Back Next Statment's
6). The Crown Prosecution Service has further failed in their duty
to advise me of anything that undermines the Crowns’ case against me by failing to
advise me that there is no legally sustainable extrinsic authority for changing
the Common Law meaning of contrary to into something that would make sense in
a summons because Contrary to does not mean the same thing under Common Law English
as According to. This is explained under my heading “House keeping Tort” below.
7). The Police have not provided me with any authority that makes it mandatory
for any local authority to deploy safety/speed/traffic cameras.
8). The Police have not provided me we with any authority that makes
it mandatory for me to supply the details they requested on their Notice
of
Intended Prosecution
AT MY OWN EXPENSE contrary to laws on slavery and thus contrary to
my offer of terms and conditions of business as notified to the Prime
Minister
and
First
Lord of the treasury’s Office and the Queen in order to tie in
each and every head of state and the subordinate offices, institutions
and organisations
that they head under the law of vicarious liability.
9). The Home Office has failed to give a legally sustainable reply to the ICHOR
Trust in breach of contract law and as it is a criminal offence to attempt to
defeat a trust, therefore, there is no legally sustainable reason as to why I
should comply with the requests of the police who have vicarious liability for
the duties and obligations of the Home Office that is indebted to the ICHOR Trust
and me and all other beneficiaries of the ICHOR Trust vicariously for my fee
due according to my tradable rights because I have not received a legally sustainable
reply to letters I have contracted around to protect my right to a legally sustainable
reply. See www.ichortrust.co.uk for evidence of what I claim is the Home Office
and other government and members of parliament attempting theft by deception
of authority by failing to give the trustee legally sustainable replies to letters
sent to and received and acknowledged by them.
10). The Police have not provided me with any evidence of their authority
for changing the Common Law meaning of contrary to into something that would
make sense in a Summons. By that I mean if I am summonsed for having done something
contrary to that which follows contrary to and what follows contrary to is
illegal then strictly speaking the summons is an inverted nonsense because
if I have done something allegedly illegal it would be illegal according to
whatever follows according to and not contrary to what follows contrary to.
11). The Police do not have an honest belief that the local Highways authority
has a mandatory obligation to deploy speed/safety/traffic
Back Next Statment's
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
