Win any court case brought against you for not paying a fine
All grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void
~ United Kingdom Bill of Rights 1688
Our Bill of Rights
The United Kingdom Bill of Rights [1688] CHAPTER 2 1 William and Mary Sess 2 is an Act declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown, is a “Preserved Imperial Enactment” in Queensland (and all other States), which says:
“Grants of Fines, &c. before Conviction, &c. And severall Grants and Promises made of Fines and Forfeitures before any Conviction or Judgement against the Persons upon whome the same were to be levyed. All which are utterly directly contrary to the knowne Lawes and Statutes and Freedome of this Realme”
No State Government may legislate against the Bill of Rights to authorize any commercial organization, including local councils (they are NOT local government!), toll companies, SPER, and not even the ATO to levy a fee or fine without a conviction before a judge and jury of our peers.
THAT IS THE LAW AND IF YOU CHALLENGE IT ALL MAGISTRATES AND JUDGES MUST ABIDE BY THE LAW
NOTE: Should you decide to challenge a fine using the information supplied in this website we take no responsibility for the actions you take. Each case is different and we cannot guarantee success.
The current legal system is based on assumed authority; that is, you assume they have authority over you because that is how they have conditioned you to think. So, the question you must ask in any court is to find out if the person presiding over a court, or levying a fine or other punitive fee against you has the authority and the jurisdiction to do so.
For example, when contesting any fine, you must ask the Magistrate or Judge this one simple question:
“Can the court/magistrate/judge prove that the officer who issued the parking/speeding/toll infringement notice and/or the Court attendance notice was a lawfully appointed Royal Crown Public Officer (CPO)?”
Caution: If you have committed a serious crime then you cannot use these techniques. You are personally responsible for any serious crimes you commit, and you should face a Jury to be judged.
A simple jurisdictional challenge before any judge or magistrate can quickly stop any legal matter if he/she cannot provide evidence (scroll further down to include the Parramatta Court Verdict):
Memorise this powerful sentence, or keep a note of it. You should also include this statement in an Affidavit to the court before you turn up.
“As the Director and Beneficiary of my legal person/corporation/trust, I give you 21 days to respond in writing providing proof of claim with evidence as to your legal or lawful jurisdiction over me, failing which you will become liable for any damages I may suffer.”
Since all Mayors, Councilors, Police, Toll Operators, Magistrates, and Judges are Corporate Officers employed by the corporation registered in the USA (read this to learn how: https://www.cirnow.com.au/how-when-did-the-government-commit-treason/) and not Commonwealth Public Officers of the Crown they have no authority over us unless we give them permission. By challenging their authority before the proceedings begin and insisting on an immediate answer you can short-circuit the procedure before it even gets started.
If they cannot produce the proof in the form of a Royal Warrant issued by the Royally appointed Governor General, then you can declare that the court has no authority and therefore you, as a Commonwealth of Australia representative declare the case dismissed, all charges dropped, and the court must close down immediately.
It is worth reminding the court, if needed, that Commonwealth law stipulates under section 92 that Trade within the Commonwealth to be free.
Section 92. On the imposition of uniform duties of customs, trade, commerce and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.
This means that if you travel on any road within the Commonwealth you do not need a licence to drive as a private citizen. Only vehicles conducting trade, commerce and intercourse among states need a licence to conduct business. Always make sure you use the correct word. If you are traveling as a private citizen then you must say you are travel or traveling. When driving a commercial vehicle you must use the word driving.
The other problem we face is that since the political party governments introduced decimal currency we cannot pay any debts using gold and silver, as mandated in:
Section 115. A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts.
Therefore, the only way we can pay any debt to the government is by using silver coins.
A Precedent has already been set
A recent judgement was handed down by a NSW Judge, not just a Magistrate, stating that a challenge to the court asking if a city council officer who issued a parking ticket could prove that he was a lawfully appointed Crown Public Officer. As he could not, the case was dismissed.
Even though the court judgement was sent to the plaintiff it is copyright to the Crown. The court, not acting under Common Law, is trying to suppress this judgement and therefore we cannot publish it. But we can publish the Case Number and the court:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
District Court Parramatta
Case Number: 2013/00041691
If you want to view the judgement you will be forced to pay a fee and justify why you want to see it. That’s the way the system works these days.
However, this case has created a legal precedent that anyone can use in any court to have their case dismissed! This is why it is so important. No longer can the fake government get away with stealing our money for bogus reasons.
This is an example of the court transcript that proved local council officers have no authority to issue parking fines if they cannot prove they have been appointed by the council. It is interesting reading, as it explains how the judge arrived at his decision.
We urge everyone to make the effort to contest any unlawful fine or fee. If they courts are hit with a deluge of people refusing to pay they will be forced to take notice.
Join the many Australians who are refusing to pay the unlawful fines levied by the criminal political party minions.
Click on Stop Paying Fines! to learn more and to sign up. We will send you documents and follow up information to guide you how to fight back:
Stop Paying Fines!
——————————————————–
If you want to do something to stop the criminal corporate political parties continuing to destroy our nation and our Democracy, sign up for free at a Common Law Assembly near you!
If there is no assembly near you, why not start one. It’s easy! Just follow these easy steps….
Click to learn how to Start an Assembly
The Common Law team are always there to fully support and help you get started.
——————————————————–
33 thoughts on “How to Win in Court”
To the publisher of this article,
I wish to ascertain the source trial that the judgement you mention contained in:
“A recent judgement was handed down by a NSW Judge, not just a Magistrate, stating that a challenge to the court asking if a city council officer who issued a parking ticket could prove that he was a lawfully appointed Crown Public Officer. As he could not, the case was dismissed.”
I look forward to your reply.
May I also ask upon providing such a source if it exist could you kindly delete my email address from your possession digital or otherwise.
Kindest Regards
I cannot provide the source, as it is a copyright court judgement and we have been told not to publish it. However, we can assure you that it is real, and that it makes the statement referred to.
Sorry, we can’t delete your email address as it is embedded by our website software, but we always respect your privacy and will never sell or give it to anyone else without a court order.
“I cannot provide the source, as it is a copyright court judgement “.
This is not true.
The facts are courts only copyright the “transcript”. The “judgement” is not copyright protected.
Further even if you do believe you cannot post the judgement you can certainly post a “cite” for the case so others can look it up.
“However, we can assure you that it is real, and that it makes the statement referred to. ” Really? Shall we reference you in court as our source then? Will the judge accept your assurance?
Paragraph- a precedent has already been set, needs more info. Name of court.name of judge, day and date, case number. Names of the relevant parties etc. so the public record can be accessed to verify these purported facts otherwise it is only hearsay to my non legal understanding. I think the term may be, verifiable info required here, not he said she said. Any specific public record info would be greatly appreciated if people wish to challenge, apart from that, an interesting post. Regards jak.
The record is not public, and we cannot reveal it. But it’s real and could be verified if a court case demands it. I will ask the gentleman in question if I can reveal the Court Case number and court location.
Hi Mike, Thanks for reply. I do not understand how it is not a public record though. Also how could it be verified if a court case demands it, without having any reference info to identify. I would appreciate it if you could ask the gentleman in question for me. And, How would I get a copy of the copyright court documents I under stand the court would want a fee. Regards. Jak. p.s. Please feel free to reply to my email address.
Jak, I have already asked the gentleman who won his case if I can publish the Case number and Jurisdiction. I’ll post it as soon as he approves.
Thanks for reply Mike.
Is this for real
Great article, what is the case number i would like to read up?
We have added the Case number and where the Case was heard to the article.
What the court and case number i need it pls ss im going to the magestrates for unlawful fines
Looking forward to read the case
i cant drive a car and that ability was taken from me by a stockbroker, but judges and the law arent much on side with individuals but that is even much more the case if your sick
Hi, you forgot to mention that the commonwealth law stipulates under section 92 that Trade within the Commonwealth to be free, and section 115 States not to coin money ( A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts. ). Section 115 would probably hold under “unlicensed driving” but you would have to exercise that right while saying you are “traveling” (think right to travel), as “driving” is considered engaging in commerce and trade with businesses. just the false corporate courts you have to deal with if caught.
Thank you for pointing that out. I think you meant that we would have to point out that under Section 95 we do not need a licence to “travel”, right? I will edit the article to include the information you have suggested.
Ok so I found and read the judgement.
EDITED…MAKE YOUR CASE…DON’T ABUSE ANYONE TO TRY AND SHOW YOUR “SUPERIOR” KNOWLEDGE.
“I would add to that the solicitor who appeared for the council today was not aware that this was a conviction appeal.”
In English this means the court will not grant either party leave to gather further evidence, you must turn up with all relevant evidence on the day or it will not be allowed. So when the defendant asks for proof the traffic inspector is a duly appointed officer of the council the councils solicitor does not have this evidence WITH HIM in court. So the court will not allow him to get it and return with it at another time and he loses.
As the judge says the tactic is unusual but law is about proper process not outcome. The councils solicitor didn’t pay attention to the details of the process and lost because of it.
This is not some great discovery. This is a trick of law that is unlikely to be able to be reproduced because all councils will now be aware of this ruse and will bring the proof of appointment to court in future. This was a one off.
EDITED…MAKE YOUR CASE…DON’T ABUSE ANYONE TO TRY AND SHOW YOUR “SUPERIOR” KNOWLEDGE.
Give a man a little knowledge and he becomes dangerous. In this case, you are omitting some very important FACTS.
1. When I originally wrote the article I did not provide any reference to the court case judgement. But so many people asked that I said I would find out if I could. I spoke to the defendant in the case and he told me the judgement he received was Copyright and therefore we could not publish it…but he agreed that if I redacted the names that would allow me to post the document. That is what I did.
2. You are ignoring the fact that the council solicitor would not have been able to produce the Crown Authority the defendant asked for. even if he had been allowed to leave the court. No council has any Crown Authority, as required by the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution 1901. Nor, for that matter, do any State governments, or any political party governments. They are all corporate employees.
I suggest you read this article very carefully, since it is apparent you are completely unaware of the facts:
How & When did the Government Commit Treason?
From now on, when writing comments to this website keep a civil tongue in your head and debate the article. Any personal attacks or attempts to denigrate our work in an attempt to make your own flawed arguments look “legitimate” will be deleted.
Section 109 of the constition states that the latter shall prevail when the state laws is inconsistent with the commonwealth. Magistrates follow what they believe they think benefits them whether right or wrong by commonwealth laws. Even this redacted document shows an appeal to the district court. It’s a shame Australia has come to this. Even their (not the commonwealth laws) terrorism laws are changed to anyone who opposes their authority to shoot on sight. “Terrorism is defined as “an action or threat of action where the action causes certain defined forms of harm or interference and the action is done or the threat is made with the intention of advancing a political, religious or (((***ideological cause***)))” notice ideological cause? If we try to take back Australia they will just say it’s an ideological cause and give them reason to shoot despite the logical reason. Laws passed after 1979? Are without referendum and therefore illegal. gun laws, road authority acts, etc convening a grand jury with the my will letter is probably the best option without bloodshed. Here is a YouTube channel shedding light on everything: “https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC4FyfclMblG-59UgxA5lW5A/videos” there is also ozff (oz freedom fighters) their site got shut down, can probably guess why. They are even fencing off parliament despite it being meant for the commonwealth. That’s all for now, thank you for reading. Please spread to other people to get the word out. Don’t forget mywillaustralia.com
I have a situation where the local council has put waste water mains and has ordered me to connect, although I have a perfectly good septic system that works
I love this site, I totally agree with everything you guys do, and totally agree that essentially; the entire government are guilty of treason against the Australian people, as every government has put their own interest in front of the will of the people
I met a bloke who didn’t have number plates on his cars …and he didn’t have any State Driving Licences.
His explanation was that by Not having a Vehicle Registration or a Driver Licence, then that meant that he had Not signed any Contract between himself and State Government to comply with any rules; …and therefore has successfully avoided any legal court actions or penalties threatened against him.
He also said; when questioned toward identifying himself, he only uses his first name and when asked for his surname, he says are you refering to my family name and when confirmed, he simply says; my family has nothing to do with this and continues to identify himself by first name only and he said without him having a signed contract between him and the State, they dismiss the case. He says this is God’s Land and he has a right to move about as he pleases.
He said; he knew 15 others that moved about the same way…
???? Interesting, does anyone else know these free people?
You can also hopld your position by asking a set up Question..”Are we in agreement that i am a man ? if the officer saids yes then that a verbal contract. Then by saying what is your source of Authority? He will say Roads & Traffic Act then u can ask how dopes that act apply to a man ? If u look at all legislation acts they have the word person which is defined in law books as a corporation entity. If they agree that you are a man or woman there is no Acts thats has power of the word “Man “Woman” as man created Governments . It goes by Creator – Men & Women – Government – Corporations – Dead entities.
G’day George,
I used this question with the police at an ANZAC stand during the ‘lockdown’ and travel restrictions of 5km from home a couple of years ago
The cops reply to my question was to ignore it and ask for my ID, at which time i said, ‘We can get back to that, are we in agreement that i am a man?’
His response was, ” I’m not arguing about it, where’s your ID?’
I was then asking my question again when him and his corporate thug colleague assaulted me ( i obviously was unaware that asking a question is an offence! )
So we cannot expect these low iq order followers to play by the rules!!
Choose the fight you can win. It’s not worth fighting over a fine. Just pay it, but pay it with a Bill of Exchange.
yes
This is intriguing. When I renewed my NSW Drivers Licence in 2022, I do not remember being shown any Terms and Conditions before I signed (what is allegedly) merely for identification purposes. Do they deem that putting your signature on your Licence is signing some undisclosed contract, of which you have no chance to alter or delete any parts you may not agree with? My limited understanding of Corporate Law is that any Contract must be witnessed and agreed upon by both parties ONCE both parties have read it and made any necessary changes. This does not seem to be the case here.
Fraud vitiates any contract
G’day Mal, these people might be able to drive ( travel ) around without any rego and/or plates, but how much time & energy are they wasting arguing the point with big ego low IQ cops? The cops are not going to listen, check what the law actually says ( most of them are clueless ) and then give you a ‘special pardon’ to continue on your travels unhindered with a police escort! The opposite is what I have seen on video’s uploaded of these interactions with the corporate policy enforcers and you’ll more likely be walking or getting a bus home to await your day in their corporate court!!
As soon as I read this I used The reserved imperial enactment against Hervey Bay regional Council Qld as this council is charging me for a service I never contracted Namely curbside pick-up of rubbish I re-cycle 90% of waste. I’ve always done so until I suddenly got hit with garbage costs which I never contracted,Also checking back they are charging me for non specified interest and charges. The council said I have to pay no explanation needs to be given. Also that I can’t use “The reserved Imperial Enactment” They charged us 8%interest We paid Rates owing but not the interest or the add-ons or the Waste collection. Could you please advise. Thank you, Peter
As there is no Hervey Bay Common Law assembly there at this time, you will be fighting alone. A good idea is to choose the fights you can win. Can you win against the council fighting alone? Very doubtful. But if you were to form a common law assembly and then start organizing local Town Hall meetings of the people…. nothing to do with the local council… and then get everyone to sign a charter binding you all to work together, you can then take on the council. Once you have the support of enough locals you can all form a community bank, and withhold your council rates in the bank. Then elect your own council of the people and get that council to manage the community. This way, you will be able to make the government council irrelevant and without money they cannot operate. It’s up to you to take action.
Does this really work? With traffic offences? How are traffic offences unlawful? Sorry to be naive, but If I do this, I do not want to break considered stupid by the judge.
Go here to read what others say:
https://t.me/c/1665086037/56109