[patriots] Re: Fwd: Thanks for taking action!
- From: Paul Talbot-Jenkins <fame_97@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 09:50:54 +0100
To make a point in this discussion, I proceeded a claim against the City of
London Police and the City Corporation with a letter of claim, this was
followed by a Statutory Demand. Contrary to the judges opinions, a Statutory
Demand does not require a hearing in a court in which you are awarded the claim
and the respondent fails to pay. A Statutory Demand is a precursor to a
petition for winding up a company or bankruptcy of an individual for failure to
pay. Check out the available forms for a StatutoryDemand. Having served my
Statutory Demand for return in the Central London County Court, the City
Corporation decided it should be challenged in the Mayor's and City of London
County Court. Judge Baister, when challenged about the conflict of interest by
transferring the hearing to their own court, justified his claim that the
Central London Court was not authorised to hear bankruptcy proceedings. Look up
the Central London County Court on Google etc. and you will see that it does
indeed have such jurisdiction. Baister also over ruled the CPR saying that I
could not issue a SD without the debt being formulated by a court hearing of a
claim. (They claim judicial discretion!)
To comply with their advice, I issued a claim for hearing in court, again this
was heard in the City of London CC. With my claim I included a complete bundle
of documentary proof including proof of lies by their police officers in their
witness statements, which of course is a criminal offence under the perjury
rules and also of perverting the course of justice bordering on fraud.
Judge Parfitt handed my 3 copies of my bundles back to me saying that the
evidence was not needed at the moment. He then declared that my claim was not
framed in the manner required. He ordered that I resubmit my claim leaving out
all reference to the police lies. This I could not do because it was
fundamental to the validity of the statements made attempting to eliminate
blame of the police.
I re-issued my claim which was struck out because, as Parfitt said, it was
without merit. He argued against the appeal court verdict in Laporte v the
Chief Constable of Gloucestershre.
I made an application for permission to appeal which was heard before judge
Birtles, husband of Patricia Hewitt, who agreed to hear an appeal. In
preparation, Birtles ordered that both parties submit bundles and cross serve
skeleton arguments. Having done this, the court set a date for March 2013. At
the hearing, Birtles declared that he had not read my bundle and adjourned the
hearing so that he could read the evidence. At the appeal, before Birtles
again, he declared that neither he nor Parfitt were looking at evidence because
evidence had not yet be asked for.
As you can see, judges will run a case round and round without any satisfaction
for the claimant. Justice is a myth in this country with and without common law
because the judges are vigorously restraint by those behind the scenes. You
cannot win an argument that has already decided before you go to court. It is
only by pushing a claim that we tie them in knots with their own words, if you
are brave enough to record it, to illustrate their blatant bias. In effect
these judges are actually perverting the course of justice themselves. In
undermining the rule of law, they actually undermine the system that keeps them
in jobs.
With best wishes
Paul
www.force4justice.co.uk
Sent from my iPad
> On 17 May 2014, at 10:57, "john TIMBRELL" <johntimbrell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Malcolm and Others, I would not argue with your statement but I would
> qualify it and say that this is correct if you use the administrative courts
> i.e all the courts bar the common law court.
> This is because freehold not ownership arise through statute law.
>
> Use the common law to challenge threats to take your PROPERTY from you and
> the legal cheats will not be able to present their statutory so called
> evidence because it cannot be voiced and therefore is classed as hearsay
> evidence.
> Stand AT the common law court and state as a MAN that the defendant ( whoever
> is threatening to remove your property) is causing you harm by threatening to
> remove your property.
> .Previously you should have sent a letter before claim to the people
> threatening you. Do not answer their correspondence because that places you,
> the MAN back to the state of your legal fiction which is dealt with in the
> admin courts.
> The letter before claim is described in the civil procedure rules under the
> Queen's bench division. The court is free to use. You can choose a JURY
> TRIAL or leave it to the 'judge' who has the same status as you a MAN. In
> other words you can sue him if he does not follow precedent. He is very
> unlikely to place himself in that position, unlike the judges in an admin
> court who are immune from being sued and therefore they can abuse the law as
> they often do.
>
> I would qualify my own statement above by stating that I am learning fro Karl
> Lenz's 162 videos. I have several letters before claim served. They have 21
> days to respond before I can submit my claim to the court. So as yet I have
> not personally proved that it works.
>
> Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 09:40:50 +0100
> From: m.d.porter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [patriots] Re: Fwd: Thanks for taking action!
> To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> I think you will find that I am correct in saying that none of us OWN our
> houses. We have the FREEHOLD not ownership!
>
> Malcolm
>
> From: Paul Talbot-Jenkins <fame_97@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "ECG group Mail,list" <patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, 16 May 2014, 23:33
> Subject: [patriots] Fwd: Thanks for taking action!
>
> Please sign and support this petition, Land Registry is failing! Does your
> property belong to someone else?
>
> With best wishes
> Paul
> www.force4justice.co.uk
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Diana S., via Avaaz.org" <avaaz@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 16 May 2014 21:26:04 BST
> To: fame_97@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Thanks for taking action!
>
> Thank you for signing my petition: David Cameron: Create mechanisms that
> allow proper investigation of Land Registry!
>
> Every single person who joins strengthens our call for action. Send the email
> below to friends and family, and post this link on your Facebook wall:
>
> Click to share this petition on Facebook
>
> Let's make change together,
>
>
> ---
> Here's the petition for forwarding to your friends:
>
> David Cameron: Create mechanisms that allow proper investigation of Land
> Registry
>
> The present situation leaves Land Registry able to be unchallenged when
> forcing victims of asset stripping into litigation that has only materialised
> because of Land Registrys own errors / mistakes.
> The Courts appear loathe to do anything except back the covering up of
> property and land theft and do nothing to change a system that has cheated
> tens if not hundreds of thousands of decent people.
> Expose the ease with which Land Registry escapes paying to compensate those
> they treat like used toilet paper who are usually the elderly, vulnerable and
> those without a voice
> http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/David_Cameron_Create_mechanisms_that_allow_proper_investigation_of_Land_Registry/?tZLhSab
>
> Sent by Avaaz on behalf of 's petition
>
>
>
>
> Avaaz.org is a 35-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure
> that the views and values of the world's people shape global decision-making.
> ("Avaaz" means "voice" or "song" in many languages.) Avaaz members live in
> every nation of the world; our team is spread across 18 countries on 6
> continents and operates in 17 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz's biggest
> campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter.
>
> This message was sent to fame_97@xxxxxxxxxxx. To change your email address,
> language, or other information, click here. Want to leave this list? Click
> here to unsubscribe.To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email.
> Instead, write to us at www.avaaz.org/en/contact or call us at
> +1-888-922-8229 (US).
>
>
Other related posts:
