The #Law, its #Enforcement and the Investigation of #Crimes by the “evil and/or foolish” Internet Court of Public Opinion

When is it Lawful to Remove Children from their Parents?

  1. The Theft Act 1968
    1. The Children are the property of their parents and not of the State.
    2. Children are stolen by the State with the aid of MAPPA: Multi-Agency Public Protection Agreements.
  2. The Fraud Act 2006; Fraud means:
    1. obtaining property by deception (at risk of future emotional harm)
    2. obtaining services dishonestly (reports from fake ‘experts’)

When is it Lawful to Assist Victims as McKenzie Friends?

  1. The Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
    1. Police commit an offence, if s/he exercises their powers and privileges improperly.
  2. The Criminal Damage Act 1971
    1. McKenzie Friends are having a lawful excuse to prevent children screaming to be heard from being damaged or endangered, as they are acting under the duress of the child.
    2. Case Law.

When is it Lawful to Report or Expose Crimes?

  1. The Protection from Harassment Act 1997
    1.  …his course of conduct was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime.
  2. The Local Government Act 1888
    1. All duties and liabilities of the inhabitants of a county shall become and be duties and liabilities of the council of such county.

The Seven Principles of Public Life

  1. Selflessness
  2. Integrity
  3. Objectivity
  4. Accountability
  5. Openness
  6. Honesty
  7. Leadership

apply to

  • the civil service
  • local government
  • the police
  • the courts and probation services
  • non-departmental public bodies
  • health, education, social and care services

Are Local Councillors complying with the Principles of Public Life?

Here are four of the Acts mentioned and the relevant Sections:

Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015

Section 26:

(1) A police constable listed in subsection (3) commits an offence if he or she—

(a) exercises the powers and privileges of a constable improperly, and

(b) knows or ought to know that the exercise is improper.

(2) A police constable guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years or a fine (or both).

Criminal Damage Act 1971

Section 5: “Without lawful excuse.”

(1) This section applies to any offence under section 1(1) above and any offence under section 2 or 3 above other than one involving a threat by the person charged to destroy or damage property in a way which he knows is likely to endanger the life of another or involving an intent by the person charged to use or cause or permit the use of something in his custody or under his control so to destroy or damage property.

(2) A person charged with an offence to which this section applies, shall, whether or not he would be treated for the purposes of this Act as having a lawful excuse apart from this subsection, be treated for those purposes as having a lawful excuse

REMEMBER: children are property of their parents, NOT the State.

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Section 4: Putting people in fear of violence

A person whose course of conduct causes another to fear, on at least two occasions, that violence will be used against him is guilty of an offence if he knows or ought to know that his course of conduct will cause the other so to fear on each of those occasions.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it will cause another to fear that violence will be used against him on any occasion if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct would cause the other so to fear on that occasion.

(3) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to show that—

(a) his course of conduct was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime.

Local Government Act 1888

Section 79

(2) All duties and liabilities of the inhabitants of a county shall become and be duties and liabilities of the council of such county.


Maybe it’s worth questioning the validity and veracity of The Judgement?

Here is the Bigger Picture as the Wider Global Context:

The Secret Covenant – Luciferian Illuminati Oath for Global Enslavement

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “The #Law, its #Enforcement and the Investigation of #Crimes by the “evil and/or foolish” Internet Court of Public Opinion

  1. “REMEMBER: children are property of their parents, NOT the State.”

    True enough! But there is a conflict between law and practice or tween law and another law or two. While parents should be the only owners of their children, the state, by suggesting that possible emotional harm is reason to take children away, usurps the rights of a parent to decide what is emotionally, or otherwise, beneficial or detrimental. The UK should not be able to take children away unless there is real physical danger to the child, in some way already demonstrated. so the social services need to be reigned in and restrained. that does need to be spelled out. I believe that it is also advantageous to eliminate all state schooling and allow parents to teach their own or choose which private schools they want and then drop all the taxes collected for schools and let the parents spend that on which school they want, regardless of location..

    Like

  2. I was curious about whether the “crimes” of the evil and/or foolish internet public. As of recent in the UN, two women have argued that to disagree with them is the equivalent of physical assault. I find this absurd. It is a ridiculous over reach of law, designed by governments, says I, to allow prosecution of non-intent as intent and prosecution of thought crimes and motives. This is very dangerous ground in our time. Maybe you could clarify your intent.

    Certainly there have been some loose canons speaking rashly against many without any substantial evidence. But the public does have rights of investigation, after which they can present to law enforcement and courts, if need be. The public should be able to hold their government official accountable as well. And it should be said about some I have seen, that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones. to me, it would be helpful for just a little bit more refinement or clarification, some specifics maybe, without referring to real people/situations/events. JUst a thought.

    Like

    • I probably misunderstood the “evil and/or foolish” internet public. I missed the sarcasm of it I would say. It would not be the 1st time something has gotten over my head.
      But what I am hearing from feminism in the USA is really scary. The twisting of language and law is unbelievable. They want to allow thought and intent crimes, as if the type of thought or intent was more important than the physical crime, which often is no crime at all. To disagree with an idea? Really? Truth would never require protection from lies. truth can stand on its own. Lies need to punish and censor since they are easily refuted by truth. Meanwhile, the internet public continues to terrify authorities. some nasty internet speech laws coming along.

      Like

        • Isn’t that addressed to us prurient internet voyeurs, no? 😉 Well, maybe someone slipped some drugs into Pufflie’s coffee when she was not looking. Judges hate being made accountable to the public, especially on the net. It upsets their long held monopoly on suppressing any involvement or concern on the part of the public who government believes should keep their (PUBLIC) noses on their faces and let their leader tell them what is right.

          Property might sound harsh to some, but how else do you convey ownership and rights of parents over their children? None here would ever suggest that Children are not far more than just property. We might lament that children are not shown more consideration by the adult world than they are, But many visiting this page have long been in the fight to defend and protect the most vulnerable citizens among them, which is both parents and children now since the loss of a child to foster care is no small loss by any measure. No parent should have their children taken, often with no good reason at all, by those appointed to protect citizens, and not steal and rape them. this is a case of total invsersion.

          In the USA, inversion is going wild. Law and definitions are becoming absurd. There are calls for lying to be called rape. Disagreeing with internet posters of “protect classes” of citizens is the equivalent of physical assault. I could go on all day. But we are witnessing the pollution and destruction of law as the world moves toward complete enslavement of the masses with not rights whatsoever allowed, much as was the case with slaves in past times. we have good reason to be concerned. Satan is casting his net over us.

          Liked by 1 person

      • They mention in (4) wild untamed animals. I’d be in trouble for sure. but anything produced by a man and woman in a joint venture, is theirs’ and would or could be property. Very precious property if we are talking kids. As well, parents supply at much cost, the need of a child, both physical and emotional. If the government tries to say that they also fund parents’ children, this is a lie. They get their money from the taxes of the parents so the parents are still the only one funding their children. So they produce and sustain children at their own cost and theirs only. government ought to stay out of any interest other than typical law such as murder, theft rape and not “possible emotional harm.” In Nova Scotia Canada law, there is no consideration and compensation for hurt feelings in TORT law.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s