Practical Lawful Dissent FMOTL antics, continued...

[JimUk1]

I always find No-Credit-Dave’s logically reasoning somewhere along the lines of this-

https://youtu.be/_lu5_5Od7WY

If Magna Carta....was invoked by the Barons, but the Barons traded it for a place in the House of Lords eventually......and we’re now fighting the sedation in Parliament....that means that Article 61 is treasonous by its very nature

[The Seventh String]

So Dave’s finally and at long last realised that his longed-for return to a medieval paradise is incompatible with the Bill of Rights, and Act of Settlement. The return of feudalism being pretty much what those Acts, among others, was intended to prevent. A moderately astute person might have spotted that ages ago by, for example, reading the Acts and some decent history books, but better late than never I suppose.

This stuff about parliament and Heath being treasonous raises a mildly interesting question of political philosophy - if treason* is taken to mean “not doing what the monarch says or somehow acting against the monarch’s interest or survival”, how can applying and obeying an Act of Parliament that has received the Royal Assent ever be treason? After all, the Queen, or the monarch of the day, has agreed with its terms and content and attached the royal OK. The same with treaties - how can a 1973 treaty be “treasonous” if it was OK’d by Liz II?

In short, if the monarch says “We agree this Act passed by our Parliament shall be the law in our realm and be enforced by our Courts” then how can either the Act or the parliament amd government that voted on it be treasonous?

Over to you Dave, the aspirin are in the cabinet in the bathroom if your head hurts too much.

*What is legally “treason” is, like most things, a bit more complicated than the PLDers think but let’s go one step at a time. Probably best to leave the more difficult stuff like can a monarch commit treason against the people and the Putney Debates until Dave’s caught up with the 1500s.

[mufc1959]

The latest from David Robinson. I bet he's fun at parties ...

Posted today.......

To: Chief Inspector Kev Byrne
Daventry Police Station
Daventry
Northamptonshire
NN11 4AA

From: David Robinson

Daventry
Northamptonshire
NN11

Served by recorded post.

Date: 03-04-2018

NOTICE
Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent

Dear Chief Inspector Byrne,

I am writing to you in order to bring to put you on Notice of the various crimes being presently committed against me, which the police (as yet) will not investigate. The allegations that I make herein are criminal in nature, therefore the police have a duty to investigate the allegations and to act upon their findings if a criminal act has indeed been committed. I trust that you will agree with that statement.

I have been studying law for sometime now. I understand that Britain is a common law jurisdiction. For it to no longer be a common law jurisdiction Treason must have been committed. The Common law (as you will know) refers to the common laws and customs of the people. The un-repealed 1215 Magna Carta and 1688 Coronation Oath Act are permanent contracts between the monarch and the people which remain in perpetuity today. A breach of either would constitute the crime of Treason at common law.

Since I have obtained absolute evidence that High Treason has and is being committed by quislings in Westminster, I have dutifully rejected the demands of the state as it is illegal to aid and abet crime. I have used the common law within Notices and Affidavits to all concerned to make my legal position known and, to provide evidence of the High Treason being committed, which provides me (as it does us all) with 'lawful excuse' not to comply with a criminal administration. The common law forbids it. Personal integrity also.

I have had some major successes over the years, mainly in helping others achieve remedy in denying the so called courts authority to act upon the ultra vires orders that they have created. Including a 7 day Committal order to prison ordered by the alleged District Judge Bromilow of Yeovil County Court 2015/16. I mention this not to gloat but to inform you of the reasons why the state is blatantly oppressing me.

I have been making this stand with absolute lawful excuse to do so since January 2010, which any properly convened court de jure hearing would confirm as being entirely legal under present day circumstances.

Since the plot to overthrow British National Sovereignty has been ongoing for generations, we no longer have common law courts where the jurors act as the judges; whom decide the validity of government statutes; whom decide what evidence is admissible in court; whom also deliver a verdict and the sentence. The verdict must also be unanimous in such a hearing. In short, there is nowhere for we the people to obtain justice.

There is no peaceful remedy against institutionalised tyranny without properly convened courts of law. We the common people, whom the police have a duty to serve according to law, are being subjected to massive state corruption and illegal court hearings where true justice is denied, which is absolute tyranny. Police are today being 'used' by a corporate front that has emerged over the last few decades, which has been used to destroy and take over all of our public services, including the police service.

Since I moved to Daventry approximately 18 months ago, I had no choice but to sign on (under duress) for entitlements to the welfare state to survive. I have been subjected to evidenced fraud and blatant ignorance with regard to the law by Atos and CAPITA (both Corporate entities) aided and abetted by the corrupt, anonymous, unaccountable agents of the Universal Credit scam. It is to my understanding that it is illegal for private corporate entities to be involved in ANY public services. It is a contradiction in terms to believe otherwise.

I was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy in 1988 and became unable to work a few years later. I was in receipt of disability benefits including the low rate of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) from the early 1990's. DLA was granted to me for life because of the nature of the degenerative condition that I endure. I have a letter from the DWP which confirms that claim. I also had no further requirement to supply medical certificates as there is no cure to my condition, therefore my condition cannot improve.

After attending an assessment by an Atos agent in Northampton in February 2017, whom lied within the report that she provided. Various agents of the DWP have used this fraudulent assessment to deny me disability entitlements. The lie within the false report is self evident as I cannot possibly do what the agent claimed she witnessed me doing, i.e., that I had demonstrated how I could wash my hair with both hands which is impossible..... DLA was also denied me some years ago for no reason. The only excuse that has been offered more recently is that DLA was scrapped whilst being replaced by a new benefit called Personal Independence payment (PIP), of which they claim I have no entitlement to. I have put managers of the DWP and Universal Credit on Notice of the facts, yet I am merely ignored as the theft and fraud continues.

I have also been subject to entitlements being deducted by fraudulent means from my account. Universal Credit and Daventry District Council agents are removing monies without justification for doing so, contrary to the evidenced facts that I have provided. I have also been standing against Daventry District Council's demands for full Council Tax of around £100.00 PCM. Last month I received £190.00 in entitlements. I could not afford to pay Council Tax even if it were legal to pay, obviously they are aware of that fact.

I have put all concerned on Notice of the facts in law with regard to Council Tax. Rossendales agents are in the process of enforcing an unauthorised Liability Order issued by Northampton Magistrates Court, which is NOT a court of law but a private corporate business, which can be evidenced by looking on the internet at 'Companies House' website. Northampton Magistrates Court's business number is 3844295. The Order is thus unauthorised and consequently illegal.

Rossendales agents still they threaten to remove my possessions (not that I have much) if I don't pay the extortionate demands. I will seek the protection of the common law and Daventry police if and when that is required. I am reporting acts of harassment, demands for monies with menaces and trespass herein. I would like to ascertain the future intentions of West Midlands police constables should I seek protection against Rossendales enforcement agents with regard to this matter. If my understanding of the law and claims against the present administration are in any way false then I seek clarity in substance, so that I do not act in breach of the common law.

The High Treason that I refer to is well evidenced and current. BREXIT and PESCO are blatant acts of High Treason by the May administration for example, but that is merely the tip of the iceberg.

All of the EU treaties sought to usurp the common law and deny the British people sovereignty. According to our Constitution (Magna Carta 1215 and the Coronation Oath Act 1688) the crown has the sole duty to deny unconstitutional Bills from being granted royal assent. That has NOT been occurring for many generations now. The 1911 Parliament Act was an act of High Treason by the Asquith administration as it destroyed the royal assent procedure contrary to the Coronation Oath Act 1688.

For the people of Britain to be truly sovereign, and to enjoy a fair, just system of service whilst being “policed by consent” (which is admitted that we are 'policed by consent' on the Police Federation website - first page), the duties of the jurors in ALL trials must be upheld in accordance with Magna Carta 1215, i.e., Articles 39,40 etc; jurors must be able to determine the legality of government statutes for the term “policed by consent” to be true. These duties have been denied the people for decades within the current de facto Admiralty courts, which is why we now live under such a despotic and entirely criminal regime. 90+% of present statutes would not pass as anything but illegal by a jury convened under the common law today.

Article 61 of the 1215 Magna Carta (which has NOT been repealed despite government propaganda) was also invoked on the 23rd March 2001. Despite the Barons' Committee being impotent and its invocation being somewhat flawed because they also used the Treasonous 1689 Bill of Rights within their petition, which usurps the duties of a constitutional monarch and jurors, the petition that they served on the 7th February 2001 provides further evidence of Treason with regard to the treaty of Nice. In brief, said treaty contravenes the rule of law and Elizabeth II had the duty under the Coronation Oath Act to instruct her parliament not to ratify it. The Bill of Rights treasonously overrules the royal assent creating Parliamentary Sovereignty which is a contradiction in terms, common sense needs to be employed because obviously something that is supposed to serve the sovereign people, cannot claim to be sovereign over them. This provides further grounds for the people to reject the current illegal administration. The invocation of said Article was also published by the MSM Ref; Daily Telegraph 24th March 2001 “Peers Petition Queen on Europe” by Caroline Davis. I have included copies of the transcripts of the petition and letters between the parties herein (Exhibit A).

Moreover, compelling evidence of Sedition and High Treason by the Heath Administration by signing Britain up to the European Economic Communities Act on the 1st January 1973, can be seen within a file collected from the Public Records Office by a David Barnby, entitled “Shoehorned Into The EU” FCO 30/1048. The files are readily available online. I have not included a copy herein.

I also have said evidence in my possession along with extensive case file(s) which I claim must be viewed as a matter of urgency within a recorded police interview without delay. I demand this for my own defence and in defence of the truth under common law.

I have been very active over the past eight years by successfully taking on the corrupt courts and other various institutions of the present regime, often in defence of others but also in defence of myself to remain within the common law, as I am again now doing against the illegal collection of Council Tax. This is why I claim the state is suppressing me in the manner that it is. I can prove to anyone whom observes the truth in law that there is no criminal intent (mens rea) within any my actions to date, quite the opposite in fact. Under common law if there is no 'mens rea' (criminal intent) then there is no crime.

Whilst serving British police constables remain unaware or ignorant as to the truth in law, because the common law was removed from universities in the 1970's in order to destroy it. And whilst serving police constables unquestioningly suppress the people for defending their right not to aid and abet crime in protection of our inalienable rights under common law, the treason will continue and the state will grow ever more tyrannical as a result. I have met many good police men and women over the years whom are stuck between a rock and a hard place, quietly they are sick and tired of the regime also, but they all knew very well the consequences for rocking the boat. John Wedger, an ex Met Police Constable being a recent good example of how the state suppresses whistle blowers.

For the sake of the future and your own families and friends liberty, I urge you to take this matter very seriously indeed. The quisling government evidently intends to embroil the British military under the command of the EU (PESCO) regardless of the people voting to leave the EU. A Nation unable to defend itself independently from all enemies foreign and domestic cannot be a sovereign Nation. How bad has it got to get before serving police constables recognise the threat to their own lives and liberty, and that of their loved ones and those they are entrusted to serve?

Any police constable(s) brave enough to make a stand against the quislings in Westminster et al (including their own high ranking officers) would be very well supported by the people, whom are waking up en masse to the longevity and complexities of the deception/Treason, and as to the remedy which is to unite under common law.

We the people are in the process of convening common law courts which cannot be denied to be anything but legitimate without publicly declaring the constitution invalid, which would be sedition to claim. I myself have a certified copy of registration of my Birth under common law via such a court. I have also (under duress) claimed full ownership of the legal fiction (MR DAVID PAUL ROBINSON).

The current corporate regime ONLY acts fraudulently and deceptively against the legal fiction, and has admitted in recent (alleged) 'court' hearings that the 'court' has no jurisdiction over the man. This is on public record within the Common Law Court case files: https://www.commonlawcourt.com/

I have claimed ownership of the legal fiction under duress of circumstances because it is not a lawful/legal entity. For something to be 'legal' it must also be 'lawful' i.e., comply with the common law constitution. I have also already officially rejected any presumed affiliations that may exist between myself and the legal fiction, by declaring my standing under common law. I also served two (2) affidavits on Buckingham Palace in 2010 removing any presumed allegiance to the crown until the treason committed by the ratification of the treaty of Nice has been redressed.

A growing number of the members of our group on Facebook ('Practical Lawful Dissent') are using various pieces of Treason evidence in their rebuttal processes. Many public servants et al have consequently been put on Notice of the facts. Those put on Notice of the evidential facts cannot later deny within a court of law that they are unaware of the facts/crime(s) that they are aiding and abetting/committing. Misprision of Treason is also a very serious offence under sec: 1 of the illegally repealed 1795 Treasonable and Seditious Practices Act. Ignorance is no defence in law. Those whom act criminally regardless of the facts that have been presented to them within proper legal Notices, are therefore guilty of High Treason themselves.

There are various movements now joining together in unity to demand the return of the rule, and due process of law within the judiciary etc. We in the Practical Lawful Dissent movement seek to help remedy the fact that due process of law in unavailable by involving British police, whilst we remain in full support of the new Chartist movement and the Winchester Declaration and Restoration Amendment. We demand the involvement of police so that a possible future confrontation between the police and the people can be avoided.

We can bring back the common law by peaceful means if only the police will observe the evidential facts and act upon them without fear nor favour. I cannot stress enough the urgency of this matter. Whilst we allow very dangerous criminals to run our country into the ground, with their grubby fingers on the buttons, the threat to our lives and liberties will only increase as more and more people wake up and unite to make a stand against them. We live in exceptional times.

The people will not allow the treason to continue for much longer. We have no choice but to defend the common law for the sake of our health and liberty, also our children and for future generations. The united Nations Agenda 21, 20-30 is evidence enough of the future intentions of the global dictatorship that is blatantly emerging..

How British police can serve such an evidently corrupt regime without objection defies logic and reason. Secret (family) courts (which are entirely unconstitutional) have stolen as many as 70,000 children from unwitting, innocent parents whilst government quislings lose the files on paedophile rings that implicate some their own members!

There are many other very serious crimes being committed and evidently so. If serving police constables, whom have become corporate policy enforcers will not stand in defence of our children and due process of law, then we the people will have no choice but to take action ourselves. All serving police constables have a duty under their Oaths of office and warrant cards to act independently of all others in accordance with the law. The law that is referred to within the police Oath of office is the common law not unconstitutional Acts and Statutes. Officers of the crown are employed on the grounds that they “know the law and observe it well”.

Summary.

Please do not ignore this Notice I require assistance against crime.

1). I require written assurance from you C.I. Kev Byrne that West Midlands police constables will only act according to to the common law constitution when dealing with I, David Robinson. That MR DAVID ROBINSON (legal fiction) is a fraudulently created entity that has been revoked, made null and void, claimed and/or rejected, and thus does not apply to David Robinson the man living at the above address at the heading of this Notice.

2). I require an interview where my herein allegations are recorded and the evidence of which are thoroughly investigated. I intend to gain a crime number once the evidence has been properly examined by police and verified to be the truth. I intend to take the matter(s) further under common law to achieve remedy and seek justice.

I require a reply to this Notice in order to pre-empt any possible breach of the peace and further breaches of the law. I trust that I have supplied enough information and directions to the Treason evidence for you to be able exercise due diligence on the matter. Please reply within 7 days from receipt of this Notice or it shall be taken to mean by all interested parties that by tacit agreement ALL of the claims I make herein are agreed upon by you in full and, that all constables from West Midlands Police who attend the address at the top of this Notice will only act according to our common law constitution.

If enforcement of unconstitutional statutes/Orders are aided and abetted by West Midlands Police despite this Notice (and others previously served), then you sir may also be held personally liable within a properly convened court de jure hearing in future. I seek however to avoid such circumstances from occurring of course. With good reason I have no confidence in British Policing at this time. I therefore require clear confirmation of intent.

The common law determines that I have the right to self defence against those whom seek to cause me (or any other) loss or harm by illegal means. I take the threats I have received from Rossendales enforcement agent 'Mr Walker' (and others) extremely seriously. I shall defend my common law rights by force if necessary and, I shall seek remedy via due process of law against ANY individual(s), who by their acts or omissions breach the common law.

Written under duress without vexation, frivolity or intent to deceive. All of the above is written as an attempt to remedy the criminal allegations herein provided in a thoroughly peaceful and legal manner. I hereby declare on penalty of perjury that all of the claims made herein are the truth as to my understanding. With all my inalienable common law rights reserved.

Any reply MUST be made on the respondents full commercial liability and on penalty of perjury, whilst also providing a clearly legible printed name of the respondent.

Sincerely David Robinson.

[longdog]

TL;DR but lets look at a few things...

I was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy in 1988 and became unable to work a few years later. I was in receipt of disability benefits including the low rate of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) from the early 1990's. DLA was granted to me for life because of the nature of the degenerative condition that I endure. I have a letter from the DWP which confirms that claim. I also had no further requirement to supply medical certificates as there is no cure to my condition, therefore my condition cannot improve.

There's a few things wrong with that as far as I can see...

First DLA was never to my knowledge granted for life but it was granted indefinitely with a note to say that they might revisit the decision at a later, unspecified, date.

Secondly a degenerative condition does not mean people cannot adjust to the condition and effectively become ineligible for a benefit or level of benefit which they previously received. A person suffering from progressive blindness for instance may be unable to leave their house or perform ordinary daily tasks but they may later adapt to their blindness to a large extent.

Thirdly medical certificates are not ordinarily required for DLA for people with a long term illness but this is not evidence that the condition cannot improve or resolve or that the person cannot adapt. It's simply a matter of how the benefit is structured.

After attending an assessment by an Atos agent in Northampton in February 2017, whom lied within the report that she provided. Various agents of the DWP have used this fraudulent assessment to deny me disability entitlements. The lie within the false report is self evident as I cannot possibly do what the agent claimed she witnessed me doing, i.e., that I had demonstrated how I could wash my hair with both hands which is impossible..... DLA was also denied me some years ago for no reason. The only excuse that has been offered more recently is that DLA was scrapped whilst being replaced by a new benefit called Personal Independence payment (PIP), of which they claim I have no entitlement to. I have put managers of the DWP and Universal Credit on Notice of the facts, yet I am merely ignored as the theft and fraud continues.

The correct procedure to follow in this case would have been to ask for a Mandatory Reconsideration (which is rather pointless as very few decisions are overturned at this stage. It's the DWP looking at their own decision based on their own medical report so why would they change their mind?) followed by an appeal before the Lower Tribunal. The Lower Tribunal overturn a very high proportion of DWP decisions and will will examine written and verbal evidence that the medical report was faulty. I was in this position some years back when the medical report was inaccurate, barely literate and full of logical inconsistencies, exaggerations and outright lies... "Spends most of his time watching television" he said... Given the fact I haven't even owned a TV since 2002 this was quite a claim... Anyhoo... I went to appeal, the DWP didn't even bother to turn up and I was in and out victorious within 5 minutes.

Given David's attitude to the courts in general I think it's highly likely that he stubbornly refused to appeal to the evil and treasonous Courts and Tribunals Service and cut his nose off to spite his face. Perhaps he genuinely believed his Magna Carta crap would work instead in which case he's every bit as big a fool as I give him credit for.

As for PIP replacing DLA... This is not news.

I have also been subject to entitlements being deducted by fraudulent means from my account. Universal Credit and Daventry District Council agents are removing monies without justification for doing so, contrary to the evidenced facts that I have provided. I have also been standing against Daventry District Council's demands for full Council Tax of around £100.00 PCM. Last month I received £190.00 in entitlements. I could not afford to pay Council Tax even if it were legal to pay, obviously they are aware of that fact.

Here the sums simply don't add up. The basic allowance under UC is £317 per month so I'm at a loss as to why he's claiming a sum of £190. Also if he was receiving UC on the basis of unemployment and that was all he was receiving then he would be entitled to CT benefit of 80% so, assuming a modest abode, he would be paying around £15-20 per month.

There is of course the distinct possibility that he's done another nose-spite-face job and decided that as he doesn't have to pay CT at all because blah, blah, blah why should he claim the benefit? I wouldn't put such stupidity beyond him. One other possibility is that the £100 DDC are getting deducted from his UC is for the rent if he lives in a council property. Again Housing Benefit should cover this entirely for a modest flat but maybe he's not claimed or maybe he's living in a property 'above his station'.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I understand that Britain is a common law jurisdiction.

And the polite response is:

Dear Mr Robinson,
Thank you for taking the time to write to me. You are mistaken. England is a delegated legislation and case law jurisdiction.
Regards

My response may not be so polite

[exiledscouser]

He’s come full circle and back to freeman on the land nonsense.

Since Footle died on its arse around 2012/13 it’s time for a new generation to try this approach. After all, TPTB don’t recognise it so it must, by extension be right.

The Byrne family seem to have been born coppers - wasn’t The Barron fond of writing endlessly to a Chief Constable Simon Byrne?

Let’s hope this latest plod files David’s gibberish in the bin like his namesake did.

[Chaos]

that I had demonstrated how I could wash my hair with both hands which is impossible

yet has no problem typing out diatribes almost daily with the same hands.

[Gregg]

I have always doubted his claim to have muscular dystrophy, its generally a childhood disease and the people who get it don't for the most part live long into adulthood, and its degenerative, which means if you've had it for 30 years, I would expect you'd be a lot more obviously suffering from it than he looks to me. I associate it with little kids in wheelchairs more than raving assholes trying to lead a popular movement with rallies and protests and such.

I dunno, there are of course exceptions and people live much better than is typical with some terrible conditions, Dr. Hawking comes immediately to mind. But from here in the Well Armed Bunker Complex, it looks like he doth complain a bit much.

[Dr. Caligari]

I understand that Britain is a common law jurisdiction.

True, for one of the three meanings of the phrase "common law."

For it to no longer be a common law jurisdiction Treason must have been committed.

False.

The Common law (as you will know) refers to the common laws and customs of the people.

False, although a few medieval judges said that to justify their law-making from the bench.

The un-repealed 1215 Magna Carta and 1688 Coronation Oath Act are permanent contracts between the monarch and the people which remain in perpetuity today.

False, false and false.

A breach of either would constitute the crime of Treason at common law.

False again.

[Notsogreen]

Good morning dissenters....I have updated the pinned post but we still need to move away from the word 'rebellion' as it conjurs up all kinds of things in peoples minds....

Article 61 is no longer our main premise for standing against the regime as its invocation was flawed.....we all still have lawful excuse to stand against a criminal regime however.....it is illegal to aid and abet crime false stop. Especially when the crime is High Treason of course.

The laymans guide will also need to be changed to be compatible with the facts......by admitting our errors and confronting them we can still use the process we use against the regime.....Treason evidence is abundant so we all still have lawful excuse to not comply with the regime.

If we ignore new information that comes into are awareness then we will be as bad as the traitors destroying our common law constitution......we are all susceptible to making mistakes but regardless of that we have still used Article 61 successfully in the past. We can still refer to its invocation and the evidence that brought its invocation about....but we obviously cannot rely on it nor the barons committee since they used the treasonous Bll of Rights within the process of invoking Article 61.

We are now more focussed on the police in this group as they are acting as the gatekeepers for the treasonous administration.....we can still use the abundant Treason evidence within our processes to deny the demands of the state so not much has changed...Peace.

From practical lawful dissent group on FB

That looks like quite a U-Turn !

[HardyW]

Dear Mr Robinson,
Thank you for taking the time to write to me. You are mistaken. For the avoidance of doubt, the assertions in your letter are rebutted in full.

As you can confirm from my letterhead, I am a senior police officer with Northamptonshire Police, which covers that county including Daventry. Your letter makes a number of assertions concerning West Midlands Police which is responsible for policing the county of West Midlands.

I assume therefore, that you are also mistaken about where you live. It is just conceivable that an officer of that force might wish to respond to your queries. Your letter is therefore being sent to Coventry.

Yours etc,

[NYGman]

Posted today.......

I have been studying law for sometime now. I understand that Britain is a common law jurisdiction. For it to no longer be a common law jurisdiction Treason must have been committed. The Common law (as you will know) refers to the common laws and customs of the people. The un-repealed 1215 Magna Carta and 1688 Coronation Oath Act are permanent contracts between the monarch and the people which remain in perpetuity today. A breach of either would constitute the crime of Treason at common law.

Do you really understand David? You may have said you do, but your analysis seems to indicate otherwise

Since I have obtained absolute evidence that High Treason has and is being committed by quislings in Westminster,

Where is this Evidence, how come no one else agrees?

I have had some major successes over the years, mainly in helping others achieve remedy in denying the so called courts authority to act upon the ultra vires orders that they have created. I

Even a stopped watch is right twice a day. can you demonstrate your work lead to this, or that it wasn't something unrelated.

Since the plot to overthrow British National Sovereignty has been ongoing for generations

Wasn't aware of any plot, can we have the details?

Northampton Magistrates Court, which is NOT a court of law but a private corporate business, which can be evidenced by looking on the internet at 'Companies House' website. Northampton Magistrates Court's business number is 3844295.

Really, I am not seeing that, and how does an entry at 'Companies House' website mean that?

The High Treason that I refer to is well evidenced and current. BREXIT and PESCO are blatant acts of High Treason by the May administration for example, but that is merely the tip of the iceberg.

How are they acts of High Treason, where is this evidence you speak of?

All of the EU treaties sought to usurp the common law and deny the British people sovereignty. According to our Constitution (Magna Carta 1215 and the Coronation Oath Act 1688) the crown has the sole duty to deny unconstitutional Bills from being granted royal assent. That has NOT been occurring for many generations now. The 1911 Parliament Act was an act of High Treason by the Asquith administration as it destroyed the royal assent procedure contrary to the Coronation Oath Act 1688.

Really? Who says? Seems to be this is your position, no one else agrees.

Article 61 of the 1215 Magna Carta (which has NOT been repealed despite government propaganda) was also invoked on the 23rd March 2001.

Really, prove it? There is no basis in law for this position.

Moreover, compelling evidence of Sedition and High Treason by the Heath Administration by signing Britain up to the European Economic Communities Act on the 1st January 1973, can be seen within a file collected from the Public Records Office by a David Barnby, entitled “Shoehorned Into The EU” FCO 30/1048. The files are readily available online. I have not included a copy herein.

Again with the Evidence, I can't get there based on this paragraph.

The current corporate regime ONLY acts fraudulently and deceptively against the legal fiction, and has admitted in recent (alleged) 'court' hearings that the 'court' has no jurisdiction over the man. This is on public record within the Common Law Court case files: https://www.commonlawcourt.com/

Really. Again, unsubstantiated statements are meaningless

Summary.

Please do not ignore this Notice I require assistance against crime.
[SNIP}
Sincerely David Robinson.

Sorry, that is all that should happen, this should be ignored, it is garbage!

[BoomerSooner17]

Article 61 is no longer our main premise for standing against the regime as its invocation was flawed.....

From practical lawful dissent group on FB

That looks like quite a U-Turn !

So Crab Bait has been walking around with "A61" tattooed on his forehead for nothing! Although we already knew that.

Welcome to Quatloos, Notsogreen!

[longdog]

Another idiot heading for jail...

Roy Begg


It's been a while. Funny their last letter said they were Handing it back to the council then enforcement agent came around, Sent him off 1st Notice then this.. A new name to send notices to lol

Followed by the usual helpful "Don't worry about it they can't do nuffink" advice that got Ollie Pinnock jailed, Crab Bait bankrupted and that mad woman evicted.

[The Seventh String]

First DLA was never to my knowledge granted for life but it was granted indefinitely with a note to say that they might revisit the decision at a later, unspecified, date.

Just for historical interest, while it is the case that no award of DLA could not be reviewed, when DLA was introduced the term “life award” was used. It was a carry-over from the Attendance Allowance DLA replaced for the under 65s. It wasn’t a technically correct description of AA either, obviously claimant’s were expected to report changes in circumstance that might lead to the removal of the award or something might come to the DWP’s attention indocating the award was wrong. As “life awards” were only made when the claimant was clearly unlikely, barring a miracle, to improve that wasn’t much of a problem.

The term was dropped because Tribunals were getting a lot of appeals from people called in for re-assessment when the Major government decided to re-examine all “life awards” a couple of years after they introduced DLA. Appellants were arguing that the words “life award” meant their entitlement could not be removed no matter what, rather than arguing legally valid points.

Perhaps he genuinely believed his Magna Carta crap would work instead in which case he's every bit as big a fool as I give him credit for.

That seems a likely explanation.

Here the sums simply don't add up. The basic allowance under UC is £317 per month
<snip>

He may not be receiving UC. He may not even have claimed it, those with established NI-based ESA claims and placed in the “support group” don’t need to claim UC.

There is of course the distinct possibility that he's done another nose-spite-face job and decided that as he doesn't have to pay CT at all because blah, blah, blah why should he claim the benefit?

That would be my guess.

Dave strikes me as the kind of person who completely believes in the rightness of his obsession and therefore won’t “compromise” if he can avoid it - hence his referral to claiming “under duress”. Which means he’s digging himself into a hole that’s going to get ever deeper. Unfortunately while he claims some benefit for income, he’s quite possibly missing out on more income the law says should be his while clocking up bills the law says he shouldn’t have to pay.

Unfortunately all those laws are statutes, therefore to Dave presumably treasonous and invalid.

As I found when doing welfare rights work in the 90s, there are some people you can’t help because they won’t co-operate for whatever reason - often to do with mental health.

[NYGman]

I don't see what the big deal is about being reassessed. If you legitimately are still in the same condition or if modern medicine has improved your condition, should it not be reassessed.

[MaritalArtist]

His understanding of Magna Carta is only equalled by Tony Hancock.

[longdog]

Today's "on topic" topics include.

Lithium chemtrails.

5G radiation killing everybody.

Human cloning.

It almost makes me nostalgic for the days when anything other than the supremacy of Article 61 of Magna Carta was treason, irrelevant or irrelevant treason. Oh those halcyon days of a couple of week ago

[longdog]

His understanding of Magna Carta is only equalled by Tony Hancock.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcggk_Ll4YA

I think you have the wrong link there and it should be...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ4mxOluXY4

"Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?"

[MaritalArtist]

Oops. Yep, that's the one !