Letter to police re offensive remarks

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0
Letter to police re offensive remarks
« on: September 20, 2018, 09:06:37 PM »
Janet McCormick
Acting Chief Constable
Cheshire Police Head quarters
Clemonds Hey
Oakmere Road
Ref free speech
Dear Janet
I have seen you post on face book regarding offensive remarks, and that should they upset some ones finer feels they are subject to prosecution. I am aware that what passes for parliament today pass what purport for laws which you are intending to enforce. But before you attempt that I feel a legal history lesson is appropriate.
The 1911/49 Parliament Acts were designed by the government in the House of Commons to overawe the House of Lords. This contravened the common law cognisance of both houses to conduct their own business in their own way. Asquith the Prime Minster in the commons threatened the House of Lords he would put 500 new peers into the Lords who would vote for its abolition unless they accepted what became the 1911 Parliament Act. The Peerage gave way and the Parliament Act was put forward for the Royal Assent, King Edward VII refused the assent on the grounds that it was unconstitutional and removed a protection from his subjects he ordered an election. Asquith and his ministers lied their way around the country and were returned. The King could still have refused the assent and shortly after the King fell ill and died. (You might consider asking her Majesty if you can investigate his death, I would be interested in the toxicology) King George V came to the Throne and was told by a minister he kept all his prerogatives but could not use any of them unless he had the backing of a minister and the 1911 Parliament Act became law on the back of two acts of treason. (1) The usurpation of the Royal Prerogative from George V Treason contrary to the 1352 Treason Act by imagining the death of the King as a fully sovereign King. (2) The over awering of the House of Lords contrary to the sec 3 of the 1848 Treason Felony Act. Parliament is as subject to the rule of law the same as the rest of use. I would refer you to the ruling in Stockdale vs. Hansard 1837 as given by Patterson J. Parliament was no longer legally constituted as the Parliament Act had effectively prevented the Upper House from carrying out its roll as laid down by the constitutional arrangements for Parliament.
The 1999 House of Lords Act illegally removed the hereditary Peerage from the Upper House another act of treason contrary to sec 3 of the 1848 Treason Felony Act. You might consider arresting and putting on trial one Anthony Lynton Blair one time Prime Minister for treason contrary to this act.
We have not had a legally constituted parliament since 1911 so the laws you are threatening to prosecute people with are in fact voided by the common law because the parliament which made them is constitutionally illegal. One of these illegal laws concerns the police. The 2002 Police Reform Act, which removed from the oath of attestation the words OUR SOVEREIGN LADY, imagines the death of her Majesty as a fully sovereign Queen which is treason contrary to the 1352 Treason Act. So you might consider arresting Anthony Lynton Blair for his high treason. The other major problem this treason gives you is every officer attested using the new oat has taken part in an act of treason. Any body who has taken part in an act of treason no matter how inadvertently is barred for life from ever holding the office of constable, this means the vast majority of police officers in the country are not police officers they are only impersonating a constable which renders them liable to arrest, and of course every conviction has become unsafe because the evidence was collected without the benefit of law. Ooopps. You might like to find yourself a lawyer who is proficient in common and constitutional law. Now I fervently believe Islam is an evil Satanic death cult responsible for the rape and prostitution ot thousands of our young school girls. I am a free born Englishman with a right to free speech, this is my birthright I have no intention of surrendering any of my common law rights and freedoms and no illegally constituted parliament is going to remove any of my rights, rights confirmed by the oaths of Kings.
Respectfully submitted
Albert Burgess

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk