34. With all due respect, I reasonably question, “Is this WESTMINSTERGATE?” as I wish to state clearly, “This is BOLLOCKS mate.”
STATEMENT OF WITNESS
(C.J.Act, 1967, S.9, M.C. Act, 1980, S. 102; M.C. Rules, 1981, S.70)
SOCPA 2005 NOTIFICATION: ‘FAMILY 4 LIFE’
SEPTEMBER 11, 2008
Statement of : Mrs. Charity Sweet
Age of Witness (d.o.b.) : 7th June 1966
Occupation of Witness : Political Activist and Artist
Address & Tel no :
This statement consisting of 9 pages plus 3 photocopies totaling 12 pages, each signed by me, is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
Please find included as photocopies, a 2 page letter addressed to Ms. J. Smith – the Home Secretary, regarding ‘Managing Protest Around Parliament’ mailed to the Public Order Unit of the Home Office, London, SW1P 4DF dated January 17th, 2008 and a copy of Miss Maranda Cameron’s original application for demonstration known as ‘Children For Peace’ – October 2007 which was blatantly ignored by Sir Ian Blair – the Chief of the Metropolis of London.
SOCPA 2005 prescribes that only the Chief of the Metropolis may place conditions upon demonstrations and he/she must authorize said demonstrations as SOCPA 2005 states clearly, when it was written and as it received Royal Assent from HRH Elizabeth II. Should Sir Ian Blair choose to delegate his authority to authorize this notification, I will expect notification from him personally of such delegation of authority clearly stating under which legal directive he has delegated said authority.
A copy of this notification will also be delivered as noted below to Ms. Sarah Winfield, Directorate of Legal Services, Metropolitan Police, Wellington House, 67 – 73 Buckingham gate, London SW1E 6BE.
Signed: _______________________________xxx
STATEMENT OF WITNESS
(C.J.Act, 1967, S.9, M.C. Act, 1980, S. 102; M.C. Rules, 1981, S.70)
SOCPA 2005? - “BOLLOCKS” – HRA 1998 Charity Sweet xxx
Notification of engagement of ALL HUMAN RIGHTS – HRA 1998 under SOCPA 2005 as ‘FAMILY 4 LIFE’ to the direct attention of Sir Ian Blair and Ms. Sarah Winfield, commencing 6 days from stamped postage date of this notification, to be received by registered mail and by hand delivery c/o Charing Cross Police Station, London and c/o the Directorate of Legal Services, Metropolitan Police, Wellington House, London.
1. HRA 1998 legislates that all Human Rights as defined within HRA 1998 are the lawful right of every living soul on the island known as Great Britain, extending over the entirety of the European Economic Community, also known as THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION.ON HUMAN RIGHTS, and specifically within the nation of England as penned by Tony Bliar, 1998, having received Royal Assent by HRH Elizabeth II, 1998.
2. I am notifying the Metropolitan police force and specifically the Chief of the Metropolis of London – Sir Ian Blair, of my right to engage, exercise and flex all of these rights, for the entirety of my lifetime, specifically and not limited to HRA 1998 Art. 10 – FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and HRA 1998 Art.11 – FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY.
3. I am declaring my right to not have these rights interfered with by any body of the State/ Crown without a clear legitimate aim that is necessary in a democratic society that is fully prescribed in law as HRA 1998 clearly states.
4. I am notifying the Metropolitan Police Force and specifically the Chief of the Metropolis of London – Sir Ian Blair that as I am the mother of two minor children – Master Malcolm William Cameron D.O.B. 11th January 1993 and Miss Maranda Dorothy Cameron D.O.B. 22nd March 1999, I am also establishing, declaring and engaging all rights within HRA 1998 for my two minor children for the entirety of their respective lifetimes within this SOCPA 2005 NOTIFICATION.
5. I am REASONABLY disgusted that my daughter’s application for demonstration under SOCPA 2005 titled as CHILDREN FOR PEACE’ of October 2007 has been blatantly disregarded and ignored. I am asserting that certain objectionable members of the Metropolitan Police and specifically Sir Ian Blair have failed in his/her/their duty to authorize Miss Maranda Cameron within 6 days of receipt of her application as is prescribed within SOCPA 2005.
6. Miss Maranda Cameron has never received her letter of authorization despite the fact that both my previous application under SOCPA 2005 titled as ‘ARTISTS 4 PEACE’ and her application as titled ‘CHILDREN FOR PEACE’ were both hand-delivered to Charing Cross Police Station on the same date and the fact that both forms were filled out in an identical fashion.
7. I refuse to fill in another Application for Demonstration form for the above clearly stated REASONS.
8. Engaging HRA 1998 Art.11 FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY, I wish to clarify that any person or persons who chooses to join myself and/or my children in my/our demonstration/engagement of any and/or all Human Rights as prescribed within HRA 1998 WILL BE WELCOME as I do not and will not limit the number of friends I/we may engage in the pursuit of peace, truth, and DEMOCRACY and provided those associated with myself and/or my children engage in lawful conduct regarding HRA 1998, respecting the rights of others. Should the number of participants be expected to surpass 20 people, I will give the Metropolitan Police 24 hours advance notice as necessary. Should the number of participants in any given demonstration/artistic expression be expected to exceed 1000 souls, I will again reasonably give Sir Ian Blair of the Metropolitan Police a further 6 clear days advance notice.
9. This declaration of my/our Human Rights regarding HRA 1998, received by the Metropolitan Police Force and Sir Ian Blair as a notification under SOCPA 2005 shall be known forthwith as ‘FAMILY 4 LIFE’ and will commence 6 days from receipt of this notification as stamped on the front page of this witness statement at Charing Cross Police Station, London. Said notification shall last for the duration of my/our natural lifetime(s) as there is nothing prescribed within SOCPA 2005 which states that notification has any suggested or allotted time limitations placed upon the time frames of demonstrations which must lawfully be adhered to.
10. As a responsible adult and parent, I will be present at any events/demonstrations organized by myself and/or my children exercising my/our human rights in any place of public free access, specifically within England and extended over the entirety of the European Economic Community of Nations with specific reference to HRA 1998 Art. 11 – FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY – also a EURPEAN CONVENTION HUMAN RIGHT.
11. I do not accept that I/we must fill in a form as suggested by the Metropolitan Police Force as it is stated nowhere within SOCPA 2005 that I must do so and any interference with Human Rights must be prescribed in law and must have a clear LEGITIMATE aim. A gag order on freedom of expression is not lawful as a banning order on freedom of assembly is deeply disturbing in any truly open and free democratic society. As previously noted, Sir Ian Blair has unlawfully neglected to authorize my daughter REGARDING SOCPA 2005, completely disregarding her human rights.
12. Lord Delekia clearly argued in the HOUSE OF LORDS that SOCPA 2005 is NOT a matter of application, but a matter of NOTIFICATION. The Commissioner of the Metropolitan police MUST AUTHORISE and may only place conditions that are necessary in a democratic society in accordance with HRA 1998.
13. I have completely fulfilled my legal obligations regarding SOCPA 2005 legislation and will be expecting receipt of a letter of authorization forthwith as authorization must be given within 6 days. Please send a copy of my letter of authorization and any further communication for myself addressed c/o Mr. George Gross , MOSS & CO Solicitors, 17 Lower Clapton Road, London, E5 ONS. Thank you in advance for your time and due concern regarding this matter.
14. Should any conditions be placed upon me and/or my children in asserting and engaging these HUMAN RIGHTS, I will expect a reasonable explanation based on fact – scribed logical reasons for placing any conditions and not opinionated irrelevant ideas disregarding common law and/or common sense. I am known to be peaceful by the Metropolitan police and have many Metropolitan Police Force witnesses who have written statements to this effect and will testify to this fact.
15. The law is the law and the processes of law must not be abused or denied. Common law is the bedrock upon which England remains a free nation under GOD as prescribed within the MAGNA CARTA, the foundation of a free and democratic society; never to be removed from any people’s of this land, especially and specifically not to be taken from the children and their future generations.
16. I am a human being and a lady and I will be treated as such – with respect. I wholly expect the same respect for my children and their rights as human beings of English and Canadian decent, both children being born on ENGLISH SOIL. I was taught by my mother who was a beautiful Kentish lass and a child evacuee of the Second World War that heritage matters - history is important. My father was member of the English Royal Navy and survived the sinking of a submarine at port. My grandfather was a member of ‘Granddad’s Army’ and my childhood piano teacher, Mrs. Daley lost her eyeball, as a child in school, during the Halifax Explosion in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. I am proud to be a peace loving Canadian and I am awed by my English origins, being of direct English decent.
17. Being English is something to be proud of despite the actions of those who work for Crown and Country, who are committing acts of treason through their various actions of breaking both domestic and international laws; specifically War Laws and those laws governing SOVEREIGNTY - falsely assuming that they are above the law.
18. The people of England will not be enslaved by the law but be governed justly by it as will the government; justly and promptly by an impartial reasonable bench assuming common sense and sound reasoning as is presently, simply not the case. Common law and common sense will prevail. Wars of aggression are deeply unlawful and grossly illegal. Genocide is a war crime.
19 I assert that I have the right to say “Bollocks to Blair” and “Bollocks to Brown” and that I have the right to express this opinion openly and honestly, publicly, as I reasonably believe that a precedent has been clearly established within the English courtrooms, stated on the public record, regarding a certain case involving Sir Richard Branson and a trial discussing/involving an album by the SEX PISTOLS as released under the title of “Never mind the Bollocks – It’s the SEX PISTOLS” This album was removed from a public recorded album shop and then placed back onto its rightful place on the shelves AND in the shop windows.
20. Unless I am grossly mistaken, ‘BOLLOCKS’ in the context of ‘a nonsense’ was redeemed from the realms of profanity by QC John Mortimer, author of ‘The Bailey’, and Professor Kinglsey, a professor of linguistics. They valiantly argued the necessity of the expression of our English language that stems from our Anglo-Saxon heritage, specifically the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ It was also duly noted within the court room that HRH PRINCE CHARLES was and continues to be well acquainted with its varied usages in his public language.
21. I am starting a clothing company, investing pounds in my business through the purchase of stock: t-shirts and hoodies that I DO NOT EXPECT TO HAVE CONFISCATED.
22. I reasonably do not wish to be arrested for lawfully selling said items in public when I have fully abided by the law and purchased a traders license and necessary insurance. I reasonably do not wish my stock to be taken into custody nor my person, either/or being remanded until trial.
23. All Crown employees and civil servants will receive a 50% discount off my clothing line known forthwith as anticopyright ‘SWEETxxx’ in sympathy of their pathetic wage increase and ever- decreasing pay packet as opposed to the extraordinary pay rises of those sitting on their morals in the Houses of Parliament, those perverting the course of justice and the astonishing bonuses of those working within .the banking, insurance and investment industries.
24. Please agree to cease and desist from further arresting me for saying/expressing the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ specifically and not limited to the phrases “Bollocks to Blair” and/or “Bollocks to Brown” LAWFULLY AND PUBLICLY on English and/or European soil.
25. It is my birthright and my Human/European Convention Right to say “BOLLOCKS” on English soil and within the E.E.C.
26. I have learnt that HRH QUEEN VICTORIA was amused by the plays of Gilbert and Sullivan of the SAVOY THEATRE thanks to the clever impresario Mr. Robert D’Oyly Carte who funded the talented W.S.Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan in Victorians times. D’Oyly is commonly known in the theatre as an ‘angel’. These plays were under threat of being banned until HRH QUEEN VICTORIA ‘saved their bacon’ as she presumably maintained her sense of humor and appreciated their wit.
England’s own ‘Gilbert and Sullivan’ master-minded numerous plays such as ‘The Gondoliers’ and ‘Trial By Jury’ which have survived the test of time and continue to be staged today - a form of ARTISTIC POLITICAL EXPRESSION with a comical political slant highlighting the farcical nature of the Crown, the State and/or the Judiciary.
