March 06, 2012

First Taste Of Scottish Justice

Just back from the JPs court. What a shambles.

They called my case number and my name, I just stood up and walked to the microphone. 

The Procurator Fiscals Depute asks "Are you still at this address?" (She reads out the address) I didn't move a muscle or say a word. (I didn't really have time).

She immediately turned to the JP sat on the throne behind her and all I heard her say was "...this is the one that...".

JP says to me: "Are you pleading guilty or not guilty?"

Me: "I am not pleading anything".

JP: "You have to plead one way or the other".

Me: "How can I plead when I have seen no evidence? All I have from the PF is words on a bit of paper."

JP: "You have to plead".

Me: "I can't plead either way until I have seen the evidence against me. Where is the photographic evidence?

My jaw nearly dropped when I heard him mutter "Irrelevant" or "Not relevant", then slightly louder, "Do you think you are guilty or not guilty?"

Me: "Based on the lack of evidence here today I would say I am not guilty".

JP: "Very good. Come back here on the x July for an Intermediate Diet at 10 am. Trial is set for xx July. Next case!"

Me: "Can I ask a question?"

JP: "No. We're done".

So I left.

Is that what passes for justice? The whole event took less than a minute.

I sat through around 40 other cases and I have to say that the JP was remarkably fair. Some people really did strain belief that they had "turned their lives around" and he admonished a few, but fined the majority. The average fine was £200 and some of them pay it off at £10 a fortnight. One guy who pleaded guilty to travelling at 82mph in a 60mph zone got fined £60 and 3 penalty points. I counted up to about £6,000 before I got bored with it. I don't imagine any of them rushing to pay their fines.

I dressed well, but no-one else appearing before him made any effort whatsoever. Raggy jeans, hoodies, and sweat pants were the order of the day. Drugs, theft, driving without insurance, benefit cheats, drunken behaviour and a couple of other misdemeanour's were heard. One guy appeared from custody, thinking he was getting out today, but he had committed some offence whilst out on bail. The JP listened to the guys lawyer for a minute then said "Seven days. Take him out".

All quite bizarre if you haven't seen it before.

So now I have to get my thinking head on. I need to find out what this diet is all about. I'm partial to bacon butties. And chips. I like chips.

I also need to know what they know, so I will request this photographic evidence they are alleged to possess. If they did have it, why would they not produce it in court today? And if they didn't have it, why not? By their own rules that evidence should have been sent to the court at least seven days in advance of the hearing. 

A real mystery.

Thoughts?

CR.

67 comments:

Nick said...

Sounds like they were prewarned to not listen to anything you wanted to say.

Maybe you should not give so much away on your blog before the next appearance, as they may be, probably are, reading it.

Does setting a trial date mean you will have the chance to speak to a jury? If that is so, surely it can be seen as positive!

Well done for having the courage to do this

Oldrightie said...

One mustn't lose sight of their pompous arrogance that they are special and more important than us. I do agree that you must be circumspect here, though. As ever keep up the good work.

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks Nick.

I have to assume that they know about the blog. I will take your advice and not post so much detail.

Regarding a jury, I have no idea. I can only hope that is the case.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

OR,

I do agree with that. There were 8 or 9 lawyers in, strutting about like peacocks they were.

I also think that she whispered to the JP "This is the pain in the arse I mentioned before we kicked off this morning". (Or something similar).

We forge ever onwards!!

CR.

CaptainUKIP said...

You were denied the opportunity of a question...I suggest you were attempting to ask the JP what he meant?

I suggest that the JP made an unlawful statement, where you do not understand terminology he used.

Statements / jargon given should be clearly explained to a level of your understanding; delivered at the speed to which the 'accused' understands / at a level to fully comprehend.

I suggest you'll need the record of proceedings to refer to for your defence (appeal).

If you do not appeal and use time to prepare within the designated time-frame / date set (July), you will likely be found guilty (by default).

If you have the right to a defence (statute requirement?), you should be permitted time to prepare, and right to see the evidence.

Not an expert, but seriously worth speaking to one!
Hope this helps.

wayne said...

Similar thing happened to me recently CR, only I ended up taking the £60 fine and points. Long story but I was warned if I challenged it, it would cost approx £600+ in court costs etc etc if I lost. I suspect many people choose not to take that risk. I think the phrase is "Got you by the bollocks"!

I too was the only person who had made an effort to dress appropriately!

Captain Ranty said...

Cap'n,

Thank you.

