Ref treason allegation against George Hamilton QPM C.C P.S.N.I. Geoffrey Cox Q.C

  • 0 Replies
  • 421 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4119
  • +75/-0

Solicitor General                                                                                                                       Albert Burgess
Robert Buckland Q.C. M.P.
5/8 Sanctuary
London
SW1P 3JS
4th March 2019
Ref treason allegation against George Hamilton QPM C.C P.S.N.I. Geoffrey Cox Q.C.M.P. Attorney General and Anthony Lynton Blair one time Prime Minister
Prosecution of British soldiers
And letters of dispensation for crime
Given to members of the IRA.
Sir
I am attaching a photo copy of an article from a book on English common and constitutional law, which clearly lays down the common law duty of all her Majesty’s subjects regarding putting down a riot or felonious assembly. This clearly lays down the conditions under which her Majesty’s armed forces are called upon by a civil authority to assist them when a breakdown of law and order has occurred. Our armed forces employed on this duty do so in their capacity as private subjects of her Majesty’s because it is illegal to use the armed forces to police the streets of her Majesty’s ancient Kingdom.
This lays down the rules the armed forces employed in this role operate under. Every one of her Majesty’s subjects when called upon by her Majesty to assist in the restoration of her Majesty’s law, has a clearly defined duty to obey her Majesty’s order, and as they are working as a servant of her Majesty tasked with restoring her Majesty’s law, they are covered by the non molestation order which covers all her Majesty’s servants when employed on her Majesty’s service. In this case her Majesty has a clear duty under the law to ensure the rule of law is maintained in her Kingdom.
This makes the prosecution of her Majesty’s subjects in or out of uniform illegal and is directly in contravention of her Majesty’s non molestation order on her subjects directly employed on her service in their efforts to restore the rule of law. For anyone whatever their status in her Majesty’s Kingdom to attempt to over turn her Majesty’s non molestation order placed on her subject is for them to commit treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act. It also attempts to overturn the common law which supports her Majesty’s subjects in their efforts to restore the rule of law. This constitutes treason against English common law because its effect is to place her Majesty’s Kingdom and her subjects at grave risk. Consequently you are required by higher law governing the actions of her Majesty’s subjects tasked with restoring the rule of law to stop all prosecutions of members of her Majesty’s armed forces, and constables who were employed in the role of the restoration of the Queens peace in her Kingdom. And to rectify the miscarriages of justice which have already occurred.
F.W Maitland LL.D in his Constitutional History of England Cambridge university press 1908 page 299 quotes Vernon J The King pro bono may charge his subjects for the safety and defence of the Kingdom, not withstanding any act of parliament, and a statute derogatory from the prerogative doth not bind the King, and the King can dispense with any law in cases of necessity.
Finch C.J No act of parliament can bar a King of his regality, as that no land should hold of him; or bar him of his allegiance of his subjects; or the relative on his part as trust and power to defend his people;
Therefore acts of parliament to take away his royal power in the defence of the Kingdom are void; they are void acts of parliament to bind the King not to command his subjects their persons and their goods.
Following on from the rulings of these eminent Justices it follows no later act of parliament can place her Majesty’s subjects in peril for complying with her instruction to put down riot or in the case of Northern Ireland felonious assembly. Whilst there is a dispute as to whether her Majesty’s subjects tasked with the restoration of the rule of law in Northern Ireland were fired upon from a riotous assembly is in this case irrelevant. Blackstone CJ on page 64 onwards volume 4 on his commentaries on the laws of England makes it perfectly clear when a riotous assembly fails to disperse when ordered to do so in her Majesty’s name they commit treason and can be killed without benefit of clergy for their treason. What is disputed is whether or not shots were fired from amongst the rioters aimed at her Majesty’s subjects carrying out their duty as laid down by law to assist her Majesty in the restoration of the rule of her law. However the rioters failed to disperse when ordered to disperse and as laid down by Blackstone CJ who was confirming the ancient common law dealing with riotous and felonious assembly’s that any fatalities amongst the rioters are justifiable homicide and any innocent person nearby killed is accidental death for which no penalty applies
