14 April 2008
Re: Charity Sweet V. Holloway CO/35572008 - Addendum
The Royal Courts of Justice
Listings Office / Administrative Courts Office
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
Listing office Fax:
To Whom It May Concern:
Urgent application and serendipitous opportunity for hearing a Writ of Habeus Corpus regarding Mrs. Barbara Tucker
It has been brought to my attention and confirmed by staff at HMP Holloway Prison that Mrs. Barbara Grace Tucker – TM9872 – is to attend the Southwark Crown Court, tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 12, in front of Judge Stone QC, to be sentenced up to the maximum of a level 3 guideline should she be found guilty under SOCPA 2005 section 132-138 as these offences are summary only.
As Mrs. Tucker will already be in the vicinity of the Royal Courts of Justice, I assume it would be a great savings to the tax-payer to use the “SERCO” journey from HMP Holloway to Southwark Crown Court and carrying on to the Royal Courts of Justice, as a round trip of justice for Mrs. Tucker, so she may be physically present for a Writ of Habeus Corpus to be heard in her presence and justice to be seen to be done
I would also further reasonably add as reasonable grounds for an urgent Writ of Habeus Corpus to be heard within 24 hours citing Archbold 2007:
Section II Soliciting or inciting to commit a crime – an indictable offence I reasonably believe has been committed by various officers of the Metropolitan Police Force, including Feb. 26, 2008.
Lastly, ENTRAPMENT is a matter which must be raised where the state has incited a peaceful member of the public through causing her harassment, alarm and distress by unlawfully denying her liberty.
4-63 Teixa de Castro v. Portugal, 28 E.H.R.R. 101 (post 16-68a)
i) It is not acceptable that the state through its agents should lure its citizens into committing acts forbidden by the law and then seek to prosecute them for doing so. Such conduct would be entrapment, a misuse of state power, and an abuse of the processes of the courts.
ii) … every court has an inherent power and duty to prevent the abuse of its process the courts can ensure that executive agents of the state do not misuse the coercive law enforcement functions of the courts and thereby oppress citizens of the state.
iv) … the doctrine of the abuse of process is reinforced by the Human Rights Act 1998
The doctrine of abuse of process enables a court to stay proceedings when it would not be fair to try a defendant; one such situation would be when the proceedings result from the executive action that threatens either basic human rights or the rule of law.
Genocide is a war crime.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Charity Sweet
14 April 2008
Re: Charity Sweet V. Holloway CO/35572008 - Addendum
The Royal Courts of Justice
Listings Office / Administrative Courts Office
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
Listing office Fax:
To Whom It May Concern:
Urgent application and serendipitous opportunity for hearing a Writ of Habeus Corpus regarding Mrs. Barbara Tucker
It has been brought to my attention and confirmed by staff at HMP Holloway Prison that Mrs. Barbara Grace Tucker – TM9872 – is to attend the Southwark Crown Court, tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 12, in front of Judge Stone QC, to be sentenced up to the maximum of a level 3 guideline should she be found guilty under SOCPA 2005 section 132-138 as these offences are summary only.
As Mrs. Tucker will already be in the vicinity of the Royal Courts of Justice, I assume it would be a great savings to the tax-payer to use the “SERCO” journey from HMP Holloway to Southwark Crown Court and carrying on to the Royal Courts of Justice, as a round trip of justice for Mrs. Tucker, so she may be physically present for a Writ of Habeus Corpus to be heard in her presence and justice to be seen to be done
I would also further reasonably add as reasonable grounds for an urgent Writ of Habeus Corpus to be heard within 24 hours citing Archbold 2007:
Section II Soliciting or inciting to commit a crime – an indictable offence I reasonably believe has been committed by various officers of the Metropolitan Police Force, including Feb. 26, 2008.
Lastly, ENTRAPMENT is a matter which must be raised where the state has incited a peaceful member of the public through causing her harassment, alarm and distress by unlawfully denying her liberty.
4-63 Teixa de Castro v. Portugal, 28 E.H.R.R. 101 (post 16-68a)
i) It is not acceptable that the state through its agents should lure its citizens into committing acts forbidden by the law and then seek to prosecute them for doing so. Such conduct would be entrapment, a misuse of state power, and an abuse of the processes of the courts.
ii) … every court has an inherent power and duty to prevent the abuse of its process the courts can ensure that executive agents of the state do not misuse the coercive law enforcement functions of the courts and thereby oppress citizens of the state.
iv) … the doctrine of the abuse of process is reinforced by the Human Rights Act 1998
The doctrine of abuse of process enables a court to stay proceedings when it would not be fair to try a defendant; one such situation would be when the proceedings result from the executive action that threatens either basic human rights or the rule of law.
Genocide is a war crime.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Charity Sweet
Re: Charity Sweet V. Holloway CO/35572008 - Addendum
The Royal Courts of Justice
Listings Office / Administrative Courts Office
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
Listing office Fax:
To Whom It May Concern:
Urgent application and serendipitous opportunity for hearing a Writ of Habeus Corpus regarding Mrs. Barbara Tucker
It has been brought to my attention and confirmed by staff at HMP Holloway Prison that Mrs. Barbara Grace Tucker – TM9872 – is to attend the Southwark Crown Court, tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 12, in front of Judge Stone QC, to be sentenced up to the maximum of a level 3 guideline should she be found guilty under SOCPA 2005 section 132-138 as these offences are summary only.
As Mrs. Tucker will already be in the vicinity of the Royal Courts of Justice, I assume it would be a great savings to the tax-payer to use the “SERCO” journey from HMP Holloway to Southwark Crown Court and carrying on to the Royal Courts of Justice, as a round trip of justice for Mrs. Tucker, so she may be physically present for a Writ of Habeus Corpus to be heard in her presence and justice to be seen to be done
I would also further reasonably add as reasonable grounds for an urgent Writ of Habeus Corpus to be heard within 24 hours citing Archbold 2007:
Section II Soliciting or inciting to commit a crime – an indictable offence I reasonably believe has been committed by various officers of the Metropolitan Police Force, including Feb. 26, 2008.
Lastly, ENTRAPMENT is a matter which must be raised where the state has incited a peaceful member of the public through causing her harassment, alarm and distress by unlawfully denying her liberty.
4-63 Teixa de Castro v. Portugal, 28 E.H.R.R. 101 (post 16-68a)
i) It is not acceptable that the state through its agents should lure its citizens into committing acts forbidden by the law and then seek to prosecute them for doing so. Such conduct would be entrapment, a misuse of state power, and an abuse of the processes of the courts.
ii) … every court has an inherent power and duty to prevent the abuse of its process the courts can ensure that executive agents of the state do not misuse the coercive law enforcement functions of the courts and thereby oppress citizens of the state.
iv) … the doctrine of the abuse of process is reinforced by the Human Rights Act 1998
The doctrine of abuse of process enables a court to stay proceedings when it would not be fair to try a defendant; one such situation would be when the proceedings result from the executive action that threatens either basic human rights or the rule of law.
Genocide is a war crime.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Charity Sweet
e-mail:
