Hold the individuals to account to their own oaths and rules
I have a summons to court for Tuesday of next week for a hearing on Council Tax. Unlike a normal summons, where you are obliged to attend, this is for a fake court and the council actively discourage you from participating. They want their rubber stamp from the false authority of the magistrate, acting on their own initiative outside of their oath of office. Anyone witnessing the process or challenging this crime is unwelcome. I can recommend this interview by Richard Vobes on the fraud:
Even my mother is getting interested in what is going on, and once the grannies revolt in sufficient numbers, it’s all over: the heavies cannot maul them in court, as it looks bad. As part of the pushback on behalf of young and old, I have just sent the email below to the clerk of Peterlee Magistrates Court. I only put people’s names out in my essays when they have done bad things, and lending your legitimate court authority to a violent and corrupt debt enforcement process qualifies to get you immortalised here:
To: Benjamin Wood, Clerk to the Justices, Peterlee Magistrates Court
Hearing [REDACTED] Case No [REDACTED]
We have received a summons from Durham County Council as invitation to an administrative hearing that we have good reason to believe is itself unlawful. As we hope you are aware, Halsbury’s Laws of England is emphatic that administrative courts are unconstitutional, characterising them as extortion. Lord Chief Justice Widgery has also ruled the same, condemning them as a judicial “dereliction of duty”.
Misrepresenting a private banking tribunal as public court of law is also malfeasance/misfeasance in public office, as well as being treason, with potential life imprisonment if found guilty of the latter. The use of deceit or duress to trick a trust beneficiary to act as trustee, so as to access the value of a bond or trust, is securities fraud.
By acting outside of their oath of public office in this way, a Magistrate is in breach of the Unlawful Oaths Act 1797, the Statutory Declarations Act 1835, and the Perjury Act 1911 Section 5. The maximum prison term for committing the offence of an unlawful oath in public office is life imprisonment.
In our previous interaction with Durham County Council and Peterlee Magistrates’ Court, neither party has been able to provide proof of claim for the purported existence of a valid liability order. Furthermore, there was no case number issued by the Court, nor any official case on public record. This would make the Court an accessory to crimes of fraud, blackmail, theft, and malfeasance.
The deliberate and pre-planned denial of due process is also a violation of superior international law, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as UK human rights law. You are personally liable for these civil rights violations under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Policing Act 2014, since you are operating ultra vires.
These are concerns of the greatest possible gravity about the conduct of the Council, the Court, as well as HMCTS and Durham Constabulary in turning a blind eye to financial crime by public authorities. Obeying orders or following protocol are not valid excuses to evade legal responsibility. It is a moral duty to expose and hold to account anyone involved in actions that cause the public harm, injury, or loss.
We are conditionally accepting the summons, and Martin will attend as a special appearance as beneficiary, provided the following information is given to us in advance, should redress be necessary: the case file, the judge’s name, the names of all parties concerned, the license numbers of all professionally licensed parties, their date of birth, their nationality, and their home address.
Under CPR part 18.1, we request an affidavit from the person making a claim against us.
Under CPR part 7, we request that a new case number is assigned by the Court.
Under CPR part 31.6, we wish to perform discovery as to the matters raised above.
We also request that a full hearing is scheduled with the Magistrate with a facility for attendance by witnesses, and the independent press if necessary. Council Tax fraud is a matter of considerable public interest at present. It will be necessary to ask the Magistrate if they are acting under their highest oath of office. We rebut in advance any presumption that we accept liability as trustee, or require the Court’s service to act on our behalf, or are incompetent to act in our own best interest.
Halsbury’s Laws of England is a default and respected judicial reference, and not prone to promoting conspiracy theories about law. I strongly urge you to get legal advice as to the lawfulness of this summons and tribunal. There is still time for the Court and its agents to turn away from this dishonourable and ruinous assertion of false authority.
Isaiah 10:1: “Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression.” — Courts that apply no judicial mind at any stage and lack elementary due process are manifestly immoral. Therefore you are not doing to others as you would have done to yourself. God’s law has not been repealed.
Martin of family Geddes :bene
pp Mr Martin Geddes
[ADDRES REDACTED]
— also to be sent via post, and copied to Durham County Council
The council has likely already securitised all the revenues it is collecting, and done so in advance of any hearing. This is unlawful and fraudulent, and creates nasty tax liabilities when unwound. They also commonly issue the summons before it has been approved by the court, but that will come out in further inquiries. These are not proper courts of law, but the equivalent of Tesco having a private criminal prosecution of a staff member who violated their handbook by accidentally leaving the frozen turkeys out to defrost.
There is nothing wrong with such a private tribunal if you have consented to it. You are bound by their rules if you have an employment contract, or have by your performance accepted their judicial service offer. This latter way is how most people get caught out, and you need to be careful. You may have inalienable rights as a man or woman, but their argument is that you have acquiesced in surrendering them by your naive behaviour as a well-trained debt slave.
For those new to the whole matter of trusts, “Mr Martin Geddes” is a separate thing from Martin who is typing at his worn keyboard. It is “we” because the letter is on behalf of both the trust or implied corporation “Mr Martin Geddes”, as well as the living man Martin of the family Geddes, who is the trust’s beneficiary. I am slowly learning their language, although I don’t feel particularly confident at it yet. The problem isn’t corporations or trusts per se, but the abuse of these mechanisms, and the misapplication of merchant law to flesh and blood (i.e. treating us as property of the state).
There is ample circumstantial evidence of a vast parallel financial system that trades in our birth certificates and uses us as security for government and corporate borrowing, ensnaring us in endless compound debt via usury that results in all collateral assets being lost in the long run. That is why we have to expose these courts and hold their agents to account: it is a disguised form of slavery. The court is trying to trick you into accepting liability as trustee, so it can raid your national insurance account as beneficiary. That this fraud has become normalised and accepted means no “great conspiracy” is needed.
The key points of the email are:
- Accept their offer to attend, but based on putting in place reasonable conditions, that of course they will not be able to satisfy, placing them in dishonour if they proceed. This is the same as how I accepted their notice of liability, subject to proof of claim of a court order, which they never can provide.
- Don’t argue points of law within their framing, as you will lose. I am challenging them under matters of having lawful authority (which they lack) and due process (which they lack). These are black and white type issues, like standing, where you either have it or you don’t — and if you don’t it obsoletes all other matters of contention.
- Refer to their own rules, and hold them to those rules. That includes criminal penalties for breaking the law. We are all equal under the law, and there is no reason why clerks, advocates, and judges are shielded from liability for committing crimes in office. Quite the opposite, as these are the most serious violations of public confidence.
- Assert your rights as if it were legitimate. They are pretending this is a genuine civil procedure, so I am asking for my rights under the Civil Procedure Rules. They cannot admit that it is a private administrative court, as that exposes them to criminal prosecution for misrepresenting its nature. However, if you do not challenge them, and simply acquiesce, there is no fraud, as you are judged to have accepted their adjudication service and that they have power over you as executor of your trust.
- Quote scripture, to remind them that courts have two core functions: determining facts and morals. This court is operating under Roman canon law, not common law. It doesn’t give another man or woman the right to trample you, no matter what unholy trickery they interpose as a false morality. Bring God to court with you, he likes defending the righteous from villains in robes.
- Rebut the relevant presumptions of Roman/Canon/Admiralty law, which are perfectly valid in dealing with shipping and cargo in ports, but the inverse of the morality that should be applied to divine beings with innate and inalienable rights. Nothing a man in robes says or does gives him a right to coerce or enslave you.
- Be prepared to hold the individuals to account, and remind them that they are personally liable when acting outside of their public function. It only takes a few of the lower functionaries have an example made of them, and the rest will get scared and stop colluding with the institutionalised crime and industrialised wrecking of civil rights.
I will also be sending this note to the council with a cover note along these lines:
Following the House of Commons speech by Andrew Bridgen MP on 20th October, I have prima facie evidence that Durham County Council is complicit in terrorism. Gene therapies have falsely and deceptively been described as safe and effective vaccines, and administered without informed consent, with active support of all UK local authorities. This has resulted in widespread serious injury or death.
Taken in combination with the unlawful actions of the Court in illegally funding the Council, I have genuine reason to believe both parties are complicit in genocide, war crimes, and economic terrorism. Under the Terrorism Act 2000, it is unlawful to fund any entity which is reasonably suspected of terrorist activity. This would include payment of any Court fees as well as Council Tax. Funding terrorism is one of the most serious crimes under statute law, with 14-30 years in prison. To even ask for money for a terrorist enterprise comes with a sentence of up to 14 years in prison.
I don’t know about you, but I am done with pretending this is normal lawful activity of a legitimate public body, neither for the Council nor the Court. Covid has fundamentally changed the relationship between the state and the citizen. Even if we are subject to presumptions of consent to be governed, and acceptance of the liabilities as well as benefits, that can never make it acceptable to murder or maim us.
There is a legal mechanism I am investigating to put any payment into a trust, whose release is conditional on the creditor proving they are acting lawfully. They will never do so, hence the money is never received. You may also no longer be able to access it either, but the moral point has been made. This means you have paid your debt, so cannot be pursued by enforcement agents. A promissory note can also do the trick. These are matters I am actively researching.
If you’re worried about who will sweep the streets, while still paying institutions that have tortured the elderly in care homes and poisoned children in school, then your priorities need attention. This is the season to overturn the tables of the moneychangers. Council Tax is all about interest on securitised debts and birth certificate trust fraud, not local services. We have plenty of resources available — once we get rid of the banking parasites and their corrupt courts that are sucking our life energy away.
Read It Now