27. Historically, the English nation and the English Crown criticized .certain European nations who chose to ban certain plays/ FORMS OF ARTISTIC EXPRESSION within their borders under the threat of loss of liberty, specifically regarding certain plays/operas which tendered ‘cheeky’ political expression, branding these countries to be fascist: i.e. Italy under the dictatorship of Mussolini.
28. It is also important to understand the global historical value of FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION specifically including ARTISTIC POLITICAL EXPRESSION as clearly illustrated by the famous painting by PICASSO known as ‘GUERNICA’, depicting the ravages of war on a civilian populated town in Northern Spain that was unnecessarily ‘bombed to bits’ by the NAZI’S – modern day ‘COLLATERAL DAMAGE’. The sorry state off affairs in IRAQ currently springs to my mind.
29. Without FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, PICASSO could not have painted. He would not have been the man that he was and he would not be remembered today for his many important artworks as valued in today’s modern ‘society’ by hopefully more than just their monetary value.
30. I was arrested once on May 1st 2006 for displaying the legitimate and lawful phrase “Bollocks 2 Blair” on a whiteboard and then issued with a public Order Ticket to which I refused to accept after being re-bailed to the police station on numerous occasions.
31. I was further arrested for saying “Bollocks to Blair” on two separate occasions, two years apart. In both cases, the CPS either dropped the charges or offered no evidence forcing an acquittal of all charges on the date of the trial or at a subsequent trial management hearing after the first attempt at trial had failed miserably, wasting vast sums of monies from the public tax-payers purse on various pre-trial hearings. I seriously and reasonably question the rational of the Crown Prosecution Service given these circumstances.
32. On numerous other occasions of freely expressing the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ in places of public free access, no action has been taken by the police against myself, nor has there been any redress within the courtrooms for exhibiting the phrase ‘Bollocks to Blair!’ and stating the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ clearly.
33.Given my above noted witness statement, I reasonably believe it is in the public interest to clearly establish the law regarding the expression of the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ and the use of this word within certain specific phrasing, in places of public free access: i.e. ‘BOLLOCKS to BROWN!’.
34. With all due respect, I reasonably question, “Is this WESTMINSTERGATE?” as I wish to state clearly, “This is BOLLOCKS mate.”
Signed: _______________________________xxx
(C.J.Act, 1967, S.9, M.C. Act, 1980, S. 102; M.C. Rules, 1981, S.70)
SOCPA 2005 NOTIFICATION: ‘FAMILY 4 LIFE’
SEPTEMBER 11, 2008
Statement of : Mrs. Charity Sweet
Age of Witness (d.o.b.) : 7th June 1966
Occupation of Witness : Political Activist and Artist
Address & Tel no :
This statement consisting of 9 pages plus 3 photocopies totaling 12 pages, each signed by me, is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
Please find included as photocopies, a 2 page letter addressed to Ms. J. Smith – the Home Secretary, regarding ‘Managing Protest Around Parliament’ mailed to the Public Order Unit of the Home Office, London, SW1P 4DF dated January 17th, 2008 and a copy of Miss Maranda Cameron’s original application for demonstration known as ‘Children For Peace’ – October 2007 which was blatantly ignored by Sir Ian Blair – the Chief of the Metropolis of London.
SOCPA 2005 prescribes that only the Chief of the Metropolis may place conditions upon demonstrations and he/she must authorize said demonstrations as SOCPA 2005 states clearly, when it was written and as it received Royal Assent from HRH Elizabeth II. Should Sir Ian Blair choose to delegate his authority to authorize this notification, I will expect notification from him personally of such delegation of authority clearly stating under which legal directive he has delegated said authority.
A copy of this notification will also be delivered as noted below to Ms. Sarah Winfield, Directorate of Legal Services, Metropolitan Police, Wellington House, 67 – 73 Buckingham gate, London SW1E 6BE.
Signed: _______________________________xxx
STATEMENT OF WITNESS
(C.J.Act, 1967, S.9, M.C. Act, 1980, S. 102; M.C. Rules, 1981, S.70)
SOCPA 2005? - “BOLLOCKS” – HRA 1998 Charity Sweet xxx
Notification of engagement of ALL HUMAN RIGHTS – HRA 1998 under SOCPA 2005 as ‘FAMILY 4 LIFE’ to the direct attention of Sir Ian Blair and Ms. Sarah Winfield, commencing 6 days from stamped postage date of this notification, to be received by registered mail and by hand delivery c/o Charing Cross Police Station, London and c/o the Directorate of Legal Services, Metropolitan Police, Wellington House, London.
1. HRA 1998 legislates that all Human Rights as defined within HRA 1998 are the lawful right of every living soul on the island known as Great Britain, extending over the entirety of the European Economic Community, also known as THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION.ON HUMAN RIGHTS, and specifically within the nation of England as penned by Tony Bliar, 1998, having received Royal Assent by HRH Elizabeth II, 1998.
2. I am notifying the Metropolitan police force and specifically the Chief of the Metropolis of London – Sir Ian Blair, of my right to engage, exercise and flex all of these rights, for the entirety of my lifetime, specifically and not limited to HRA 1998 Art. 10 – FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and HRA 1998 Art.11 – FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY.
3. I am declaring my right to not have these rights interfered with by any body of the State/ Crown without a clear legitimate aim that is necessary in a democratic society that is fully prescribed in law as HRA 1998 clearly states.
4. I am notifying the Metropolitan Police Force and specifically the Chief of the Metropolis of London – Sir Ian Blair that as I am the mother of two minor children – Master Malcolm William Cameron D.O.B. 11th January 1993 and Miss Maranda Dorothy Cameron D.O.B. 22nd March 1999, I am also establishing, declaring and engaging all rights within HRA 1998 for my two minor children for the entirety of their respective lifetimes within this SOCPA 2005 NOTIFICATION.
5. I am REASONABLY disgusted that my daughter’s application for demonstration under SOCPA 2005 titled as CHILDREN FOR PEACE’ of October 2007 has been blatantly disregarded and ignored. I am asserting that certain objectionable members of the Metropolitan Police and specifically Sir Ian Blair have failed in his/her/their duty to authorize Miss Maranda Cameron within 6 days of receipt of her application as is prescribed within SOCPA 2005.
6. Miss Maranda Cameron has never received her letter of authorization despite the fact that both my previous application under SOCPA 2005 titled as ‘ARTISTS 4 PEACE’ and her application as titled ‘CHILDREN FOR PEACE’ were both hand-delivered to Charing Cross Police Station on the same date and the fact that both forms were filled out in an identical fashion.
7. I refuse to fill in another Application for Demonstration form for the above clearly stated REASONS.
8. Engaging HRA 1998 Art.11 FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY, I wish to clarify that any person or persons who chooses to join myself and/or my children in my/our demonstration/engagement of any and/or all Human Rights as prescribed within HRA 1998 WILL BE WELCOME as I do not and will not limit the number of friends I/we may engage in the pursuit of peace, truth, and DEMOCRACY and provided those associated with myself and/or my children engage in lawful conduct regarding HRA 1998, respecting the rights of others. Should the number of participants be expected to surpass 20 people, I will give the Metropolitan Police 24 hours advance notice as necessary. Should the number of participants in any given demonstration/artistic expression be expected to exceed 1000 souls, I will again reasonably give Sir Ian Blair of the Metropolitan Police a further 6 clear days advance notice.
9. This declaration of my/our Human Rights regarding HRA 1998, received by the Metropolitan Police Force and Sir Ian Blair as a notification under SOCPA 2005 shall be known forthwith as ‘FAMILY 4 LIFE’ and will commence 6 days from receipt of this notification as stamped on the front page of this witness statement at Charing Cross Police Station, London. Said notification shall last for the duration of my/our natural lifetime(s) as there is nothing prescribed within SOCPA 2005 which states that notification has any suggested or allotted time limitations placed upon the time frames of demonstrations which must lawfully be adhered to.
10. As a responsible adult and parent, I will be present at any events/demonstrations organized by myself and/or my children exercising my/our human rights in any place of public free access, specifically within England and extended over the entirety of the European Economic Community of Nations with specific reference to HRA 1998 Art. 11 – FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY – also a EURPEAN CONVENTION HUMAN RIGHT.
11. I do not accept that I/we must fill in a form as suggested by the Metropolitan Police Force as it is stated nowhere within SOCPA 2005 that I must do so and any interference with Human Rights must be prescribed in law and must have a clear LEGITIMATE aim. A gag order on freedom of expression is not lawful as a banning order on freedom of assembly is deeply disturbing in any truly open and free democratic society. As previously noted, Sir Ian Blair has unlawfully neglected to authorize my daughter REGARDING SOCPA 2005, completely disregarding her human rights.
12. Lord Delekia clearly argued in the HOUSE OF LORDS that SOCPA 2005 is NOT a matter of application, but a matter of NOTIFICATION. The Commissioner of the Metropolitan police MUST AUTHORISE and may only place conditions that are necessary in a democratic society in accordance with HRA 1998.
13. I have completely fulfilled my legal obligations regarding SOCPA 2005 legislation and will be expecting receipt of a letter of authorization forthwith as authorization must be given within 6 days. Please send a copy of my letter of authorization and any further communication for myself addressed c/o Mr. George Gross , MOSS & CO Solicitors, 17 Lower Clapton Road, London, E5 ONS. Thank you in advance for your time and due concern regarding this matter.
14. Should any conditions be placed upon me and/or my children in asserting and engaging these HUMAN RIGHTS, I will expect a reasonable explanation based on fact – scribed logical reasons for placing any conditions and not opinionated irrelevant ideas disregarding common law and/or common sense. I am known to be peaceful by the Metropolitan police and have many Metropolitan Police Force witnesses who have written statements to this effect and will testify to this fact.
15. The law is the law and the processes of law must not be abused or denied. Common law is the bedrock upon which England remains a free nation under GOD as prescribed within the MAGNA CARTA, the foundation of a free and democratic society; never to be removed from any people’s of this land, especially and specifically not to be taken from the children and their future generations.
16. I am a human being and a lady and I will be treated as such – with respect. I wholly expect the same respect for my children and their rights as human beings of English and Canadian decent, both children being born on ENGLISH SOIL. I was taught by my mother who was a beautiful Kentish lass and a child evacuee of the Second World War that heritage matters - history is important. My father was member of the English Royal Navy and survived the sinking of a submarine at port. My grandfather was a member of ‘Granddad’s Army’ and my childhood piano teacher, Mrs. Daley lost her eyeball, as a child in school, during the Halifax Explosion in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. I am proud to be a peace loving Canadian and I am awed by my English origins, being of direct English decent.
17. Being English is something to be proud of despite the actions of those who work for Crown and Country, who are committing acts of treason through their various actions of breaking both domestic and international laws; specifically War Laws and those laws governing SOVEREIGNTY - falsely assuming that they are above the law.
18. The people of England will not be enslaved by the law but be governed justly by it as will the government; justly and promptly by an impartial reasonable bench assuming common sense and sound reasoning as is presently, simply not the case. Common law and common sense will prevail. Wars of aggression are deeply unlawful and grossly illegal. Genocide is a war crime.
19 I assert that I have the right to say “Bollocks to Blair” and “Bollocks to Brown” and that I have the right to express this opinion openly and honestly, publicly, as I reasonably believe that a precedent has been clearly established within the English courtrooms, stated on the public record, regarding a certain case involving Sir Richard Branson and a trial discussing/involving an album by the SEX PISTOLS as released under the title of “Never mind the Bollocks – It’s the SEX PISTOLS” This album was removed from a public recorded album shop and then placed back onto its rightful place on the shelves AND in the shop windows.
20. Unless I am grossly mistaken, ‘BOLLOCKS’ in the context of ‘a nonsense’ was redeemed from the realms of profanity by QC John Mortimer, author of ‘The Bailey’, and Professor Kinglsey, a professor of linguistics. They valiantly argued the necessity of the expression of our English language that stems from our Anglo-Saxon heritage, specifically the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ It was also duly noted within the court room that HRH PRINCE CHARLES was and continues to be well acquainted with its varied usages in his public language.
21. I am starting a clothing company, investing pounds in my business through the purchase of stock: t-shirts and hoodies that I DO NOT EXPECT TO HAVE CONFISCATED.
22. I reasonably do not wish to be arrested for lawfully selling said items in public when I have fully abided by the law and purchased a traders license and necessary insurance. I reasonably do not wish my stock to be taken into custody nor my person, either/or being remanded until trial.
23. All Crown employees and civil servants will receive a 50% discount off my clothing line known forthwith as anticopyright ‘SWEETxxx’ in sympathy of their pathetic wage increase and ever- decreasing pay packet as opposed to the extraordinary pay rises of those sitting on their morals in the Houses of Parliament, those perverting the course of justice and the astonishing bonuses of those working within .the banking, insurance and investment industries.
24. Please agree to cease and desist from further arresting me for saying/expressing the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ specifically and not limited to the phrases “Bollocks to Blair” and/or “Bollocks to Brown” LAWFULLY AND PUBLICLY on English and/or European soil.
25. It is my birthright and my Human/European Convention Right to say “BOLLOCKS” on English soil and within the E.E.C.
26. I have learnt that HRH QUEEN VICTORIA was amused by the plays of Gilbert and Sullivan of the SAVOY THEATRE thanks to the clever impresario Mr. Robert D’Oyly Carte who funded the talented W.S.Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan in Victorians times. D’Oyly is commonly known in the theatre as an ‘angel’. These plays were under threat of being banned until HRH QUEEN VICTORIA ‘saved their bacon’ as she presumably maintained her sense of humor and appreciated their wit.
England’s own ‘Gilbert and Sullivan’ master-minded numerous plays such as ‘The Gondoliers’ and ‘Trial By Jury’ which have survived the test of time and continue to be staged today - a form of ARTISTIC POLITICAL EXPRESSION with a comical political slant highlighting the farcical nature of the Crown, the State and/or the Judiciary.
27. Historically, the English nation and the English Crown criticized .certain European nations who chose to ban certain plays/ FORMS OF ARTISTIC EXPRESSION within their borders under the threat of loss of liberty, specifically regarding certain plays/operas which tendered ‘cheeky’ political expression, branding these countries to be fascist: i.e. Italy under the dictatorship of Mussolini.
28. It is also important to understand the global historical value of FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION specifically including ARTISTIC POLITICAL EXPRESSION as clearly illustrated by the famous painting by PICASSO known as ‘GUERNICA’, depicting the ravages of war on a civilian populated town in Northern Spain that was unnecessarily ‘bombed to bits’ by the NAZI’S – modern day ‘COLLATERAL DAMAGE’. The sorry state off affairs in IRAQ currently springs to my mind.
29. Without FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, PICASSO could not have painted. He would not have been the man that he was and he would not be remembered today for his many important artworks as valued in today’s modern ‘society’ by hopefully more than just their monetary value.
30. I was arrested once on May 1st 2006 for displaying the legitimate and lawful phrase “Bollocks 2 Blair” on a whiteboard and then issued with a public Order Ticket to which I refused to accept after being re-bailed to the police station on numerous occasions.
31. I was further arrested for saying “Bollocks to Blair” on two separate occasions, two years apart. In both cases, the CPS either dropped the charges or offered no evidence forcing an acquittal of all charges on the date of the trial or at a subsequent trial management hearing after the first attempt at trial had failed miserably, wasting vast sums of monies from the public tax-payers purse on various pre-trial hearings. I seriously and reasonably question the rational of the Crown Prosecution Service given these circumstances.
32. On numerous other occasions of freely expressing the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ in places of public free access, no action has been taken by the police against myself, nor has there been any redress within the courtrooms for exhibiting the phrase ‘Bollocks to Blair!’ and stating the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ clearly.
33.Given my above noted witness statement, I reasonably believe it is in the public interest to clearly establish the law regarding the expression of the word ‘BOLLOCKS’ and the use of this word within certain specific phrasing, in places of public free access: i.e. ‘BOLLOCKS to BROWN!’.
34. With all due respect, I reasonably question, “Is this WESTMINSTERGATE?” as I wish to state clearly, “This is BOLLOCKS mate.”
Signed: _______________________________xxx
e-mail:
