A Legal View of Mandatory Vax

The following letter may be amended to suit your own situation. If you are employed by a club, company, business, or government, you can use this letter to help stop any attempt to force you to be Jabbed (it is not a vaccination).

Any attempt to force, require, mandate, coerce, or conscript any living man or woman to do anything against their will is a crime, and we have the right and a duty to take the offenders to court. It is up to each one of us to know the law and to use it to protect us, our family, our community, and our country against any attack on our sovereignty.

For more information about taking anyone to a common law court, please click here to visit the common law website.

Copy and paste the letter below into your word processor to send to the organization trying to force you to get the Jab.

                                                                                 John Citizen



Business Office


Dear Management Team,

Sometimes herd instinct can lead to serious errors in the perception of risk. My name is Mandi Thompson and my daughter is a student at the Central Coast Grammar School whose formal end of year function you are hosting on the 4th December 2021.

Your invitation from the school for us to attend if double vaccinated is a possible serious potential criminal liability you urgently need to get your lawyers opinion on. The invitation from the School contains serious Covid19 restrictions that are politically motivated, but instigated by yourselves,  and my objections to them are essentially political.

Political objections are seriously protected by law, and while the State of New South Wales is presently quite lawless, I have reason to believe this will not be so for very much longer, as huge demonstrations of public anger, are being noticed by politicians.

Political dissent is protected by law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which is Schedule 2 to the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986( CTH). Your Covid19 restrictions are in breach of S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). They represent a severe deprivation of  physical liberty by a rogue State Government attempting to have everyone take what is in effect a potential death sentence in the form of a fake vaccine completely discredited by factual evidence worldwide.

I have done some research, and severe deprivation of physical liberty in breach of the International Covenant  Civil and Political Rights and the creation of two classes of people, the vaccinated and unvaccinated, offends its basic principles. Your directive to the school clearly discriminates against conscientious objectors.

The Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) clearly states:

 The only offences against laws of the Commonwealth are those offences created by, or under the authority of, this Code or any other Act.

Note: Under subsection 38(1) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 Act means an Act passed by the Parliament of the Commonwealth.

The States have no power, as follows to create any directive contrary to law, whatsoever because of this Section.

I am entitled to complain against  any State legislated alleged restrictions : 9.5   Claim of right
  (1)  A person is not criminally responsible for an offence that has a physical element relating to property if:
 (a)  at the time of the conduct constituting the offence, the person is under a mistaken belief about a proprietary or possessory right; and

 (b)  the existence of that right would negate a fault element for any physical element of the offence.

 (2)  A person is not criminally responsible for any other offence arising necessarily out of the exercise of the proprietary or possessory right that he or she mistakenly believes to exist.
 (3)  This section does not negate criminal responsibility for an offence relating to the use of force against a person. If I attempted to attend I believe that your security would use force to prevent me entry.

The Claim of Right I allege arises out of S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH) and when that section is engaged S 268:20 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH) is engaged. S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH) incorporates Article 9 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights into the Criminal Law of the Commonwealth. Once it is engaged, by an attempt to arbitrarily physically deprive a subject of the Queen of the Constitution of his or her physical liberty, which is a valuable right, and intrinsic to a fair and guaranteed quality of life. The definition of property is important.  Property includes:

Criminal Code Act 1995 S 130 The Proper administration of government:

“property” includes: (a)  real property; and (b)  personal property; and  (c)  money; and  (d)  a thing in action or other intangible property; and  (e)  electricity; and

The claim of Right I claim on behalf of my daughter and myself is to exercise freedom, and choose not to take the chance that we will be killed by an experimental vaccine that has murdered large numbers of people worldwide, and up to 500 here in Australia.: The unvaxxed are a large group, largely better educated than the crowd, and have done their due diligence, and said no way. It has not yet killed everybody, but there are indications it will be very serious over time, already  killing large numbers of athletes, and potentially causing severe injuries, to a very large number of people in countries around the world. To exclude unvaxxed people from your venue is to do violence to them.

Criminal Code Act 1995   S 80.2A   Urging violence against groups
 (1)  A person (the first person ) commits an offence if:

  • the first person intentionally urges another person, or a group, to use force or violence against a group (the targeted group ); and
     (b)  the first person does so intending that force or violence will occur; and
    (c)  the targeted group is distinguished by race, religion, nationality, national or ethnic origin or political opinion; and
     (d)  the use of the force or violence would threaten the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth.
    Penalty:  Imprisonment for 7 years.

I am  part of  a group, ( the targeted group) that holds a political opinion that the imposition of Border Closures, Mask Mandates and Mandatory vaccinations, is a direct offence by a group part of the State of New South Wales  and its  servants, to impose an illegal physical restraint on another group, the objectors, which holds a political opinion that the State of New South Wales  and Commonwealth as corporate entities formed into two groups,  liable under S 78 Constitution and S 64 Judiciary Act 1903 to be sued and potentially bankrupted, if and when the Federal Court of Australia decides to do its public duty, or the Supreme Court in New South Wales allows a 459E Notice under the Corporations Act of the Commonwealth, to be served upon them, and that have to answer the Liquidated Demand contained in that Notice. Under S 4b Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) the liquidated penalty for an offence against S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH) is $1,071,000  and for an individual who offends that section, it is $214,000 as a penalty. Your school could not survive a prosecution.

The Constitution guarantees of freedom:

  • S 2 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 that there shall be one Sovereign.
  • S 5 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900, that Commonwealth Law always prevails over State Law.
    S 51 Placitum (xxxi) Constitution that the deprivation of physical liberty be imposed on “just terms” by every Commonwealth entity.
  • S 92 Constitution, that interstate travel shall be ABSOLUTELY free. 
  • S 106, 107 and 108 Constitution subjects States to the Laws of the Commonwealth.
    S 109 Constitution, that the Laws of the Commonwealth must prevail.
    S 128 Constitution that this law cannot be overruled by any State law until approved by a Referendum.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is a Law of the Commonwealth by S 13 Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth)  as Schedule 2 to the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986  despite the dereliction of duty by the Australian Human Rights Commissioner.

S 268:20 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH) S 1(d)  the grounds on which the targeting is based are political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender or other grounds that are recognised in paragraph 1 of article 2 of the Covenant; and

Article 2 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: 1.    Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Article 50 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 50: The provisions of  the present  Covenant shall extend to all parts of federal States without any limitations or exceptions.

As a member of the unvaxxed group I hold  the political view that all present Australian Governments are acting outside the provisions of the Laws of the Commonwealth and Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 and Constitution. I am writing to you so that you can get an opinion from a senior lawyer on the risk you are running discriminating against a large proportion of the community probably in excess of two million.

Yours sincerely

Mandi Thompson

Download Letter in Word DOC format:

A Legal View of Mandatory Jab
A Legal View of Mandatory Jab

Download and amend this letter to suit your own situation. If you are employed by a club, company, business, or government, you can use this letter to help stop any attempt to force you to be Jabbed (it is not a vaccination).

Size: 28KB

Who is John Grey?

The nom de plume of a distinguished legal practitioner, a gentleman and a scholar, a fine judge of women and wines, with more than 50 years experience in law. He no longer practices, but he continues to advise and write about the law. His in-depth knowledge of the law, and dealing with the legal fraternity, has been of invaluable assistance to this Author.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 thoughts on “A Legal View of Mandatory Vax”