English Freemen Standing In Court - Council Tax Hearing - The Takedown Begins!
1 year ago
00:00
1010
More
1. English Freemen Standing In Court - Council Tax He…
1 year ago
Here we see Englsih Freemen standing in court as Lay Advisors to another Freemen.
This is for a Council Tax Liability Order hearing in Cwmbran Magistrates Court in South Wales, There were 14 Freemen in attendance.
The court was never convened as the Freemen never handed juridiction to magistrates or the clerk by standing up when ordered to do so and the magistrates never sat down.
The magistrates twice abandoned the court (the ship) and it was the Freemen who called the Police and at one point the Lay advisor can clearly be heard calling attending Police Constables to arrest the magistrates for impersonating judges.
There were many criminal acts committed this day by the company personnel (Magistrates, solictors, security and the clerk) and Police complaints are under way pending prosecutions for Fraud among other things.
But for the real shocker of how these people think they are above the law ...
Watch until the end!
This is for a Council Tax Liability Order hearing in Cwmbran Magistrates Court in South Wales, There were 14 Freemen in attendance.
The court was never convened as the Freemen never handed juridiction to magistrates or the clerk by standing up when ordered to do so and the magistrates never sat down.
The magistrates twice abandoned the court (the ship) and it was the Freemen who called the Police and at one point the Lay advisor can clearly be heard calling attending Police Constables to arrest the magistrates for impersonating judges.
There were many criminal acts committed this day by the company personnel (Magistrates, solictors, security and the clerk) and Police complaints are under way pending prosecutions for Fraud among other things.
But for the real shocker of how these people think they are above the law ...
Watch until the end!
-
british goose7 months ago -
-
Mar11 months ago
-
Michael Stabile1 year ago -
Tina Wort1 year ago
-
Luccast1 year ago -
Jay1 year ago
-
-
Raniel Rowdy1 year ago
-
canadajams1 year ago
MP4
00:16:50
5 Related collections
See all 5 collectionsStatistics
| Date | Plays | Likes | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| Totals | 63K | 46 | 100 |
| Feb 13th | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 12th | 16 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 11th | 9 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 10th | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 9th | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 8th | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 7th | 8 | 0 | 0 |
Prev week
-
Vimeo: About / Blog / Developers / Jobs /
Community Guidelines /
Help Center / Video School / Music Store / Site Map
/ Vimeo
or 
-
Legal: TM + ©2012 Vimeo, LLC. All rights reserved. / Terms of Service / Privacy Statement / Copyright
It’s all about where I put my energy! It’s my energy and I choose where to put it surely? Well that would be true if I lived alone on this planet but I am connected to all my brothers and sisters here and we are ONE and responsable therfore for all of this which we have co created.
So unless I become aware of all the contracts that have been made on my behalf via my birth certificate, registration of this and that application for this and that... My consent to being governed etc etc ALL ARE CONTRACTS and they are not written in a language I am familiar with (Legalese is not English) It is no longer about sitting on the fence in the mass comfort zone, this is still consenting to the corruption ... those who choose to make a stand for truth and justice peacefully meet the resistance of the illusion full on as you can see from this video and the brave freeman here; he was the bringer of light into a corrupt court room. My wish is that those who attend to the duties within the courts of this land will also make a stand for truth and justice… we can help them if we choose to continue to remind them of the truth. The truth will set us all free.
Does anyone know where I can learn about it other than books in "lawyer speak"?
also to get more of an idea about life, i found this and thought it quite eye opening! beware, its a pretty deep n crazy rabbit hole, you have been warned! 2012time2growup.ning.com
No fear, be free
Love Light and peace!
Producing the Birth Certificate under some deluded quasi-religious belief that a person is a legal fiction (when recent law dictionaries clearly state that "person" refers to natural persons ie human beings) is nothing more than grandstanding to a crowd of the faithful.
It's like the pope standing on the balcony overlooking saint peters square to the gathered multitude and saying that god wants us to shun all homosexuals and that catholic priests don't fiddle with choirboys. It sounds great, but it just isn't true.
On that eveidence alone, the court had already decided that the defendent was guilty.
so whats the crack then? do we stand a chance of beating this corrupt system?
whats next, has the bloke been summond to court again, has he been fined?
your efforts are appreciated, at there are some with the minerals to try and make a stand against greed and corruption!
Love Light and peace, keep up the good work.
i think something like this needs to spread like wild fire!
They rely on getting a certain number of cases through the courts every day in order to keep the money flowing in - if we can dramatically reduce that income flow by keeping them occupied for 45 minutes per case (as we did) then they are not going to achieve as much each day but the costs of the lawyers and magistrates isnt going to decrease.
Therefore before very long it becomes a loss making venture for them.
The person who allowed me to enter court on his behalf was more than happy with outcome as beforehand we had planned and discussed the fact that they would probably issue the LO anyway (they always do).
However since that date he, myself and a couple of others have been giving the police and courts there a lot to think about and complaints are lodged and we are pressing for charges alongside some commercial remedies that are in place now.
I have never professed to knowing all the answers or even to knowing the correct approach, my attitude and that of those concerned is that as long as we are giving them hell then at least we are doing "something".
That said, I am sure that when we see your court video we will all be very much educated and so I look forward to it with baited breath.
I fail to understand the purpose of this whole process other than to give an audience to this very odd man in court.
It seems to me that if nothing else, he is flattering many of the officials involved if he thinks they did or did not do something because they were aware that they had to uphold an oath. They clearly stood there bemused because they thought they were delaing with a mad man.
I think it's great if you're testing our system...but being totally honest, I don't know enough to know if you are or not.
Can you lay out the facts more clearly in this blog, maybe?
Without that background understanding, while this video will stimulate considerable interest (what really happened there and why...?) it doesn't, in and of itself, prove anything to the passing viewer.
Thanks for sharing it - like I said, very interesting.
Of course, if you didnt do this, it would be fair to assume that you knew you had no case and you were just intent on wasting people's time.
So did you appeal?
We are implementing remedies on the private side that will mean that they have to do with these remedies first before they can proceed with the council tax case proper - if they dont it will cost them very dearly.
We will keep you updated as we go.
Disregard the simple minds. They are barely a distraction. They exist in all fields where people look to better themselves. Its unavoidable. They are a drain on all of us. They really DO wish to be subservient. I used to think they were just kidding. Slaves have always enjoyed their servitude. And they don't try to hide it.
History shows us they will always try to bring down greatness.
I look forward to your coming success.
You have great spirit !
For any people needing a crash course in the British system of government:
Parliament is generally free to make whatever laws it wishes. The only consent that is required for Parliament's authority is that of the people in electing their MPs. Once Parliament enacts a law, it is valid in the manner and extent for which Parliament may provide, including requiring people to pay taxes and be subject to legal proceedings against their wishes if they refuse to pay. As Parliament is free to abolish or amend the common law position, the statutes providing for Council Tax liability take precedence over any individual's notions of common law.
As to claims that the "legal fiction" was present because a birth certificate was brought into court: You can't possibly be serious. Corporate personhood is a legal fiction. Natural people are not a "legal fiction". A birth certificate does not "create" a person or their legal identity; rather, it merely documents the details of his birth. The facts of being born and alive attract legal consequences. (By the way, if a birth certificate did create legal personhood for natural persons, merely bringing it to court would not mean that the person was validly present and represented. If I bring a certificate of incorporation to court, that does not mean that I have standing to represent the corporation; only those who have standing per the rules of procedure can represent another person.)
The person who made this video does not understand what happened in court. The "lay adviser" merely disrupted proceedings and eventually agreed to leave. As actual the person who was subject to the proceedings could not be identified as present in the court, he was not responding to the proceedings and not providing anything to rebut the Council's case. The result was that the liability order was issued. If the person who was subject to the proceedings claims that the liability order contained an error as to the time of the proceedings and the issuance of the order, then such an administrative mistake can be corrected. Such an error does not change the fact that the person did not actually respond to the proceedings and that a liability order was rightly issued.
By the way, filming court proceedings constitutes contempt of court. Those who put this video online have produced evidence of an offence.
Politicians are false gods and the gov is a bankrupt corporation. They only have power because we give it to them by tacit acceptance, but that is changing.
Only a fool would allow their life to be controlled by a soul less fiction - corporation.
Good on the freemen who fronted this de facto court of contracts. The alleged Magistrates are the real criminals right up there with Roland Friessler
Check out Robert Menard on youtube, and get a life
The Crown is not technically a corporation, but you are correct in that it functions in a similar manner in that its must act via agents and officers to do anything. The government is wholly capable of exercising jurisdiction over persons, whether they are natural persons or the product of a legal fiction.
As to your complaints about the role of politicians: A key reason why the public accepts the British government and does not attempt to overthrow it is the fact that it is democratically elected. If you dislike the politicians who run the country, then it is through the ballot box that you may legitimately seek to effect change. I suggest that voting would have more impact than pretending that the government and its laws don't exist.
As to your description of the Magistrates' Court: The Magistrates' Court functions mainly as a criminal court, not as a "court of contracts", though Council Tax proceedings are among the handful of civil matters that they may adjudicate. You have presented no evidence that the Magistrates did anything other than attempt to conduct proceedings and issue a judgment as the law requires.
Until that time I will continue NOT to pay it as I have done for the last year.
I do not stand in the corporate jurisdiction, I do not submit or stand under Admiralty law - I am a freeman, born on the land, living on the land and I abide by the COMMON LAW - not these vexatious and fictional "ACTS" (the clue is in the name) that these people try and inflict upon us.
If you feel you should pay tax - then pay it - I'm not stopping you - but just because you don't comprehend that there is no law forcing you or me to pay it does not mean I am going to be a sheeple and pay it.
Just as there is NO LAW in the USA that allows the IRS to collect income tax - it doesn't exist!
Eveyrthing they do is geared around collecting money - it isnt about making your life better - wake up and smell the coffee - if it was - we would be living in utopia woudln't we.
Instead, crime, drugs, petrol, tax, tobacco and everything else is on the increase whilst education, health and care in the community are thrown to the dogs.
And in all of that the ONLY people making any money are ... the very politicians you want to pay so that they can keep ripping everyone off.
Are you REALLY that blind? God I hope not because if you are then its clear to me why the land is in the mess its in and why people are such willing slaves!
Baaah!
You have rather misunderstood the nature of common law. Common law can only be "shown" to the extent that someone can show a court ruling clarifying the common law. Regardless, common law is not the only law. Parliament is free to abolish any aspect of common law or impose obligations other than those contained in common law. This is known as Parliamentary sovereignty and is a major aspect of the British constitution.
As to your claims that there is no law providing for income tax in the US, I note that 26 U.S.C. § 1 imposes a tax on taxable income and that taxable income is defined in 26 U.S.C. § 63.
-----------------------------------
Section 1 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:
1 Council tax in respect of dwellings
(1) As regards the financial year beginning in 1993 and subsequent financial years, each billing authority shall, in accordance with this Part, levy and collect a tax, to be called council tax, which shall be payable in respect of dwellings situated in its area.
[(2) In this Part “billing authority” means—
(a) in relation to England, a district council or London borough council, the Common Council or the Council of the Isles of Scilly, and
(b) in relation to Wales, a county council or county borough council.]
(3) For the purposes of this Part the Secretary of State may make regulations containing rules for treating a dwelling as situated in a billing authority's area if part only of the dwelling falls within the area.
----------------------
Section 6 Local Government Finance Act 1992:
6 Persons liable to pay council tax
(1) The person who is liable to pay council tax in respect of any chargeable dwelling and any day is the person who falls within the first paragraph of subsection (2) below to apply, taking paragraph (a) of that subsection first, paragraph (b) next, and so on.
(2) A person falls within this subsection in relation to any chargeable dwelling and any day if, on that day—
(a) he is a resident of the dwelling and has a freehold interest in the whole or any part of it;
(b) he is such a resident and has a leasehold interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling which is not inferior to another such interest held by another such resident;
(c) he is both such a resident and a statutory[, secure or introductory tenant] of the whole or any part of the dwelling;
(d) he is such a resident and has a contractual licence to occupy the whole or any part of the dwelling;
(e) he is such a resident; or
(f) he is the owner of the dwelling.
(3) Where, in relation to any chargeable dwelling and any day, two or more persons fall within the first paragraph of subsection (2) above to apply, they shall each be jointly and severally liable to pay the council tax in respect of the dwelling and that day.
(4) Subsection (3) above shall not apply as respects any day on which one or more of the persons there mentioned fall to be disregarded for the purposes of discount by virtue of [paragraph 2 (severely mentally impaired) or 4 (students etc) of Schedule 1 to this Act] and one or more of them do not; and liability to pay the council tax in respect of the dwelling and that day shall be determined as follows—
(a) if only one of those persons does not fall to be so disregarded, he shall be solely liable;
(b) if two or more of those persons do not fall to be so disregarded, they shall each be jointly and severally liable.
(5) In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires—
“owner”, in relation to any dwelling, means the person as regards whom the following conditions are fulfilled—
(a) he has a material interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling; and
(b) at least part of the dwelling or, as the case may be, of the part concerned is not subject to a material interest inferior to his interest;
“resident”, in relation to any dwelling, means an individual who has attained the age of 18 years and has his sole or main residence in the dwelling.
(6) In this section—
[“introductory tenant” means a tenant under an introductory tenancy within the meaning of Chapter I of Part V of the Housing Act 1996;]
“material interest” means a freehold interest or a leasehold interest which was granted for a term of six months or more;
“secure tenant” means a tenant under a secure tenancy within the meaning of Part IV of the Housing Act 1985;
“statutory tenant” means a statutory tenant within the meaning of the Rent Act 1977 or the Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976.
I have just referred you to the law that imposes income tax liability on most people in the USA. You may want to look it up before adopting the line of people who clearly don't know how to read a statute.
*I take it that nobody has verified these figures, as any subject of a study who supplied such information would have to supply very sensitive personal and financial data. Even if their claims that they pay no taxes are correct, keep in mind that some of these people may well say that they are rebelling but may actually have no taxable income. (In fact, I could honestly march with a placard saying that I am a US citizen who pays no income tax in the US on his earnings. This is true because the foreign earned income exclusion and standard deduction result in me having no taxable income and the foreign tax credit would offset anything not covered by those provisions.)
Police complaints have been lodged against the magistrates, commercial bonded liens are going in against those same magistrates.
You don't get it moo har / jules - you really don't.
We entered that court knowing full well that they would probably issue the LO anyway - but we disrupted their day big time - they even had to change the courtroom to accomodate us all.
Added to that the extra paperwork and crap they are now dealing with because of all the independent police complaints that have been lodged (all of which have to be dealt with now) and the Liens that are about to be served. The failed Bailiffs visits that will happen because we serve Bailiffs with lawful documents that stop them in their tracks.
All of this means that the council will be responsible for racking up thousands of pounds of cost that they cannot come back to the recipient of the LO for.
Now, if they are chasing £300 quid and it costs them many thousands to chase that and they can't get the costs of that chasing back then it doesn't take a genius to work out that already because of the cost of the court staff and the magistrates etc that they are ALREADY at a massive loss on this case.
Its all FINANCIAL - whether we proved anything in court is irrelevant - fact is we went in there and as was said on the video we cost them more money than they were after just in the council solicitors cost alone!
Now, if 1% of the population of this country did this - the system would crumble overnight because they would be spending ten times the amount of money that they were trying to collect and thats unsustainable in any business!
This is long game and one which we will continue to play until its done.
THATS THE POINT.
If you don't agree then thats your right, however if you know of a better method for costing them money then I'm dying to hear it.
Until then we'll keep on keeping on until we know of a better way to do this.
I would rather DO something than simply write about it.
you are right the GAME is still on - and thats all it is ... A GAME!
As to your statement that you will serve bailiffs with documents: Are you stating that you have filed claims against the bailiffs who will be coming to your house? Even if you have done so, that will not affect the liability order issued by the Magistrates' Court and will not disrupt the immediate authority of the bailiffs to enforce the order. As they will be acting with lawful authority, your claims will fail.
If you are opposed to the laws regarding the imposition and collection of Council Tax, then please put your energies to a more productive form of protest.
As for energies & Protest - where are you directing your energies, what form of protest and ... are you getting anywhere with it?
"Rebel Leader plus 10 hours ago
I have a barrister I can talk to for free, she's a friend. I created my own pack to use against bailiffs and to date its been effective for me and I hear that some people over at lawful Rebellion. org have had some success with it.
As for energies & Protest - where are you directing your energies, what form of protest and ... are you getting anywhere with it?"
So for the record - lawfulrebellion.org are nothing to do with us or what we do.
Everyone Happy now - great - now I can get on with some important stuff.
i think the use of the word 'success' may have been a typical ray st.clair overstatement that one of us had 'success' in downloading the pack... lol
we just like to make sure we're well away from people who create noise.
Councils have been ripping people off for years and it's about time they were made accountable.
I uncovered a scam that councils are using last year and I just wish I had the resources to set up a company to claim back on behalf of those affected. When calculating council tax benefits routinely 20% of exess income is taken from the benefit entitlement in the form of taper relief, yet the statutory instrument which the councils have to adhere to states that the taper relief should be set at 2 and 6/7ths of a percent (around 2.85%). When an appeal was made before a tribunal the councils representative could offer no explanation for this anomoly other than this..