I was trying to ask a question about the court process. Particularly involving evidence: where is it and why can't I see it? Those were my openers but he shut me down and got rid of me.

Taking a lawyer in with me just shouts to the world "This man is an idiot. He cannot handle his own affairs".

I can handle them, I just need to study a great deal harder on court procedure.

Of all the people today who showed up without a lawyer, all pleaded guilty.

All (except one) with a lawyer pleaded guilty as well.

The money machine just kept on turning.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Wayne,

Sometimes that is the right thing to do. I also pick my fights carefully.

I don't feel I should take the fine and the points because they have yet to prove that I did anything wrong. It doesn't matter what I know, or what I think they know, the only thing that matters is what they can prove.

Naively, I thought they'd whip out the photo and say "HA!, there you are, guilty as sin!"

But that didn't happen and I want to know why.

CR.

wayne said...

I agree mate. My situation was different...... Good luck, as always, all the same.

Anonymous said...

Hi Cap'n,

I hate to say it but I feel a kangaroo court on its way. I think people who have read what I've written in the past will know that you cannot win against the system IF YOU PLAY BY THEIR RULES. The game is rigged, nothing but one big corrupt casino.

Think about it? How many of these civil law courts are their up and down the length and breadth of the UK & Ireland? Now multiply that by the fines they impose? Now look at how much the lawyers make? THIS IS BIG FUCKING BUSINESS and if anyone thinks they'll stand up and show them for the thieves they are, they to be either incredibly brave or stupid.

Should you attempt to show them up for what they are you have an incredibly high probability of being found in contempt and yet how contempuous is this illegal money racket?

Do you really think they want you to win when in doing so would show others just how illegal and corrupt the whole debacle is?

You are fighting against a self preservation system. They win because they make the rules. Would you play someone at chess who allowed you only a pawn and a king, or stated that all your pieces can only move forward one square at a time? Of course you wouldn't. So capt'n, why in the fuck are you entertaining these cunts?

You're fucked if you attend and if you don't. At least in the latter you're not playing the game they want you to. Maybe the resistance needs to move up a level and start playing the system at their own game? This war (which it is) won't be won legally and fairly. Being one of honour, chivalry and respect will continue one to be shoved head first in the mud ALWAYS!

The system wins because it uses the people as its protection. It bullies people into submission. It threatens the innocent and in doing so scares off would-be support. I think its high time the system not only got a taste of its own medicine, but is literally half drowned to death by the stuff.

Do these arseholes in the Pig force, Armed forces, Social services and overall state not realise the hell they're creating? Obviously not.
The people are and always have been the enemy. The people ARE the oppressive state. Time to stop beating around the bush here. The elites may be calling the shots but the people are carrying them out. Who would you be more annoyed at - the man who told his thugs to beat you up or the thugs themselves? Exactly!!

Time to wake the fuck up people because many are still asleep who believe they're awake. The system always wins when you play by the rules. Their rules, their game, their corruption and always their victory.

regards

Harbinger

CaptainUKIP said...

The CAB would know the proceedings, rules and conditions of court, especially with regard to how to avoid ending up being found in "contempt of court"!

The CAB are the only people other than a Solicitor who can demand (request) legal documents on behalf of us peasants ;)
And they have access to documents from the all-powerful DWP, if they haven't already got them.

Anonymous said...

Amen to Harbinger, They don't follow the rules so why should the rest of us?

It is about time people did something about this croc of shit we call a country before we are just killed in the steet for thinking they are arsholes let alone knowing the fact.


Kyd

CaptainUKIP said...

Intermediate Diet

http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguidesc/criminal.htm#_Intermediate_Diet


http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/courtusers/crimcourtattenders/attending_06.asp

Captain Ranty said...

Harby,

That's enough of that common sense! :)

I'm in this now, and I am determined to fight. You say we are fighting a battle according to their rules, and I agree fully.

But under their OWN rules, they have to have something that says I am guilty.

Once they start changing their own rules I am well and truly fucked.

But I'll go down swinging....

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Cap'n,

Thank you for both comments. Both very useful.

Checking out the links now.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Kyd,

He brings a certain....clarity, does he not?

I have long said that the pen is mightier than the sword so I am not about to lay down my finest weapon.

As I said in earlier posts, we are alone in this, until we aren't. Until our numbers grow exponentially, we have to skirmish, make them bleed a little here, bruise them a little there.

I agree we need to do something, but not enough are angry enough to even write to their MPs. What chance of them taking to the streets in protest?

Sweet Fanny Adams, I would guess.

CR.

Christopher - Conservative Perspective said...

Captain,,,

I had to look up that term,Intermediate diet....

Intermediate dietHC Deb 16 December 1992 vol 216 cc466-74
337A.—(1) the court shall, in respect of every case which is adjourned for trial, fix a diet (to be known as an intermediate diet) for the purpose of ascertaining—

(a) the state of preparation of the prosecutor and of the accused with respect to their cases; and
(b) whether the accused intends to adhere to the plea of not guilty.

(2) At an intermediate diet, the court may ask the prosecutor and the accused any question for the purposes mentioned in subsection (1) above.

(3) The accused shall attend an intermediate diet of which he has received intimation or to which he has been cited.

(4) A plea of guilty may be tendered at the intermediate diet; and section 336 of this Act shall apply accordingly."


Sounds like what we in the US call a pre-trial.

Anyway, what is the charge?

Also, GOOD LUCK!

Captain Ranty said...

Hi Chris,

Thanks for that. I think I looked at the same link.

The charge? They say I was travelling at 70mph in a 60mph zone. I have not confirmed or denied it. They say they have photographic evidence, but when I asked for it today they failed to produce it.

I can only assume they are keeping their one big weapon under wraps until the trial.

Isn't it bizarre though? The Justice of the Peace makes you plead without them having to prove anything.

If I had plead guilty the photo would never see the light of day. Mind you, pleading not guilty hasn't made them produce it either.

Thanks for the good wishes too!

CR.

Anonymous said...

Kyd,

They are fomenting armed struggle, regardless whether people want it or not. People in society simply haven't a clue about the insane poverty that's about to hit them. Food prices in some cases have doubled in less than a year ffs! And no one gives a shit. Bus fares and all other rises go up well above inflation. And what of the average Joe's yearly wage increase? They're instituting volunteer work with no condition of gaining employment after the trial period.

As society gets poorer and armed conflict becomes inevitable, those being shit on by the system go into the security services, to continue fucking over the rest of society, in exactly the same position as them, in order to collect a wage and protect those who are making the hell in the first place. AND THEY DO IT WILLINGLY!!!!!

They want people on the streets. They want them all together en masse, out there being filmed, easier to hit them with crowd control. And when they identify them its off to the kangaroo courts for a 75quid fine for protesting against the loss of liberty.

Look at the Weimar republic before WW2? Look at how the Jews (those who later pissed off to control Hollywood) paid a pittance to desperate German women, to perform in their sex shows? Look at the rise of Hitler and why? Look at any precursor to major conflict and you'll find an impoverished people. And of course, the revolutionary leaders will be controlled also.

This is happening now. Our society is a poverty ridden, drug fuelled, immoral and degradated shit hole as was pre planned. It didn't just 'get that way by itself' as the MSM whores will have you know otherwise. And the people will listen and obey.

When the conflict comes and soon as is planned, a front on attack will end in total decimation. The public is an animal without a head and the elite knows this. An individual with a head could do far more damage to the system compared to a group without. A large group of individuals could totally decimate the system. Why? Simply because the elites are a group of individuals and promote the 'individual group' mentality so as to protect themselves from harm. Go into any job today, any university or school and you'll see this being hammered into all.

If victory is to be achieved and we are to win back our freedom, personal sacrifices must be made by all AND I MEAN ALL! Victory will only come at a tremendous cost to the people for tptb will never relinquish their power. Period.

regards

Harbinger

Sean O'Hare said...

Cap'n

I can't help but thinking that you've played into their hands so far. However, I don't think you would have fared any better if you had refused to attend their kangaroo court. You would probably been arrested and dragged their anyway. When you get the opportunity you will need to emphasise the question of their jurisdiction over you or anyone else in lawful rebellion. But then again who am I to give you advice as I haven't (so far) had the courage to stick my neck out!

anonemo said...

have a look at the forums here cap

http://www.pepipoo.com/

Captain Ranty said...

Sean,

You are right, I did what everyone else does.

The only light at the end of the tunnel is a trial. I can be heard there. (Then dragged away in chains...)

I thought it better to turn up dressed for the part in their game, rather than stand there in handcuffs and my pretty lace knickers.

Made no difference in the end.

The guy wouldn't listen.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks mate.

TSL sent the same links a short while ago.

I have a lot of reading to do....

CR.

nala said...

