Upon whose “authority” does a man acting as a judge in one of her majesty’s courts declare that an illegal and void mortgage is legal and valid?
Under the purported authority of the reigning monarch to sit in judgment over her citizen-subject-slaves.
Upon whose “authority” does a Common Law Jury acquit a man charged with murder in one of her majesty’s courts?
Under the established authority of British Common Law, in accordance with more than two millennia of customs and usages.
Upon whose “authority” does a Sovereign Grand Jury declare that a criminal Act of Parliament is a nullity?
Under the unalienable authority of a voluntary association of at least 13 Sovereign Men and Women of these islands, for the sole purpose of doing whatever is necessary to put right a wrongdoing in their community, in accordance with Ancient British [Molmutine] Common Law and the Treaty of Universal Community Trust.
Upon whose “authority” would you rely in the event that you founded a Sovereign Grand Jury of at least 13 jurors in your community, for the sole purpose of overturning the endemic miscarriages of justice which are blighting the lives of your family, friends and neighbours?
Under nobody’s authority but your own, as it is your unalienable right to do so; if not your moral obligation having been furnished with the evidence of a wrongdoing.
So are you a citizen-subject-slave of her majesty, who consents to your own subjugation to EU hegemony; or are you sovereign, self-owned flesh and blood, subject to no external authority?
In just 13 days from now [November the 1st 2014], the encroaching EU dictatorship will presume that you agree to do only what is specifically written in more than a million statutes, codes and regulations, sanctioned by unelected, unaccountable EU commissioners and implemented by their armies of paper-shuffling bureaucrats, who are on the brink of perfecting their entirely illegitimate claim to jurisdiction over every aspect of your life and those of your children.
Therefore, in the demonstrable absence of justice being attainable in her majesty’s courts; decisive action has been taken by a Sovereign Grand Jury of the indigenous people of Britain [under the protection of the Treaty of Universal Community Trust], in the form of two Unilateral Declarations, which declare that:
1. The Act of Parliament purporting to abolish the Grand Jury was a nullity from its enactment in 1933; and
2. The Acts of Parliament and Her Majesty’s Government purporting to transfer British Sovereignty to the EU supranational dictatorship are also illegal and void ab initio [from the beginning].
Since the decisions of a Grand Jury are beyond the jurisdiction of any government institution in any event, the effect and validity of these declarations can only be challenged by a properly convened Sovereign Grand Jury of the indigenous people of Britain; but only if there are serious errors and/or omissions in the decisions reached, which is self-evidently not the case to all who have studied the Constitutional Monarchy and the nature and history of the Grand Jury, which I endeavoured to synthesise in this video podcast.
It must be stressed that the immeasurably significant effects of these declarations are: to resurrect the ancient institution of justice, which has been the people’s remedy for a myriad of injustices, since at least 400 years before the foundation of the Christian Church; whilst simultaneously raising lawful opposition to the purported transfer of British Sovereignty, which can only exist in the hands of the people, as so many millions on these shores have been praying that the reigning monarch would do of her own volition since 1972, which, for whatever reasons, she has abjectly failed to do for decades, despite such demonstrably widespread opposition from the people.
In any event, neither her majesty’s government, nor the EU Commissars, are capable of challenging these declarations, on the basis that the Grand Jury is beyond the jurisdiction of any government institution; only a properly convened Grand Jury of the Sovereign people of Britain could do that. However, given the self-evident fact that these actions have been taken in defence of such obviously treacherous and treasonous wrongdoings against the British people by successive governments, it is perhaps more likely that Tony Blair apologises for lying through his teeth over non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, than for a properly convened Grand Jury to establish material evidence that these declarations are ill-founded in fact, law or jurisdiction.
