Monday, May 28, 2012

U.K.: Landmark Case Could Bring Down the Legal System – Queen not valid monarch

U.K.: Landmark Case Could Bring Down the Legal System – Queen not valid monarch

Landmark Case Could Stymie Legal System
If everyone began using this defence tomorrow, in all of the Commonwealth courts and in the United States, the entire legal system could be brought to its knees in a matter of weeks if not days.”
For those of you who have been following the John Anthony Hill (JAH) Case, it is great to be able to share that he was acquitted, on the 12th of May 2011, of the ridiculous and politically-motivated charge of attempting to “pervert the course of justice”. For those of you less familiar with this landmark case, John Anthony Hill is the Producer of the documentary film “7/7 Ripple Effect”. For more details about this extraordinary case and the trial itself, please visit the following links:-
There are two very important precedents that were established with this case that need to be studied in detail. There was a preliminary argument presented to the court to challenge both the jurisdiction and the sovereignty of Elizabeth Battenberg/Mountbatten, which was based on two distinct points. The first point being she was knowingly, and with malice aforethought, coronated on a fake stone in 1953 and thus has never been lawfully crowned.
There are those who may wish to argue that this point is irrelevant, as Judge Jeffrey Vincent Pegden did at the trial, wrongly thinking the Coronation is just a ceremony because she has been pretending to be the monarch for over 58 years. In actual fact the Coronation is a binding oath and a contract, requiring the monarch’s signature. Which brings us to the second point.
At that Coronation ceremony, Elizabeth signed a binding contract, before God and the British people, that she would do her utmost to maintain The Laws of God. This she solemnly swore to do, with her hand placed on the Sovereign’s Bible, before kissing The Bible and signing the contract. Please note well that in The Law of God, found in the first five books of The Bible, man-made legislation is strictly prohibited.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

IMHO they had to use a fake stone at the Coronation of her because she's not truly of the royal bloodline ( I think if they had used the real stone she probably would have been zapped on the spot or something to that effect)? They are usurpers to the crown. The only one of that family that was of the true royal bloodline was Diana. The usurpers and their kind have been trying to wipe out the true royal bloodline for centuries. As far as I have studied it started with them trying to wipe out Charlemagne's bloodline.... well they didn't totally succeed with that one!

Anonymous said...

Let's hope the expose is sooner not years!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

3 comments: Fred, May 28, 2012 at 9:40 pm (UTC 1). With the United Kingdom being in fact the name of a registered company ,what so called legality, does it have, or can it exercise? If it is a Corporation UK INC, it is not an independent sovereign nation, and as such can have no authority over it’s subjects. All the services ( Servus is the Latin name for slave ) the Hospitals , the Schools and most importantly the Police, are listed Companies ~ do a check on them in Dunn and Bradstreet . Are they worthwhile investments? The way the system is organised The People are under no compulsion to obey (lawfully) under common law which is the law of the land~ however legally ~ that is a different matter that is the law of the sea. Hence the terminology used (in the dock at a trial) It starts when the baby passes down the birthing ( berth ) canal, and is given a Birth (berth ) Certificate. That child now been handed over to the Registrar ( just like a ship ) it has been abandoned and salvaged . That is why the Child Welfare people can remove a baby on any pretext ( the child has been handed to the state and does not belong to the parents ~sad but true ~ you have been tricked ~ you do not have to register a baby. Has The Acts of Parliament are just that, acts (part of a play ). As for their statutes ~ they also are not law, but are given the force of law by the consent of the governed ~ did you consent? Two tit bits for you ~the meaning of Law, is the masterful use of language ~nothing to do with equality, fairness or justice . With Justice being what it says for the rulers . Justus . And by the way the meaning of your Parliament is derived from two French words /parler/ to speak and /mentir/ to lie . Just a little bit of information for you lot out there ~Time TO Wake UP. There is a chance that this will be derided by the usual suspects, the shills, and those who have a vested interest spooks etc. But the sleeper must awaken The time is starting to move very quickly.For the ones who are awake, they will understand.///
Steve, May 28, 2012 at 11:02 pm (UTC 1). Thank you Fred. ////
Janelle Marshall. May 29, 2012 at 5:50 am(UTC 1).
http://hitofthegoodlife.com/.... This above/previous link, leads to copy of the Declaration and Notice of Claim to the Throne of England which is the Throne of David, and belongs to the returned Christ, whose name today is Brian Leonard Golightly Marshall, received by the Queen on June 14th 2010. She is in default to him. Elizabeth is the Whore of the Revelation riding the Zionist corporate beast, the 7 hills are the continents of people. She was educated by her father George the VI that should the Christ make his presence known during her reign, she was to hand over the Throne to him ....(....)
http://philosophers-stone.co.uk/wordpress/2012/05/u-k-landmark-case-could-bring-down-the-legal-system-queen-not-valid-monarch/

Anonymous said...

Jury Rejects State Charges, against 7/7 Ripple Effect’s Muad’Dib. May 12, 2011 by NK, Nick Kollerstrom, 68 comments.// At 4pm on Thursday 12th May, at Southwark Crown Court, the jury returned and declared Muad’Dib (Anthony John Hill) innocent of attempting to ‘pervert the course of justice’. / http://terroronthetube.co.uk/author/admin/ ...for more.../
Mr. Hill has spent 151 days incarcerated in Wandsworth prison over the past few months, and this verdict spared him, mercifully, a sentence of up to 20 years in jail. His offence? He had sent six DVD copies of his film ‘7/7: The Ripple Effect’ ...to various persons at the time (in 2008) of the trial in Kingston, of three ‘terror’ suspects, alleged co-conspirators with the London ‘suicide bombers’. The DVD’s were intercepted and never reached their targets. The Kingston suspects were found innocent (only to later be retried for the same offences, but that’s another story). Muad’Dib’s trial started on Monday 9th May, with a challenge to the monarchy, and, hence, the authority of the court. This was ruled ‘out of order’ by the judge. On Tuesday a jury were sworn in. On Wednesday they watched all of his film, ‘The Ripple Effect’, in open court. Over the Tuesday and Wednesday the jury heard in-depth discussions of both 7/7 and 9/11, with Mr Hill laying out clearly, and at his own leisurely pace under cross-examination, the reasons he believes that both these ‘attacks by terrorists’ were, in fact, false flag attacks by agencies of the state, against its own people, carried out with the purpose of providing a pretext for invasion of innocent countries in the middle east, in order to control their natural resources. This was surely the first ever fully-explored set of such allegations of false flag terror made against any state, before an ordinary collection of the citizens of that state. It is also clear from the verdict that, when such information is placed before such ordinary citizens, the majority of them ‘get it.’ ...A group of up to 25 supporters attended the four days of the trial, a couple travelling from as far afield as Finland and the state of Montana..... His well-referenced study focussed very much on what happened at Canary Wharf on that morning, seeing the Ripple narrative, whereby the young alleged bombers had been inveigled into a terror drill that morning, then fled to Canary wharf, where they were shot – as the best account yet. The new 3rd edition of my book Terror on the Tube, endorses this view. ... http://terroronthetube.co.uk/2011/05/12/muaddib-acquitted/

Anonymous said...

TRANSCRIPT, version 0.5.3, last updated 04.11.07. 01 - MOCK EXERCISES AND BOMB HOAXES IN THE RUN-UP TO 7/7/2005. 02 - PETER POWER: DUPE, OR ACCOMPLICE? 03 - FOREIGN SECURITY FIRMS - CAN THEY BE TRUSTED?
04 - THE FOUR MUSLIMS: ACTORS, OR PATSIES? 05 - THE GHOST TRAINS. 06 - THE NUMBER 30 BUS.
07- PRE-PLANTED EXPLOSIVES. 08 - CONCLUSION. 09 - EPILOGUE.
Dear Viewer, I hope this finds you well, in good spirit and having a good day. Regarding the 7/7/2005 terrorist attacks in London, let us look at the facts, and what we were told, and compare them. Then, using Ockham’s Razor and common-sense, let us see what conclusions are to be drawn, so we can all understand what most likely really did happen that day. ....(...) http://jforjustice.co.uk/77/

Anonymous said...

....part1/2...... U.K.: Landmark Case Could Stymie Legal System - Queen not valid monarch.Written by Debra Siddons ,Friday, 27 May 2011 07:51. ...For more details about this extraordinary case and the trial itself, please visit the following links:- .. http://mtrial.org + http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com ....Please note well that in The Law of God,found in the first five books of The Bible, man-made legislation... is strictly prohibited.The very first time that she gave "royal assent" to any piece of man-made legislation, she broke her solemn oath with God and with the British people, and she ceased to be the monarch with immediate effect. To date, she has broken her oath thousands and thousands of times, which is a water-proof, iron-clad, undeniable FACT. She is therefore without question not the monarch, but instead is a criminal guilty of high treason among her other numerous crimes.
All of the courts in the U.K. are referred to as HM courts or "her majesty's" courts, which means every judge draws their authority from her. All cases brought by the state are "Regina vs. Xxxxxxx", which means they are all brought in the name of the queen. So if she isn't really the monarch, then she doesn't have the authority or the jurisdiction to bring a case against anyone else. And neither do any of "her majesty's" courts or judges. ..... All that is required now is for YOU to spread the word to as many as possible, so that this peaceful rebellion, can begin immediately. Or you can watch the last remnants of your freedoms swept away, as the Global Elite plunge the entire world into bankruptcy and WW3, to usher in their "New World Order". Bearing in mind the legal maxim that no man can judge in his own cause, it should be crystal clear, that no judge in the Commonwealth could lawfully rule on a challenge to the jurisdiction and sovereignty of the monarch. It is a question of their own authority, so they are obviously not impartial to the outcome. That is why the ONLY way the question of jurisdiction can lawfully and impartially be decided, is by a jury.And that is exactly why John Anthony Hill requested a jury trial, to decide his challenge to the jurisdiction and sovereignty of Elizabeth. No judge under any circumstances can deny someone their right to request a jury trial. No judge can lawfully rule in their own cause. That doesn't mean they won't try, it only means that when they do, they are committing a criminal act (just as Judge Jeffrey Vincent Pegden did at John Anthony Hill's trial) and that their decision is immediate grounds... for an appeal and for a citizen's arrest. The fact that the court and its corrupt judge tried to ignore this particular point, is proof that they are well aware they have no lawful authority. That is one of the reasons why this is a landmark case. If everyone began using this defence tomorrow, in all of the Commonwealth courts and in the United States, the entire legal system could be brought to its knees, in a matter of weeks if not days......
For additional details about this bullet-proof defence, please visit: http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm#crimes .....
(from: http://exopolitics.blogs.com/breaking_news/2011/05/uk-landmark-case-could-stymie-legal-system-queen-not-valid-monarch.html )

Anonymous said...

....part2....By now some of you may be beginning to see the Light at the end of this very dark tunnel, and are so enthusiastic about putting this simple plan into motion, that you may have forgotten there was a second precedent set during this landmark case........ John Anthony Hill was also able to enter into the official record, his testimony about what happened on September 11th, 2001 in the United States and that both 9/11 and 7/7 were false flag attacks. He went on to show the jurors the now infamous BBC report of the col-lapse of the Salomon Brothers building (WTC7) by Jane Standley on 9/11/2001. She reported the collapse,25 minutes before it actually occurred,and with the building clearly visible and still standing in the window behind Jane Standley's left shoulder, leaving no doubt that the BBC had foreknowledge of the event. As a result of the "7/7 Ripple Effect" being shown to the jurors, by the prosecution and John Anthony Hill's testimony about 9/11, the truth that those two events were false flag attacks and that the mainstream media is nothing more than a government propaganda machine, is now officially on record. And the "Not Guilty" verdict by the jury, is a ringing endorsement of that official record. ...
http://exopolitics.blogs.com/breaking_news/2011/05/uk-landmark-case-could-stymie-legal-system-queen-not-valid-monarch.html .... and.....http://www.henrymakow.com/hill.html ****************..The TRUTH about the British Monarchy; the "Golden Jubilee" (50 year reign) of the queen who never was, and The GOSPEL of The Kingdom. The word British is Hebrew and it means "Covenant Man" or the "People of The Covenant", as it does also in the Welsh language. Elizabeth Mountbatten, also known by the aliases Elizabeth Windsor and Elizabeth the Second, who has never officially been crowned, because she was crowned sitting upon a fake Stone of Destiny, is, like all of her predecessors, from the royal line of king David of Israel and the British Throne is the Throne of David that is to be inherited by Christ, during the Second-Coming, very soon according to Nostradamus. .... (...) ...the British peoples are Israel, God's Chosen people. The monarchy does not want the people to learn and keep The Covenant and God's Laws, or they would teach The Covenant in school. They want people to obey their laws, under which they can keep the people in poverty, and slaves to them and their friends. Employee is only a modern polite word, for slave. For those who might claim that they are Christians and that The Laws no longer apply, I will quote you Christ's own words on this subject:- Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy The Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass from The Law, till all (the prophecies) be fulfilled.*** The next sick joke is that the monarch claims to be "Defender of The Faith", whilst doing the opposite of everything that Jesus said.....(....) http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm and
http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm#crimes.