Hi capn'our game up here is con-funded by their rules,Criminal Prucedure (Scotland)1995 sec 257.
Respectfully suggest a letter of assignment to procurator fiscal, this is what a lawyer would do to attain the mmmm evidence they are going to present, not nesessarily all the evidence they pocess.
Do you know if it was a fixed camera, rules are slightly different for a mobil one.
If you want to get hold of me for a chat willing to do that you know where to find me.
Respect to you and yours dude, nala

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks Nala.

I will write the PF a letter tomorrow and ask for what he has.

It was a mobile camera.

I'll try to call you later in the week, or when he has sent the evidence to me.

CR.

William said...

Let's be clear. The JP doesn't understand Law he has no need to. The clerk of the court DOES but he or she chooses to ignore the LAW every working day until it suits their purposes to embrace the Law.

That is what passes for 'court justice' in their creation (that we the people who live upon the British Isles have allowed to come into existence) the United Kingdom. In reality it is theft on a colossal scale masquerading as justice.

'They' didn't want to hear anything that may put their earnings and assumed 'position of power' in jeopardy. Even if they understand that they are in actually robbing people blind they are not people of conscience so they invent all sorts of 'bluffs and wonder' to provide justification for their actions. Wigs, fancy courtrooms, sitting 'higher than the accused', fancy titles, hangers on etc etc.

It's all a charade to ensure the flood of cash keeps on flowing and keeps on getting bigger. The Clerk is akin to a Tesco store manager. He or she is charged with ensuring that the production unit (The Court) achieves it's financial targets in any financial year. Obviously, as you have discovered, this means ensuring the sheep are herded through as fast as possibly each accepting the courts fine without a murmur. There are only so many court hours in a day and only so many sheep can be dealt with in a court day so unless the level of fine keeps getting ramped up the only solution to more income is to speed the process by reducing the involvement from the sheep to simply turning up.

Sheep that turn up and murmur as you did will get put off to another theft process which will likely end up with you being found 'guilty' of not accepting the fine in your absence.

JP's have to meet their managers target. JP's and Magistrates believe they are god in their courts but they aren't. They have to dance to the tune of the Clerk in the same way that the Tesco line managers have to dance to the tune of the store manager. The same process is in play in the local councils where the elected councillors are run by the Chief Executive.
It's exactly the same scam played out for the same reasons keeping the money river flowing.

I am sure you are being well advised and I know your research will be as deep as it needs to be but I am pleased to see you will not be 'revealing everything on here. I don't believe in coincidence and the appearance if Diky di do trolling his way across the Land of Ranty has something to do with your interaction with the PF.
If you haven't already read the Art of War by San Tzu. It's not an easy read as it isn't literal and requires interpretation but he does provide the most effective ways to deceive the enemy..

westcoast2 said...

CR
This is my understanding of what the JP was doing.

It seems the JP needed you to plead to determine whether the JP could handle the case or not. If you had plead guilty the JP would have dealt with the matter.

Since you plead not guilty the JP handled it more like a directions hearing than a determination of your guilt or innocence.

As such it was quite short as nothing could be settled at this stage.

The JP set a date/time for another hearing to determine what the evidence is and how prepared you/they are to proceed further. I am unfamiliar with 'diet' although if it is another Directions type hearing it will again decide how the case proceeds.

The question you asked, if the JP was conducting a simple directions hearing after you plead not guilty, was on-balance probably irrelevant as that could be asked/answered at the next (diet) hearing. This seems to be just part of the process.

It is worth finding out whether this 'Diet' is another directions hearing rather than a trial of some sort and what options the justice has if you continue to plead not guilty.

Disclaimer: Just my thoughts :)!

Christopher - Conservative Perspective said...

Captain,

An alleged speeding violation and the supposed evidence is a photograph?

No expert here but that sounds, well, ridiculous.

Would this fancy camera be hooked up yo a radar gun thus showing a speed stamp and date?

Captain Ranty said...

Chris,

Yes, it is hooked up to a radar, and I am hoping it is time-stamped. This is all the evidence they have so it ought to be good.

I'd just like a wee squint at the thing myself....

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

William,

I think you have just described it all to a tee.

But we don't have to like it, and we don't have to put up with it.

I'll continue until it is hopeless or until it is senseless to carry on.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Westy,

You are bang on.

There are four Diets:

1. Pleading Diet- That was today. I was focussing my attention on what I would be saying, not knowing that I would not get heard today. A basic mistake. We live and learn).