Whilst her Majesty did not in her Royal person give these orders to her armed forces the orders were given by ministers of the Crown and senior military officers in support of her Majesty in her duty to return her Kingdom to the rule of law. Any orders given by them are given in her Majesty name and with an authority directly derived from her Majesty for the defence of her subjects and the restoration on her Majesty’s law. It therefore follows the non molestation order covers everyone tasked with the restoration of the rule of law.
From the rulings of the two eminent justices you can see parliament has no authority to interfere or obstruct her Majesty in the restoration of the Queens peace in her Kingdom. Any later acts are therefore void and of no effect. I further submit that there is no authority on earth that can remove the subject’s right to defend this Kingdom and the rule of law. Nor is there any authority on earth that can prevent the subject from arming himself to defend this Kingdom and the rule of law in support of her Majesty.
For the Chief Constable of the PSNI and the Attorney General to authorise prosecutions of her Majesty’s subjects who kill rioters whilst complying with her Majesty’s order to restore the rule of law in her Kingdom contravenes the common law and seeks to set her Majesty’s lawful order to her subjects to restore the rule of her law in her Kingdom at nought. This is for the Chief Constable and the Attorney General to negate her Majesty’s lawful order to her subjects this is to imagine her Majesty’s death as a fully Sovereign Queen of England from which all her other titles pre-eminences and prerogatives flow. This constitutes on the part of the Chief Constable and the Attorney General a clear act of high treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act. I am therefore in support of her Majesty submitting an allegation of high treason against the Chief Constable of the PSNI George Hamilton QPM and the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox Q.C. M.P. Her Majesty’s right to total complete and absolute Sovereignty was confirmed in Parliament on the 8th March 1784 after a twenty year running battle between King George III and the House of Commons as to where ultimate Sovereignty lay with the lawfully anointed King or with the Elected House, After a speech by Pitt in which he asked is it better to be ruled by one despot or by three hundred and fifty despots who can never agree. The King won the vote and was confirmed by Parliamentary vote as the Supreme Governor of England. Any other result would have been contrary to the 1351 Treason Act and that applies today. I would mention that Parliament is not now and never has been sovereign only the lawfully anointed King/Queen holds full complete and total Sovereignty any other claim constitutes a clear act of high treason. The provisions of the 1695 Treason Act which places a three year time limit on prosecutions for treason are also void, it is against common right and reason to allow treason to go unpunished because the traitor/s were able to hide for three years, it is repugnant that traitors should go unpunished because they can hide for three years, it is impossible to perform because this section of the 1695 Treason Act is void because it allows traitors to commit treason on more than one occasion so the common law strikes it down.
Dispensations from the penalty from a crime.
The 1689 Bill of Rights which incorporates the 1689 Declaration of Rights outlaws for all time the granting of dispensations as they were given by James II, James was granting dispensations allowing those who broke existing law to avoid the penalty for their offence.
The letters of dispensation from being arrested and placed on trial given to members of the IRA are illegal and of no effect, because they breach a major constitutional law. The 1689 Bill of Rights. Anthony Lynton Blair one time Prime Minster of the United Kingdom, who issued these letters, is guilty of the criminal offence at common law of perverting the course of justice, and treason contrary to the constitutional and common law arrangements of England. The IRA members who received these unlawful letters were all wanted by her Majesty for attacks with firearms and bombs and other implements of torture, on her Majesty’s subjects. I request and require you to investigate Anthony Lynton Blair for the offences of Perverting the Course of Justice at Common Law and Treason contrary to the constitutional arrangements of her Majesty’s Kingdom by giving aid and comfort to her Majesty’s enemy’s within and without the realm. I would refer you to the ruling given by Patterson J in Stockdale vs. Hansard 1837. You are further requested and required to ignore these letters of dispensation and place those who were given them before her Majesty’s courts so the relatives of those subjects tortured and murdered can see justice done in her Majesty’s name.
Respectfully submitted
Albert Burgess
Cc H.RH Queen Elizabeth II
Cressida Dick QPM Commissioner of the Metropolis please can every one send it in as well


 
Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk