MIKE'S APPEAL ( No wisecracks, thank you!)

[MikeThomas]

Not sure how to write this one up Suffice to say that the Appeal was rejected as the CPS had proved their case relating to statutes.

There is some goods news though, but I'll have to 'word' it in my head first and then I'll post the full details later on. Is that OK?

This topic can now be moved to the 'Court' section of the forum if you all agree?

[kevin]

In your own time Mike, and it's up to you where the thread is posted

[Veronica]

Yes, Mike. Do what you will.

I presume you are not posting this from jail?

[MikeThomas]

Cardiff Crown Court, Friday, 30th October

My wife and I arrived in good time for the 11 o'clock hearing. An appeal on my no insurance/MOT conviction from 3rd, September. All the paperwork had been submitted and I was there to make a special visit to establish jurisdiction in front of two Magistrates and a Judge called Terry John.

Just before 11, a young man called Michael Hammond introduced himself as the sub-contracting solicitor for the Crown Prosecution Service. I informed him that I had gained estoppal on the CPS and he seemed geuinely surprised. It was the first he had heard of it! He did however, suggest that I make an 'application' to the Judge to hear the estoppal. Impossible to do if you are not prepared to contract with the court.

At 11am an Usher called Sophie asked if I would be seated in the court as the Judge was about to arrive to start the hearing. "Not without reservation of my inaleinable rights" says I. "OK" she replied, "I'll just ask the Judge".

She came back two minutes later to announce that the Judge was seated and led me to the threasehold of the doorway to the court where I asked "Sir! Would it be alright if I entered this room and engaged in these proceedings with the full reservation of my inaleinable rights?"

The Judge nodded his approval and gestured for me to enter.

"For and on the record, as there is no objection fron the court , I wll now be entering in these proceedings and engaging in them with the full reservation of my inaleinable rights"

I sat on the bench next to the Prosecuting Council and the Judge explanined what would happen and stated that he would help me if I needed it and would explain anything I was un-certain of. He was as good as his word. He asked me to explain my Notice of Standing and accepted it into the court record. He then explained to the rest of the court that I was to be addressed as 'Michael' or 'Michael of the Thomas family'.

"Before we start, are we on the record?" I asked

"Everything is recorded in Crown Court " says Judge John "For the record"

Now, I'm a little flummoxed here as this guy has agreed to address me as a human being, made everyone aware that I have a perfect right to do so and is probably one of the nicest 'authority figures' I have ever met!

I then assert my claim that I do not intend to enter into contract with the court and he says thats fine, but this is a re-hearing at my request. Well of course it is!

I then told him the appeal was made under protest & duress due to the appallling behaviour of Bridgend Magistrates Court when I did exactly what I've done this morning. He did seemed concerned by that.

Proceedings start with the CPS laying their claim and bringing on their witness PC 4432 Chaplin. PC Chaplin quoted from his notebook and the Judge asked to see it. I think he was interested in the reply to the caution where I said "I reserve my rights at all times and do not waive these rights at any time or for any reason. Futher more , I do not consent to statutes".

The Judge then had the notebook passed to me where I pointed out that I had signed it as Michael: Thomas (Agent) and made sure the court took note of this.

I was then asked if I wanted to cross-examine PC Chaplin which I declined because I did not want to enter into contract with the court.

Then it was my turn to state my case ( with full reservation of rights etc) and I quoted that 'statutes' were rules of a society that I was not a member of and all the trimmings that went with it. You know the drill: a society must be nameable and have members of which they could not prove I was one.

I mentioned that as far as I was aware that because everyone in the court worked for the Crown that I would not get a fair trial, I mentioned the 'estoppal' gained on the CPS and the fact thta I would not aid & abet War Criminals by paying taxes on insurance policies and a cut of MOT fees and declared that I was in Lawful Rebellion and thus had 'Lawful Excuse'.

The panel retired to discuss their judgement and came back about 8 minuts later.

Judge John summed up with eloquence and I wish I could remember it all. In a nutshell he addressed all my points by stating that we all belong to society, the court do consider themselves 'independant & impartial' and that not paying War Criminals was a matter for my own consceince and ruled that the original conviction had been upheld.

Then came the matter of costs. The CPS asked for £400. The Judge said "No! Thats too much", I chirped in"I'm not paying it anyway!"

The Judge continued "Despite what you say its still too much and I'm awarding £200 for costs".

And that was that. A truely wonderful experiance made better by a good Judge who dealt with me as a human being but could only judge me as a 'person'. How could he deal with me any other way? He cannot assume jurisdiction over a human so he can only proceed against the 'person'.

The whole hearing was civilised with nothing but courtesy from everyone. I wonder if they were pre-warned? On reflextion it does seem so. And the Judge? I can't help but think that he was offering me little clues as to my standing especially when he mentioned that War Criminals was a matter for my conscience. When I got home I looked up the ECHR and in Article 9 It says this:

Article 9 - conscience and religion
Article 9 provides a right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion This includes the freedom to change a religion or belief, and to manifest a religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society"

And what have I learned from this: It does'nt matter if your a Freeman or a Slave. If you 'break' their statutes, that is all that matters. That is their 'be all & end all' of the situation. Reasons don't matter. Lawful excuse is no excuse in their eyes. You broke their statutes and now they want their money.

After the Judge left I approached the Clerk and asked her who I made the bill out to. "What bill?" she asked, bemused.

"Well," I said " the court have just given me an order to pay £200 costs and as they have accepted my Notice of Standing into the record I'm entitled to charge for every order."

She called over the CPS guy to help her as she stated she had no legal training. "Whats the problem?" asks Michael Hammond.

I explained to him the order/bill situation and said "You witnessed the Judge accept my Notice onto the record did'nt you?"

"Yes, I suppose he did!" he replied looking slightly startled, "If I were you I would send it to Lynne Mills, the Court Manager"

Can anyone help me prepare an 'ironclad' bill for Cardiff Crown Court?

[huntingross]

It sucks when all that effort results in the same conclusion.....but well done for standing up.

As for the Bill, this is from the Act:

3. Bill of exchange defined. — (1) A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in writing, addressed by one person to another, signed by the person giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified person, or to bearer.

As long as you stick to the basics it shouldn't go wrong....it is in writing so the format is of no matter as long as it follows the basics.

[Farmer]

Judge John summed up with eloquence and I wish I could remember it all. In a nutshell he addressed all my points by stating that we all belong to society, the court do consider themselves 'independant & impartial' and that not paying War Criminals was a matter for my own consceince and ruled that the original conviction had been upheld.

Which brings us back to how that is so. He didn't say 'a society', just "society". This could mean the whole world if the case was a hearing under admiralty.

I also think we need to find out what they see as 'inalienable rights' as it's something that comes from the US and their constitution. My feeling is that they see it as meaning something else for example: your rights from the rulings the judges have made over the centuries.

[Veronica]

Appeal on the basis that your Inalienable Rights were accepted by the Court, and that is on the record.

And that it is Your Right to choose which society you do ... [b]or do not ... belong to.[/b]

Quote examples: I do not belong to the Law Society ... I do not belong to the Co-Operative Wholesale Society ... I am not a Freemason ... thus I'm not bound by these Society's rules.

And that it is up to them to PROVE that you are a Member of a Society whose subsisting regulations they are applying against you. Just saying "You are a member" is NOT PROOF. It is merely an assertion.

A Society MUST have a Name ... otherwise it has no substance in Law.
A Society MUST have a DEFINED Membership.
It MUST have declared & published its Common Goals.
... and so on. The last Appendix in my book.

Write an Appeal that way. House of Lords or ECHR if necessary.

[MikeThomas]

Sounds like a plan..... Now! Where do I start?

What I did plan was to pay them with an Elder(Promissary) note and then bill them for the £100,000 for following a court order.

[Veronica]

Sounds like a plan..... Now! Where do I start?

Good question.

Can we help Mike out, folks? Thinking caps on ... and all that?

(I can take on any more at the moment. As the Moderators know ... I'm tied up on another project)

[huntingross]

I know this will sound like my latest thing to bang on about.....but secession seems very relevant.....it is every mans right to self determination by declaring yourself independent.....effectively divorcing yourself from the society you are presumed to be a member of......just the wiki description of it crystalised it for me.....the US declaration of independence is a good read and several websites on the subject make a lot of sense.