2. Intermediate Diet -That is the next hearing at which I am supposed to confirm that I have gathered my evidence for my defence and that I will not change my plea once the trial begins.

3. Trial Diet-The main event. It is here that the PF drags out his guns, presents them to the sheriff, and then I get a go. Only the sheriff can decide whether to go forward to Number 4.

4. Solemn Diet-A court with a jury and stuff.

I will weigh up the options when the evidence comes in from the PF. The photo that may hang me may also save me.

CR.

James Higham said...

I sat through around 40 other cases and I have to say that the JP was remarkably fair. Some people really did strain belief that they had "turned their lives around" and he admonished a few, but fined the majority. The average fine was £200 and some of them pay it off at £10 a fortnight. One guy who pleaded guilty to travelling at 82mph in a 60mph zone got fined £60 and 3 penalty points. I counted up to about £6,000 before I got bored with it. I don't imagine any of them rushing to pay their fines.

I dressed well, but no-one else appearing before him made any effort whatsoever. Raggy jeans, hoodies, and sweat pants were the order of the day. Drugs, theft, driving without insurance, benefit cheats, drunken behaviour and a couple of other misdemeanour's were heard. One guy appeared from custody, thinking he was getting out today, but he had committed some offence whilst out on bail. The JP listened to the guys lawyer for a minute then said "Seven days. Take him out".

Fascinating, Cap'n, fascinating.

nominedeus said...

What !!!!...not hung drawn and quartered for your sheer bloody minded insolence ....I suppose its a start, glad to see you back m8, there are many wise words already spoken here so I won't try to better them...best advice have a LOOOONG chat with Nala, he has been there and bought the T shirt (well actually he said he talked them out of one for free!)

Anonymous said...

to plead guilty or not guilty is to brings controversy,as we know to plead is to beg,
guilty comes from the word gilder which means money!,
they delt with you as soon as you invited 'controversy'
that is when i think you stepped into their jurisdiction cap,
they could not deal with you until you entered not guilty,
the courts are corrupt as we know but have to abide by certain rules or 'honour'lol,no controversy no case.
i dont know what you were feeling at the time cap,but as a first timer i would be nervous as,
can i encourage you to download frank ocollins podcasts,yes he waffles a bit but the depth of knowlede this man has is huge
nige.

Anonymous said...

Captain

Interesting stuff indeed.

As a Barrister, although I dont touch criminal law, or venture north of the border, you may want to lean on me for a few bits of advice. Not sure how to email you, but work that out and Bobs your Uncle.

By the way, your plea of not guilty was just the same as not pleading because that would have counted for not guilty too, and your next hearing will be in front of magistrates again and no jury. Unless they don't have sufficient sentencing powers (which they do) you wont get a jury trial.

Interesting aspect about the lack of evidence. I think you are right to take the route you have without having seen the evidence, and more importantly, having an opportunity to get some legal advice based on the evidence. If its presented at the next hearing, that's your way out. It will delay thing a bit more, but time will probably help to plan your approach.

Magistrates courts are the pits, but always entertaining in a way to see so much low life cocking a snook at the system without giving a shit.

The Travelling Toper said...

Captain,
Regardless of whether you are eventually found guilty or not guilty the main point that stands out from your case is the fact that you have got the bastards rattled. If they are reading your blog and making comments about you being the 'awkward one' then you have won. All it needs is for every one of us to follow your example in all our encounters with officialdom.

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks all, for the comments and the info.

I have some serious learning to do before the next stage so it will all come in handy.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Anon (19:25),

Thanks for the comment and the offer of help.

Just so we are on the same page: you do know that if I can get my evidence submitted, it will change your world completely?

If I can successfully prove that the monarch is in violation of her Oath, (and that since she is sidelined) all magistrates, judges, and sheriffs lose their authority instantly.

No court in the land has any authority.

Are you absolutely certain you want to assist? :)

I can be reached at captainranty at btinternet dot com

If you are genuine (forgive me being wary) I will even let you know my government name.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

TTT,

From your lips to God's ears.

All I ever wanted from this blog was to animate the sleeping.

I cannot win the war on my own. The odd skirmish, maybe, but the war will take a few more of us.

I'm still pinning my hopes on that Hundredth Monkey.

CR.

Anonymous said...

www.drivershandbook.co.uk/

By Martin Thwaite.

Give it a google CR may give you an idea or three.

Well worth buying.

A quote on what he says about solicitors and barristers. "They are a close second to the worlds oldest profession". As if we didn't already know.

Morgan..

Captain Ranty said...

Hi Morgan,

Long time no see. Are you well?

I have that book! I had meant to buy the Motorcycle Handbook but I pressed the wrong button and ended up with that one.

Never thought to read the thing before this kerfuffle.

I'll dig it out.

CR.

Anonymous said...

All's well Captain.Thanks.

Dont let the fraternity get to you, it's a grind down process. Always has been.

Got the bloody 'T' shirt.

Stay safe.

Morgan..

OBO 110X said...

Perhaps it would've been better to NCRTS this one but that was your choice. Anyway perhaps you should go on the offensive? In England the form is N244 Civil Procedure Rules, ask the court to make an order under section 31.16 to disclose documents they plan to use against you. Not sure what the Scottish equivalent is???

coz said...

Kewel. Sounds ok to me, I did similar, chose to plead not guilty (all the legal aid people will be told to plead guilty, it's the system), in a way you're playing by their rules if you enter a plea, but after that I rejected jurisdiction (I am not that name), so I didn't get everything perfect but the result (no conviction recorded) was satisfactory to me. It should have been 'no case to answer' technically, but the result was ok, so I let the judge utter whatever face saving words he deemed necessary.

Good that you got a look at the process, makes it less mysterious. In the end there is no injured party here so I don't know that emphasising evidence is worthwhile. Just bone up on whatever you prefer, 'contempt of court' isn't unusual in these situations, but only living beings and their property can suffer contempt, AFAIK, think there's a few variations on this theme.

It strikes me as very odd that they never tried to establish your identity, or did you not mention it? If they haven't established identity how can they proceed?

You got plenty of time. Well done Ranty.

Anonymous said...

its me again

re
My jaw nearly dropped when I heard him mutter "Irrelevant" or "Not relevant", then slightly louder, "Do you think you are guilty or not guilty?"

Me: "Based on the lack of evidence here today I would say I am not guilty". - Ok they gotcha, you just admitted to using the NAME

never go to court, games are played (on) in courts. But if you "must go", you must always plead guilty
because not do so means you are in dis-honour

however there is a correct way to "plead" , and that us this

I plead "guilty to the facts". and nothing else, never say guilty or not guilty

well what are the facts in the matter?, well they have to be discovered/proved in an evidenceary hearing ( something they never want!!)

Jan M said...

Hang on in there CR, there's a lot of people here cheering for you and help if you need it.

Anonymous said...

Fuck 'em Capt, Fuck 'em all.
Good luck.

Anonymous said...

Tell them you're not going on any diet ;-)

Anonymous said...

Cap'n,

"If I can successfully prove that the monarch is in violation of her Oath, (and that since she is sidelined) all magistrates, judges, and sheriffs lose their authority instantly."

Sorry buddy but that simply isn't going to happen. Remember Mua'dib (John Anthony Hill) who did the 7/7 Ripple Effect? Well part of his defence was proving the Queen had broken every one of her coronation oaths. And of course he had overwhelming proof which was listened to and that was it. Yes, that was it. All members, of all establishments are servants to the Queen/Crown. You will not find any barrister or judge who will even contemplate taking on the monarchy. That's career suicide and very possibly the end of their lives. That's how it works.

http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm

The only way justice will be metted out to the corrupt within society (system) is to reenact 1789 France.

regards

Harbinger

Anonymous said...

CR,

As you know, I'm also awaiting trial... A new development. Regardless of whether I'm found guilty or not the CPS intends serving me with a restraining order...

I'll catch you on Twatter with a link...

Olly

William said...

I am coming to the realisation that there are but two types of people in this world. Those who accept personal responsibility and just want to be left alone and those who don't accept personal responsibility. Of the latter there are two sub groups. Those who seek to control others as a way of avoiding responsibility, the psychopaths and those who willingly give responsibility in return for 'a quiet life'.
In terms of numbers the smallest group are the psychopaths next comes the those accepting personal responsibility but by far the biggest group is those who abdicate responsibility to the psychopaths.

The psychopaths are able to maintain control because they constantly tell their audience the slaves in abdication group that without them they would have to stand on their own two feet and accept personal responsibility for their actions.
They also employ as many as they possibly can in their 'state sector' thus ensuring that the 'never bit the hand that feeds you' viewpoint gets cemented into the lives of their slaves.
The state sector is the biggest employer in the land and it makes the rules for private businesses to play by. This is not coincidence it is design.

People that do accept that were are 100% responsible for our own actions are of zero interest to the psychopaths. They are well aware that there is currently nothing better on offer to their slaves than 'the way of the psychopath'. It has been this way all of my lifetime. The psychopaths are well aware that their slaves are not for turning. However I turned. I went away from 'doing as they told me to do' to finding out that actually its all an illusion courtesy of a parking enforcement company which was legally able to impose a time limit/fine scam on a Co-op car park and was then unable to lawfully enforce it. Ever since I found out legal and lawful are actually two entirely different things I stopped being a slave and started down a different road that is much more fun and much more entertaining.

But crucially for me the minute I attempt to enlighten those around me they look at me as though I have invited the devil into my home. They do not see the state run by psychopaths as the devil. They accept it as the price for their 'quiet life'. This is what was in play in court yesterday. By trying to educate the bench and the lawyers that they are in the wrong game you were on a hiding to nothing. They regard themselves as being 'players' in the right game.
But you have discovered at first hand that the courts are simply an extortion business designed from the ground up to extract as much cash as possible from their slaves whilst using 'justice' to ensure those not fined carry on accepting tax rise after tax rise and are kept under control by finance. The ironic thing is that those accepting fines yesterday will probably pay their fines from their benefit payouts. Taxpayers fining fellow taxpayers who will pay the fine from their taxpayer funded benefits is as good an example of the sheer lunacy of a state run by psychopaths as you will find.

Richard said...

This is probably irrelevant to you, as you will no doubt be asserting that the court has no jurisdiction over you. But if you choose to challenge a speeding summons from a mobile unit with photograph, time and speed stamp, don't bother. I got clocked in exactly that way, and requested a copy of the photo and supporting paperwork. They got the time on the system wrong by about 20 minutes, and in fact I was in a meeting with the great and the good of the county at the time of the 'offence'. I pleaded not guilty and argued in court that, as speed was a function of distance and time, and they couldn't get the time right, how could they be sure the speed was right? The prosecuting solicitor asked me if I had a qualification in electronics. I said I did not, and the magistrates found me guilty without further argument. For having the audacity to question them, I had £180 added to my fine.

Don;'t think you will get away with questioning the evidence. You need to be cleverer than that, or cleverer than I was. Which I am sure you are :)

General Pyston Broak said...

Ooooh, just think maybe they've lost the photo, that would be funny. No evidence, nothing to answer. Maybe they've lost the photo in some more cases, but the defendant has just pleaded guilty thinking that as they saw the flash in their rear view mirror they were caught.

Good luck in July Captain.

Nick said...

Richard.
I know hind site is a wonderful gift. This s not a criticism, but, could you not have asked the prosecuting parasite " what electronic or even physics qualification" he held?
As I say not a critism, more of an observation. Turn their own questions back at the Buggers!

Richard said...

Nick, if you knew how many times I have been over that half-hour in my head since the case was heard! TBH, it was the first time I had ever attended a court as 'the accused', and I was pretty nervous. A lot of good stuff got forgotten in the rush. I'll know next time.

What made it more irritating was the case heard before mine. Her name was Dr Susan XXX and I heard her lawyer coaching her in the hallway beforehand. She was on 9 points and accused of 90 in a 60 or something - ban territory. Her line was "I am DOCTOR Susan XXX and if I lose the use of my car my work will be adversely affected, and those who rely on me will suffer". She escaped a ban. The 'doctor' bit was her PhD, and she worked as a medical rep.

Next time I will have a lawyer too.

Steven UK said...

Capt R,

Just out of my own curiosity (and sorry if you’ve already answered this on other comments) I have some questions.

Given the prominence of, if you don't mind me say saying, your rather magnificent blog, do you fear they will they simply ignore the law and make an example of you?

Given what happened to Robert Green, isn’t “Scottish Justice” the biggest oxymoron one can possibly write? (Perhaps that’s more of a rhetorical question)

Also, forgive me for my half-arsed, poorly researched and largely second hand knowledge of the issues highlighted by the freeman movement, have you just entered into contract by entering a plea? Or are you taking the Marc Stevens’ approach of beating them at their own game?

Thanks and good luck with everything

dak said...

Captain,

Well done for standing up so far, I hope it all works out for us.

As part of your discovery process you could also ask for the calibration and test records for the camera and associated equipment, traced back to national standards. I know it's maybe playing their own game but at the very least it's another annoyance for them.

coz said...

So...you're pleading not guilty, you then reject jurisdiction (I am not that name) which is to claim Common Law applies here. Under Common Law if there is no injury to living beings or their property no crime has been committed, if you then go to the photo evidence thing, it's a bit nonsensical unless you hope the pic will prove the absence of an injured party. No injured party, no crime has been committed. There'll be some 20 minutes of bucking manouevres from the judge attempting to get you back under jurisdiction, then it's over.

Not sure what your strategy is, but like some others have said, it's possibly better to keep it under your hat until it's history.

Dave_G said...

Cap'n

Demand not only the photographic evidence but also the type-approval certificate, the CE approval, the calibration certificate and details of the training/qualifications of the person using the instrument.

If they can produce all of those in the correct form I'll eat your hat (you DO wear a pork pie hat?)

Anonymous said...

Well done Capt, better luck next time.
Richard who posted at 19,18 you too would not be banned either, you can only use this once in court as a get out jail free card, next time it's a ban........been there done that !. On my license it says not banned due to course of hardship, how ever this was back in the early 90s, and not too sure if you can still use this now.

Del

Richard said...

"If they can produce all of those in the correct form I'll eat your hat (you DO wear a pork pie hat?)"

They did for me, at my insistence. All the paperwork was in order, suprise surprise. That was what they increased my fine for: all the work I had put them to. Basically an extra penalty for being arsey.

(Jeez, these new captchas are a pain.)

Gordon the Fence Post Tortoise said...

Ah... summary justice more resembles self serving arbitrary justice these days. Parasites feeding off sclerotic process.

It's high time the dullards got dragged into the 21st century. Why they don't just plop all the speed cam pics onto the web?? That'd dissuade all but the truly determined from challenges - instead, they rely on bullying and bluster - miscarriages of justice abound (all those tens of thousands fake number plates.... the number is so big now that they've stopped publishing it!) and the system sinks deeper into disrepute as they pig headedly try to extract fines from cloned plate owners...

With motoring offences there's a veritable queue of leeches taking a bite, insurance companies for starters - you'll get gouged for extra premium payments, depending on area you might have to spend a day being patronised and shown charnel house images. I've got no sypathy for people who've demonstrably driven like berks - but 35 in a 30?

But anyway ... if they had sent you a link to a hi-res piccy of CR behind the wheel with overlaid time and speed - your only real way out would be to be a plod... or they got the TRO wrong and the speed limit was illegally enforced - more common than you'd think, that one :-)

coz said...

mmm, no you don't dispute it on their terms, having established a Common Law situation in court by declaring yourself not to be the 'name' they use, to then backtrack to their game of accuracy of speed measurement devices or whatever evidence would put you back under their jurisdiction, under Maritime Law.

All you need to do is reject 'the name' (i.e. I am not your vassal/commodity and therefore not subject to statute 'law', I am a living soul and only subject to Common Law, that's what rejecting 'the name' means), then demand proof of injury to a living being or their property. If their photo evidence proves no injured party, that is the only reason to refer to that 'evidence' in court. The next 20 minutes after that will just be the judge's attempts to trick you into moving back into their jurisdiction.

coz said...

It's the quick and the dead, Maritime law basically declares us dead, inert, non living. You need to tell them that's not the case and their dead law doesn't apply.

I'm thrilled that you are entering into the court arena, it's way more fun than a long drawn out beaurocratic paper war yawn. I'm also delighted that you have seen how some judges/magistrates can be OK, and that there is at some level a need for 'bulk' court procedures.

stealthy said...

Go get 'em geeze, Don't get too bogged down with detail just make sure you don't put yourself in dishonour :D Respect to all ranters!

coz said...

This is also a great example of the 'don't take on a case you couldn't afford to lose' genre, for a 10ks over the speed limit offence, Ranty is not risking his house or his livelihood here, even if he were to lose, it would not be a huuuuge cost, and I would chip in, since I encourage those who have what it takes for a successful court appearance to do so, and Ranty has always struck me as the type who has what it takes.

There are other people I would discourage from the 'cut to the chase' court appearamce, those folks are better suited to the paperwork war.

Remember 'contempt of court' is yet another alleged injury to a non-living entity (it's a common tactic in these situations), courts do not breathe, nor do they have souls, therefore they cannot suffer an 'injury' under Common Law.

handymanphil said...

Writing to you separately Ranty!