch the real criminals when my van was stolen but are happy to pounce on a measly small sppeding fine (I was doing 57 mph in a 50mph area) yes I know its above the limit but I was under pressure to reach to a destination quickly and the road was clear (despite it being nighttime)

I know these offenses fall under statutory law and so I can waiver them in court. Please I want to state to you I am a rebel with a cause. This is not about me being irresponsible and asking for your expertise to live irresponsible and say F*CK YOU" to the law. I am asking this because I have had it to my eyeballs about the corruption that is in the UK establishment. These bastards in the police force think they are above accountability. (I know there are some good officers protecting the public from the menaces of society but I sense there are in the minority these days :( )
Can anyone give me any advice on the notice of intended prosecution letter given to me. I dont want to fill it out as then I am entering into a legal contract with them. What are the steps you can recommend me to do?

BTW dont get me started on the insurance companies, they are a bunch of crooks these days as well!!! On my Esure policy I rang them up after my car was seized and said If I could pay the fine would they reinstate my policy? They refused. Yet they had to nerve to send me a letter threatening a dca to collect the remaining money that they had planned to obtain from me for the yearly premium paid by monthly installments even though it is them who refused to reinstate it!!!!! BTW insurance companies have stooped to new unprecedented lows. All the thousands of unfortunate people who lost their homes in the australian bushfires will receive NO financial support to rebuild their homes from the Australian government as the government will simply ask those destitute people "Did you have home insurance?" . The f***ng cretins of CEO's who run these insurance deliberately raised their premiums to unaffordable levels months before the fires occured (with foreknowledge about the coming fires!) heres the evidence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N6VWgRg0VA

I hate the system!!!!!!! PLease can anyone help a vulnerable person seek justice against these corrupt barstards in the police force who seek to ruin my chances to drive to make a living but are happy for real car criminals to walk free!!!! I shall be grateful for any support received!!!!

Re: Received a letter for Notice for Intended Prosection. Help

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:19 pm
by iamani
Hi greenelephant150

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be much you can do about any of it...

Re: the insurance premium - you've taken out a loan on a 12 month term. Whoever gave you the loan expects repayment regardless of your situation with the insurers. There are ways to deal with debt collectors posted here and on goodforumotion.com.

Re: the insurers - they will use any excuse to cancel your cover as your agreement with them states that if you give cause for them to cancel your cover they are not obliged to refund you.

Re: police not investigating theft of car - if you had standing like the barrister you mention does, you could sue them for negligence perhaps...

Re: NIP - there are several ways to deal with those, depending on your level of knowledge. Unfortunately it is not enough to 'hate the system', you have to learn the system. Without knowledge you are stuck. It's designed that way. If you are starting from a point of no knowledge it would take pages of text to explain a technique to you.

Have you thought about learning how the system works?

If you are not interested in doing that then i would honestly recommend just paying the ticket... sorry.

Cheers!

Re: Received a letter for Notice for Intended Prosection. Help

PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:38 am
by greenelephant150
OK I will list down my present knowledge
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I know about the strawman concept, that all financial fines issues from either the state or the financial industry all fall under statutory law and that the liable party needed to resolve the fine is not directly who is stated on the document. Instead a legal fiction has been created at the moment of birth [via birth certificate] of the physical human who has the same birth details and same name the state wants to take liability for.
Ive seen "Councils, courts and conmen" on youtube where a human called 'Stephen Barry' has a representitive who had a birth certificate of the defendant an for and on the record presented the court, meaning the representitive told the court what party was liable for the charge and the human being known as 'Stephen Barry' accepts no liability.
* I understand that you have to enter the courtroom with a verbal agreement from the judge that one's "god given and inelienable rights are to be upheld".
* I understand the court doesnt being to the judge/magistrate but to the people of UK.
* That if you unwittingly obey the any command from a member of state ie (from the clerk of the court, magistrate ) when in the courtroom, you have subrogated all of your rights over to the state and agreed to "Stand under" the magistrate (Yes I know that in legalese when they tell you a statement (usually an order)) they (the bench) always respond with "Do you understand?" This is a trap as they are using legalese instead of english. Therefore if you answer "Yes" you are saying in legalese "Yes I stand under the authority of the state"
* If a request is asked by the bench designed to "put you in a corner", meaning that no matter what possible course of action you decide to do you are obeying the command, in such a situation you conditionally accept to agree with the command/request issues by the state under condition all of my "god given and inelienable rights are to be upheld". If the state refuses then you can refuse the request.
* I understand that it isnt a case of "denying the alleged offence took place when court proceedings happen" instead you are simply distancing yourself from the true liable party the state wants you to take liability for. So long as the offence in question under statutory law doesnt exist in common law then you demand the court upholds their oaths of office to uphold common law. The battle arguement is never about whether one is gulity/or not guilty of the alleged statutory offence, instead about what body of law will be enforced in the courtroom
* All members of the court (judges, magistrates, and clerks, as well as constables) have to swear an oath to the queen after their formative training years just before they take officially take up their intended roles. This oath promises to serve the queen an uphold common law.. There is another video where the same representitive is in another courtroom and asked the magistrate if they are on oath today. He is demanding that they uphold the oath in the courtroom. This creates a conflict of interest for the magistrate, as the magistrate intended to enforce statutory law as that is where the alleged offence lies. However failing to uphold their oath and therefore common law is an offence of treason against the state as it is the oath itself that gives them the authority to act in the capacity of their position they are serving in the court. If there is no oath there is no authority to obey the bench! The oath bounds/binds the people on the bench to honour and enforce common law only. It reduces the power of the magistrate as opposed to statutory law where no oath is needed and so the magistrate is unbound and can have full control over proceedings.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In short I know of the principles and proceedings regarding the court. What I am asking from you guys is what do I do with the police demands sent to me (notice of intended prosecution)
I know that you can send a letter stating that you stand under common law and that you take no liability for the alleged offence. Also (more importantly) I know you can send them a bill stating that any correspondence you send me I can charge you say £500 per letter. Basically Im not too concerned about the money. I just need help in being able to draft a letter to Beds police informing that I am not entering into a statutory contract with them and finding ways that I can successfully enforce requests of money off them and obtain money from them. As said I am NOT IN THIS FOR THE MONEY. I just want to be able to have the knowledge to enforce it when I need so that it will put off the police from harassing me (as I know people in the freeman movement have done before).
I have tried my best to be a honourable citizen with the authorities but when I see my business collapse because of deliberate negligence from the police and no they are trying to finish me off when I have tried my best to be an honorable citizen leaves me now no choice but to enter a power stuggle with the police. And rightly so for they refused to uphold their duties to serve and protect the public through the loss of my vehicle and now they wish to turn against me. Please I am requesting the background principles that requests and collection of money against the police can be enforced from. As said this is not about money but the capacity and the power to be able to do so as a deterrent for the police to leave me alone and that I will not be pushed around. Had the letter I received was a PCN I most likely would have grumbled, moaned about it and probably entered into the strawman proceedings or perhaps paid it off depending how I felt but to receive such a harsh letter in such unjust circumstances has filled me with anger against the crooks that are in the police force. I will be so indebted and grateful for any help given to me in knowledge about money enforcement will be so welcome!!! Im not in favour of having to undermine a magistrate who may not be corrupt and may have served in their capacity with honour, unless I have to. I want to avoid peripheral issues/collateral damage so to speak. My anger and rebellion is against the police and I want to hit them where it hurts, just like I had to suffer years ago where the police done so with impunity.

Thank you

Re: Received a letter for Notice for Intended Prosection. Help

PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:14 pm
by iamani
Hi greenelephant150

Ha! Would you look at that  -  someone's put some effort in! No bitching and whining about lack of help, no recrimination, just effort. Good for you.

Ok, so you seem to have taken the introductory course and you have a grasp on some of the more popular concepts...

This is not legal advice, it is merely my opinion.

Your biggest problem appears to be anger  -  you have to lose the anger. Anger demonstrates incompetence and ignorance and will hold you back. Your anger hurts only you, as the machine you are angry at doesn't even know you are alive. Anger also evidences fear. You need to lose all thoughts of revenge, rebellion and money. Instead of seeking revenge seek redress, remedy and relief; for (lawful) rebellion substitute lawful (eg conditional) acceptance; and there is no money, only value.

1) "I know about the strawman concept, that all financial fines issues from either the state or the financial industry all fall under statutory law and that the liable party needed to resolve the fine is not directly who is stated on the document. Instead a legal fiction has been created at the moment of birth [via birth certificate] of the physical human who has the same birth details and same name the state wants to take liability for"

If you are going with the common consensus of 'strawman' you might not know it as well as you think you do...
The birth registration enables the state to create, under licence, a legal-fiction using a derivative of the bairn's name. The bairn is NOT registered as to do so would be evidence of slavery. The surety/guarantor for this Crown-created, Crown-copyrighted and thus Crown-owned entity is HM Treasury. When you ignorantly assume the identity of the legal-fiction and use it in your life you also assume its liabilities/obligations and become surety/guarantor in place of the Treasury. Congratulations -  you are in effect now employed by the state to play a massive game of Monopo-let's-pretend. You are now obligated to abide by the rules (aka legislation) governing such entities within the game. As surety you are liable to pay the fines  -  how you do that is up to you. You can pay it out of your pocket or you can authorise payment from funds held under the NAME. The NAME, being a legal-entity, has nothing to do with any flesh-entity until it is assumed and used by a flesh-entity.
What to do about the NAME? Depends on you. We have several options. We can assume the NAME in ignorance and suffer (the most popular option), we can claim the name and operate it competently, or we can eschew the NAME and leave the game. The second and third options require a whole lot of work. Your decision will mark you either as competent or as a slave  -  simple as that.

2) "Ive seen "Councils, courts and conmen" on youtube where a human called 'Stephen Barry' has a representitive who had a birth certificate of the defendant an for and on the record presented the court, meaning the representitive told the court what party was liable for the charge and the human being known as 'Stephen Barry' accepts no liability."

Stephen Barry, or more accurately Stephen-barry, did very well. i remember that video by title but not sure if i watched it. Perhaps i should. Was he successful? He is right in his assertion, but allow me to correct you  -  the entity that the birth certificate represents IS the defendant. No flesh-entity is being accused, the court just needs the legal-entity to be represented by someone who will ensure the account is settled.

3) "I understand that you have to enter the courtroom with a verbal agreement from the judge that one's 'god given and inalienable rights are to be upheld'."

i don't know if i would trust a verbal agreement, you can't wave that in the air in a courtroom as evidence of intent the way you can a prior-posted Notice of Special Appearance.
i would advise caution in spouting about 'god given and inalienable rights' unless and until you fully understand what 'God-given' actually means, and that the term inalienable is more for the American market.

4) "I understand the court doesnt belong to the judge/magistrate but to the people of UK."

That's not quite right. Common-law courts belong to the people, magistrate courts are privately-run and privately-owned places of business. Who owns the buildings of both are the nation's creditors.

5) "That if you unwittingly obey the any command from a member of state ie (from the clerk of the court, magistrate ) when in the courtroom, you have subrogated all of your rights over to the state and agreed to "Stand under" the magistrate (Yes I know that in legalese when they tell you a statement (usually an order)) they (the bench) always respond with "Do you understand?" This is a trap as they are using legalese instead of english. Therefore if you answer "Yes" you are saying in legalese "Yes I stand under the authority of the state" "

Yes, this is useful to know  -  but it's just the tip of the iceberg as far as language is concerned. Most of their tricks and traps revolve around language, and fraudulent conveyance of same. It is good to develop an understanding of the 'langue de l'Eglise' but try not to use it yourself as it is very easy to come unstuck and cede jurisdiction. It is a professional and private language that only legal professionals should use. Your best bet is to learn your own language and insist upon its use in your dealings lest you be fooled.

6) "If a request is asked by the bench designed to "put you in a corner", meaning that no matter what possible course of action you decide to do you are obeying the command, in such a situation you conditionally accept to agree with the command/request issues by the state under condition all of my "god given and inelienable rights are to be upheld". If the state refuses then you can refuse the request."

Perhaps technically correct, but again i think more attuned to the American market. You don't have such rights in a mags court as the presumption is that you have waived those rights by agreement, which also usually means you have no standing and thus no capacity. That's why you want to challenge jurisdiction. Yes, they will try to box you in with your own words, so don't let them. Use the same technique against them, just don't make any claims or statements -  every word out of your mouth should be either framing a question that you know the answer to and which will put them in the difficult position, or offering conditional acceptance. Remember: claims must be proven and questions must be answered. You can't be held liable for questions, for such is your duty under due diligence. Intelligent questions are a mark of competence.

7) "I understand that it isnt a case of "denying the alleged offence took place when court proceedings happen" "

Yes  -  if you reach the point where the actual offence is being discussed ie the subject matter, you are pretty much toast as to argue the facts proves both delinquency and incompetence on your part.

8) "...instead you are simply distancing yourself from the true liable party the state wants you to take liability for..."

Nail on the head  -  bang-on. If you can manage this prior to any hearing then you won't have to attend court. Whether you can achieve this in court depends on your nerve, your knowledge and the quality of your questions...
However, the state doesn't want you to take liability  -  you've already done that all by yourself.

9) "...So long as the offence in question under statutory law doesnt exist in common law then you demand the court upholds their oaths of office to uphold common law..."

Er... no. Or rather, you can do that but lots of people here could tell you from experience that it doesn't work. The problem - again - is your lack of standing.
i'd be more inclined to ask WHICH oath they honour today... but that's another story.

10) "The battle arguement is never about whether one is gulity/or not guilty of the alleged statutory offence, instead about what body of law will be enforced in the courtroom"

Please stop talking of battles and arguments. Although that is actually a good analogy for what transpires in court, the opposite is always outwardly portrayed by competent players. Having said that, you are absolutely right to say it's all about jurisdiction  ('body of law'). Asking for proof of jurisdiction is your right and your responsibility and when you know what they are doing and so ask the right questions it makes it difficult for them to hoodwink you and proceed.

11) "All members of the court (judges, magistrates, and clerks, as well as constables) have to swear an oath to the queen after their formative training years just before they take officially take up their intended roles. This oath promises to serve the queen an uphold common law.."

Have you read the police constable oath?
It offers a promise to '... serve the Queen in the office of Constable...'. Who or what is 'the Queen'? Which 'Queen' do they serve? The Queen of Sheba? Are they serving a drag queen down the street who just happens to hold the office of Constable? Or is the Queen of England also a constable? Because that's how it can be interpreted using English language and grammar. It should be more specific if it is to mean what we think it means, until then the oath is worthless  -  as we have found.
Re: judge/magistrate oath  -  which oath? The first oath they swear is to the B.A.R. so how can they swear oath to the public and H.M. the Queen? That's a big conflict of interest and something useful to know when in court...

12) "There is another video where the same representitive is in another courtroom and asked the magistrate if they are on oath today. He is demanding that they uphold the oath in the courtroom. This creates a conflict of interest for the magistrate, as the magistrate intended to enforce statutory law as that is where the alleged offence lies. However failing to uphold their oath and therefore common law is an offence of treason against the state as it is the oath itself that gives them the authority to act in the capacity of their position they are serving in the court. If there is no oath there is no authority to obey the bench!"

See previous answer...


13) "The oath bounds/binds the people on the bench to honour and enforce common law only. It reduces the power of the magistrate as opposed to statutory law where no oath is needed and so the magistrate is unbound and can have full control over proceedings."

Only if one has standing and successfully asserts it.

14) "In short I know of the principles and proceedings regarding the court."

You are aware of some of them. You won't know them until you experience them.

15) "What I am asking from you guys is what do I do with the police demands sent to me (notice of intended prosecution)"

We'll get to that shortly.

16) "I know that you can send a letter stating that you stand under common law and that you take no liability for the alleged offence."

Yes you can  -  but it won't work if that's all your letter says. It is a bit more complicated than that. Comes down to the questions you ask.

17) "Also (more importantly) I know you can send them a bill stating that any correspondence you send me I can charge you say £500 per letter. Basically Im not too concerned about the money. I just need help in being able to draft a letter to Beds police informing that I am not entering into a statutory contract with them and finding ways that I can successfully enforce requests of money off them and obtain money from them."

Is that all you need...? Well, you're not alone. Lots of people are trying to make that work, and i'm sure one or two of them have succeeded. But let me edit your statement there:
"Basically Im not too concerned about the money... I just need help... to... successfully... obtain money from them."

Ahem.

18) "As said I am NOT IN THIS FOR THE MONEY."

AHEM!

19) "I just want to be able to have the knowledge to enforce it when I need so that it will put off the police from harassing me (as I know people in the freeman movement have done before)."

You and me both, buddy. In fact it's the number one reason for getting into this stuff  -  to get on the legendary 'do not detain' list. You'll find that the best you can achieve is to 'know your stuff' and go private, just like those 'people in the 'freeman movement' you mention.

20)"I have tried my best to be a honourable citizen with the authorities..."

Nope  -  you are in permanent dishonour whatever you do until you achieve competence and standing (not criticism of you  -  we're all in same boat).

21)"...but when I see my business collapse because of deliberate negligence from the police..."

Sorry to hear about your business, myself and others have suffered same. At same time, laying blame is childish if unaccompanied by a legal claim.

22) "...and now they are trying to finish me off..."

It only seems that way. They don't care one way or the other.

23) "...when I have tried my best to be an honorable citizen..."

Have you...? Really...? Of whom did you ask permission to use that Crown-copyright identity you operate under...?

24) "...leaves me now no choice but to enter a power struggle with the police."

Wrong! You have other choices, and you can't win such a struggle. Very bad idea. If you don't adjust your attitude and perspective you will get crushed.

25) "And rightly so for they refused to uphold their duties to serve and protect the public through the loss of my vehicle..."

Their duty is to prevent breach of the peace and to protect property. Everything else they do is just their job.

26) "...and now they wish to turn against me."

See no. 22)

27) "Please I am requesting the background principles that requests and collection of money against the police can be enforced from."

Can't be done without standing.

28) "As said this is not about money but..."

Are you sure? The reason i ask is that how to obtain money from the police seems to be a recurring theme here...

29) "...the capacity and the power to be able to do so as a deterrent for the police to leave me alone and that I will not be pushed around."

Please refer to no. 19.

30) "Had the letter I received was a PCN I most likely would have grumbled, moaned about it and probably entered into the strawman proceedings or perhaps paid it off depending how I felt but to receive such a harsh letter in such unjust circumstances has filled me with anger against the crooks that are in the police force."

Lose the anger. Lose the victim mentality. Ask yourself if you should bear any responsibility for your situation and go from there.

31) "I will be so indebted and grateful for any help given to me in knowledge..."

You're welcome.

32) "...about money enforcement will be so welcome!!!"

Er... and you are sure this isn't about money...?

33) "Im not in favour of having to undermine a magistrate who may not be corrupt and may have served in their capacity with honour,..."

No such animal exists. Feel free to undermine like a sapper.

34) "...unless I have to."

i suspect you may have to.

35) "I want to avoid peripheral issues/collateral damage so to speak."

A worthy aim.

36) "My anger and rebellion is against the police and I want to hit them where it hurts, just like I had to suffer years ago where the police done so with impunity."

...and we finish where we started  -  in a heady mix of anger, rebellion, greed and revenge. It's neither helpful nor good for you.

Ok, nitty-gritty time:

15) "What I am asking from you guys is what do I do with the police demands sent to me (notice of intended prosecution)"

(...and how to getz paid.)

You have 3 business days from receipt of the NIP to lodge any objections you might have. After that you are deemed to have accepted the offer. i know it says you have 14 days or 28 days but that is another trick. You are past the 3 day mark so that's not good. One should at least acknowledge receipt, but never mind.

Doesn't an NIP give the option of speed-awareness course? If the letter states one is to be prosecuted, with no alternative offered, then one option is to notice the court of your intention to make a special appearance to challenge jurisdiction. One might include an offer of conditional acceptance and some questions that must be answered prior to commencement of the hearing, either by post or on the day. One could make a list of questions that they can't answer but can't refuse to answer. You might get lucky: they might brush it under the carpet. If they don't respond to your questions via correspondence it doesn't necessarily mean failure, you might get there on the day to find the hearing has been cancelled. These things DO happen  -  but don't count on it. Have your plan and your questions ready and keep your nerve. It's only a speeding ticket after all  -  no prospect of jail, and a limited fine. Good for practice.

How to getz paid:

You're not getting paid. There's lots of info out there on how to engineer a situation where they owe you money, basically using their methods against them, but it won't work if you have no standing.

Given your level of knowledge, you have already (imo) mentioned your best bet  -  go back to no.2) and learn how that works.

Hope that helps.

See what i mean about pages of text being necessary for the simplest thing?

Apparently the price of freedom is eternal vigilance...

Cheers!