Mr Ken Lay Chief Commissioner of Police

23-9-2013

5

Ref: 130923-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Ken Lay Chief Commissioner of Police-terrorism- etc

Sir, as a CONSTITUTIONALIST I express my concerns as to the misuse and abuse of police powers which I view may constitute a form of terrorism. As shown in the quotation below “terrorism” can have different meanings, however, in the language of the Framers of the 10 Constitution (The Commonwealth of Australia Act 1900 (UK)) within which in section 106 the States were created, they held
.

HANSARD 26-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 15 Mr. ISAACS: If he is a South Australian, is he prepared to disfranchise the women of his colony; if he is a New South Welshman, is he prepared to give way on the question of proportional representation in the people's House; if he is a Victorian is he willing to allow a property qualification for the electors? Now this establishes, I think, beyond any possibility of doubt, the position we must take up; that while we are prepared to admit the necessity-not only the advisability, but the necessity of compromise-for that is very evident from 20 the diverse opinions which have been expressed all round the Chamber, there are limits which cannot be passed. There is a line up to which concession may become at any moment a sacred duty, but to pass that line would be treason; and therefore, when we are asked solemnly and gravely to abandon the principle of responsible government, when we are invited to surrender the latest-born, but, as I think, the noblest child of our constitutional system-a system which has not only nurtured and preserved, but has strengthened the 25 liberties of our people-then, END QUOTE
.

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 30 Mr. BARTON.- Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. END QUOTE 35

The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. CLARK.40 for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and secure to him. END QUOTE
.

HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 45 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its Constitution, END QUOTE HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 50 Mr. BARTON.-Our civil rights are not in the hands of any Government, but the rights of the Crown in prosecuting criminals are. END QUOTE p1 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Again, “it can only act as the agents of the people.” and it is well known in law that an agent (The Government of the Day /the Parliament/ the government authorities (including the Police and Sheriff’s Office) cannot exercise a greater power then the grantor (The people).
5

No one can be a criminal for exercising his/her constitutional rights! No law no matter its intention can in any way deny a person his/her constitutional rights! No court can deny a person his/her constitutional rights! Yet, we find time and time again that ordinary citizens are subjected to a form of terrorism/extortion etc that involved the police. It is general held that not knowing the law is not excuse, well that should likewise apply to the police and the sheriff!
.

10

15

In my correspondence (130921-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Malcolm Turnbullt Re republican versus monarchist-etc) to Mr Malcolm Turnbull Minister in the Mr Tony Abbott led Federal Government, I
stated the following:

QUOTE 21-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE 20 Recently, I wrote to the Sheriff of Victoria Mr Brendan Facey, and pointed out how the Supreme Court of Victoria in its 2010 decision erred in constitutional law. It somehow held that because the Commonwealth had not legislated that then the Victorian Parliament legislation as to radar units was lawful! . Well this is what then Framers of the Constitution stated; 25 . Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive. 30 END QUOTE Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 35 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100. Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws? Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth. 40 END QUOTE END QUOTE 21-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE QUOTE 21-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates 45 QUOTE Mr. REID: We must make it clear that the moment the Federal Parliament legislates on one of those points enumerated in clause 52, that instant the whole State law on the subject is dead. There cannot be two laws, one Federal and one State, on the same subject. But that I merely mention as almost a verbal criticism, because there is no doubt, whatever that the intention of the framers was not to propose any 50 complication of the kind. END QUOTE
.

Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 55 The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: We ought to be careful not to load the commonwealth with any more duties than are absolutely necessary. Although it is quite true that this power is permissive, you will always find that if once power is given to the commonwealth to legislate on a particular question, there will be continual pressure brought to bear on the commonwealth to exercise that power. The moment the commonwealth exercises the power, the states must retire from 60 that field of legislation. END QUOTE p2 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

END QUOTE 21-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE

5

10

15

20

25

30

In my correspondence “130904-COMPLAINT Ref Brendan Facey Director IM&ES -Sheriff) OBL 1106575301-CONSTITUTIONAL issues etc” I did very much set out why the “Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) decision” by the Victorian Supreme Court of Victoria was without legal validity as to hold that the state somehow could legislate where the Commonwealth had not for a particular radar unit. No one in his right mind could possibly expect any Parliament to legislate for every particular item that may be created in the world. It would be for those who pursue legislation to request the rightful legislator to provide for legislation. If the request is not made or made but refused or not attended to then this doesn’t mean that somehow then the State can do its own thing disregarding constitutional limitations. That is taking the law into its own hands, unconstitutionally, and the Victorian Police should never be aiding and betting in criminal conduct like this, where this result in the denial of citizens constitutional rights. Therefore, it is not relevant if the State of Victoria or others did request the Commonwealth to legislate as all that is relevant is if the Commonwealth did or didn’t legislate for it. As the Supreme Court of Victoria held that the Commonwealth had not legislated for it then it had no judicial powers to nevertheless enforce the radar equipment alleged findings merely because the Victorian Parliament had legislated for this. As the States were created within s106 of the constitution “subject to this constitution” then it is bound by the true meaning and application of the constitution, and it is irrelevant if a judge may fancy to ignore this as no judge can override the constitution and implied legal principles. The Supreme Court of Victoria made a finding of fact in “Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) decision” that the particular speed detection equipment was not certified by the Commonwealth of Australia, and as such on that basis the Court had in my view no legal authority to ignore this, but was bound to accept that the failure of appropriate jurisdiction didn’t exist. The court cannot assume jurisdiction merely because it fancy to do so! And because it is a corporated court using the same ABN number as the Department of Justice then clearly its impartiality is in question. This I successfully litigated also on 19 July 2006 against the Commonwealth in the County Court of Victoria.
.

The same as I did previously extensively set out to Sheriff Brendan Facey, that the purported “Infringement Court is unconstitutional, as it cannot have a registrar as a head of a court but must 35 be under supervision of a judge. And the claimed association with the Magistrates Court of Victoria would be unconstitutional as the Magistrates Court of Victoria is a designated Chapter III court of the constitution and the High Court of Australia made clear that this must be an “open court”. Clearly the spitting out of more than 4 million pluss orders/warrants without any “open court” hearing violates the constitutional requirement for a Chapter III court.
40
.

All taxation should go into Consolidated Revenue Funds, and as I understand it Premier Napthine made known that Infringement fines are a form of taxation. Well then why is it all going into an unregistered business entity “Civic Compliance Vic” bank account? At least this is the title by Westpac! 45 As owner of the trademark MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® I was not permitted to trade under this trademark unless I had it registered as a business name, as I have. Neither was I permitted to operate finances unless I had a bank account with this identity, as I have. Then why is the Victorian Police ignoring the rule of law and allow some private corporation to use the Victorian trademark Civic Compliance Victoria and demand monies? also failing to disclose as 50 required by the deed certain details! Indeed, as I view it the Attorney-General (at that time) Mr Robert Hulls and the police minister had no legal authority to authorise and sign a deed with a private company that allowed this private company to access court records and issue court orders and warrants through its computer system as if they are a competent court of jurisdiction court
p3 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

orders. The separation of powers means that the government cannot interfere with the courts nor give away access to the court system. Below I quote part of my 23-1-2013 submission as Professional Advocate representing solicitor 5 and barristor Mr Harold James Johnson
QUOTE We find however that the State Parliament has corrupted the system of separation of powers between the executives, the government, and the judiciary, and by this now basically the government dictates as a how the courts are to conduct themselves. Actually, having now allowed a private corporation under the government trademark Civic Compliance Victoria to issue court orders, using court computers, and to fine people and issue warrants without any real judge being involved, there is no proper judicial system in place. I will not dwell on this further as the CCV issue is too large to detail all this. This also underlines why a VELVET REVOLUTION is the only alternative to clean up this corrupt conduct, because it is unlikely any judge is willing to stand up for the oath he/she made. Indeed, as I referred to at the previous hearing a Supreme Court of Victoria judge made clear, that he speaks out just before he retires, that the Courts are now “Business Unit 19” by the government, and that the Government has access to the courts compute. It is the PERCEPTION that first of all undermines the judiciary, where a government has access to court computers. But worse is that now a private company actually issues even warrants, and other court orders, use the Police emblem and Sheriff emblem (to issue correspondence as if they are the police and/or the sheriff office) all to terrorise people in paying up. As a matter of fact it was reported that by error Civic Compliance Victoria did to against more than 2,000 NSW motorist. Now, how on earth could any judicial officer accept this kind of elaborate rot to be permitted to continue, I may well ask. As a Registrar made clear to me, some 96% of people rather pay then to fight, because they know it cost them more to fight and generally they will loose anyhow irrespective if they are in their rights. Now, this is the STAR CHAMBER COURT mentality that now is part of the modus operandi of our legal system An innocent professional driver can lose points, and so his ability to earn an income, his ability to pay off his truck payments, and in the end his entire life is disintegrating, and often marriage goes bust, and then later it is found that the speed detection camera was incorrectly set, or that it was unstable, etc, to me this is terrorism! END QUOTE.

10

15

20

25

30

Further, in Harris v Caladine the High Court of Australia made clear that a registrars decision must always be reviewable as otherwise it is unconstitutional and null and void. Well, when the Infringement Registrar purportedly issued an order against me he refused my request for a review before a judge, Instead subsequently issued a warrant against me. THE ORDERS 35 AND SUBSEQUENT WARRANT WERE AND REMAIN TO BE WITHOUT LEGAL FORCE!
.

My aging wife (81 years old) travels with me generally in the car registered with RIKATI number plate. and if the police were to say intercept me and or the Sheriff were to do so 40 and say my wife were to get a heart attack and dies then I can assure you I will sue the pants of you all for causing her dead. In my view what you and other police officers are involved in is nothing less but terrorism. To abuse and misuse powers for ulterior purposes.
.

In 1988, a warrant was issued against my 2 year old daughter, and the police then executed this 45 warrant. the Supreme Court of Victoria, a few days later, held the warrant was unlawful (The warrant sought to achieve precisely contrary to the Supreme Court of Victoria orders, I had obtained previously!). Later, I discovered that the police had actually gone to a nursing home and got an elderly former Justice of the Peace signing the warrant, even so she suffered of Alzheimers and didn’t know what she was signing for. It was her son who gave me the 50 understanding that even so he had long ago cancelled her to be a Justice of the Peace nevertheless the police kept pestering her to sign warrants, etc. This to me is terrorism, because the Police were willing to pervert the course of justice, and arrest peopple on that basis, and concealing this from the courts! While this was about 25 years ago, and so long before you were Chief Commissioner, nevertheless, it shows the dirty conduct by certain police to achieve a 55 warrant. And to me this constitutes terrorism, as it is not only swindling the courts in that a valid warrant was issued but also grossly denying an victim of his legal rights. and lawyers generally would realise this con job when representing their clients.
p4 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

5

10

15

20

25

Recently, there was an issue about police seemingly picking upon coloured persons. Well about 25 years ago I had a passenger in my private vehicle which was from Fiji and never had seen a police car. I was lawfully parked (waiting for my children) in a parking bay on an estate and the police then commanded my passenger to get out of the vehicle and started to ask him questions, such as his identity, etc. I then intervened to explain he was a passenger and I viewed the police had absolutely no right to make demands upon him, merely because he looked from the passenger seat to the police car. So, the police then made clear they had a smart person on their hands, and they would deal with that. They then declared my vehicle to be unroadworthty and had bold tyres, etc. And made clear that if the car was still there in an hour then they would issue further notices, and I was not permitted to drive the car away, as it had to be towed. I immediately phoned the sergeant of Flemmington police and explained matters and he advised me to drive the vehicle to Flemmington Police Station. This I did. A constable there advised me the Sergeant was not in for the day, and he would inspect my vehicle. He did and he announced I did better to pay the infringement notice, even so he could find nothing wrong with my vehicle. I made clear that I had spoken with the sergeant earlier, and so he was in. Subsequently the constable got the sergeant out, and he inspected the vehicle, noticing that in fact I had the previous day fitted new tyres on the vehicle, and that there was absolutely nothing wrong with my vehicle, and so he ripped the infringement notice up. I then filed a formal complaint with the then Chief Commissioner of Police, and was subsequently advised that the two police officers were sent on a training course, how to inspect vehicles for road worthiness. What was clear was, that the police simply were terrorising me, and the constable at the station even sought to let them get away with it but I would not take it as such. I do not accept that a coloured person because of the colour of his skin should be picked upon by the police, as I view was the way the police were operating in Flemmington then already. And, because I correctly stood up for this passengers right then they abused and misuse police powers.
.

30

35

40

45

50

Also about 25 years ago, a police officer pulled me over, while I was driving in the country, and made known to me one of my tail lights was out. I was able to fix it on the spot. He noticed that I had 5 of my youngest children in the car, albeit all were in a seat belt, and he friendly wished me a safe trip home. Minutes later he pulled me over again, and alerted me to that a warrant was outstanding against me apparently issued in Williamstown. As it was close to midnight and with 5 little children in the car he accepted to come to my residence in a few weeks to seek to clarify matters. He attended some weeks later, with the local police officer, and I then showed him a letter form the Attorney-General that the police and the court had been unable to locate any files as to why a warrant was issued against me, and the police had withdrawn the case, and the warrant was no more. It was beyond me why on earth the Williamstown located Magistrates Court would have issued any warrant as I had not being in that area for years and had no police conflicts then either anywhere in the western part of Melbourne. Therefore, it was of concern to me that somehow a warrant could be issued without court files! Then again, as I for decades assisted people in their cases involving the police it may have been yet another police abuse of powers. Going to court without any real case, and obviously without that I knew about it. So the warrant is issued vexatiously. And it is no good to claim it doesn’t happens because a magistrate once faced with a police officer claiming to have served a summons upon me on a particular date, and even claiming my (then) wife served him with coffee, made clear that unless I could disprove he served the summons I had no way to get the previous conviction overturned, that was issued in my absenteeism. Well, I showed the Magistrate my gas and electricity bills (of a property I had 6 months earlier for residence), that I had moved out of that address 6 months before the police claimed to have served the summons and my (then) wife gave him coffee. More over when I cross examined the police about the alleged speed he claimed I was doing 75 kilometres in a 60 kilometres zone. I asked him if perhaps it could have been 74 or 76 but he insisted it was 75 when I drove past the petrol station. I then submitted photo’s of that petrol
p5 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

station which displayed a 75 kilometres speed zone . The magistrate told the police officer of for having lied about serving the summons, and falsely claiming it was a 60 kilometre speed zone where in fact it was clearly proven it was a 75 kilometre speed zone. But how many times do police get away with them perverting the course of justice as this police officer had done to have 5 me in absenteeism convicted of speeding?
.

Why is it that in court police officers never have to disclose averse findings of their past dishonesty in court? I have been subjected to untold incidents of police abuse and misuse of power, and I do not 10 wonder at all why the youth of today may have little respect for police in particular the level of criminality within the police force. Including a police officer altering the Infringement Notice original afterwards whereas my copy didn’t show the alteration! After all, no use for the police to hold that they can assist police against criminals not paying 15 traffic fines, because ample of police also are subjected to traffic fines, and so likewise are deemed criminals. But you find that somehow often when a police officer challenges it then the police officer wins the case but all other motorist who were fined by the use of the same camera somehow still are “criminals”.
20

Now consider this: And the High Court of Australia also stated:

Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann; Spi [1999] HCA 27 (17 June 1999) QUOTE 25 For constitutional purposes, they are a nullity. No doctrine of res judicata or issue estoppel can prevail against the Constitution. Mr Gould is entitled to disregard the orders made in Gould v Brown. No doubt, as Latham CJ said of invalid legislation, "he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour". That is because those relying on the earlier decision may seek to enforce it against Mr Gould. END QUOTE 30 Well, as I indicated above the police officer who assisted in regard of my taillight (shining his

35

torch, while I replaced the faulty light bulb with a spare, I had with me) subsequently didn’t pursue the warrant but let me sort it out, we now find the police pulling over drivers and directing them albeit I view illegally, to the Sheriff. At least it did so years ago in Broadmeadows with me!
.

40

While the police may have powers to stop a motorist to inspect the vehicle for road worthiness, it has to my understanding no powers to stop a motorist and then direct him to the Sheriff who then check out if there is a warrant out or not. As such to me the police become terrorist abusing their police powers for ulterior reasons.
http://www.northernweekly.com.au/story/1736859/joint-operation-to-clean-up-a-fine-mess/ QUOTE Joint operation to clean up a fine mess By TARA MURRAY and BENJAMIN MILLAR

45

Aug. 28, 2013, 2:17 p.m. END QUOTE http://www.northernweekly.com.au/story/1736859/joint-operation-to-clean-up-a-fine-mess/ QUOTE

50

The Sheriff’s Office arrested more than 2000 people and took action over more than 1.1 million warrants last year – up more than 27 per cent on the previous year. “Clearly some people don’t get the message until a sheriff’s officer clamps their car, suspends their driver’s licence or arrests them,” Mr Facey said. Across the state, 728,549 people racked up 3,760,798 unpaid fines valued at $1,316,218,549.

55 END QUOTE p6 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/1709327/sheriffs-blitz-on-unpaid-fines-in-ballarat/ http://www.standard.net.au/story/1695720/sheriffs-office-bags-43000-clip-at-sheepvention/ http://www.monashweekly.com.au/story/1557662/high-noon-as-sheriff-nabs-fine-dodgers/ 5
.

The rule of law is that the moment a person objects to the validity of legislation it is ULTRA VIRES ab initio, unless and untill, if ever at all, a court of competent jurisdiction declares the legislation to be INTRA VIRES.

Uniform Tax \case, 1942 (65CLR 373 at 408) 23-7-1942 10 QUOTE Common expressions such as: 'The Courts have declared a statute invalid'," says Chief Justice Latham, "sometimes lead to misunderstanding. A pretended law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it. Naturally, he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favor, but such a decision is not an element, which produces invalidity in any law. 15 The law is not valid until a court pronounces against it - and thereafter invalid. If it is beyond power it is invalid ab initio. END QUOTE 20

Well, it seems the Victorian Police could give a damn about the terorism conduct it engage in by assisting the Sheriff and his deputies to extort monies from people who are going on their daily business, all because of unconstitutional and so illegal Infringement Court orders/warrants.
.

After all, as since Febraurty 2011 I objected to the jurisdiction of any court to deal with this matter then unless and until a court of competent jurisdiction had overruled this no court could 25 invoke jurisdiction. The Infringement Court is not a court of competent jurisdiction nor invested with federal jurisdiction to determine issues relating to the constitution, and as such its purported issue of orders/warrant cannot be valid. More over, when an objection against legislation is made then this is not only applicable for the objector but so anyone else. Hence, when I objected to the constitutional validity of the 30 Infringement Act 2006 then the entire act could no longer be enforced against anyone, not just only against me! But with the Victorian Police willing and able to assist in the terrorism by the Sheriff against citizen s then why would the Sheriff and his deputies concern themselves about what is lawful or not.
35

40

The Framers of the Constitution made clear that all that was needed was a JUDICIAL decision AFTER both parfties were heard. Well, the Infringement Court clearly doesn’t hear both parties and so fails on this legal principle also. More over, the Magistrates Court has cedrtain legal provisions and if the Infringement Court were to operate as part of the Magistrates Court of Victoria then its legal procedures do not comply with the Magistrates Court Act
,

When I commenced to represented Mr Colosimo, as a Professional Advocate, before Her Honour Harbison J, in the 6th contempt hearing, after Mr Colosimo got rid of his barrister, in a case that involved more then 20 lawyers, I pointed out to Her Honour that she had no jurisdiction, there was no legitimate evidence to rely upon, etc. Upon my submission Her Honour ordered a 45 permanent stay the contempt case, acknowledging that I was correct in law, that once filed the other party could not withdraw the contempt application, and I opposed it to be withdrawn. Well aware that if it was withdrawn they could file it again whereas a permanent stay would prevent this.
50

I may use my self proclaimed “crummy English”, in view English was not my native language and neither did I have any formal education in the English language, but I proved often enought to defeat lawyers. and, it seems I better give you also a lesson in constitutional matters, but the value of it is left up to the inteligence you may or may not posess to comprehend it all.
.

55

People who grew up in Australia are living with notions of procedures even so it can be totally and utterly wrong.
p7 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

As I wrote to Mr Malcolm Turnbull on 21 September 20013:
QUOTE 2 SEPTEMBER 2013 CORRESPONDENCE Malcolm, 5 as a CONSTITUTIONALIST I put the challenge to you to disprove my reasoning in my “ 130920Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott Re various issues-Republic by stealth!” correspondence to Mr Tony Abbott, of which you were provided a copy via email at the same time. 10 While your email refers to “MP” it must be clear you are not a Member of Parliament until the writs are returned, and you are sworn in for the seat elected for. If in fact you fail to accept the seat then you will not become an MP (Member of Parliament) either. It is of concern to me what we have people running around using the references of “MP” even so they are not, and worse are fraudulently using Consolidated Revenue Funds for this. With all those lawyers in the parliament it seems not a single one understand the true meaning and application of the constitution and many are therefore fraudulently using monies from Consolidated Revenue Funds as result, but if a pensioner was to do the same then politicians would argue they deserved to be punished as they are stealing from the taxpayers. Well to me every politician doing the same likewise should be facing the courts and no excuse for not knowing what is applicable. . I can accept that any successful candidate for purpose of travelling to the Parliament to take up the seat would be entitled to compensation in regard to this, including a limited overnight accommodation cost. That the Framers of the Constitution considered and for this also provided for an “allowance”. Therefore a Minister of the Crown is entitled, when having taken up a seat in the parliament, to an “allowance” and as a Minister also entitled to receive remuneration for being a Minister of the Crown. the ‘allowance is payable from Consolidated Revenue Funds whereas the “salary” is payable by the Queen, for which Her Majesty receives monies from Consolidated Revenue Funds. It is important that it is understood that a Minister is and remains entitled to any “allowance”; when also being a Member of Parliament. A Minister, such as yourself, not now being a Member of Parliament therefore cannot receive the same amount of monies as you would once you become a Member of Parliament, if at all. For example, so to say, you could be declared a bankrupt before being able to take up the seat and then by s44 of the constitution you would not be able to take up the seat and your appointment as Minister would expire by no later then 3 months after the appointment commenced (Section 64 of the constitution). Obviously, my issue is if you and other former Members of Parliament, since the House of Representatives was dissolved, nevertheless continue to use the perks as a Member of Parliament, such as mobile and other communications at expenses of the taxpayers and likewise travel and use accommodation even so not constitutionally entitled upon? END QUOTE 2 SEPTEMBER 2013 CORRESPONDENCE

15

20

25

30

35

40

And also, for example: 130920-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott Re various issues-Republic by stealth!

45

QUOTE 2 SEPTEMBER 2013 CORRESPONDENCE HANSARD 16-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-No, there would be no prohibition in that respect. The offices of Speaker and Chairman of Committees are not offices of profit under the Crown. They are parliamentary offices, and Parliament has always retained a power over its own Estimates to the extent that really the Speaker and President of the local Chambers have always exercised a right to submit their own Estimates, and those Estimates, as a rule, as far as I know in practice in my own colony, are altogether untouched by the Government of the day. Now, these are political offices, but not offices of profit under the Crown. END QUOTE What basically is applicable is, that a person not when elected but when actually taking up the seat in the Parliament at the return of the writs, then and only from then on can the person be paid an ‘allowance’, not being a ‘salary’. p8 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

50

55

On Wednesday 128 September 2013 I happen to read an article about a Victorian Member of Parliament Geoff Shaw, who was instead of being at his local (Frankston) political office was actually working at his accountancy office. it seems it was held he was ripping of the public doing so. The truth is he did precisely what the Framers of the Constitution debated to be applicable. That those who are elected continue to work in 5 their normal daily job and receive an “allowance” (not being a “salary”) towards the travel expenses and loss of income for attending to the Parliament. essentially people have been by masses brainwashed that a person who actually acts appropriately in that regard may be deemed to be a thief. END QUOTE 2 SEPTEMBER 2013 CORRESPONDENCE 10

For the record I have to my recollection never had contact with Mr Geoff Shaw or any of his representatives, and so the man wouldn’t even be aware of my writings, and may not even be aware of my existence. But, my issue is why did the police consider it appropriate to charge Mr Geoff Shaw for alleged misuse of a vebicle but doesn’t do so with others? Why is he singled out? If you are going after those abusing Consolidated Revenue funds why then not after all of them,? You see once the Governor dissolves the House then not a single person in the Lower House remains to be a Member of Parliament. And as the States are constituted within s106 of the (federal) constitution its legal principles apply. As such any candidate elected cannot receive an “allowance” (not being a salary) until the writs are returned, and they have actually taken up the seat elected for. So for all those months that they are after the dissolution of ther House and before the writs are returned then they are not entitled to use their former parliamentarian titles, phones, vehicles, etc. After all, they are and never were employed because they are “elected” to represent. Then if they become Minister of the Crown then as like the Governor they are employed by the British Crown, and payment is to be made to the Queen and Her Majesty decides their pay. As such, those who were Members of the Parliament, prior to the Houses being dissolved, and still continued to use their parliamentrian perks, but not c onsgtitutionally entitled to this, in my view all defrauded Consolidated Revenue Funds. All of them failing to declare to the Electoral Commission the monies they had received, the financial beneffits from the perks, etc, then all would in my view have committed offences by concealing those details. The State Parliament cannot override its creator the constitution nor its embedded legal principles that applies to the states also. . As I indicated I understand from various statement on the internet that Mr Shaw was accused of defrauding Consolidated Revenue for daring to work in his private office while being paid by the State. While this may not be an issue pursued by the police it nevertheless show how the masses have been brainwashed to believe in some version of events to be applicable contrary to what actually is constitutionally aspplicable. . If Mr Shaw acted dishonest, not something I have nor can be permitted to decide, then lets deal with each and every parliamentarian who has done so. Constitutionally there is no provision for a shadow cabinet, So, why are there so many paid salaries for being a in a shadow cabinert? To me thisn is defrauding taxpayewrs also. Constitutionally, Minister are employed with the Monarch, that is the British Crown and no other, and if Mr Baillieu is no longer a Minister then why is he not charged for using a driver and vehicle? Are we applying double standards? It should be clear that if Mr Shaw was not a Minister then he could not be in receipt of a ”salary” but only an “allowance” to compensate him for the loss of income of his ordinary daily work, while attending to the Parliament. If therefore he was provided with a vehicle not being a Minister, as Mr Ted Baillieu was, then I see quite frankly no difference as to one using it or the other.
p9 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Seems to me, the Victorian Police should first of all check out what is constitutionally applicable, and forget asking some lawyer who pretends to be a constitutional lawyer but knows likely next to nothing avout it. Go to any court case involving parties all being represented and of the 100 cases you find 100 set 5 of lawyers to be on the loosing ed and 100 set of lawyer on the winning end, when the court has to adjudicate, and so you got a 50% chance to have a winning team or a losing set of lawyers. If doctors had this in operations of 50% patients dying they would be deemded to be Charletans. A “constitutional lawyer” is an oxymoron, as much as a “humanist killer” or a “fire bug fire fighhter”.
10

As I indicated above, the states are bound “subject to this constitution” and so also the embedded legal principles that Members of Parliament are not employed by the State and cannot recieve a “salary” but only an “allowance”. Ministers of State” are not employed by the State, but are employed by the British Crown, to which their salaries are payable,. 15 It also means, that former Ministers, Premiers and Governor’s have no legal right to receive so called pensions from the State Consiolidated Revenue Funds as relating to their employement with the British Crown, as the moment their commission is terminated this is the end of their entitlements of that pay. As such, boy, did the police so to say open a Pandoora Box to charge Mr Shaw but not others as 20 this is like a can of worms where they all may be on a slippery slope. Again, the State Parliament cannot legislate contrary to the legal principles embedded in the constitution, and so it is immaterial if the state legislated for certain perks, as it is and remains to be ULTRA VIRES to the constitution, if it offends the legal principles embedded in the constitution.
25

Whatever may or may not be the allegations against Mr Shaw, the Victorian Police, I view has a duty and obligation not to single him out and allow other perhaps more serious offenders to be left untouched. It is because of my so called “crummy English” I tend to check out matters more then most others, including lawyers, tend to do. Hence I discover details and facts most lawyer 30 would never become aware off. . A clear example is where I comprehensively defeated the Commonwealth in both appeals on FAILING TO VOTE as I submitted to the court on 19 July 2006, that compulsory voting was unconstitutional, etc. 35 . Now how many lawyers would be aware of this when they still fine people, albeit unconstitutionally? How many magistrates understand this rule of law if they continue to find electors guilty of FAILING TO VOTE, despite that I proved in court, and unchallenged by the Commonwealth, it is unconstitutional to compel anyone to vote. Hence the legislation is 40 ULTRA VIRES for so far it compels a n elector to vote .
QUOTE
From: Mal <csgroups@iprimus.com.au>

To: INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com Cc: Date: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:03 pm

p10 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Subject:

Julia Gillard paid $4243 to Department of Finance because Tim Mathieson misused car | The Australian

Attachments: Text version of this message. (1KB)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/julia-gillard-wrote-personal-cheque-for-4243-to-departmentof-finance-because-partner-tim-mathieson-misued-taxpayer-funded-car/story-e6frg6n6-1226720672 955 Geoff Shaw was charged today for similar alleged misuses of his State Government car to do his private commercial business in it, was he not? The former first bloke appears to have been an expensive hand-bag for her! But will Tim now also be charged like Geoff Shaw, given the admission by Ms. Gillard by her having herself refunded his misuses of public funded vehicle after being caught out by the department of finance? JULIA Gillard wrote a personal cheque for $4243 to the Department of Finance because her partner, Tim Mathieson, had misused her taxpayer-funded car to drive around Victoria selling shampoo and other haircare products in breach of parliamentary rules. Documents released to The Australian under Freedom of Information laws yesterday show that Ms Gillard made the payment on March 9, 2007, as deputy leader of the opposition because of concern over a breach of rules forbidding the use of the car for commercial purposes. The documents were provided yesterday after a 10-month battle by the former prime minister and her office to prevent the Department of Finance from following through on its decision to release the material. The $4243 repayment by Ms Gillard indicates her office estimated that Mr Mathieson had driven several thousand kilometres while pursuing his commercial interests in the private-plated car, which was wholly funded by the commonwealth.

END QUOTE 5 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/julia-gillard-wrote-personal-cheque-for-4243-to-department-of-financebecause-partner-tim-mathieson-misued-taxpayer-funded-car/story-e6frg6n6-1226720672955 QUOTE

10

Julia Gillard paid $4243 to Department of Finance because Tim Mathieson misused car by: Hedley Thomas From: The Australian September 17, 2013 9:22AM - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/julia-gillard-wrote-personal-cheque-for-4243-todepartment-of-finance-because-partner-tim-mathieson-misued-taxpayer-funded-car/storye6frg6n6-1226720672955#sthash.KRZcodVM.dpuf
END QUOTE http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tim-mathiesons-car-use-cost-julia-gillard-4000/story-fn59niix-122 6720523293#mm-premium QUOTE

15

20

Tim Mathieson's car use cost Julia Gillard $4000 by: Hedley Thomas From: The Australian September 17, 2013 12:00AM

JULIA Gillard wrote a personal cheque for $4243 to the Department of Finance because her partner, Tim Mathieson, had misused her taxpayer-funded car to drive around Victoria selling shampoo and other haircare products in breach of parliamentary rules.Documents released to The 25 Australian under Freedom of Information laws yesterday show that Ms Gillard made the
p11 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

payment on March 9, 2007, as deputy leader of the opposition because of concern over a breach of rules forbidding the use of the car for commercial purposes. The documents were provided yesterday after a 10-month battle by the former prime minister and her office to prevent the Department of Finance from following through on its decision to release the material. - See more 5 at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tim-mathiesons-car-use-cost-julia-gillard4000/story-fn59niix-1226720523293#sthash.KjKTDQIz.dpuf
END QUOTE 10

I be looking forwards if the Victorian Police will be laying any charges against Ms Julia Gillard (as it was her vehicle apparently) and/or Tim Mathieson!

As I indicated, I view the Police themselves are involved in terrorism, when they are assisting the 15 Sheriff’s Office to execute purported Infringement Court orders/warrants despite well aware that since I commenced to challenge the validity of the legislation, etc, they cannot do so. . As I quoted above the Wakim decision where the High Court of Australia clearly stated anyone can ignore those unconstitutional court orders. Well the Sheriff and the Victorian Police 20 obviously are acting contrary to the High Court of Australia decision! Safe to say that the onus was upon the so called “enforcement agency” to take the matter to a court of competent jurisdiction, as to prove jurisdiction! Failing that, no valid court order/warrant can exist from the Infringement Court! Hence, the police cannot act, and certainly not assist the Sheriff’s Office in executing those kind of unconstitutional court orders/warrants. 25 . Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done” R v Sussex Justices, Ex parte McCarthy ([1924].
Law Encyclopedia: Coram [Latin, Before; in the presence of.] 30 The term coram is used in phrases that refer to the appearance of a person before another individual or 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.

35 Bowers v Smith (1953) 1 ALL ER 320 (Re Clarke Hall) and (Morrison on Children, 7 Ed, P3) QUOTE "... the first business of the court is to try to issue whether or not the case is bought within the terms of the statute, and only if this be proven by proper evidence can the court proceed to decide upon treatment" END QUOTE 40 HALSBURY’S LAWS OF AUSTRALIA says under (130-13460): Consent to summary jurisdiction. “The consent to be tried summarily must be clear and unequivocal and a failure to carry out the procedure for obtaining the consent will deprive the Court of Jurisdiction to determine the matters summarily”. 45 “A man who exercises his rights harms no one” … a Legal Maxim. Article 11 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which she/he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence." 50 END QUOTE

. The legal doctrine of “ex turpi causa non oritur action” denies any remedy to a litigant (including a prosecutor) who does not come to court with clean hands.
55

If your own action is very unlawful and very unethical, if you come to court with “Dirty Hands” best not to question others legality, morality, and ethics!
p12 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

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. 5 END QUOTE

The following applies as much to Federal laws of the Commonwealth of Australia as it does to federal laws in the USA; http://familyguardian.taxtactics.com/Subjects/LawAndGovt/ChallJurisdiction/AuthoritiesArticle/AuthOnJurisdiction.htm
10 QUOTE 37 Am Jur 2d at section 8 states, in part: "Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters, and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments." END QUOTE 15 And QUOTE The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. 20 This is succinctly stated as follows: The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a 25 statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it. . . A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede 30 any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. END QUOTE Sixteenth American Jurisprudence 35 Second Edition, 1998 version, Section 203 (formerly Section 256) Sixteenth American Jurisprudence 2d; SS: 256 & 257: "The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute … is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. 'Such an unconstitutional law is void', the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority to anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts preformed under it . . . 'A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. 'No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." . . . “The fact that one acts in reliance on a statute which has theretofore been adjudged unconstitutional does not protect him from civil or criminal responsibility ...”.

40

45

50 Harris v Caladine [1991] HCA 9; (1991) 172 CLR 84 (17 April 1991) QUOTE CCH 92-217 page 78485 (1991) The Court could not make an order which otherwise fell outside its jurisdiction merely because the parties consent to it.. END QUOTE 55 .

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/1991/9.html?stem=0&synonyms=0 &query="otherwise%20fell%20outside%20its%20jurisdiction%20"
Harris v Caladine [1991] HCA 9; (1991) 172 CLR 84 (17 April 1991) QUOTE

p13 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

The Full Court on appeal from Maxwell J. held that the review of the Deputy Registrar's decision was confined to an inquiry whether the parties did in fact consent to the terms of the order and whether the terms agreed upon were in a form appropriate to the type of order sought and were enforceable. But the order made by the Deputy Registrar must have been made pursuant to s.79 - the section which confers power upon the 5 Court to order a settlement of or an alteration in the property interests of the parties. The Court could not make an order which otherwise fell outside its jurisdiction merely because the parties consented to it and it follows, a fortiori, that a Registrar, exercising a delegated power, could not do so. Thus, for instance, under s.80(1)(j) of the Act the Court may make an order by consent, but only in exercising its powers under Pt VIII. Section 37A(1)(g) allows the delegation to the Registrar of the power to make an order by consent, 10 but only where it is a power of the Court. And O.36A, r.2(1)(n) delegates to the Registrar the power referred to in s.37A(1)(g). END QUOTE QUOTE Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980). 15 The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven. END QUOTE QUOTE Hagens v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533, Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven 20 END QUOTE QUOTE Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct. 768, No sanctions can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction. END QUOTE QUOTE Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 2nd 906 at 910, Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even on final determination. END QUOTE
.

25

30 QUOTE Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471. Where there is absence of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack. END QUOTE 35

Director General, Department of Commerce v Cianfrano and Anor [2008] NSWADTAP 56 (24 July 2008) NEW SOUTH WALES ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS TRIBUNAL 40 QUOTE 3 The Tribunal decided, contrary to the Department’s submission, that it did have jurisdiction to determine the adequacy of search question: Director-General, Department of Commerce and anor (No 2) [2006] NSW ADT 195. The matter was listed for further directions. The Tribunal’s orders were as follows: 45 1. First Respondent’s objection to jurisdiction dismissed. 2. Tribunal to reconvene to make further directions as appropriate. END QUOTE

Some exampels as to how a court of competent jurisdiction deals with an OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION:

Trapman v Sydney Water Corporation & Ors [2009] FMCA 942 (16 September 2009) QUOTE 1. Accordingly, I find that the Court has jurisdiction to deal with the matters contained in Particulars (a)(ii), (v), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi) and (xii) of Exhibit 1. 1. It follows that I find that the Court does not have jurisdiction to deal 55 with the matters contained in Particulars (a) (i),(iii), (iv) and (vi) of Exhibit 1. 1. I make orders accordingly. END QUOTE p14 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati 50

.

. Watson v Director-General, Department of Services, Technology and Administration [2010] NSWADT 44 (12 February 2010) QUOTE 5 He also stated that, if the Tribunal agreed this view, he would seek an order that the Respondent pay the Applicants’ costs occasioned by the objection to jurisdiction on an indemnity basis. END QUOTE And 10 QUOTE The orders to be made 64 For the foregoing reasons, each of the applications constituting these proceedings is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 65 In consequence, the Tribunal’s orders made on 6 January 2010 are discharged. 20 66 In addition, the directions hearing set down for 15 February 2010 is vacated. END QUOTE

15

As I objected to the jurisdiction of any court, then the onus was upon the Victorian Police to place matters before a COMPETENT COURT OF JURISDICTION that could invoke Federal 25 jurisdiction, in view that I all along relied upon legal principles embedded in the constitution. ‘ Indeed, the police prosecutor as a OFFICER OF THE COURT should have disclosed my objection to jurisdiction to the Infringement Court.
.

Foster (1950) S.R. (N.S.W.) 149, at p151 (Lord Denning, speaking on the role of an advocate) 30 QUOTE As an advocate he is a minister of Justice equally with a judge, A Barrister cannot pick or choose his clients...He must accept the brief and do all he honourably can on behalf of his client. I say 'All he honourably can' because his duty is not only to his client. He has a duty to the court which is paramount. It is a mistake to suppose that he is a mouthpiece of his client to say what he wants: or 35 his tool to do what he directs. He is none of those things. He owes his allegiance to a higher cause. It is the cause of truth and Justice. He must not consciously misstate the facts. He must not knowingly conceal the truth. He must not unjustly make a charge of fraud, that is, without evidence to support it. He must produce all relevant authorities, even those that are against him. He must see that his client discloses, if ordered, all relevant documents, even those that are fatal to his case. He must disregard the 40 specific instructions of his client, if they conflict with his duty to the court. END QUOTE Taylor v. Taylor (1979) Fam LR 5, 289289 at 290 298 and 300 HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUOTE In my opinion, the words 'false evidence' in s79A(1) do not mean evidence which is wilfully false. The subsection should be read according to its terms. To say that 'false evidence should be read as 'wilful false evidence' is to introduce a provision not expressed by the provision; cf s6H of the Royal Commission Act 1902 which speaks of a witness 'who knowingly gives false testimony'. This interpretation is reinforced by reference elsewhere in s79A(1) to the separate grounds of fraud and suppression of evidence which would comprehend cases of wilful false evidence. At common law, a judgment will be set aside if it has been obtained by fraud. In the exercise of this jurisdiction, it has been held that an applicant must show something more than perjury, ie. new facts (Baker v. Wadsworth [1898] 67 LJQB 301; Everett V. Ribbands [1946] 175 LT 143). This tends to suggest that the words 'false evidence' should be given their literal meaning END QUOTE And Taylor v. Taylor (1979) Fam LR 5, 289289 at 290 298 and 300 HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUOTE In my opinion, the jurisdiction extends not only to the setting aside of judgments which have been obtained without service or notice to a party (Craig v. Kanssen [1943] KB 256 at 262 - 263) but to the setting aside of a default or ex-parte judgment obtained when the absence of the party is due to no fault on his part. I can find no indication in the Family Law Act of an intention to displace this inherent jurisdiction. p15 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

45

50

55

60

END QUOTE
.

QUOTE R.V. Crimmins (1959) VR 270 Suppression of relevant evidence 5 END QUOTE
.

10

QUOTE Byrne v Byrne (1965) 7 FLR 342 at 343 Fraud: Usually takes the form of a statement of what is false or the suppression of what is true. END QUOTE

The issue is not if some private company did or didn’t set up a system that prevents a police officer to notify the Infringement Registrar of an OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION but that the police officer was duty bound to notify the Infringement Registrar that I had objected to jurisdiction and therefore the matter couldn’t be proceedings before the Infringement Court, 15 unless and until, if at all, a court of competent jurisdiction ruled averse to my claims. It is not relevant if ordinary the Infringement Court had been dealing with Infringement Notices in the past, because it is the inherent legal right for a accused to object to the jurisdiction of a court, and for the plaintiff/prosecutor then to prove jurisdiction. I learned this lesson when the 20 Supreme Court of Victoria had an objection to jurisdiction from government solicitors, and the trailjudge made clear that it was their right to object no matter what, and I had the onus to prove jurisdiction! As the trail judge made clear the fact that the Supreme Court of Victoria was the higherst court of the State, and had been dealing with simular cases in the past, proved nothing!
.

While it is obvious that the State Government now relies upon the police to be a tax collector in reality the police function is to maintain law and order and not become tax collectors. It was not for me to elect to go to court as I was not seeking to sue anyone. the Police pursued I had committed an offence and so it was for the police to then take it to as competent court of jurisdiction, where from onset I made known my objections. where the police failed to do so then 30 this must be fatal to its case. Then to assist the Sheriff in executing purported Infringement Court orders/warrants to me is nothing less then terrorism.
25
.’

In my view the Chief Commissioner of Police has a duty of care towards police officers in the police force, that they are not needlessly left at risk of being personally sued for seeking to 35 execute invalid Infringement Court orders/warrants, because their superior couldn’t give a damn about protecting them. There is no such thing for police officers deliberately left unknown by their superiors of invalid Infringement Court orders/warrant and then executing them and be free from being liable because their superiors seek to con their own officers in acting unlawfully.
.

40

45

The history of my case is extensive in writing and if the police and the Sheriff’s Office elect to ignore this then they must accept the legal consequences, and be personally liable because I do not accept that taxpayers should be ending up paying for cost which was caused deliberately by the Chief Commissioner and the Sheriff (and those working under them) for thwarting the rule of law application.

AS I VIEW IT, THIS IS A DELIBERATE CONDUCT OF TERRORISM. INDEED, STOPPING A PARENT IN DRIVING A CHILD TO SCHOOL FOR EXECUTING INVALID INFRINGEMENT COURT ORDERS/WARRANTS AND TO EXTORT THEM TO PAY UP OF BE IMPRISONED AND/OR ARRESTING THEM IS NOTHING LESS 50 IN MY VIEW THEN TERRORISM AND EXTORTION. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO ISSUE WITH THE POLICE AND/OR THE SHERIFF EXECUTING VALID COURT ORDERS/WARRANTS IN A LAWFUL MANNER, BUT TOTALLY OPPOSE THE MISUSE AND ABUSE OF POWERS IN THE PROCESS OF 55 DOING SO. IF A DRIVER IS STOPPED FOR A ROAD WORTHINESS CHECK AND THE POLICE FIND THE VEHICLE TO BE OK THEN I VIEW THERE IS NO LEGAL JURISDICTION
p16 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

THEN TO DIRECT THE DRIVER TO THE SHERIFF TO BE CHECKED OUT FOR ANY OUTSTANDING ALLEGED ORDERS/WARRANTS BECAUSE THIS GOES BEYOND THE POWERS OF THE POLICE FOR ROAD WORTHINESS CHECKING A VEHICLE.
5

There are ample of U.S.A Authorities which makes clear the police cannot stop a motorist for ulterior purposes nothing to do with the vehicle itself. Indeed, time and time again it held purported evidence found by the police in a vehicle to be inadmissible because it was an unlawful search, nothing to do with the checking of a road worthiness. As the Supreme Court of Victoria recently made clear a man running away not wanting to answer questions was entitled to do so. As such, it must be clear that the police has the powers to check if a driver is licensed to drive a motor vehicle, but not if somehow then this relaters to other issues, because then the checking is not for lawfulness of using the vehicle but for ulterior purposes which makes it unlawfull.
.

10

15

QUOTE Sorell v Smith (1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords In an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual injury, will give good cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not illegal is of the essence of the conspiracy. 20 END QUOTE
.

25

In my view, if therefore the Victorian Police uses its powers to stop motorist as to enable the Sheriff’s Office unlawfully to check the driver for outstanding fines/warrants then this becomes a conspiracy!

A person may lawfully uses a motor vehicle not belonging to him, and the police cannot just stop the vehicle, as it does unlawfully, just so the Sheriff can check the identity of the driver against any outstanding orders/warrants., as much as the police cannot do so against a person walking along a footpath or riding a bicycle for the Sheriff to check the identity. That must be clear by the 30 recent decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria. And in R v Kidman [1915] HCA 58; (1915) 20 CLR 425 (16 September 1915) it was held
QUOTE 35 In more developed societies the redress of civil wrongs is in practice required to be sought by the party aggrieved, while in the case of violations of the law entailing penal consequences the proceedings are instituted in the name or on behalf of the sovereign authority. This has been for so long a time the rule in British communities that any reference in a Statute to judicial power or its exercise must be interpreted by its light. The analogy between the two kinds of proceedings is thus expressed in Chitty on the Common Law (2nd ed., vol. i., p. 841):—"Criminal informations, properly so called, are analogous to declarations for the redress of a personal injury, except that the latter are at the suit of a subject for the satisfaction of a private wrong, and the former are in the name of the King, for the punishment of offences affecting the interests of the public. They are accusations or complaints for serious misdemeanors, which, whether they immediately affect the safety of the Crown, or, in the first instance, encroach more nearly on individual rights, require to be speedily repressed for the good of society at large." END QUOTE R v Kidman [1915] HCA 58; (1915) 20 CLR 425 (16 September 1915) QUOTE 50 A man attempting to steal Commonwealth treasure may be resisted to death; a man obstructing any Commonwealth officer in the performance of his duty may be thrust aside with all the force necessary to enable the officer to perform his duty. All this is implied executive power, but punishment, whether regarded as retribution or as a deterrent, is beyond the scope of the executive power. That is, it is not incidental to it, or to its execution, in the sense which would include it by implication in the grant of power. The Executive cannot change or add to the law; it can only execute it; and any change of or addition to law is not incidental when we are speaking of a non-legislative power. p17 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

40

45

55

END QUOTE HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 5 Mr. BARTON.-Our civil rights are not in the hands of any Government, but the rights of the Crown in prosecuting criminals are. END QUOTE 10

Then the question arises that if a warrant was issued, when were the matters prosecuted by the Crown in court? When was the sumnmons served upon the accused in name of the Crown?
.

As a former police prosecutor stated:
QUOTE EMAIL http://www.membersonly.aussiespeedingfines.com/memberspage.php 15 Saturday - Jun 22, 2013 9:21 am How and why you should fight ALL fines - by an ex-Police Sergeant! 20 We have received the following e-mail from an Ex-Victoria Police Sergeant and we would urge everyone to read it carefully and note that it details the very points that we raise in our e-book about challenging every fine you get. Hi, 25 My name is Stan. I am a retired Sergeant of Police in Victoria for 14 years. I was also a police prosecutor at times, so I know what I am talking about. I spent half my life in Magistrates Court during my time in the Force. I was only ever a very fair copper, and I am proud of my time in the job, looking after the interests of Victorians, often to the detriment of my family and my health. I never booked any driver for a trifling offence "ever". People committing trifling offences commonly used to get a warning and a licence / vehicle check. It had to be serious before I booked anyone. I am so annoyed at what is happening these days, in what I call "Indiscriminate revenue gathering" It is absolutely disgusting. The government and the Police Force need to hang their heads in shame. If you did a survey of current serving members of the police forces in this country, you would be hard pushed to find many who disagree with me. I know how the legal system works, and I know how to beat the system. This is how to do it, and if about 10% of all drivers booked follow my specific instructions, then the entire system will crash and become unworkable to the extent, that the government will have no choice but to stop issuing fines for every type of traffic offence. The whole lot of them. Seriously. I do not feel guilty about coming out with this information, as I think it's about time someone stood up for hard working, civil minded, law abiding taxpayers in this country, who are being screwed. 45 This is very simple and very basic. The idea is to clog up the system in the traffic camera office and the courts by drivers exercising their rights to remain innocent until proven guilty. SIMPLE BASIC LEGAL STEPS TO FOLLOW................ 50 1. Do not accept the alleged offence. There are numerous valid reasons to dispute every single alleged offence. Often the charges are incorrect or the evidence is illegally or incorrectly gathered. 55 2. Challenge it, tell them that you are going to defend the matter. Make them earn their miserable $150 or $200 or whatever. They have to prepare evidence and witnesses. Just the wages for the camera operator or the Policeman on the day of the court, will be more than the actual fine. You are also taking a camera operator or a member of the Police Force off the street for the day. But it won't get to that point.....read on.... 3. If a court date is ever set, and it does not suit you, do not accept it, ask for a delay to a time and place that suits you. p18 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

30

35

40

60

4. When they re set the date, delay it as often as possible. keep pleading not guilty all through the process. You have every right to be sick, or go for an adjournment if the day does not suit for any legitimate reason.For example you may have pressing family or work commitments which prevent you from attending a particular court on a particular day. 5 5. If it ever actually gets to court, (which is unlikely if everyone does this) and if you are unwell that day, ring the court in the morning and tell them that you cannot make it as you are sick. The camera operator, and a police prosecutor will already be at court, and will be greatly inconvenienced, by having to come back another day. The whole time this is going on, the amount of paperwork involved at the traffic camera office is huge. Several staff are involved, and it rapidly becomes very costly, probably running into thousands. .....with me so far.....keep reading....... 6. The court system is then placed under such a massive load by people who wanted "their day in court" that it simply will not be able to cope unless they open up about another 50 magistrates courts, and this is obviously going to cost the government a lot more than any revenue raised. If all the above fails, which is highly unlikely....and you actually go to court and get convicted......you have a right of appeal. Make sure you appeal the conviction. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see what happens. They are not going to spend millions chasing hundreds. 7 Tell everyone you know to challenge their alleged offences, and the entire system will crash within a few weeks. 8. Please pass this on. AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT YOU ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY AND THAT THERE IS A VERY HIGH PROBABILITY THAT THE EVIDENCE USED AGAINST YOU IS WRONG. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO CHALLENGE ANY ALLEGED OFFENCE. THIS IS WHY COURTS EXIST....SO USE THEM......A LOT. Regards, 30 Stan END QUOTE EMAIL

10

15

20

25

The point is when did the police check if the advise on the infringement Notice to make a payment to Civic Compliance Victoria was actually lawful? Politicians all over the world are 35 creating systems that they rip of taxpayers, and this one seems to be to me one of them. Why is the Victorian Police advising to make a payment to a bank account purportedly being “Civic Compliance Victoria” when in fact the Westpac bank has it as “Civic Compliance Vic” not being the same as the trademark? Is this a deliberate different version so that monies are not at all paid into an account of Civic Compliance Victoria but in another account known as “Civic 40 Compliance Vic” in a similar manner as Julia Gillard and her then boyfriend Wilson set up a bank account purporting to be a Trade Union account, but was not? Why indeed did Westpac allow the registration of a bank account in the name of ””Civic Compliance Vic” when to my knowledge there is no such registered business operating?
.

If the company behind Civic Compliance Victoria and/or Civic Compliance Vic is a private company using the trademark or letterheads (as I previously exposed) of the police, the Sheriff’s office the Court, etc, then where does the liability lie if something goes terribly wrong? Is the Chief Commissioner of Police willing to take full responsibility for any liability arising of conduct by the company operating under the Victorian Trademark Civic Compliance Victoria 50 when it uses the Victorian Police letterhead? Indeed, is this a lawful exercise by a private company?
45
.

It is lawful to issue orders/warrants purportedly issued by a Infringement Court Registrar but actually being the private company parading as Infringement Registrar, and accessing court 55 computer facilities. (Seen below also the notation about “Business Unit 19”) Why is it that the Magistrates court of Victoria doesn’t list in its yearly reporting the number of Infringement Court orders/warrants even so the Magistrates Court of Victoria letterhead is used by the purported Infringement Registrar?
p19 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Why is it that the correspondence, most of it, are not signed? Is this because they are issued by the private company and so no actual official police officer or Registrar is on the job, and may only afterwards make out to have been.After all, as I did set out in the past, considering the numerous Infringement Court orders/warrants then for a Registrar to be able to deal with this he 5 must be super human, as he somehow can on his own process more cases then as the Magistrates Court in Victoria all magistrates together can deal with. If one were to consider the Sheriffs claim: http://www.northernweekly.com.au/story/1736859/joint-operation-to-clean-up-a-fine-mess/
QUOTE 10 The Sheriff’s Office arrested more than 2000 people and took action over more than 1.1 million warrants last year – up more than 27 per cent on the previous year. END QUOTE 15

IF WE TAKE IT THAT 1.1 MILLION WARRANTS ARE ISSUED IN A YEAR FOR NON PAYMENTS, THIS MEANS THAT THERE ARE ABOUT 1.1 MILLION COURT HEARINGS BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE INFRINGEMENT COURT TO HEAR AND DETERMINE ACCORDING TO LAW IF A WARRANT SHOULD OR SHOULDN’T BE ISSUED.
.

Again, you will not find this number of warrants issued listed by the Magistrates Court of Victoria, this even so where the Infringement Court uses the letterhead of the Magistrates Court of Victoria then its orders/warrants should be included in yearly reporting. So, about 1,100,000 warrants issued in a year. if we take the extreme that the Infringement Court Registrar works on a 52 week basis without taking holidays or taking time of during the 25 festivities then this will come to about 1,100,000 : 52 = 21,153.84615 warrants a week
20

30

35

40

45

50

Calculated this on a daily basis would be 1.100.000 : 365 = 3013.69863 warrants a day, not taking any time of for holidays, weekends. etc. But if we are more realistic and consider there are usually 48 working weeks and 10 sick days (apart of equipment break down, etc.) and ordinary a court may sit on average 6 hours a day then we would have: 1,100,000 : {(48 x 5-10) x 6} = 1,100,000: {230 x 6} = 1,100,000 : 1380=797,1014492 warrants an hour or about 13,28502415 warrants a minute. (For the record I used to work in production planning, and subsequently when promoted to manage a factory had to do my own production planning also, hence I can easily understand that the figures so to say do not add up, when it comes to the purported Infringement Court orders/warrants. And again, I referred to the calculations of the warrants but if you add the number of other coiurt orders then it be likely less then a second for every order/warrant. One must be absolutely brain dead not to realise there is something wrong in this all!) If we consider that ordinary that is in a competent court of law evidence is to be given under oath both by the Prosecutor and the Defendant and the presiding judicial officer has to consider all material presented to the court, as well as consider it all then we have a super human Registrar. Indeed, one has to ask if the Victorian Police force can accomplish these kind of cases in giving evidence then why cannot do the same in other cases? Obviously the question is in which court room were the cases heard and determined? after all there must be a court room for it. Why do Magistrates complain about their workload and can only do a few cases a day when a registrar can do cases after case every minute of the day if not in a few seconds? . Obviously one must be a humbug and/or a moron to accept that this is actually eventuating in a court room. No one is in his right mind is going to accept that the police actually were under oath giving evidence in criminal cases (as that is what they are effectively) of a rate of about 13 cases every minute to obtain warrants.
p20 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

As such, common sense alone should have warned you that this Infringement Court cannot be operating to the standards of an “open court”as required for the Magistrates Court of Victoria. . Did you as Chief Commissioner ever bother to attend to an Infringement Court hearing, after all 5 they are criminal matters aren’t day to discover why a 100% success rate in getting warrants issues is a little suspicious? What kind of policed officer can you if you betray the oath of a police officer to serve the people, if you in fact go along with this kind of treason against the people. Don’t you have any shame to 10 place other police officers in this kind of situation? . Don’t you understand that this is also why not just the youth of today but a person like myself loose respect for the police because they no longer are serving the general community but are more interested to protect their own job security, even if this means to participate in an elaborate 15 fraud upon the people? Your job, even if you may not be aware of this, albeit that is not an excuse, is to maintain law and order and not flaunt this and assist a government to screw the citizens of the state and others. In my view, if anyone needs to be arrested then it are the politicians for abusing and misusing their powers to decimate our constitutional rights.
20

As I received correspondence from the Registrar of the Infringement Court under the letterhead of the Magistrates Court of Victoria then I demand you come clean and make known how many officers attend to the Infringement Court to under oath provided evidence, including in the case against me, and when was an summons issued for me to attend as like others. As after all, the 25 Infringement Act 2006 did not dispose of the Magistrates Court of Victoria legal processes, and so I view I am entitled to know what really eventuated. . Are you going to claim that you were not aware your officers actually never gave any sworn oath in such criminal cases? Who is running the show I may then ask? 30 . Are you saying you haven’t got a clue how the system operates, and didn’t bother to check it out, this even so your officers are assisting the Sheriff in executing about 1,100,000 warrants? Surely, common sense alone should prevail that you are just not up to the job if you don’t know this?
35 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.- Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. 40 END QUOTE .

Again, an agent (the government) cannot have greater powers then the grantor (the People). So if the Government can get you to assist in the arrest of people because of an alleged debt, then why do you not do the same for my wife? For nearly 2 years she is trying to get an $200 plus 45 overpayment refunded, that in error Yarra Valley Water had paid to the SRO (State Revenue Office) as they claimed not to have my wife’s address, this even so my wife was and still is a customer of them. After about 2 years (and she is 81 years old) they have still failed to refund the overpayment. If the government can have you and other police as fools running after alleged debtors then why don’t you do the same for my wife? 50 .

p21 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

At least in her case it is not some accusation, but admitted by the SRO also that they are holding this money for her. Just that so far they refused to pay it out, even so my wife made a personal trip to YVW to identify herself as being the rightful person to claim the monies back. You see, if you are going to play police officer then do it equally for all citizens, and not just be a glorify debt collector for unlawful orders/warrants and in the process may destroy the lively hood of many, destroy families and perhaps even cause suicides. . This is not about law breakers, because to establish a person being guilty or not must require a 10 proper forum of a competent court of jurisdiction not some STAR CHAMBER COURT outlawed by the Imperial Act Application Act 1980 (Vic).
5

If those people who were subject to the extortion racket turned out never having been convicted appropriately in law, because of the invalidity of the court orders/warrants, then you can never 15 undo the harm you caused to them. Not once did you bother to respond to my past correspondences, and this to me underlines you have no integrity to be Chief Commissioner of Police at all. As I outlined above, with the policed officer and the taillight, when I advised him I was unaware 20 about the warrant case he simply allowed me sufficient time to sort it out. And when he did come to check it out I provided him with a copy of the Attorney-Generals letter stating the warrant was no more, as the case had been withdrawn. As such, the police do not have to enforce orders/warrants that are invalid and without legal force.. And my records of correspondence shows I alerted you of this time and time again. 25 . As such I view you run a terrorism racket with the Sheriff and you both should vacate your positions, and let as more competent person do the job. alternatively we have to have a VELVET REVOLUTION which will return to us our constitutional and other legal rights in which citizens can be guaranteed to have respective conduct by the police serving the community 30 according to law, including the principle law the constitution! . Don’t you feel any shame as to the harm inflicted upon so many, who may be totally unaware about the scam that is purport rated upon them?
35 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism QUOTE

Terrorism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 40 Jump to: navigation, search "Terrorist" redirects here. For other uses, see Terrorist (disambiguation). "Terrorist organization" redirects here. For other uses, see List of designated terrorist organizations. Terrorism Definitions History Incidents Types[show] Anarchist p22 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

45

Nationalist Communist Conservative Left-wing Right-wing
Saffron terror

Militia movement Resistance movement Religious
Christian Islamic Jewish

Single-issue
Eco-terrorism Anti-abortion

Ethnic Narcoterrorism Tactics[show] Agro-terrorism Aircraft hijacking
list

Animal-borne bomb attacks Bioterrorism Car bombing
list

Cyberterrorism Dirty bomb Dry run Explosive Hostage-taking Improvised explosive device Individual terror Insurgency Kidnapping Letter bomb Nuclear Paper terrorism Piracy Propaganda of the deed Proxy bomb School shooting Suicide attack
list

Rockets and mortars Terrorist groups[show] Charities accused of ties to terrorism State terrorism[show] By state Pakistan Russia Saudi Arabia Sri Lanka United States Organization[show] Fronting Training camp p23 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Lone wolf Clandestine cell system Leaderless resistance Fighting terrorism[show] International conventions Anti-terrorism legislation Terrorism insurance t e Terrorism is the systematic use of violent terror as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition.[1][2] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror); are perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians). Some definitions now include acts of 5 unlawful violence and war. The use of similar tactics by criminal organizations for protection rackets or to enforce a code of silence is usually not labeled terrorism, though these same actions may be labeled terrorism when done by a politically motivated group. The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged,[3] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”.[4][5] The concept of terrorism 10 may be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[6] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).[6][7] Terrorism has been practiced by a broad array of political organizations to further their objectives. It has been practiced by both right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic groups, religious groups, revolutionaries, 15 and ruling governments.[8] An abiding characteristic is the indiscriminate use of violence against noncombatants for the purpose of gaining publicity for a group, cause, or individual. The symbolism of terrorism can leverage human fear to help achieve these goals.[9]

Contents
[hide] 20

Origin of term[edit source | editbeta]

"Terrorism" comes from the French word terrorisme,[10] and originally referred specifically to state terrorism as practiced by the French government during the Reign of terror. The French word terrorisme in turn derives from the Latin verb terreō meaning “I frighten”.[11] The terror cimbricus was a panic and state of emergency in Rome in response to the approach of warriors of the Cimbri tribe in 105 BC. The Jacobins cited this precedent when 25 imposing a Reign of Terror during the French Revolution.[12][13] After the Jacobins lost power, the word "terrorist" became a term of abuse.[6] Although "terrorism" originally referred to acts committed by a government, currently it usually refers to the killing of innocent people[14] for political purposes in such a way as to create a media spectacle. This meaning can be traced back to Sergey Nechayev, who described himself as a "terrorist".[15] Nechayev founded the Russian terrorist group "People's Retribution" (Народная расправа) in 1869.[16] 30 In November 2004, a United Nations Secretary General report described terrorism as any act "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act".[17]

Definition[edit source | editbeta]
Stamp of Azerbaijan with "Stop Terrorism!" description 35 The definition of terrorism has proved controversial. Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of terrorism in their national legislation. Moreover, the international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[18] In this regard, Angus Martyn, briefing the Australian Parliament, stated that 40 "The international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term floundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination."[1] These divergences have made it impossible for the United Nations to conclude a Comprehensive Convention on 45 International Terrorism that incorporates a single, all-encompassing, legally binding, criminal law definition terrorism.[19] The international community has adopted a series of sectoral conventions that define and criminalize various types of terrorist activities. Since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned terrorist acts using the following p24 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

political description of terrorism: "Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them."[20] Bruce Hoffman, a scholar, has noted: It is not only individual agencies within the same governmental apparatus that cannot agree on a single definition of terrorism. Experts and other long-established scholars in the field are equally incapable of reaching a consensus. In the first edition of his magisterial survey, 'Political Terrorism: A Research Guide,' Alex Schmid devoted more than a hundred pages to examining more than a hundred different definitions of terrorism in an effort to discover a broadly acceptable, reasonably comprehensive explication of the word. Four years and a second edition later, Schimd was no closer to the goal of his quest, conceding in the first sentence of the revised volume that the “search for an adequate definition is still on” Walter Laqueur despaired of defining terrorism in both editions of his monumental work on the subject, maintaining that it is neither possible to do so nor worthwhile to make the attempt.”[21] Hoffman believes it is possible to identify some key characteristics of terrorism. He proposes that: The Baghdad bus station was the scene of a triple car bombing in August 2005 that killed 43 people. By distinguishing terrorists from other types of criminals and terrorism from other forms of crime, we come to appreciate that terrorism is : A definition proposed by Carsten Bockstette at the George C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies, underlines the psychological and tactical aspects of terrorism: Oslo, Norway immediately after the 2011 terrorist attack in Norway perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik. Walter Laqueur, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that "the only general characteristic of terrorism generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence".[citation needed] This criterion alone does not produce, however, a useful definition, since it includes many violent acts not usually considered terrorism: war, riot, organized crime, or even a simple assault.[citation needed] Property destruction that does not endanger life is not usually considered a violent crime,[according to whom?] but some have described property destruction by the Earth Liberation Front[24] and Animal Liberation Front[25] as violence and terrorism; see ecoterrorism. Terrorist attacks are usually carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact.[26] Each act of terrorism is a “performance” devised to have an impact on many large audiences. Terrorists also attack national symbols,[27] to show power and to attempt to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government, while increasing the prestige of the given terrorist organization and/or ideology behind a terrorist act.[28] Terrorist acts frequently have a political purpose.[29] Terrorism is a political tactic, like letter-writing or protesting, which is used by activists when they believe that no other means will effect the kind of change they desire.[according to whom?] The change is desired so badly that failure to achieve change is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians.[citation needed] This is often where the inter-relationship between terrorism and religion occurs. When a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious or "cosmic"[30] struggle, such as over the control of an ancestral homeland or holy site such as Israel and Jerusalem, failing in the political goal (nationalism) becomes equated with spiritual failure, which, for the highly committed, is worse than their own death or the deaths of innocent civilians.[31] Very often, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings"[citation needed] that tie into a specific view of the world that the terrorists possess. Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists' goals of instilling fear, getting their message out to an audience or otherwise satisfying the demands of their often radical religious and political agendas.[32] A collection of photographs of those killed during the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Some official, governmental definitions of terrorism use the criterion of the illegitimacy or unlawfulness of the act.[33][better source needed] to distinguish between actions authorized by a government (and thus "lawful") and those of other actors, including individuals and small groups. Using this criterion, actions that would otherwise qualify as terrorism would not be considered terrorism if they were government sanctioned.[citation needed] For example, firebombing a city, which is designed to affect civilian support for a cause, would not be considered terrorism if it were authorized by a government.[original research?] This criterion is inherently problematic and is not universally accepted,[attribution needed] because: it denies the existence of state terrorism;[34] the same act may or may not be classed as terrorism depending on whether its sponsorship is traced to a "legitimate" government; "legitimacy" and "lawfulness" are subjective, depending on the perspective of one government or another; and it diverges from the historically accepted meaning and origin of the term.[10][35][36][37] Among the various definitions there are several that do not recognize the possibility of legitimate use of violence by civilians against an invader in an occupied country.[citation needed] Other definitions would label as terrorist groups only the resistance movements that oppose an invader with violent acts that undiscriminately kill or harm civilians and non-combatants, thus making a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence.[citation needed] According to Ali Khan, the distinction lies ultimately in a political judgment.[38] p25 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

An associated, and arguably more easily definable, but not equivalent term is violent non-state actor.[39] The semantic scope of this term includes not only "terrorists", but while excluding some individuals or groups who have previously been described as "terrorists", and also explicitly excludes state terrorism. According to the FBI, terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, 5 the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.[citation needed] Barack Obama, commenting on the Boston Marathon bombings of April, 2013, declared "Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror."[40] Various commentators have pointed out the distinction between "act of terror" and "terrorism", particularly when used by the White House.[41][42][43]

Pejorative use[edit source | editbeta]
10 The terms "terrorism" and "terrorist" (someone who engages in terrorism) carry strong negative connotations.[44] These terms are often used as political labels, to condemn violence or the threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, unjustified or to condemn an entire segment of a population.[45] Those labeled "terrorists" by their opponents rarely identify themselves as such, and typically use other terms or terms specific to their situation, such as separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, revolutionary, vigilante, militant, paramilitary, guerrilla, 15 rebel, patriot, or any similar-meaning word in other languages and cultures. Jihadi, mujaheddin, and fedayeen are similar Arabic words which have entered the English lexicon. It is common for both parties in a conflict to describe each other as terrorists.[46] On the question of whether particular terrorist acts, such as killing civilians, can be justified as the lesser evil in a particular circumstance, philosophers have expressed different views: while, according to David Rodin, utilitarian 20 philosophers can (in theory) conceive of cases in which the evil of terrorism is outweighed by the good which could not be achieved in a less morally costly way, in practice the "harmful effects of undermining the convention of noncombatant immunity is thought to outweigh the goods that may be achieved by particular acts of terrorism".[47] Among the non-utilitarian philosophers, Michael Walzer argued that terrorism can be morally justified in only one specific case: when "a nation or community faces the extreme threat of complete destruction and the only way it can 25 preserve itself is by intentionally targeting non-combatants, then it is morally entitled to do so".[47][48] In his book Inside Terrorism Bruce Hoffman offered an explanation of why the term terrorism becomes distorted: The pejorative connotations of the word can be summed up in the aphorism, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".[46] This is exemplified when a group using irregular military methods is an ally of a state against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the state and starts to use those methods against its former ally. During World 30 War II, the Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army was allied with the British, but during the Malayan Emergency, members of its successor (the Malayan Races Liberation Army), were branded "terrorists" by the British.[52][53] More recently, Ronald Reagan and others in the American administration frequently called the Afghan Mujahideen "freedom fighters" during their war against the Soviet Union,[54] yet twenty years later, when a new generation of Afghan men are fighting against what they perceive to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks were 35 labelled "terrorism" by George W. Bush.[55][56][57] Groups accused of terrorism understandably prefer terms reflecting legitimate military or ideological action.[58][59][60] Leading terrorism researcher Professor Martin Rudner, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies at Ottawa's Carleton University, defines "terrorist acts" as attacks against civilians for political or other ideological goals, and said: Some groups, when involved in a "liberation" struggle, have been called "terrorists" by the Western governments or 40 media. Later, these same persons, as leaders of the liberated nations, are called "statesmen" by similar organizations. Two examples of this phenomenon are the Nobel Peace Prize laureates Menachem Begin and Nelson Mandela.[62][63][64][65][66][67] WikiLeaks whistleblower Julian Assange has been called a "terrorist" by Sarah Palin and Joe Biden.[68][69] Sometimes, states which are close allies, for reasons of history, culture and politics, can disagree over whether or not 45 members of a certain organization are terrorists. For instance, for many years, some branches of the United States government refused to label members of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) as terrorists while the IRA was using methods against one of the United States' closest allies (the United Kingdom) which the UK branded as terrorism. This was highlighted by the Quinn v. Robinson case.[70][71] For these and other reasons, media outlets wishing to preserve a reputation for impartiality try to be careful in their 50 use of the term.[72][73]

Types of terrorism[edit source | editbeta]
King David Hotel after being bombed by the Zionist terrorist group Irgun, July 1946

p26 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

A view of damages to the U.S. Embassy in Beirut caused by a terrorist bomb attack, April 1983

Sbarro pizza restaurant bombing in Jerusalem, in which 15 Israeli civilians were killed and 130 were wounded by a Hamas suicide bomber. In early 1975, the Law Enforcement Assistant Administration in the United States formed the National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. One of the five volumes that the committee wrote was entitled 10 Disorders and Terrorism, produced by the Task Force on Disorders and Terrorism under the direction of H.H.A. Cooper, Director of the Task Force staff.[74] The Task Force classified terrorism into six categories. Number of failed, foiled or successful terrorist attacks by year and type within the European Union. Source: Europol.[76][77][78] 1 person died in terrorist attacks from separatist groups in 2010.[76] Several sources[79][80][81] have further defined the typology of terrorism: 15 Attacks on 'collaborators' are used to intimidate people from cooperating with the state in order to undermine state control. This strategy was used in the USA in its War of Independence and in Ireland, in Kenya, in Algeria and in Cyprus during their independence struggles. Attacks on high profile symbolic targets are used to incite counter-terrorism by the state to polarise the population. 20 This strategy was used by Al Qaeda in its attacks on the USA in September 2001. These attacks are also used to draw international attention to struggles which are otherwise unreported such as the Palestinian airplane hijackings in 1970 and the South Moluccan hostage crises in the Netherlands in 1975. Abrahm suggests that terrorist organizations do not select terrorism for its political effectiveness.[82] Individual terrorists tend to be motivated more by a desire for social solidarity with other members of their organization than by 25 political platforms or strategic objectives, which are often murky and undefined.[82]

5

Motivation of terrorists[edit source | editbeta]

Democracy and domestic terrorism[edit source | editbeta]
Demonstration in Madrid against ETA, January 2000. Roughly a million people met there. The relationship between domestic terrorism and democracy is very complex. Terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate political freedom, and is least common in the most democratic nations.[83][84][85][86] However, one 30 study suggests that suicide terrorism may be an exception to this general rule. Evidence regarding this particular method of terrorism reveals that every modern suicide campaign has targeted a democracy–a state with a considerable degree of political freedom.[87] The study suggests that concessions awarded to terrorists during the 1980s and 1990s for suicide attacks increased their frequency.[88] Some examples of "terrorism" in non-democracies include ETA in Spain under Francisco Franco (although the 35 group's terrorist activities increased sharply after Franco's death),[89] the Shining Path in Peru under Alberto Fujimori,[90] the Kurdistan Workers Party when Turkey was ruled by military leaders and the ANC in South Africa.[91] Democracies, such as the United Kingdom, United States, Israel, Indonesia, India, Spain and the Philippines, have also experienced domestic terrorism. While a democratic nation espousing civil liberties may claim a sense of higher moral ground than other regimes, an 40 act of terrorism within such a state may cause a dilemma: whether to maintain its civil liberties and thus risk being p27 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

perceived as ineffective in dealing with the problem; or alternatively to restrict its civil liberties and thus risk delegitimizing its claim of supporting civil liberties.[92] For this reason, homegrown terrorism has started to be seen as a greater threat, as stated by former CIA Director Michael Hayden.[93] This dilemma, some social theorists would conclude, may very well play into the initial plans of the acting terrorist(s); namely, to delegitimize the state.[94] 5

Religious terrorism[edit source | editbeta]
Civilians trapped in a London Underground train after a bomb exploded further down the train at Russell Square Tube station on 7th July 2005

10 Islamabad Marriott Hotel bombing. Some 35,000 Pakistanis have died from terrorist attacks in recent years.[95] Religious terrorism is terrorism performed by groups or individuals, the motivation of which is typically rooted in faith-based tenets. Terrorist acts throughout the centuries have been performed on religious grounds with the hope to either spread or enforce a system of belief, viewpoint or opinion.[96] Religious terrorism does not in itself necessarily define a specific religious standpoint or view, but instead usually defines an individual or a group view or 15 interpretation of that belief system's teachings.

Perpetrators[edit source | editbeta]
The perpetrators of acts of terrorism can be individuals, groups, or states. According to some definitions, clandestine or semi-clandestine state actors may also carry out terrorist acts outside the framework of a state of war. However, the most common image of terrorism is that it is carried out by small and secretive cells, highly motivated to serve a 20 particular cause and many of the most deadly operations in recent times, such as the September 11 attacks, the London underground bombing, and the 2002 Bali bombing were planned and carried out by a close clique, composed of close friends, family members and other strong social networks. These groups benefited from the free flow of information and efficient telecommunications to succeed where others had failed.[97] Over the years, many people have attempted to come up with a terrorist profile to attempt to explain these 25 individuals' actions through their psychology and social circumstances. Others, like Roderick Hindery, have sought to discern profiles in the propaganda tactics used by terrorists. Some security organizations designate these groups as violent non-state actors.[98] A 2007 study by economist Alan B. Krueger found that terrorists were less likely to come from an impoverished background (28% vs. 33%) and more likely to have at least a high-school education (47% vs. 38%). Another analysis found only 16% of terrorists came from impoverished families, vs. 30% of male 30 Palestinians, and over 60% had gone beyond high school, vs. 15% of the populace.[99] To avoid detection, a terrorist will look, dress, and behave normally until executing the assigned mission. Some claim that attempts to profile terrorists based on personality, physical, or sociological traits are not useful.[100] The physical and behavioral description of the terrorist could describe almost any normal person.[101] However, the majority of terrorist attacks are carried out by military age men, aged 16–40.[101] 35

Terrorist groups[edit source | editbeta]
There is speculation that anthrax mailed inside letters to U.S. politicians was the work of a lone wolf terrorist. Main articles: List of designated terrorist organizations and Lone wolf (terrorism)

State sponsors[edit source | editbeta]
A state can sponsor terrorism by funding or harboring a terrorist organization. Opinions as to which acts of violence 40 by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism vary widely. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such.

State terrorism[edit source | editbeta]
This terrified baby was almost the only human being left alive in Shanghai's South Station after brutal Japanese bombing, August 28, 1937 p28 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

5

10

15

20

25

As with "terrorism" the concept of "state terrorism" is controversial.[103] The Chairman of the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee has stated that the Committee was conscious of 12 international Conventions on the subject, and none of them referred to State terrorism, which was not an international legal concept. If States abused their power, they should be judged against international conventions dealing with war crimes, international human rights and international humanitarian law.[104] Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said that it is "time to set aside debates on so-called 'state terrorism'. The use of force by states is already thoroughly regulated under international law"[105] However, he also made clear that, "regardless of the differences between governments on the question of definition of terrorism, what is clear and what we can all agree on is any deliberate attack on innocent civilians, regardless of one's cause, is unacceptable and fits into the definition of terrorism."[106] State terrorism has been used to refer to terrorist acts by governmental agents or forces. This involves the use of state resources employed by a state's foreign policies, such as using its military to directly perform acts of terrorism. Professor of Political Science Michael Stohl cites the examples that include Germany’s bombing of London and the U.S. atomic destruction of Hiroshima during World War II. He argues that “the use of terror tactics is common in international relations and the state has been and remains a more likely employer of terrorism within the international system than insurgents." They also cite the First strike option as an example of the "terror of coercive diplomacy" as a form of this, which holds the world hostage with the implied threat of using nuclear weapons in "crisis management." They argue that the institutionalized form of terrorism has occurred as a result of changes that took place following World War II. In this analysis, state terrorism exhibited as a form of foreign policy was shaped by the presence and use of weapons of mass destruction, and that the legitimizing of such violent behavior led to an increasingly accepted form of this state behavior.[107][108][108] Some theorists suggest genocide is a type of terrorism as committed by Adolf Hitler.[citation needed] State terrorism has also been used to describe peacetime actions by governmental agents such as the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.[109] Charles Stewart Parnell described William Ewart Gladstone's Irish Coercion Act as terrorism in his "no-Rent manifesto" in 1881, during the Irish Land War.[110] The concept is also used to describe political repressions by governments against their own civilian population with the purpose to incite fear. For example, taking and executing civilian hostages or extrajudicial elimination campaigns are commonly considered "terror" or terrorism, for example during the Red Terror or Great Terror.[111] Such actions are often also described as democide or genocide which has been argued to be equivalent to state terrorism.[112] Empirical studies on this have found that democracies have little democide.[113][114]

30

Funding[edit source | editbeta]

State sponsors have constituted a major form of funding; for example, Palestine Liberation Organization, Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and some other terrorist groups were funded by the Soviet Union.[115][116] The Stern Gang received funding from Italian Fascist officers in Beirut to undermine the British Mandate for Palestine.[117] Pakistan has created and nurtured terrorist groups as policy for achieving tactical 35 objectives against its neighbours, especially India.[118] "Revolutionary tax" is another major form of funding, and essentially a euphemism for "protection money".[115] Revolutionary taxes are typically extorted from businesses, and they also "play a secondary role as one other means of intimidating the target population".[115] Other major sources of funding include kidnapping for ransoms, smuggling, fraud and robbery.[115] 40 The Financial Action Task Force is an inter-governmental body whose mandate, since October 2001, has included combatting terrorist financing.[119]

Tactics[edit source | editbeta]
The Wall Street bombing at noon on September 16, 1920 killed thirty-eight people and injured several hundred. The perpetrators were never caught. 45 Terrorism is a form of asymmetric warfare, and is more common when direct conventional warfare will not be effective because forces vary greatly in power.[120] The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political conflict. The type of conflict varies widely; historical examples include: Terrorist attacks are often targeted to maximize fear and publicity, usually using explosives or poison.[121] There 50 is concern about terrorist attacks employing weapons of mass destruction. Terrorist organizations usually methodically plan attacks in advance, and may train participants, plant undercover agents, and raise money from supporters or through organized crime. Communications occur through modern telecommunications, or through oldfashioned methods such as couriers.

Responses[edit source | editbeta]
55 X-ray backscatter technology (AIT) machine used by the TSA to screen passengers. According to the TSA, this is what the remote TSA agent would see on their screen. p29 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the political spectrum and reassessments of fundamental values. Specific types of responses include: The term "counter-terrorism" has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors. 5 According to a report by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin in the Washington Post, "Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States."[122]

Mass media[edit source | editbeta]
Mass media exposure may be a primary goal of those carrying out terrorism, to expose issues that would otherwise 10 be ignored by the media. Some consider this to be manipulation and exploitation of the media.[123] The Internet has created a new channel for groups to spread their messages. This has created a cycle of measures and counter measures by groups in support of and in opposition to terrorist movements. The United Nations has created its own online counter-terrorism resource.[124] The mass media will, on occasion, censor organizations involved in terrorism (through self-restraint or regulation) to 15 discourage further terrorism. However, this may encourage organizations to perform more extreme acts of terrorism to be shown in the mass media. Conversely James F. Pastor explains the significant relationship between terrorism and the media, and the underlying benefit each receives from the other.[125]

History[edit source | editbeta]
Number of terrorist incidents 2010 20 The history of terrorism goes back to the Sicarii Zealots, a Jewish extremist group active in Judaea Province at the beginning of the 1st century AD. After Zealotry rebellion in the 1st century AD, when some prominent collaborators with Roman rule were killed,[127][128] according to contemporary historian Josephus, in 6 AD Judas of Galilee formed a small and more extreme offshoot of the Zealots, the Sicarii.[129] Their terror also was directed against Jewish "collaborators", including temple priests, Sadducees, Herodians, and other wealthy elites.[130] 25 The term "terrorism" itself was originally used to describe the actions of the Jacobin Club during the "Reign of Terror" in the French Revolution. "Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible," said Jacobin leader Maximilien Robespierre. In 1795, Edmund Burke denounced the Jacobins for letting "thousands of those hellhounds called Terrorists...loose on the people" of France.[131] In January 1858, Italian patriot Felice Orsini threw three bombs in an attempt to assassinate French Emperor 30 Napoleon III.[132] Eight bystanders were killed and 142 injured.[132] The incident played a crucial role as an inspiration for the development of the early Russian terrorist groups.[132] Russian Sergey Nechayev, who founded People's Retribution in 1869, described himself as a "terrorist", an early example of the term being employed in its modern meaning.[15] Nechayev's story is told in fictionalized form by Fyodor Dostoevsky in the novel The Possessed. German anarchist writer Johann Most dispensed "advice for terrorists" in the 1880s.[133] 35

Terrorism databases[edit source | editbeta]
The following terrorism databases are or were made publicly available for research purposes, and track specific acts of terrorism: The following publicly available resource indexes electronic and bibliographic resources on the subject of terrorism: 40 The following terrorism databases are maintained in secrecy by the United State Government for intelligence and counter-terrorism purposes:

See also[edit source | editbeta]
This "see also" section may contain an excessive number of suggestions. Please ensure that only the most relevant suggestions are given and that they are not red links, and consider integrating suggestions into the article itself. (July 2013) 45 END QUOTE

Nothing in this correspondence is intended and neither must be perceived to indicate that I somehow support a person to act in breach of law. What I am on about its that if a person is accused of a breach of law then we must follow the legal principle embedded in the constitution that a judicial determination can only be made AFTER both parties have been heard.
p30 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

50

Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. OCONNOR.-With reference to the meaning of the term due process of law, there is in Baker's Annotated Notes on the Constitution of the United States, page 215, this statement5 Due process of law does not imply that all trials in the state courts affecting the property of persons must be by jury. The requirement is met if the trial be in accordance with the settled course of judicial proceedings, and this is regulated by the law of the state. If the state law provides that there shall be a due hearing given to the rights of the partiesMr. BARTON.-And a judicial determination. 10 Mr. OCONNOR.-Yes, and a judicial determination-that is all that is necessary. END QUOTE

Registrars are not OFFICERS OF THE COURT as such, and cannot operate without the supervision of a judger, and one doesn’t need any reason to have a registrars decision reviewed 15 because the mere fact that a party seeks a revied is sufficient in law. http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/1991/9.html?stem=0&synonyms=0 &query="otherwise%20fell%20outside%20its%20jurisdiction%20"
Harris v Caladine [1991] HCA 9; (1991) 172 CLR 84 (17 April 1991) QUOTE 20 The Full Court on appeal from Maxwell J. held that the review of the Deputy Registrar's decision was confined to an inquiry whether the parties did in fact consent to the terms of the order and whether the terms agreed upon were in a form appropriate to the type of order sought and were enforceable. But the order made by the Deputy Registrar must have been made pursuant to s.79 - the section which confers power upon the Court to order a settlement of or an alteration in the property interests of the parties. The Court could not 25 make an order which otherwise fell outside its jurisdiction merely because the parties consented to it and it follows, a fortiori, that a Registrar, exercising a delegated power, could not do so. Thus, for instance, under s.80(1)(j) of the Act the Court may make an order by consent, but only in exercising its powers under Pt VIII. Section 37A(1)(g) allows the delegation to the Registrar of the power to make an order by consent, but only where it is a power of the Court. And O.36A, r.2(1)(n) delegates to the Registrar the power referred 30 to in s.37A(1)(g). END QUOTE QUOTE Scuderi v Morris [2001] VSCA 190 (29 October 2001 In order to resolve this appeal and to determine the relevant principles, we have had to look at a considerable number of additional reported decisions as well as a variety of text books, many of which we have had to find for ourselves with the invaluable assistance of the researchers engaged by the Court. END QUOTE . Hansard 2-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates 40 QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS: I think it is advisable that private people should not be put to the expense of having important questions of constitutional law decided out of their own pockets. END QUOTE 35 45

If therefore the supervising magistrate (if there is any) cannot dispose of matters (hearing and determining cases) but in “open court”, then the Infringement Registrar clearly neither can exercise such procedure. Therefore, the Infringement Registrar supervised (if he is, as otherwise the Infringement Court is without legal status) is bound by the limitations of the magistrate that supervises the
p31 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

50

Infringement Registrar. Because the magistrate is bound by “open court” requirements then the Infringement Registrar likewise is. . If you assisted in 1 year alone to have 2,000 people arrested by invalid warrants then can you 5 really sleep at night, knowing the terrorism you assisted with purport rated upon those innocent people? After all, if the warrants are invalid then the victims are deemed innocent. In my view to maintain the integrity of the Victorian Police force you should insist that no police officer will assist in the execution of any invalid order/warrant and if the Sheriff and/or his 10 deputies persist doing so then you will not hesitate to have them arrested as you must serve and protect the community again any tyrannical government conduct.
Ambard v Att Gen for Trinidad and Tabaco (1939) AC 322 at 335 QUOTE 15 The basic of the right to fair comment is the Right of Freedom of speech and the inalienable right of everyone to comment fairly upon matters of public importance. END QUOTE

No wrong committed in criticism of administration of justice:
20 LORD ATKIN in AMBARD v ATTORNEY-GENERAL for TRINIDAD and TABAGO (1936) A.C. 332, at 335 QUOTE But whether the authority and position or an individual judge, or the due administration of justice, is concerned, no wrong is committed by any member of the public who exercises the ordinary right of criticising, in good faith, in private or public, the public act done in the seat of justice. The path of criticism is a public way, the 25 wrong headed are permitted to err therein: provided that members of the public abstain from imputing improper motives to those taking part in the administration of justice, and are genuinely exercising a right of criticism, and not acting in malice or attempting to impair the administration of justice, they are immune. Justice is not a cloistered virtue: she must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful, even though outspoken, comments of ordinary man 30 END QUOTE
.

The right for the public to be informed about the judicial process being properly applied or acts:
THE COMMENTS OF SIR JAMES MARTIN C.J., IN THE MATTER “THE EVENING NEWS” (1880) N.S.W. LR 211 AT 239.: 35 QUOTE The right of the public to canvass fairly and honestly what takes place here cannot be disputed. Our practice of sitting here with open doors and transacting our judicial functions as we do, always in the broad light of day, would be shown of some of its value if the public opinion respecting our proceedings were at all times to be rigidly suppressed. We claim no immunity from fair, even though it be mistaken criticism. 40 END QUOTE
.

As to value of criticism, keeping judge subject to rules and principles of honour and justice;
45 R v FOSTER (1937) St. E Qd 368 Re WASEMAN (1969) N.Z.L.R. 55, 58-59 Re BOROVSKI (1971) 19 D.L.R. (34) 537 SOLICITOR-GENERAL v RADIO AVON LTD (1978) 1 N.Z.L.R. 225, at 230-31

This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to all issues and details.
50

Awaiting your response,

G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)
®

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL
(

Our name is our motto!)

p32 23-9-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful