with holding drivers details

Request help if you have a Court Appearance pending.

with holding drivers details

Postby teflontone » Mon Jul 01, 2013 11:16 am

Hi all, this has been going on for a year and a half now. we got a letter off plod asking us to name the driver of a vehicle we owned at the time, however I went to stay with family in America and on my return several months later. had a summons to appear at stafford magistrates court, I sent veronicas template letter about them being on dunn and bradstreet, this then made them send it back to the cps, Anyways finally just before the new court date I went and filed papers,Notice of Public Declaration of Non-Jurisdiction – Denial of Service
.
SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE MAGISTRATES COURT
The court house
ST16 3DW

CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICES

Summons Issue Date: 07/06/2013

Case number 211200226035
URN : 1200226035/VH

Master,ceri hughes
Address. 33 sutton drive, stafford, st16 1ur

DETAILS OF DECLARATION AND/OR DENIAL OF JURISDICTION:

I, ceri of the family hughes am the agent and representative for MISS CERI LOUISE HUGHES (a legal fiction) and I present this affirmation as a declaration and affidavit of truth to the court as evidence of the facts for and on the record:

• I do solemnly swear that the facts contained herein are true, correct and certain
• I reserve all rights and waive all privileges.
• My vessel (person) is not bonded for the corporate legal arena.
• The law of STATUTES is the law of CONTRACT. And we, as human beings, have the right to decline to contract. Statutes do not apply, a STATUTE is a legislative rule of society given the force of law by the consent of the governed – I do not give my consent, tacit or otherwise.
• I have no ‘UNDERSTANDING’ of this matter… I ‘UNDERSTAND’ no one.
• We are all equal in law however knowledge separates the governed from the masters. If we are all equal, do we not have the status of Sovereigns and Diplomats if we so choose?
• I will not allow a plea in my absence, anyone entering a plea without my written permission will be considered the defendant and responsible for all costs.
• This document does not form part of a negotiable instrument.
• We cannot give to anyone or anything any power or authority we do not have.
• My law is the Bible. “If righteousness is not made profitable, then corruption will prevail.”

Is this a TORT action or a COMMERCIAL CRIME? If it is a TORT, then where is the INJURED PARTY or if it is a COMMERCIAL CRIME, then where is the CONTRACT?


EX Dolo malo non oritur action (Out of fraud no action arises)

“IT IS NOT LAW FOR ANYONE TO GIVE DRIVERS DETAILS.
WHERE IS THE LOSS OR HARM BEING CAUSED BY FAILURE TO GIVE DRIVERS DETAILS.”

THIS DOCUMENT CANNOT BE SIGNED BY A CORPORATION OR LEGAL FICTION AND MUST BE SIGNED BY A REAL PARTY OF INTEREST, NOT AN AUTHORISED THIRD PARTY


Signed:------------------------------------ Witness:------------------------------

Date:--------------------------------------

N DJ1 DENIAL OF JURISDICTION (6.09)
then we received a notice from the justices clerk saying £700 and 6 points.
Notice of Void Order

DO NOT IGNORE THIS NOTICE

Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal.
Regarding Reference: 211200226035 your ‘Order’ dated 7th June, 2013.

I am in receipt of your ‘Order’ dated 7th june, 2013. Said correspondence was unresponsive to my previous good faith Offer, and is hereby ignored as insubstantial, without dishonour.

In addition, the ‘Order’ you sent me is unsigned; showing only your printed name, styling yourself as Justices’ Clerk. It reveals a gross ignorance of the law if you believe that a Justices’ Clerk can make and serve any lawful order. A lawful Court Order has to be signed by a Magistrate but even so, the lawful validity of any alleged ‘Court’ has to be established first. At this point it is perfectly evident that due process has been denied by moving straight to judgment - apparently by you! As already established by previous Notices (the legitimate matters I raised remain without response and completely disregarded), the said ‘Court’ has no jurisdiction in the matter and so you have issued a Void Order. Being Void the Order does not have to be obeyed because, for example, in Crane v Director of Public Prosecutions [1921], it was stated that if an order is void ab initio (from the beginning) then there is no real order of the court (it is a figment and nothing real). Therefore, the defendant does not commit an offense if he ignores the void convictions and their related orders for enforcement in the present case.

However, in the spirit of Christian forgiveness, I shall attempt to deal with the matter amicably and give another opportunity to establish the validity of your Court and your judgment. I therefore, require the name of the Magistrate (if there was one) and whether s/he was trying the matter (in my absence) under his/her solemn Magistrates Oath (please see the attachment in respect of this). Failing to provide this information will reveal conclusively that your ‘Court’ is in reality a Star Chamber, i.e., an unlawful court of expediency; a kangaroo court; in other words, a complete sham.

If you refuse to provide this information, you will be digging an even deeper hole and condemning yourself further. In the event of a deliberate failure in this, I demand that your ‘Judgment’ be set aside and a lawful trial by a Court de Jure to be instituted. You cannot refuse this. It is the law. Further, you cannot convict me of a crime without a jury of my peers making a judgment by verdict. In the event of your refusal to agree this, I demand to proceed to a Court de Jure now.

Furthermore, if you fail to give satisfaction on this, I shall pursue a Judicial Review. A higher court will be well versed in the matters of Common Law of which you seem so woefully unaware. Please also let me have the details of how to institute those proceedings.

I have also received a Notice of Endorsement of Licence also issued by you and a Further steps Notice from DVLA. Please notify them to hold off until further actions are being taken by me are completed. Otherwise you will be swiftly entering the realms of harassment. As you may (or may not) know, harassment is a criminal offence brought against individuals and is punishable by fines or imprisonment or both. You may also be interested to know that since the United Nations War Crimes Commissions in Nuremburg and other cities after World War II, during the trials of captured Nazis, it was established that ‘following orders’ was not a defence excusing torture and other war crimes that any normal person would realize was grossly criminal. Similarly with harassment; ‘following orders’ or ‘just doing my job’ is not an allowable defence excusing harassment in Western Europe to this day.

Yours sincerely without ill-will, vexation or frivolity,



They have since replied saying its with their legal dept, they enclosed forms to fill in for a new court date etc but have so far refused to name the magistrate. I believe if I can get the right help and advice as feel a bit overwhelmed by it at present, however saying that I will go toe to toe with the bastards and to the death if need be, my fear is getting it right.
If anyone has the time or inclination to help me on this I will be very grateful. Especially on filling out the form, I am happy to pay for any expenses that may be incurred as a result of you helping me. If we do get a new date with a jury I will defo need someone to hold my hand on that one, lol. thanks in advance for advice or offers of help.
teflontone
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:07 pm

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby Dreadlock » Wed Jul 03, 2013 5:06 pm

Denying them jurisdiction is the best route to take, however you need to be able to answer the following questions:

1. Can you explain why the driver was not in their jurisdiction?
2. Do you know how to deny them jurisdiction in their attempts to gain it?
3. Do you know why it doesn't matter if you give them the driver's name?
4. Do you know the difference between; "Joe Bloggs", "Mr Joe Bloggs", "JOE BLOGGS", "Mr JOE BLOGGS" and "Joe BLOGGS"?

If you can't answer those questions pay the fine. Seriously.Then continue educating yourself until you can answer them.

Good Luck.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby teflontone » Thu Jul 04, 2013 7:45 pm

Hi thanks for the reply.
1 The driver has never been disclosed. The car is a driving school car I am an ADI,(operating in commerce) They wrote to the owner my partner.
2. Denied them everything from day one. Actually got the court to refer back to the CPS, They decided to play on.
3. Yes!
$ yes!
They are refusing to disclose the mags name as I have him down as liable for costs.
I wanted to hear from folk in a similar situation, a bit of moral support, I went to the police station to make a complaint against the justice clerk,(misconduct in public office) they refused to take my complaint, despite me putting the policyman on his oath.
Truth is they cant hear me or see me by choice. they want me to roll over I promise I won't. I want a trial by jury, if i win I believe then we could get this act overturned etc, a long slow process I know but done properly. something that can be used later on regina v hughes 2013, The justices clerk has acted beyond his remit he is a tortfeasor and I want to do this properly and fuck them from all angles well and truly, I am just one man trying to take this lot down If I could get just some help moral support on this and take them down then we all win surely? I stopped teaching people to drive, the DSA are crooks, It is our right to use a conveyance to travel.
teflontone
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:07 pm

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby Dreadlock » Fri Jul 05, 2013 5:33 pm

I read your DETAILS OF DECLARATION AND/OR DENIAL OF JURISDICTION and it is not convincing.

Please state in simple language why the driver was not acting within the jurisdiction of the Crown.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby teflontone » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:51 pm

simple because the driver was neither myself or my partner
teflontone
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:07 pm

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby teflontone » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:03 pm

And at the time she was unaware of anything as she was receiving treatment and medication for mental health issues, all this has been verified. Drs ready to back up what im saying. It has been mentioned that the cps should have never attempted to bring this to court!Purely on the mental health issue, apparently there is some statute or act to back this up? I am in the process of form filling for a court de jure. Hopefully the 12 good and true will see us through this. Must admit to feeling more positive was hoping for a lay advisor when the court date is due?
teflontone
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:07 pm

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby Dreadlock » Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:19 pm

From their perspective the registered keeper is within their jurisdiction and they are correct. If you or your partner are the registered keeper and you gave someone else permission to use the car
then you or your partner are liable for the actions of that person while they are using the car - unless you provide their name.

It now becomes an issue of whether or not the actual driver was driving in their jurisdiction. However, from what I gather the driver was not in her correct frame of mind and did not have permission to use the car. So all question of jurisdiction becomes irrelevant - they can't prosecute someone who was, it seems, temporarily insane or something similar. If you have doctors that will verify all this I can't see that the Crown has a leg to stand on. They are just trying to scare you into paying up. Don't worry about it and stand your ground.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby teflontone » Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:18 pm

Thanks I appreciate your time, I am standing firm I will not back down, Just waiting to hear back from their legal dept, then its time for the next step, I also have a recording I made of the Policyman refusing to take my complaint about the justices clerk for misconduct in public office. I tried to advise him that he was there to take a complaint then look into it and that he was negligent if he didnt take all the details and look into this. so will try another police station see if I can get some joy there. or should I forget that route?
teflontone
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:07 pm

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby Dreadlock » Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:51 pm

The Police work for the Crown of which the monarch is the sole shareholder.
The Courts' authority comes directly from the monarch. So essentially they are working for the same person. There is no real separation of powers in this country.
In my opinion you'd be wasting your time.

Earlier I said, "If you or your partner are the registered keeper..". I should have said, "If you or your partner were acting in the role of the registered keeper." Important distinction!
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: with holding drivers details

Postby Rongo121 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:17 pm

Hi Tony.

Looks like you're making it very complicated instead of keeping it simple.
It's my understanding that they are still making the presumption that you are a trustee, because you have'nt rebutted that presumption in your paperwork.
I, ceri of the family hughes am the agent and representative for MISS CERI LOUISE HUGHES (a legal fiction) and I present this affirmation as a declaration and affidavit of truth to the court as evidence of the facts for and on the record:


Everyone in the court will be acting as an agent for MISS CERI LOUISE HUGHES or they would'nt be there. "Record", is that the public record or the courts private record?

I would have tried something like this:

To the clerk of the court.

This document is a matter of public record.

Ceri Louise Hughes hereby rebuts all presumptions and assumptions.

Ceri Louise Hughes is the sole beneficiary for MISS CERI LOUISE HUGHES.

Who is the liable party for MISS CERI LOUISE HUGHES?

It is my understanding that statutes only apply to government employees/agents, and public servants/trustees, or by consent, and i do not consent.

Ceri Louise Hughes is not a public trustee and does not perform a function of government.
If you believe otherwise please provide the following proofs/evidence.
1.Evidence of the payroll.
2.In what capacity does she perform a function of government?
3.How many hours, and when, did she perform a function of government? (so she can bill the government for her services).

It is my understanding that you and any court staff involved, are the public servants/public trustees in this matter.

etc.

They're only interested in what role you're playing, and if you don't make it clear then they'll make the presumption that you are a trustee.
Besides there's no harm done in trying something like that, can't be any worse than the responses you've had so far.

Best of luck.

John.
Rongo121
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:51 pm
Location: Stoke on Trent

Next

Return to McKenzie Friends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest