Urgent: advice needed, please!

Need help and support? Post here and we will do our best.

Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby iamani » Tue Feb 27, 2018 8:11 pm

Greetings

i've been trying to help a YouTuber PUBLIC SERVANT CRIMINALS with some problems.

He has just called me while the police were smashing down his door on bullshit charges, a no-bail warrant that they refused to show him, and have carted him off.

Is anyone reading who can advise me how to help him in this instance? Forum post, private message, anything please...
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby musashi » Tue Feb 27, 2018 10:15 pm

If he has any sense he'll say nothing at any stage, not argue or bluster, and he'll be released eventually on some bail or other. That's the time to start to help. If they are bullsit charges then he'll have an unbeatable case.

If you try to find out what is going on they'll pull out the old data protection lies and you'll get nowhere except annoyed. Make contact anyway so they know that there are people on the outside who're watching and he's not alone. The more who ask about him the safer he'll be.
https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights
http://www.offendersfamilieshelpline.org/index.php/rights-in-custody/

I'll remind anyone reading this about POWER OF ATTORNEY so others can find out what they're doing to you if you do get lifted. If you're an activist it's a good idea.

If he has a friend who can get to court and ask a judge for a writ of habeus corpus - he's being held and no-one knows why so it might be unlawful - and serve it on the cops.

If they've charged him and he's got a court appearance then he should launch counter claim[u] immediately [/u.

If there are no charges laid then start a lien claim immediately.
Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby iamani » Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:55 am

Hi musashi

i knew you'd respond, thank you.

It just so happens that your video on liens is what woke him up, which led him to V's book, which led to him being able to take on the DASS (successfully) over the right to care for his own mother when she got dementia, to tackle (successfully) the court of protection, to beat (alleged) foul play to reach the court in time for the second/final hearing in same court.

If he hadn't made it in time, he'd have lost. He did make it in time, and it transpires that the opposition didn't turn up, so he won!

Here's where it gets interesting....


Many years ago he was disqualified (driving) for twelve months, as soon as he hears 'disqualified...' he loses his temper and is escorted from court. He did not hear the judge say '.... with a requirement for an extended test to regain licence'. His brief never bothered to contact him to let him know.

No-one ever asked him to return his license, so after twelve months he just started driving again on the same one. Eventually he is stopped on the road, and the constable tells him he has to apply for a new licence - which he does.

DVLA issues him one - no fuss or bother. This was 6 years ago and he's been stopped several times since then, with nary a problem with his licence on every PNC or whatever, the DVLA site always confirming its validity.

So..... the last day of august last yeae and he's on his way to this vital court of protection hearing at Liverpool family court, and he has to use the Mersey Tunnel to get there. Now, he has motor trade insurance, but he is stopped by Tunnel Police (which btw is a private constabulary for the MPTA) for an insurance check - no mention of licence issues.

The tunnel Bobby takes his insurance cert. and tells him to wait in the car while he checks it in the tunnel office.

15 minutes later Scott enters the office, asks if he's being detained as he has to get to court. The Bobby is evasive so Scott tells him if he's not being detained he's off to court and will be there if they want him, and that he will stop off for his insurance cert. on his way back.
The Bobby says nowt, so Scott leaves, and makes court in time, wins by default on account of his oppo (wirral council if i remember rightly) not turning up (he had a good case), picks up his insurance cert on way home.

Still no mention of licence issues....

Next day, same tunnel Bobby and an accomplice turn up at his business and demand that he accompany them to attend a 'Voluntary Attendance' interview (oh, the irony!) or they would arrest him. They refused to state what it would be about, the accomplice refused to even give his name.

Scott asserts his common-law rights and stands his ground calmly and peacefully, so an emergency assist call is made which brings 8 matrix bobbies in 4 vehicles. After again standing his ground he is finally advised that there may be a problem with his licence, at which point he agrees (to get them out of his shop) to attend a VA interview by appointment. (He records EVERYTHING! and it's all on his yt channel).

Prior to the appointment he calls their inspector and advises that he will only be attending to drop off a prepared statement.

When he attends the appointment at his local police station, he hands over his prepared statement and attempts to leave at which point he is physically obstructed and restrained by Tunnel Bobby, who eventually let's him go.

Merseyside Police have given the tunnel police a copy of the cctv incident footage upon their request, but apparently destroyed their own copy before Scott asked for one. He is currently awaiting a response from a request to the tunnel police for a copy.

So.... three months later (december) he gets a letter from DVLA that his licence must be returned to them as he was driving whilst disqualified for the last 12 years because THEY HAD JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THE EXTENDED RETEST REQUIREMENT!

Turns out that although the court had notified the DVLA about the 12 month disqualification period, for some reason they did not inform the DVLA of the order for an extended retest requirement.

So he stopped driving and started wondering what had happened to make this 12 year old un-issued court order for an extended retest requirement that he knew nothing about, suddenly re-appear on the very same day he is heading to court. This information had never made it to the DVLA or its database, or the Police National Computer even. It had never made it out if the court it was issued from.

This would suggest that this data could only be accessed by a court official. The plot thickens.....

Upon enquiry it turns out that the tunnel bobby was acting on '...information PRESENTED to him....' that due to a 12 year old unissued-and-so-not-previously-enforced court order (for an extended retest requirement) Scott was technically driving while disqualified. Tunnel bobby was presented with the evidence on the very same day that Scott was due to use the tunnel to get to court....hmmmm

The problem tunnel bobby had was that the DVLA database and the PNC checks all said Scott had a valid driving licence, so tunnel bobby couldn't be sure of his information. So instead he stopped Scott under pretext of an insurance check.

Tbc shortly...
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby iamani » Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:24 am

Cont.

We know that the personal data presented to the tunnel bobby could only be accessed by a court official. We know that this personal data was presented as evidence on the day that only Scott and the court staff knew he would have to use the tunnel. We know that whoever accessed the personal data chose to inform the tunnel police rather than Merseyside Police or even the DVLA......

Hmmmm, i wonder who might have done this? And why?

Disgusted by the treatment of himself and his mother over her healthcare and finances after she contracted dementia, Scott started a support group on Facebook called 'Dementia Fraud' for people who were facing similar experiences and started documenting it all on his YT channel 'PUBLIC SERVANT CRIMINALS'. He may have uncovered institutionalised harvesting of the elderly by a member of the judiciary, he may not......

He has been asked 3 times to return a licence that now seems to have never existed according to latest edit of the DVLA records.

That licence might be evidence against the DVLA, the courts, and the police - maybe even a judge....?

They decided to prosecute him for driving whilst disqualified. It being a civil matter (however they try to dress it up as 'criminal') he refused service of process. He has also noticed various officials, and made various SARs and even issued a fee schedule to the chief constable in an attempt to dissuade them from arresting him for a civil matter. All he has asked for is that the matter of the 12 year old order be re-heard before a court before revoking the licence.

Instead they apparently had a hearing yesterday (tuesday) and issued a no-bail warrant for his arrest, which Merseyside Police executed last night (tuesday) by ignoring his protests and requests to see the warrant and bashing his door down. They refused to recognise him as a living man and carted him off.

This man has done nothing wrong. In one of the letters received from DVLA it said '....you would have been informed by the court of the order for extended retest' and in the very same paragraph says '....the court failed to inform us of the order for an extended retest.' Breathtaking, no...?

Fact is the court made a mistake 12 years ago , and it would appear that some court official may have abused their position to use that information for gain rather than any notion of justice. Allegedly.

....and the physical licence he holds is evidence without which he is defenceless to the charges of driving while disqualified.

Where do you turn....?
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby musashi » Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:44 am

Got a lot to look at there but I have a very busy day ahead of me so can't reply in any substance just yet. I'll have a look later when I have time to sit and re-read it.
Maadministration; conspiracy to pervert the course of justice; data protection offences; false imprisonment; probably assault; and probably more.
Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby iamani » Wed Feb 28, 2018 1:38 pm

Hi musashi

Thank you,sincerely,much appreciated.

Quick update - he had his hearing this morning and was released about 12.30, and he's spitting feathers.

Apparently he gave a good account of himself (as usual) and told the judge what's what. Although he insisted on a crown court case this was denied, and he was adjourned until May.

We were hoping to keep all this 'private' until we had worked out some stuff (our lack of knowledge been holding us up).

i honestly could not see how they were going to be able to arrest him with all the evidence he has, as i say, he's done nowt wrong.
How can they possibly win? The mind boggles....
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby musashi » Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:45 pm

I'm still uncertain about what he has actually been charged with!

Hi musashi

i knew you'd respond, thank you.
So, I'm that predictable, eh?

It just so happens that your video on liens is what woke him up, which led him to V's book, which led to him being able to take on the DASS (successfully) over the right to care for his own mother when she got dementia, to tackle (successfully) the court of protection, to beat (alleged) foul play to reach the court in time for the second/final hearing in same court.

If he hadn't made it in time, he'd have lost. He did make it in time, and it transpires that the opposition didn't turn up, so he won!

Here's where it gets interesting....


Many years ago he was disqualified (driving) for twelve months, as soon as he hears 'disqualified...' he loses his temper and is escorted from court. He did not hear the judge say '.... with a requirement for an extended test to regain licence'. His brief never bothered to contact him to let him know.
Negligence on the part of the brief, perhaps?

No-one ever asked him to return his license, so after twelve months he just started driving again on the same one. Eventually he is stopped on the road, and the constable tells him he has to apply for a new licence - which he does.
How would any constable know he needed to apply for a new licence? Is there another database he can check? Sounds like cops keep their own database of their results in court.

DVLA issues him one - no fuss or bother. This was 6 years ago and he's been stopped several times since then, with nary a problem with his licence on every PNC or whatever, the DVLA site always confirming its validity.
Maladministration by the court in not informing dvla.

So..... the last day of august last year and he's on his way to this vital court of protection hearing at Liverpool family court, and he has to use the Mersey Tunnel to get there. Now, he has motor trade insurance, but he is stopped by Tunnel Police (which btw is a private constabulary for the MPTA) for an insurance check - no mention of licence issues.
Does a private police have the authority to stop drivers for any kind of check?
Is it a state executive or just a security wallah in a uniform? What kind of uniform? Does he have a statutory existence with statutory powers?


The tunnel Bobby takes his insurance cert. and tells him to wait in the car while he checks it in the tunnel office.
What checks did he in fact make? Who did he contact? A record should have been kept. If no record kept it is maladministration – maybe more - and creates a liability.
Never carry your documents. You don't have to and they may be lost or stolen, cloned and used to fuck you over – ask for a producer every time. It gives them nothing at that moment to fuck you about with .

15 minutes later Scott enters the office, asks if he's being detained as he has to get to court. The Bobby is evasive so Scott tells him if he's not being detained he's off to court and will be there if they want him, and that he will stop off for his insurance cert. on his way back.
Why leave the certificate? Should have taken a receipt.

The Bobby says nowt, so Scott leaves, and makes court in time, wins by default on account of his oppo (wirral council if i remember rightly) not turning up (he had a good case), picks up his insurance cert on way home.

Still no mention of licence issues....

Next day, same tunnel Bobby and an accomplice turn up at his business and demand that he accompany them to attend a 'Voluntary Attendance' interview (oh, the irony!) or they would arrest him. They refused to state what it would be about, the accomplice refused to even give his name.
Who runs these VAs? Where are they held? What is their lawful/legal standing?
Uniformed constables are obliged on demand to give their name and police station they work out of although not to sho0w their warrant cards. Plain clothes police are obliged on demand to show their warrant cards.
A VA, if it is voluntary is, in fact, voluntary. The threat to arrest if a voluntary action is not performed is extortion/blackmail/enticement to slavery. A crime which creates a liability.
The reasons for attendance/arrest must always be given.
Does the tunnel booby have authority to come to one's door and make demands?


Scott asserts his common-law rights and stands his ground calmly and peacefully, so an emergency assist call is made which brings 8 matrix bobbies in 4 vehicles. After again standing his ground he is finally advised that there may be a problem with his licence, at which point he agrees (to get them out of his shop) to attend a VA interview by appointment. (He records EVERYTHING! and it's all on his yt channel).
A problem with his licence, even if there is one, is not grounds for an arrest. This is coercion by threat of police action in a civil matter as you know and creates a liability against the cops.

Prior to the appointment he calls their inspector and advises that he will only be attending to drop off a prepared statement.
What was the inspector's reply? Was this recorded?
When he attends the appointment at his local police station, he hands over his prepared statement and attempts to leave at which point he is physically obstructed and restrained by Tunnel Bobby, who eventually let's him go.
This is false imprisonment, even if only for a few seconds, and if bodily contact was made then it is assault occasioning actual bodily harm. For an established baseline on damages for false arrest see Oscar v Chief Constable RUC [1992] NI290. Compo for assault can be deduced from the Magistrates courts sentencing guidelines – a maximum five grand fine, so he can demand that as a baseline minimum to start with on a claim.

Merseyside Police have given the tunnel police a copy of the cctv incident footage upon their request, but apparently destroyed their own copy before Scott asked for one. He is currently awaiting a response from a request to the tunnel police for a copy.
A copy is made from the original footage. If a copy is lost, well, make another one from the original footage. The fact that a copy has been made proves that original footages existed and that recording equipment was functioning normally.
If the original footage is now missing/deleted then data protection has been seriously breached as well as the Police Discipline Codes, Police Codes of Practice, Standard Operating Procedure, and the course of justice has been intentionally perverted. The officer in charge of the custody suite at that time is liable – go for him.
A very basic computer forensics search of the relevant equipment will show when and who erased the footage, as all log ins are recorded and all actions on the machine are recorded as standard. It would be very, very easy to discover when it was done and who did it.
Besides, why make a copy then destroy it?

So.... three months later (December) he gets a letter from DVLA that his licence must be returned to them as he was driving whilst disqualified for the last 12 years because THEY HAD JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THE EXTENDED RETEST REQUIREMENT!
Turns out that although the court had notified the DVLA about the 12 month disqualification period, for some reason they did not inform the DVLA of the order for an extended retest requirement.
Again, court maladministration. SAR to dvla. SAR to court.

So he stopped driving and started wondering what had happened to make this 12 year old un-issued court order for an extended retest requirement that he knew nothing about, suddenly re-appear on the very same day he is heading to court. This information had never made it to the DVLA or its database, or the Police National Computer even. It had never made it out if the court it was issued from.
This would suggest that this data could only be accessed by a court official. The plot thickens.....
Data Protection offences again. Perverting the course of justice again. Computer forensics will reveal all.

Upon enquiry it turns out that the tunnel bobby was acting on '...information PRESENTED to him....' that due to a 12 year old unissued-and-so-not-previously-enforced court order (for an extended retest requirement) Scott was technically driving while disqualified. Tunnel bobby was presented with the evidence on the very same day that Scott was due to use the tunnel to get to court....hmmmm
By whom, in what manner, and when, exactly? Information presented should be recorded somewhere if its an official matter as well as a report on what actions if any where taken as a result of that.

The problem tunnel bobby had was that the DVLA database and the PNC checks all said Scott had a valid driving licence, so tunnel bobby couldn't be sure of his information. So instead he stopped Scott under pretext of an insurance check.
Again, does he have the right to stop and make such demands?
Tbc shortly...

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!
by iamani » Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:24 am
Cont.

We know that the personal data presented to the tunnel bobby could only be accessed by a court official. We know that this personal data was presented as evidence on the day that only Scott and the court staff knew he would have to use the tunnel. We know that whoever accessed the personal data chose to inform the tunnel police rather than Merseyside Police or even the DVLA......
Hmmmm, i wonder who might have done this? And why?
Conspiracy by the sound of it and, again, data was accessed and the log-in can be traced to a given individual.
Your attention is drawn to Data Protection Act, 1998, specifically but not necessarily exclusively to section 2. g; h – sensitive data
section 55 – disclosure.
Schedule 3, paragraph 4 – consent of subject

Disgusted by the treatment of himself and his mother over her healthcare and finances after she contracted dementia, Scott started a support group on Facebook called 'Dementia Fraud' for people who were facing similar experiences and started documenting it all on his YT channel 'PUBLIC SERVANT CRIMINALS'. He may have uncovered institutionalised harvesting of the elderly by a member of the judiciary, he may not......
He probably has which is why he is being targeted. AGENDA 21 - for profit and fun.

He has been asked 3 times to return a licence that now seems to have never existed according to latest edit of the DVLA records.
That licence might be evidence against the DVLA, the courts, and the police - maybe even a judge....?
Do an SAR to dvla and see what exactly they do have. Same with court. Same with tunnel guys.

They decided to prosecute him for driving whilst disqualified. It being a civil matter (however they try to dress it up as 'criminal') he refused service of process. He has also noticed various officials, and made various SARs and even issued a fee schedule to the chief constable in an attempt to dissuade them from arresting him for a civil matter. All he has asked for is that the matter of the 12 year old order be re-heard before a court before revoking the licence.
They have to prove INTENT in the matter of driving while disqualified. It is not a crime of strict liability. ALWAYS DEMAND THEY PROVE INTENT. Many, many things disappear when we demand they prove intent. No intent – no crime/offence. If you don't know then you don't know and they have to prove that you did know. A negative averment on the matter will sort that out.
Forget fee schedules – they are invalid in law and one of Mike Dobson's cases showed that when he tried to enforce one. It tells them also that you are a freeman, or took your shit off the net, will be a troublemaker, and they act accordingly. Say nothing except about the matter in hand and keep a money claim to the very end. Don't mention a claim until you make the claim, you only scare them and make them fight dirtier and harder.


Instead they apparently had a hearing yesterday (tuesday) and issued a no-bail warrant for his arrest, which Merseyside Police executed last night (tuesday) by ignoring his protests and requests to see the warrant and bashing his door down. They refused to recognise him as a living man and carted him off.
If you are disqualified then your insurance is automatically invalidated – that's a criminal, matter these days. Best check what the arrest was for.
Any court procedure held without one's knowledge is void under section 14 of the Magistrates Courts Act, 1984 and others. Possibly, and depending on the nature of the hearing - it might not have been a hearing but just an application by the police - a Statutory Declaration of the void order should be issued by him under sec 14 and given to the court which issued the bench warrant. Cops are not liable on a bad warrant.

This man has done nothing wrong. In one of the letters received from DVLA it said '....you would have been informed by the court of the order for extended retest' and in the very same paragraph says '....the court failed to inform us of the order for an extended retest.' Breathtaking, no...?
Just covering themselves – not our fault – and telling you who the bad guys are. Good evidence for a court maladministration defence and a claim for compo for distress etc.

Fact is the court made a mistake 12 years ago , and it would appear that some court official may have abused their position to use that information for gain rather than any notion of justice. Allegedly.

....and the physical licence he holds is evidence without which he is defenceless to the charges of driving while disqualified.
Keep the licence – photocopy it at a solicitor's office, or maybe commissioner of oaths, get it certified as a true copy by them and then send the original to dvla. Alternatively, get a certified copy anyway, say the original can't be found then, just as it so often happens in the fairy tale world of La La Legal, it can magically reappear to be accidentally found just in the very nick of time. Remember, when one is arrested the police have powers of search, and its amazing what can disappear when a cop searches a place, so it's good to keep stuff elsewhere.

Where do you turn....?
Always to oneself first, then to trusted others.
If your friend has not already done it then he must get enduring power of attorney to act for his mother. Read the Act. An application at court may be necessary if she has no lucid moments. If she does, then get that power of attorney with a legal witness present and/or acting on his behalf. The bastards are after her life and her wealth and he stands in their way. The courts must assume the capacity to litigate – to make rational choices based on clear understanding - until proven otherwise in a court, and it's hard for the scavengers to prove that an EPoA was not given in her capacity to make such rational decisions. Again, a negative averment to any challenge made to you is very powerful.
The definition of a fool is one who is honest with the dishonest, and I for one would have no hesitation in forging her signature or getting her to sign an EPoA even when she was irrational – as long as she was capable of signing. Let them prove that she wasn't!
A friend is in probate right now because of someone doing a false signature to change a will and the handwriting expert evidence he has is not accepted because it's not infallible. It is suggestive but not persuasive.


You have presented no evidence that my mother was incapacitated when she gave me enduring power of attorney. I do not believe you have any evidence she was incapacitated at the time she gave me enduring power of attorney, and I do not believe that any such evidence exists.

Dead easy and dead powerful because they have to produce that evidence. It would be dangerous for a judge to proceed on an assumption.

I would begin to prepare claims against the tunnel booby, the cops, and the courts on the basis of what I suspected had been done and fine tune it as the evidence came in – or failed to come in.

For example, in court I might reasonably suggest that the cops had unlawfully interfered with the computer CCTV footage and leave them to deny it. I have created a controversy and can now require the judge to issue a Production Order to the cops to show the computer forensics. It costs me nothing more than a few words and they'll do the rest between them.

I might also suggest that the tunnel booby was in receipt of unlawfully divulged data protected information and an accomplice thereby. He'd have to deny this and not only show the information he received but show that the data he received was lawfully supplied by whomsoever supplied it. He will certainly cover his own arse when he sees the sling coming.

I might then oblige the named person who divulged the information received by the tunnel booby to justify under data protection laws his/her disclosure of that information – and why!


Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby iamani » Fri Mar 02, 2018 4:05 am

Hi musashi

Thanks for the comprehensive debrief, you caught one or two things i didn't, cheers! i'm currently drafting a clarification and update i'll hopefully post tomorrow.

Btw, Scott has been trying to join the site so he can post but doesn't seem to be getting the confirmation email - are you aware of any problems with enrollment at the moment?

Cheers!
law is all is love is all is law
iamani
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:06 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby musashi » Fri Mar 02, 2018 12:10 pm

Btw, Scott has been trying to join the site so he can post but doesn't seem to be getting the confirmation email - are you aware of any problems with enrollment at the moment?


I'm pretty sure that no-one has been able to register since Treeman abandoned the site more than a year ago as he did all the admin.
Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Urgent: advice needed, please!

Postby musashi » Fri Mar 02, 2018 6:49 pm

These days I'm a Confirmed Anarchist ... and generally only talk to Subscribers via a Mailing List ...
http://fmotl.com/mailman/listinfo/newsletter_fmotl.com

That's what V said in that last post so perhaps if you get on there you could ask for help.

I spoke to Treeman today and he no longer has admin or moderator status so he can offer no help or advice.
Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Next

Return to Help Wanted

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests