Court summons over school attendance

Need help and support? Post here and we will do our best.

Re: Court summons over school attendance

Postby bustachemtrails » Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:45 am

Hi Scorpio, I think you handled the situation very well so far and I congratulate you on your lack of fear more than anything.

If I were in your situation I would not grant the so called court of law anymore jurisdiction. I would serve a Notice on the clerk/legal advisor revoking consent to their presumed jurisdiction. We all know magistrates courts are not courts of law so why would we consent to the arbitration services of a treasonous corporation? they claim to be representing the Queen yet the ministry of justice is a private corporation and, all magistrates courts are operating under the ministry of justice. The Queen has no jurisdiction since her continuing breach of the Coronation oath Act which is well evidenced as it was telivised.

I did exactly this over two years ago and served some rather hefty notices on the legal adivisor of a magistrates court. I included the crimes of treason in my notices and flatly declined their offer/summons. I have not paid their fines (ransom demand) and I will not attend their corporate place of business, the police seem to have given up on me as has the so called court and, I find myself in a stalemate situation.

I even attempted to report Wiltshire police constabulary (named constables included) to Avon and Somerset constabulary for compounding treason last summer, along wth the coercive attempts of Chippenham magistrates court to demand that I commit a criminal offense by granting jurisdiction to their treasonous enterprise. The sergeant who dealt with me phoned Wiltshire police and Chippenham magistrates court plc and was informed that, because it was already being dealt with (which of course it is not) he should not accept the evidence in my possession, and of course he wouldn't. He also wouldn't arrest me since my notices encouraged the so called court to withdraw the arrest warrant they had previously placed on my head.

Now the prime concern is obviously that of your step daughter and the lack of duty of care from the school with regard to their unreasonable treatment of her. Since through their actions you have been subjected to a tort being unlawful harassment from the council I would certainly go after them as suggested in previous comments but, I would certainly distance myself from the so called court also, as they have a tendency to run roughshod over good folk.

My notices were rather long winded so I wont post them up on this thread, and in future I would keep them as simple as possible. I will just post up the none jurisdiction notice that went unrebutted, so that the manner in which I dealt with them can be seen. I think it matters a great deal in how they respond to us when we don't have doubt or fear in our communications with them.

To; Karin Needham. From; David: Robinson(family).
The courthouse, c/o
Pewsham way,
Chippenham, Wiltshire.
Wiltshire.
SN15 3BF.

Date: 4th December 2012.
Your ref:1000190283/KN


Served by recorded delivery.


Notice of non jurisdiction and opportunity to cure.



Dear Karin Needham,

Re: case number 1000190283.


Thank you for your letter addressed to the legal fiction Mr Robinson in response to the documents I served on you on the 16th of November 2012.


By the un-rebutted evidence already served on Chippenham Magistrates Court, you do NOT have the authority to review the case file and then make demands on myself/legal fiction, or can you or Chippenham Magistrates Court decide whether an arrest warrant be in effect or not. You are Acting ultra vires in a quisling capacity and I demand that you CEASE AND DESIST in this unlawful charade ! I await your FULL response to my previous documents served on you on the 16th Nov 2012.


Whereas I do not consent to your arbitrary service nor do you have a lawful binding contract with the legal fiction (Mr Robinson) or myself (the agent), that grants consent to Chippenham magistrates court plc service. What precisely do you not understand within the documentation already served on you on the 16th of November 2012 with regard to my rebuttal of your presumed jurisdiction ?
 

If you cannot provide me with a properly convened court de-Jure in open forum to arbitrate this matter in a just and fair manner, then DO NOT harass me further or wast my time with unlawful, coercive pressures and claims of jurisdiction when you evidently (by un-rebutted affidavit) have none, whilst continuing to ignore my lawful points in previous notices regarding the matter of jurisdiction. This causes me to suffer a tort. It is to my understanding that it is larceny to ignore the lawful claims I have made by sworn affidavit, you have a duty of care to check the evidence and to respond to the documentation served in full, in accordance with the laws of the land.


WHEREAS YOU HAVE NO CONSENT, CONTRACT NOR JURISDICTION at this time over my legal fiction (or agent thereof), I demand that you pass this case on to a higher jurisdiction, that being referred to in my previous affidavit and notices dated 16th Nov 2012, as our constitutional law FORBIDS me to accept the arbitration and jurisdiction of Chippenham magistrates court and, especially whilst being officially in lawful rebellion. I claim that the corporation you represent (Chippenham Magistrates Court) is at this time, a criminal enterprise operating under treasonous legislation.


If you continue to ignore my evidence and claims previously served and, continue to address your correspondence to the legal fiction, I may ignore your letters/notices with no dishonour on my part. Any response to this notice is required to be made on your full commercial liability and penalty of perjury.


Without vexation, frivolity or ill will and, with all my natural inalienable rights intact, and on my full commercial liability and penalty of perjury.



David : Robinson (family).



Again well done. The main Notice or compilation of notices I refer to in the above notice can also be viewed on www.jforjustice.net if you click on "how some have used the defence" under David of the Robinson family affidavit of truth.
bustachemtrails
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:19 pm
Location: Devizes, wiltshire

Re: Court summons over school attendance

Postby wanabfree » Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:28 pm

Dreadlock wrote:Hi Scorpio,

The clerk admitting that the magistrates were not under oath just goes to show that what you attended was not a proper court but merely an administrative hearing. It is also evidence that Pitano was very likely correct when he said the summons was not a legitimate court summons. I hope you went ahead with the FOI request, as I suggested, if for no other reason than as a learning exercise - it certainly can't do any harm.

Unfortunately you did give the "court" jurisdiction in two ways. Firstly, you attended in the capacity in which you were summonsed and responded in that capacity. To put it another way, if you had attended and the court had told you that you were to play the part of a dog, because a dog had committed the offence of pooping on the pavement, would you have said "Ok! I'll be that dog!"? When you go to court, the court assumes that you know what role you are playing and that you are there to play that role - they certainly aren't going to tell you what your role is, that would give the game away. If at the time that a dog pooped on the pavement you were playing a cat, then tell the court that. They have jurisdiction over the dog that committed the offence - not the cat that didn't! And it's up to them to prove that you were playing a dog at the time and not a cat!

Secondly, when you proceeded to present your statement to the "court" you implied that they have authority and jurisdiction. If the court had been populated by 10 year old children, would you have bothered to make your presentation to them or would you have simply walked out, thereby denying that they have any authority or jurisdiction? By giving a presentation, even to a bunch of ten year olds, you are implying that they have authority and may stand in judgment of you.

On the bright side you said enough to cause the prosecutor to ask for more time so maybe there is a legal flaw in their case. :)
Hope my explanation of what is happening in these places helps. Good luck on the 8th.



I’m pretty sure you have given the bureaucrats reading this a good laugh, and for anyone else reading and believing this crap, more confusion, and fallacies to repeat elsewhere ?.

So In summary, you said, at the beginning “what you attended was not a proper court but merely an administrative hearing”,

So one minute your saying, this isn’t a proper court, but then you say “Unfortunately you did give the "court" jurisdiction” ?

So how can it automagically acquire “jurisdiction” if it wasn’t a proper court ?

Please make your mind up ? It was either a proper court or it wasn’t ?

even administrative hearings have to be “proper” to have jurisdiction don’t they ?, Or are you simply overlooking the obvious, or ignoring the contradiction in your statement, because you’re trying to prove how clever you think you are, when in fact, you’re talking complete bollox ?.

And where did you get all that crap about “capacity “ from , women’s weekly ?.

I can’t be bothered to point out all the other logical fallacies in your post; I stopped counting after I got to the first 5 or so ?.

Seriously Scorpio, do not listen to some of these people, they are truly clueless, and no amount of pointing it out, is going to change their ways.

If you can get back to me on Skype, I’ll send you through some books on logical fallacies, and you can learn for yourself what I’m referring to.
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

Re: Court summons over school attendance

Postby Dreadlock » Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:46 pm

Hi wanabfree, it's so nice to have you back.

So In summary, you said, at the beginning “what you attended was not a proper court but merely an administrative hearing”,

So one minute your saying, this isn’t a proper court, but then you say “Unfortunately you did give the "court" jurisdiction” ?

So how can it automagically acquire “jurisdiction” if it wasn’t a proper court ?

Please make your mind up ? It was either a proper court or it wasn’t ?

even administrative hearings have to be “proper” to have jurisdiction don’t they ?, Or are you simply overlooking the obvious, or ignoring the contradiction in your statement, because you’re trying to prove how clever you think you are, when in fact, you’re talking complete bollox ?.


You see what I said as a contradiction because you clearly do not fully understand how jurisdiction works.

And where did you get all that crap about “capacity “ from , women’s weekly ?.


I'm afraid if you don't understand the importance of capacity/role/position in court, you'll never understand fully how court works.

It worries me that you are offering advice to people without even a grasp of these basics. I watched the Marc Stevens video you linked and he makes no mention of capacity either, despite the fact that it is intrinsically linked to jurisdiction which is the main topic of his presentation. It's not that what he said was wrong, rather he has missed a very important piece of the puzzle which is probably why he holds some of the opinions that he stated and approaches court cases in the way that he does. He might have some success with his method because his approach is certainly logical, but he is making a mountain out of a molehill.

If you want to discuss this further please start a new thread. I offer you ONE chance for a civil discussion. If you stoop to your usual tactics, elements of which are already evident in your previous post, I will end the discussion immediately. If you don't want a discussion that's fine by me. Maybe someone else will be kind enough to explain jurisdiction and capacity to you.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: Court summons over school attendance

Postby wanabfree » Mon Mar 24, 2014 5:32 pm

Dreadlock wrote:Hi wanabfree, it's so nice to have you back.

So In summary, you said, at the beginning “what you attended was not a proper court but merely an administrative hearing”,

So one minute your saying, this isn’t a proper court, but then you say “Unfortunately you did give the "court" jurisdiction” ?

So how can it automagically acquire “jurisdiction” if it wasn’t a proper court ?

Please make your mind up ? It was either a proper court or it wasn’t ?

even administrative hearings have to be “proper” to have jurisdiction don’t they ?, Or are you simply overlooking the obvious, or ignoring the contradiction in your statement, because you’re trying to prove how clever you think you are, when in fact, you’re talking complete bollox ?.


You see what I said as a contradiction because you clearly do not fully understand how jurisdiction works.

And where did you get all that crap about “capacity “ from , women’s weekly ?.


I'm afraid if you don't understand the importance of capacity/role/position in court, you'll never understand fully how court works.

It worries me that you are offering advice to people without even a grasp of these basics. I watched the Marc Stevens video you linked and he makes no mention of capacity either, despite the fact that it is intrinsically linked to jurisdiction which is the main topic of his presentation. It's not that what he said was wrong, rather he has missed a very important piece of the puzzle which is probably why he holds some of the opinions that he stated and approaches court cases in the way that he does. He might have some success with his method because his approach is certainly logical, but he is making a mountain out of a molehill.

If you want to discuss this further please start a new thread. I offer you ONE chance for a civil discussion. If you stoop to your usual tactics, elements of which are already evident in your previous post, I will end the discussion immediately. If you don't want a discussion that's fine by me. Maybe someone else will be kind enough to explain jurisdiction and capacity to you.


Your patronising comments, and personal attacks on me, are the same usual tactics you stoop to, so to accuse me of the same is the pot calling the kettle black, quite frankly.

Evidenced by the accusations you continue to make against me.

I’ll happily start a new thread to clear this issue up, and I’ll play nice, but don’t for second think I am going to accept, or put with further personal attacks or childish backhanded comments, I’ll give as good as I get, and I’ll be expecting proof, that means real verifiable evidence to your claims.

so if you think you can show I lack understanding, and should not be advising or helping people, then bring it on.

I have offered to many of you on this forum, an opportunity to call into my radio show and challenge my claims or opinions, but as yet not one of you has taken me up on it ?.

It’s not an issue of, “I am lord of my own show”, and can manipulate or propagandise the content, it’s open to anyone to call in, critic or otherwise, and we’ve had them all.

everyone can listen to it, and see for themselves if I am full of crap or not ?, I can either show the facts or i can’t, or present a measurable, working model, of what I am explaining ?,

I am yet to see a freeman or similar applologist , do the same ?.

So if you want to carry this on, through a new thread that’s fine with me, as these issues need to be put to bed, before more people fall victim to it.
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

Previous

Return to Help Wanted

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron