Judge Stone - are you stoned? WTF?
Current mood: blissful
Category: News and Politics
8:37 p.m. 21/02/08 – notes
I spy with my little eye…
Mr. MI5 Roger S. Smith a.k.a. Smithy – your cover is blown
So the story goes…
I received a text message from Barb earlier. Mr. Brian W. Haw caught Smithy entering the courtroom from the judge's entrance and not the public entrance. Oops. WTF?
As I had to leave court early, I witnessed Smithy standing around, outside the court, looking out of place, all by himself: billy-no-mates; no other coppers present who had previously perjured themselves as witnesses for the state and bent barstards. They had all left.
I told him, "I thought I could smell something" as his behavior was irregular. He appeared to be waiting for the courtroom to empty, alone. Was he waiting to speak to the judge? Apparently so. Brian and Babs caught him out.
The bench colluding behind closed doors and open court regarding politically and commercially motivated trials against political dissenters in a feeble attempt to silence the voice of the people who are speaking for the majority of the nation.
Who is Roger S. Smith?
So the story goes…
On the surface, Smithy is a lowly PC who happens to handle the entire SOCPA budget as head of 'events' at Charing Cross Police Station – CX. Curiously, it was no problem for him to drop one hundred and eleven thousands pounds or thereabouts on the theft/illegal seizure of the personal property of Brian Haw which was reasonably recreated as an exhibition called State Britain which won the Turner Prize last year.
Why is Smithy in attendance at every one of our trials – those persons clearly associated with Brian – and present in the custody suite when we have been arrested and unlawfully been denied our liberty?
Why is he present in an officer's uniform as a PC, presumably being paid from the public purse when he is not a witness in the trials he attends nor an officer on duty in the custody suite?
Why does he visit us in cells so regularly?
Why are we in cells so regularly?
Why does he visit us in court so regularly?
Why are we in court so regularly?
What is Smithy to do with Brian Haw?
So the story goes…
SOCPA 2005 was created as a "sledgehammer to crack a nut", to gag the lone voice of one man calling out for peace and against state sanctions and genocide – peacefully in a place of free public access, in full view of his Parliament, at Parliament Square: his residence of almost seven years.
It appears that Mr. 'No political dissent please, we're British!' Tony the Terror Blair penned SOCPA 2005 - the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act - as a gag order on political dissent regarding his personal criminality of committing war crimes.
The Human Rights Act – HRA 1998 was brought from European law into English law in 1998. Article 10 gives all persons on British soil the right to freedom of expression in any shape or form barring illicit sexual content or condoning violence. That is my first assumption of law. Without human expression in some state or form, of what value is a mind or a life?
Article 11 guarantees freedom of assembly. This declares the rights of all people on British soil to assembly freely and peacefully and become friends. That is my second assumption of the law.
As Mr. Haw is determined to remain in Parliament Square "as long as it takes", to stop the ongoing crimes of infanticide, genocide, theft, rape and torture, looting of nations… SOCPA was penned to limit his freedom of expression with a mind to extinguishing it. That was and remains Parliament and the Judiciary's clear intention – this is fact.
Under Gordon Goebbels Brown, Parliament has been duly informed by Mr. Haw and others, of their continued war crimes against all humanities children – "every child is precious". He has been requested to cease and desist from extinguishing the lives of any more innocent civilians, on behalf of all the peaceful people in the world who desire peace in their time – in their children's time – for their children and all the generations to come.
Parliament is well aware that numerous national and international laws are being blatantly broken and the tax-paying is funding this criminal behavior, resulting in criminal liability for all tax-payers under Article 25 of the Statute of Rome; aiding and abetting a war criminal including providing the means is a war crime in itself.
When the State is behaving as a terrorist, the people must unite and declare that racism is the cancer that is killing societies and communities in reality – in real terms.
Real people and real children are really dying as innocent civilians in order that very few inhumane individuals may make great profit – the war machine and the arms industry – while subjugates fight for the scraps and the big brown envelopes on offer for grossly perverting the course of justice.
All global economies are run on back-handers. This is the current state of global economics and it is not sustainable. Too many hands in the cookie jar leaves no money in the public purse for the jobs that matter most in society and the provision of a decent wage – the teachers, the ambulance men, the firemen, the nurses, and the police. Budgeting - it's all about priorities.
Accounting irregularities have grossly exceeded any checks and balance, which have been removed, thus necessitating the immediate audit and public submission of all accounts of all levels of government, into the public domain, for the public record.
We, the people, demand the see the books or 'cook-books', as the case may be. Funding genocide is a war crime as well as committing genocide. When we dump our nuclear waste – depleted uranium onto their land, we are responsible for creating a nuclear holocaust. Iraq is not a 'Chernobyl' accident. Parliament has reduced paying taxes to committing a war crime.
Why was Smithy colluding with Judge Stoner?
What is his price?
How are they black-mailing him and keeping him under control?
Smithy knows I have his number and that I know his crime of choice… his little secret ain't a secret. He apparently shares a common interest with the judiciary.
Why did Smithy target Mrs. Barb Tucker? Who is Babs?
So the story goes…
The corrupt District Judge Nicholas Evans refused to accept that Babs had joined Brian Haw as was part of his exempt demonstration. Brian was exempt from the law as his demonstration began 4 years before the law was enacted. It is clearly against the threads of democracy to criminalize a peaceful person retrospectively when they could not have any way to travel back in time to alter their past non-criminal peaceful behavior. The fact that Brian is no longer exempt is nonsense and a gross miscarriage of justice.
"Which is the crime? Committing genocide or calling out against genocide?"
As a result of DJ Evans refusing to accept that Babes was with Brian on the day she embarked down the murky road of injustice to begin her criminal record as a 'serious organized criminal' for daring to stand as book ends with Brian Haw, wearing matching pink sparkly banners. Evans refused to accept the truth of the evidence and refused to accept Article 11 of HRA 1998 as a point of law.
If Babs could join Brian, then anyone could…
Mrs. Tucker was convicted of wearing a pink sparkly banner in a place of free public access for speaking her mind and voicing her heart – "Love, Peace, Justice 4 All." Bollocks. This was her 'actus reus' – guilty act?
Where is the foreseeable harm? That warrants dragging her through criminal proceedings? What exactly is the 'mens rea' - guilty mind - of this case?
Should a jury witness the gross perversion of justice that is being carried within the walls of Elizabeth's courtrooms… the Nazism of the elite would truly come to light.
An undated and untimed email is suspect in itself, especially when produced in a court of law as valid evidence whereas a timed and dated email is accepted within reality to exist and have been delivered when it is 'opened' at the other end and certainly once it has been made into a hard copy – i.e. printed out.
Barb's notification was delivered by email. The Commissioner of the Met, Sir Ian Blair, must authorize within 6 days and he may place conditions upon any demonstration given just, reasonable cause according to SOCPA sections 132 - 138. The Commissioner may delegate his authority and an untimed undated email is not evidence that carries any weight whatsoever, of the delegation of authority and dereliction of duties.
Babs broadly answered all relevant prescribed requirements of SOCPA, fulfilling her legal requirement and the Commissioner failed to authorize. Should she be held responsible for his failure of duty? Bollocks.
Lord Delekia clearly stated in the House of Lords that SOCPA was determined to be a legal process of 'notification' and not an un-scribed process-less act of 'seeking permission'. The difference between these two assumptions is vast. The first assumes a right and the right to exercise that right given 6 days advance notice to the state. The other assumes that there is no right and permission must be requested from the state.
What is this bollocks and who am I to question such bollocks?
I am an artist and a mum and I have been criminalized for daring to exhibit art without previous permission of a known pisshead – Sir Ian Blair. I was flexing my rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly – sue me.
We, the people, demand peace to be a priority of parliament. The sole focus of government should not be illegal war and inhumane terrorism by the state, on sovereign nations and innocent civilians. Our troops are losing their lives. Our sons and daughters belong back on British soil. They need our respect and all the medical help we can offer them as they too have been subjected to the horrors of this illegal war – firsthand. They are suffering cancer, birth-deformities and illness similar to the victims of Chernobyl, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kosovo…
Peace is possible if we believe and act upon those beliefs – peacefully – forcefully – willfully – intentionally – in aid of these beliefs.
There is always the real possibility to ensure peace in the present. We do not have to buy into their fear. We can live in hope, as children do. They have to. They don't sport our rose-tinted, media – blinded shades of reality.
We, the people, demand the truth be told to the public.
We, the people, demand peace.
We, the people, demand and declare that our voices are heard and peaceful action be taken to ensure our children's peaceful survival.
We, the people, have a heart for our fellow man and his child.
We, the people, demand Parliament show some compassion, humanity and sanity. Murder is wrong and killing foreign children for domestic financial gain is as sick as any government may stoop.
Does human life now only have monetary value?
Who decides which child lives and which child dies?
The judiciary, the police, the crown prosecution service, Parliament, the home office and various members of the state in senior civil service positions have clearly been caught red-handed colluding to pervert the course of justice, aiding, abetting and committing war crimes. These are the facts.
There is no legitimate aim in any interference with freedom of expression and freedom of assembly as supposed with SOCPA 2005. There is no foreseeable harm in exercising these rights in places of public free access. There are no prescribed processes in dealing with SOCPA 2005 which has left the police in a position of unfettered power. Bollocks.
The Commissioner has not proven beyond any doubt that he has delegated his authority and the bucks stops with him and leads to Smithy and directly to 10 Downing Street, via MI5.
Mr. "EU - stuff the pound" Tony Bliar penned the gag order that has been shown to be criminalizing the peaceful behavior of innocent civilians and lied to his country to pursue an illegal war against sovereign nations and he writes crap law.
Mr. Gordon Goebbels Brown maintains the gag order on peaceful political dissent and the trials have become more scripted under his obvious direction: piss-poor theatre as the cases progress up through the ranks of the court houses of current injustice.
There is continual criminal behavior and gross irregularities regarding due process, law and democracy occurring within the courtrooms of Great Britain.
Mrs. Charity Sweet XXX