She said that they make the calculation over 7 days so the percentage was therefore 2.85 x 7, so in essence if your monthly excess income was £100, the statutory instrument states that 2.85% of that should be deducted from council tax benefits, in other words £2.85. What the council was deducting was nearly 20% due to their unlawful method of calculating. Needless to say the council have brushed this under the carpet no doubt afraid of the repercussions should this scam be uncovered and claims be made by the public to recover the money stolen from them. The tribunal has found in favour of the council (no suprise there) with a promise of a substancial explanation of the ruling to follow, this has yet to arrive despite the hearing taking place last September (2009). The council don't really seem interested in persuing me for council tax to this day despite a change in my circumstances which would mean me paying full whack.
Basically, the aim is to waste lots of people's time quoting old common law which has either long since been repealed or is completely irrelevent and in so doing, cost the Council and Court money.
But this is the bit i really dont understand. Both these organisations raise their budget from the taxpayer (or slave, if you prefer), so if you cost them money, they have to charge more in Council Tax etc.
Even if we all accept all your arguments regarding civil disobedience, long game and illegality of the system, it would only be of use if the rest of the population agreed with you, but unfortunately for you, I think you are in such a small minority that you will make no difference.
It seems to me that most people who dislike Council Tax do so because of how much it is, not because they disagree with the principle of social responsibility and the delivery of local services.
At the very most, all this could possibly do is increase the amount of Council Tax and is therefore directly against the 'freemen' you purport to be supporting.
And then to read a post from some idiot moaning about the benefit system is just ridiculous - anyone too stupid to see the glaring hypocrisy of this deserves to be made to pay double, let alone less.
We are all waiting with baited breath.
Put up or shut up!
The only way to sort these so called governments out is a full blown tax rebellion.
It was called NAZI GERMANY
Have you ever heard of Godwin's Law?
So, you don't recognise parliament, the courts, statute law or the whole of the CJS it seems.
You don't recognise the requirement to pay council tax.
But, when it come to the crunch you cry for assistance from a section of the CJS you neither recognise nor want to pay for, the Police.
Says it all really.
administrativeappeals.tribunals.gov.uk/aspx/view.aspx?id=2817
Interesting performance art video. I assume no-one really believes any of this made-up-on-the-spot law?
It could not be more clear. You are either very stupid or have an ulterior motive.
If people like you are those "fighting the system", it's little wonder you've made zero progress!
Jason Holmes - I really dont want to lower myself to name calling, but you are making it really difficult to avoid - surely you can see the ridiculous hypocrisy????
If you disagree with statute law, how on earth can you agree with claiming a benefit which only exists in statute law?
Jason Holmes, you cant seriously think that the taper is 2 6/7% per day, week or month?
The legislation clearly calulates the benefit on a daily basis because CT is calculated on a daily basis) and so the 2 6/7% is therefore also per day, which is exactly 20% per week.
I would have thought that you could take the daily excess income and times it by 2 6/7%, but you cant take the weekly income and times it by the daily taper, because that would be really stupid.
Jason, if you are going to continue attempting to interpret legislation, the only advice I can give you is to read the whole document before pulling individual bits out of context.
It mentions the figure several times in the decision document. In particular, read points 10 and 11 which explain the calculations very clearly.
This is beginning to be a bit of a joke, really (or should I say, even more of one). We have people who clearly have no idea about current law, are unable to perform simple calculations and apparently cannot read either, yet these people think they've found a way to beat the system. You go, girl!
Believe me Tom I have the greatest respect for you. it is simple, the legislation states 2 6/7%. If it had meant to say 20% it would have.
The Secretary of State could amend the regulations to the desired figure with a swift procedure. The claimant would receive his past benefit entitlement, but the only other people who would benefit would be those who had made similar appeals.
This whole thread started with me seeing an article about an apparent freeman trying to get the truth out about a corrupt system and all it has come down to is a seemingly grubby little conman whose views on free speech differ dependant upon whether someone is talking about him or not.
If anyone here believes for a second in this 'Rebel Leader' and the accuracy of his assertions, let his censorship of information tell you the type of duplicity he truly believes in.
If anyone tries his ridiculous 'filibustering' at their next court hearing, please realise now that you have brought it on yourself by listening to charlatans like this.
The really annoying thing is that the people most likely to believe in this tripe are the ones that deserve the most protection from people like this.