The PLD gang don't like courts, like them they do not.
Never go!
It's supporting treason!
But they do obsess nonetheless.
Bellion Re David is going to court in Derby 3rd Jan and is trying to drum up support. So far Crabby has signed up.
What's it for? He's not for saying, only this;
I need witnesses to attend Southern Derbyshire courts on 3rd jan 2018. 10am... The witnesses are to attend to write down questions and answers for me for the court record as my evidence of my standing. They have already been informed of Treason
They need to either go to court every time or not at all this lot. David Rebellion (see what he did there) is confident that the Art 61 route is sure to get victory. After all, he has irrefutable proof;
My friend in Yorkshire
Who never gets named.....
sent all notices off and they still ignored him. He attended shown all evidence he had tried to deal with it honourably which the prosecution denied then the judge dismissed the case. That was for speeding, driving through lights and not declaring the driver under S172 (3). So Article 61 does work when notices are shown to be valid evidence
So, James Smith has been summonsed to the fake non court for alleged speeding. This causes a great deal of debate between the gang. James starts off by asking everyone;
Can anyone offer advice on how you would go about dealing with this ? I understand article 61 ok but when it comes to speeding I’m not sure where I stand ..
If you use A61 in court then likely as not the bus stop is where you'll be standing matey. I don't think King John or the Barons had speeding matters in mind either when they signed up to Magnum Carter.
Gloomy Ryan isn't too sure that the magic will work;
Just so you're aware Article 61 will not protect you from them taking your licence away if it gets to that stage. If you're under oath I would suggest sending a 'Notice of Conditional Acceptance' to them.
As if that'll make the slightest bit of difference. And if A61 admittedly won't assist you in speeding matters, why the hell would it be any more or less effective for any other court matters? It either works or it does not.
Priscilla faces speeding matters too but she appears to have 'pulled a Jimmy' and denied knowing anything about it;
Very interesting, I have a speeding case going back to court after I made a "Stat Dec" upon my Oath that I was not aware of the case, and now I have a new hearing date.. Of course, standing under A61.MC.1215 I served ALL notices, which were all ignored. Luckily, I have another crack at things and I will be producing ALL my documentation, however, David Robinson states continuously NOT to attend their unlawful courts.. But we know what happens when that is the case, and warrants are issued for arrwst etc etc.. its a minefield
I'm reading that she was aware all along but has chosen to tell the court some lies. Jez is more defiant;
i have just received a letter saying i was doing 37 in a 30, fuck em, my notice of conditional acceptance is going in
but Priscilla and despite her earlier post, demonstrating a bit of realism and maybe a little knowledge of the matter from the outset replies;
you will be ignored as I was.. and ultimately convicted in your abscence
Brian is of a different mind;
Driving is all about confidence. Confidence in the machine you are driving and confidence in ones own ability. I regularly drive 100mph on the motorways since about 2003. And I do lots of overtaking on the inside lanes rather than slowing down. There is (or was I haven't read it for years) an important bit in the highway code which says slower road users should pull over for faster road users.
The dangerous drivers are those that think I should go as slow as them, the ones that do not like changing lanes and the ones that drive within the speed limit but stay a few yards behind the vehicle in front. Remember and apply the two second rule, all the time, and you'll be safe.
There we have it, Toad of Toad Hall can now post on FB.
Back to the 'get you off' comments.
Marc thinks James should establish the following;
The other thing you need to know is, the machine that said you were speeding has to have a calibration certificate for the day in question.
Excellent advice, that's the cops on the ropes. Jez, he of the Conditional Acceptance letter tried that himself;
When I got my letter it came with a code that I entered on the Lancashire police website and it had a copy of the calibration cert for the camera that took my pic plus a photo of my vehicle....I can see myself in the driving seat and my partner in the passenger seat on the photo
D'oh!
There's no camera in James's case, just VASCAR or 'nascar' as he refers to it. How fast was he going? Tooley Stu thinks its just under the ton and goes full FOOTLE;
+96mph is a 6 pointer and +£100 fine. I would layer my defense behind a few walls..
1/- A61, treason.
2- PC not under oath (oath is 'according to law', not statute)
3- Police and courts not recognised since 2001
4- Return letter, saying you are not LEGAL FICTION it is addressed to .....
5- When invited to court, it is an INVITE, not an order
.. I could be wrong, but that would be my course.
Neal thinks its a bit faster than that and has bad news;
AI am afraid 103mph is an automatic ban and a very heavy fine plus costs and a contribution to criminal injuries
So, for a group that despises the court system, does not recognise its authority and advises its members to ignore it, they sure do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time before the beak.
