The political party corporate governments and their courts are all morally and financially corrupt. This letter from John Grey* explains:
Monica Smit spent 21 days in Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second’s accommodation in Victoria. The State of Victoria now owes her $2,771,000 for each day she spent in involuntary confinement. I see the Australian Cossack Simeon has likewise been arrested in Sydney. He, too, is eligible for a massive payout.
The only reason this is happening is that the Federal Court of Australia is an organization that is a Court in name only but in fact is a branch of the Scott Morrison Intimidation Organisation called the Australian Government. It is staffed by serial criminal offenders, whose purpose and object in life is to refuse to deliver justice to the subjects of the Queen of the Constitution resident in the Commonwealth of Australia.
Here is a breakdown of how she earned her $2,772,000 a day while in custody.
When arrested she was protected by S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) which defines a crime against humanity as imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty. It incorporates Articles 9, 14 and 15 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights into the Laws of the Commonwealth and sets a penalty of seventeen years imprisonment for a breach of it. Seventeen years is 204 months, and the formula to calculate the liquidated demand that arises daily under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) is in S 4B , and S 4K Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) states that it accrues daily while the offence continues. Each month accrues five penalty units, that is 204 months by five and equals 1,020 penalty units. That means that the Police who detained her, accrued the sum of $214,200 for the first day, and those who continued her incarceration without a trial first had accrued the same every day she was there.
However the real criminal is the State of Victoria which by S 64 Judiciary Act 1903 is declared a subject of the Queen of the Constitution exactly the same as Monica Smit is, and liable as a Body Corporate to five times the penalty an individual accrues as imprisonment cannot be inflicted upon a corporation. S the State of Victoria for each day accrued $1.071.000 and that is not the end of it. Because the State of Victoria has no CH III Constitution Courts and the Magistrate refused to grant her bail, it offended S 43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) for the whole time she was in there and that accrues ten years imprisonment. Ten years imprisonment accrues $126,000 for an individual and $630,000 for the State of Victoria per day.
Once a Proscribed inhumane act is committed in breach of S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth), S 268:20 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) applies as Monica Smit was persecuted for her political activism. That is another seventeen years imprisonment. Another $1,071,000 per day. So the total per day, is $2,772,000 for every day she was imprisoned arbitrarily.
The 21 days she spent in involuntary hospitality, means that the Total Bill the State of Victoria has accrued, is $58,212,000. They should be sent an invoice for that amount. The Police when they become aware that they have or are likely to lose their Superannuation and salary if they continue to obey illegal Orders, will almost certainly rebel.
Then we come to the Federal Court of Australia. On the 7th November 2016 they made the Federal Court ( Criminal Practice ) Rules 2016. In those Rules are Form CP14 and CP15. An indictment and Notice of Indictment. In Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne, these prescribed forms have been lodged with the Federal Court of Australia and in each Capital City a Judicial Registrar has refused to let them be issued. This is a crime against S 43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and all the Judges as well as the Registrars who are the actual offenders are caught by S 11.2 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) Anyone who aids abets counsels or procures the commission of a crime is guilty of that crime. S 43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) makes it a crime to attempt to obstruct, prevent, pervert or to defeat the course of justice in relation to a judicial power of the Commonwealth. If the Commonwealth Attorney General and Home Affairs Minister and Commissioner Australian Federal Police do not Act to enforce these laws, they are likely to be forever disqualified from the Parliament of the Commonwealth, and lose a salary of around $800,000 per annum in the case of the Commissioner.
The Attorney General can indict Daniel Andrews, Annastacia Paluszczuk and Perrotet, under S 71A Judiciary Act 1903 without prior committal hearings, and every Premier and the Prime Minister Morrison are guilty as members of the so called National Cabinet.
However, the whole house of cards that is presently the Commonwealth may be about to collapse. Gesara-Nesara was started on the 1st October 2021. It is said to be proclaimed on the 15th October 2021 in Australia, the United States of America, Canada and probably the United Kingdom, and Martial Law implemented until new elections can be held, with all present seat holders excluded.
For those who doubt that Gesara-Nesara is real, try calling the IRS in the USA. It no longer exists.
Individuals
+1-800-829-1040
7 a.m. to 7 p.m. local time
Businesses
+1-800-829-4933
7 a.m. to 7 p.m. local time
All the States will be bankrupted, including the Commonwealth, and the legal system restored to 1870 when it was sabotaged by lawyers, who were after 498 years admitted to the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It will restore the common law in place until 1873 when the Judicature Act 1873 (imp) was enacted stripping the clergy of judicial power, by the lawyers newly elected to the House of Commons. It is said that the Act of 1871 has been nullified, and so too must the Act of 1873 merging Church and State, in a lawyer Judge.
Kindest regards
John Grey
* Who is John Grey?
John is 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.
5 thoughts on “The Government and Courts are Bankrupt”
article 24. and Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 No 30. and the cestui que vie act 1666
and the cestui que vie trust estate evidencing the “beneficiary/ usufructuary”?
Division 13 Recovery of property on determination of a life or lives
18 and 19 Charles II c 11—The Cestui que Vie Act 1666; 6 Anne c 72 (or c 18)—The Cestui que Vie Act 1707.
38 Property—determination of a life or lives
(1) Every person having any estate or interest in any property determinable upon a life or lives who, after the determination of such life or lives without the express consent of the person next immediately entitled upon or after such determination, holds over or continues in possession of such property estate or interest, or of the rents, profits or income thereof, shall be liable in damages or to an account for such rents and profits, or both, to the person entitled to such property, estate, interest, rents, profits or income after the determination of such life or lives.
(2) Where a reversion remainder or other estate or interest in any property is expectant upon the determination of a life or lives, the reversioner remainderman or other person entitled to such reversion remainder or other estate or interest may in any proceeding claiming relief on the basis that such life or lives has or have determined, adduce evidence of belief that such life or lives has or have been determined and of the grounds of such belief, and thereupon the court may in its discretion order that unless the person or persons on whose life or lives such reversion remainder or other estate or interest is expectant is or are produced in court or is or are otherwise shown to be living, such person or persons shall for the purposes of such proceedings be accounted as dead, and relief may be given accordingly.
(3) If in such proceedings the lastmentioned person is shown to have remained beyond Australia, or otherwise absented himself from the place in which if in Australia he might be expected to be found, for the space of seven years or upwards, such person, if not proved to be living, shall for the purposes of such proceedings be accounted as dead, and relief may be given accordingly.
(4) If in any such proceedings judgment has been given against the plaintiff, and afterwards such plaintiff brings subsequent proceedings upon the basis that such life has determined, the court may make an order staying such proceedings permanently or until further order or for such time as may be thought fit.
(5) If in consequence of the judgment given in any such proceedings, any person having any estate or interest in any property determinable on such life or lives has been evicted from or deprived of any property or any estate or interest therein, and afterwards it appears that such person or persons on whose life or lives such estate or interest depends is or are living or was or were living at the time of such eviction or deprivation, the court may give such relief as is appropriate in the circumstances.
Can you simplify all that to a couple of sentences?
Caveat: I do not have or hold any legal qualifications or training. You may wish to look at N.S.W. Registration of Births Deaths and Marriages Act 1899 No 17, Part VIII Penalties. Possibly I am a Beneficiary of that obligation created under threat of penalty.
Blacks 4th.
“CESTUI QUE TRUST. He who has a right to a
beneficial interest in and out of an estate the legal
title to which is vested in another. 2 Washb. Real
Prop. 163. The person who possesses the equitable
right to property and receives the rents, issues,
and profits thereof, the legal estate of which is
vested in a trustee. Bernardsville Methodist Episcopal
Church v. Seney, 85 N.J.Eq. 271, 96 A. 388,
389; Moore v. Shifflett, 187 Ky. 7, 216 S.W. 614,
616. Beneficiary of trust, Ulmer v. Fulton, 129
Ohio St. 323, 195 N.E. 557, 564, 97 A.L.R. 1170.
CESTUI QUE USE. He for whose use and benefit
lands or tenements are held by another. The
cestui que use has the right to receive the profits
and benefits of the estate, but the legal title and
possession (as well as the duty of defending the
same) reside in the other. 2 Bla.Comm. 330; 2
Washb. Real Prop. 95.
CESTUI QUE VIE. He whose life is the measure
of the duration of an estate. 1 Washb. Real Prop.
88. The person for whose life any lands, tenements,
or hereditaments are held.”
I cannot read the Victoria document… am I able to see it? Is this the same stuff that is saying that Australia is running a parallel corporate “government” and not a legitimate Commonwealth Government? Therefore, the politicians are actually squatters in VACANT office? Is this relating to the broken Great Seal from 1973, or way earlier as mentioned in your article, somehow? How have they gotten away with this?
Yes, to all your questions.