• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 
 p1
 
 p1 3-12-2011 111201- Brendan Facey Director IM&ES -Sheriff) OBL 1106575301
ISPECTOR-RIKA
TI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
 
A 1
st
edition limited special numbered book on Data
DVD
 
ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
 
PLEASE OTE
: You may order books in the
ISPECTOR-RIKATI® series
by making a reservation, by fax0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mailINSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.comSee alsowww.schorel-hlavka.com  Downloading of documents from bloghttp://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati 
WITHOUT PREJUDICE 
 
Bendan Facey
Director, Infringement Management & Enforcement Services
1-12-2011
 
C/oM
r Robert Clark 
MP Attorney-Generalrobert.clark@parliament.vic.gov.au 
5
Re: Obl 1106575301
Sir,thank you for your 28 November 2011 correspondence signed as “Bendan Facey Director,Infringement Management & Enforcement Services” with “per” and some scribble of an M in acircle.10I also noticed that a correspondence dated 18 November 2011 was purportedly signed by you as“Bendan Facey Director, Infringement Management and Enforcement Services (Sheriff)” to Mr George Graf (CD/11/560872) of 1/187 Bench Street, FRANKSTON VIC 3199.
QUOTE
15
END QUOTE
In view that you are claiming to be a Sheriff (Something the correspondence forwarded to me onyour behalf didn’t disclose!) then obviously you are able to make known as to which legal process was followed to issue orders against me. For example the date of any court hearing held20to issue the purported Infringement Order notice, the Warrant and any other court documents.
.
As you ought to be aware fromhttp://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/its-ok-to-do-a-runner-judge/story-fn7x8me2-1226206685079that in this case a drunk run away from police wasentitled to do so because he was not arrested. In another case where the court held the police25unlawfully arrested a person it was held he was entitled to use whatever means to free himself from unlawful custody.
Chu v Henham
[1999] VSC 139 (4 May 1999)QUOTE44. In the course of his judgment Hedigan, J stated -
30
"The right of citizens to resist unlawful search and arrest is as old as their inclination todo so. The role of the courts in balancing the exercise of 
police
powers conferred by theState and the rights of citizens to be free from unlawful search and seizure may be tracedthrough centuries of cases."45. His Honour referred to previous decisions of this court including to McLinley v. Minster [1911] VLR 347,
35
in which case Madden, CJ at p.350-351 said -"The whole question was - did Minster assault McLinley ... if the question of the assault onMcLinley had been deliberately and properly investigated it would have become important toascertain whether or not the assault was justified and that would depend on whether the constablehad lawfully arrested and was lawfully holding Minster because it is an important principle of law
40
 
 
 p2
 
 p2 3-12-2011 111201- Brendan Facey Director IM&ES -Sheriff) OBL 1106575301
ISPECTOR-RIKA
TI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
 
A 1
st
edition limited special numbered book on Data
DVD
 
ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
 
PLEASE OTE
: You may order books in the
ISPECTOR-RIKATI® series
by making a reservation, by fax0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mailINSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.comSee alsowww.schorel-hlavka.com  Downloading of documents from bloghttp://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati that no man has the right to deprive another of his liberty except according to law, and if he doesso the person so unlawfully deprived has a perfect right to use reasonable efforts to beat him off and to get out of his custody."END QUOTE 
.
5I have previously complained that the Victorian Police such as in Camp Road Broadmeadowsdirected me into a car park (on two occasions) only then to direct me immediately to a Sheriff who then would check on his lap top if there were any outstanding warrants, etc. This I madeclear was unlawful because while the police has the right to check a persons right to use a motor vehicle, and if the vehicle is roadworthy there is no power for the Police to detain any motorist10for the sake of checking if some warrant was outstanding as this has nothing to do with motor registration requirements and neither of a person being licensed to drive.I did at various times take photographs of vehicles wheel clamped as in time I intend to use thisin court so the Court will be provided with registration numbers of other motor vehicles who Iview were unlawfully detained as result of this kind of conduct.15
.
It must be clear that if any Sheriff were to seek to detain me on an alleged warrant then I canassure you that so to say Hell will be more comfortable then my response because I am not as a
COSTITUTIOALIST
going to be subjected to your kind of terrorism that easy!
.
20On 19 July 2006 I comprehensively (after a 5 year epic legal battle) defeated the commonwealthon bias of FAILING TO VOTE, etc, and then the jokers of lawyers for the Commonwealthdiscovered that tasting defeat at my hands was something they had never expected. As a matter of fact in that case I pursued some 50 constitutional issues of which none the then Attorney-General for the State of Victoria sought to oppose and so the State of Victoria is bound by this.25Hence, in any subsequent litigation I can rely upon this court decision and boy you wouldn’twant to mesh with a court determination, would you? So, when I received some unsigned andwithout identity of some purported Sheriff a letter stating a warrant was issued but not disclosingwhen the hearing was held and who was the judicial officer then quite frankly it seems to me youas a Director should resign in shame to allow this kind of terrorism to eventuate.30Don’t you understand that the Framers of the Constitution made clear that any judicialdetermination can only be applied
AFTER 
both parties have been heard? So, this nice little ripoff scheme to terrorise citizens to pay off or the government sponsored terrorist group calledSheriff’s will wheelclamp motor vehicles is precisely what I am after to expose that thoseSheriff’s are acting unlawfully as they are not at all enforcing legally issued court orders but are35issuing vexatious orders and warrants!
.
Any Sheriff who seeks to enforce a Warrant what was issued by a private company Tenixsolutions IMES Pty Ltd operating as Civic compliance Victoria actually could placehimself/herself to be legally accountable for kidnapping, unlawful arrest, tampering with a motor 40vehicle and a lot more pending on what the particular Sheriff may have been up to.
.
Any Sheriff who authorise as such the towing of the motor vehicle could be liable frfor what theycall in the USA grand Theft Auto or plainly stated theft of a motor vehicle.
.
45
 Kikonda Butema Farms Ltd v The Inspector General of Government HCT-00-CV-MA-593-2003
QUOTE
Constitution needles to mention is a supreme law of the land.
END QUOTE 
50Because the States were created within s106 of the Constitution then all legal principlesembedded in the constitution are also applicable to the States:
.
Hansard
1-3-1898
Constitution Convention Debates
 QUOTE
 Sir JOH DOWER 
.-
55
 
 
 p3
 
 p3 3-12-2011 111201- Brendan Facey Director IM&ES -Sheriff) OBL 1106575301
ISPECTOR-RIKA
TI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
 
A 1
st
edition limited special numbered book on Data
DVD
 
ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
 
PLEASE OTE
: You may order books in the
ISPECTOR-RIKATI® series
by making a reservation, by fax0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mailINSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.comSee alsowww.schorel-hlavka.com  Downloading of documents from bloghttp://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati 
I think we might, on the attempt to found this great Commonwealth, just advance one step, not beyondthe substance of the legislation, but beyond the form of the legislation, of the different colonies, and saythat there shall be embedded in the Constitution the righteous principlethat the Ministers of theCrown and their officials shall be liable for any arbitrary act or wrong they may do,
 
in the same way asany private person would be.
 
5
END QUOTE
.
This means that you as Director can be held liable as much as the Sheriff who takes the actionand as you are silently or otherwise participating then this becomes a
COSPIRACY
!
.
10
QUOTESorell v Smith
(1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of LordsIn an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual injury, will givegood cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not illegal is of the essence of theconspiracy.
ED QUOTE
 
15
.
My wife is 79 and had breathing problems after she read your 28 November 2011correspondence that also included that the Sheriff could come and sell up items. She is scared todeath about this and I can assure you that if my wife were to suffer any ill health or even death I be going after your ass for having terrorised her with your threats rather than to have stopped the20rot.
.
Let’s be clear about it when the Police issued their infringement notice I responded that Iobjected to the jurisdiction of any court, as such also a
STAR CHAMBER COURT
and/or 
KAGAROO COURT
to hear and determine matters. It is not relevant if legislation purports a25court has jurisdiction as it is not for the court to assume anything as the prosecutor must prove jurisdiction and by this also overcome each and every element of any objection to jurisdiction!Hence, from that moment the police could do nothing but to place the matter before a court of what they held competent jurisdiction and the police as the accuser had the legal obligation to prove jurisdiction for the court to hear and determine matters. This they failed to do.30
Land & Environment Court as well, in one case a "judge" described himself as a"coram" -
Law Encyclopedia: Coram[Latin, Before; in the presence of.]
 
The term coram is used in phrases that refer to the appearance of a person before another individual or 
35
a group. Coram non judice, "in the presence of a person not a judge," is a phrase that describes a proceeding brought before a court that 
 
lacks the jurisdiction to hear such a matter  . Any judgment rendered by the court in such a case is void.
 
Bowers v Smith (1953) 1 ALL ER 320 (Re Clarke Hall) and (Morrison on Children, 7 Ed, P3)
 
40
QUOTE
"... the first business of the court is to try to issue whether or not the case is bought within the terms of thestatute, and only if this be proven by proper evidence can the court proceed to decide upon treatment 
"END QUOTE
.
45What we had was that the police upon my objection responded to refuse a review, even so noreview was actually sought by me as I simply opposed jurisdiction! If there is no court to enforcesomething then any further process is a sheer waste of time. Also the Imperial Act InterpretationAct 1980 (Vic) states clearly that any fine before conviction is void.Still the police then issued a further Infringement Notice despite of this.50
.
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...