|
Back to other
letters index ~ The
poisonous
'cup' of spiritual death ~
"Capitulate or DIE" is
the 'powerbrokers' cry
| Page
- 1 |
My
open response to Magistrate Stanton |
|
Page - 2 |
Letter to Attorneys-general of all States |
|
Page - 3 |
Letter to Governor Kate Warner of Tasmania |
|
Page - 4 |
Final
submission by Terence from Wudy |
|
Page - 5 |
Initial defence submission to the Magistrate |
Page 1
This is an open
response to the findings of Magistrate Stanton in the 'case' File
No: 31785/2017 of my 'client' Mr. Charles Wudy of Launceston.
Magistrate Stanton lists sixteen (16) findings which form the basis
of his decision to fine 'Charles' $ 1,800.00 and to disqualify him
from driving for 24 months.
This case is one
wherein Charles, a staunch Christian and a man of peace was driving his vehicle in a steady
manner when apprehended by constable Groves who clearly stated to
the court that Charles was not in any way disturbing the peace nor
was he intoxicated and showing no evidence of alcohol.
Charles Wudy is of the
belief that if he is living within the precepts of God's
Command and within the 'proviso' of the Freedom of Religion' Acts of
the Constitution, and is thus going about his day
peacefully and not disturbing the peace,
that it is error for anyone to 'apprehend' him and make
demands upon him which are
intrusive and
disturbing his peace in contravention of the
Constitution and also in conflict with God's Command unto man.
Charles Wudy refused to
be breath tested and acknowledged that he did not pay an annual
licence 'fee' to validate his driver's certificate of competency
since
he, being a pacifist, he could not fund the coffers of a system that
interfered in the
lives of others and caused them 'punitive' harm.
Note: Magistrate: A Magistrate is a civil officer with limited
powers who administers the law within a court of Petty Sessions
dealing with minor offences.
What can I state to
Magistrate Stanton? Sir you are proven to be an
UNCIVIL state officer because you find
'reason' to deny Charles Wudy his
democratic civil RIGHT to live by his
peaceful
ideology and to thus not fund a
contra
ideological doctrine of punishment, interference, control, causing of harm and
war.
Sir, in your very first
ITEM 1 of 16 findings you have lied as you base your
entire 'case' for police intervention
on the words - - - "turned left into - - -
road - - - without indicating." I am advised by Mr
Wudy that during the entire 'trial' case constable Groves NEVER so
stated, and Mr Wudy advised me that he had used his
indicators before turning.
Mr Wudy 'turned'
because he found himself confronted by a road 'block' ahead with
three police cars, and he knew that their occupants were not only
'armed,' but were in total ignorance of the Constitution as
well as his 'Civil Rights' granted to those with the
ideological belief in PEACE, and to
avoid 'confrontation' he turned down a side road but was observed by
one of the police officers who then 'took chase.'
Mr. Wudy as all
citizens is entitled to SELF-determination as long as he does not
disturbed the peace. You Sir have overstepped the bounds of
LOGIC, sanity, rationality, truth, and THE LAW of this land.
In your ITEM 4 of 16
you remark that Mr Wudy "gave submissions" but you refused them
because they contained constitutional matters. Surely this
should have alerted you to the FACT that this case was one of
'religious ideology, belief and conscience' and thus a
case to be heard by the High Court ONLY, rather than your court of
petty sessions?
Your ITEM 11 of 16
clearly indicates Mr. Wudy's ideological philosophy to which you
clearly REFER to, but you continue to DENY his Right to live by:
Reference within Wudy's submission are clear and given:
|
"Pacifists
such as myself (Charles) are eternally obedient to God
and thus they:
"Render unto God that which is God's." Obedience
to God's
"Love one another" Command unto death. Pacifists
have the divine right to NOT fund the 'war machine' nor
to be COMPLICIT to the causing of harm to others because
voters funding the State by licence 'fee' are
complicit
to:
|
The
control over others - the punishment of
others - the causing of harm to others - the
invasion of others lands - the killing or
maiming of others - the destruction of the
property of others etc.
Thus ACCORDING TO MY RELIGIOUS BELIEF they
accrue a 'spiritual due of suffering' within
the immutable 'eye for an eye' Law of God. |
IF there is
any 'doubt' as to the 'authenticity' of MY RELIGIOUS
IDEOLOGICAL belief, then the matter should be referred
to the High Court by the prosecution for the 'judgement'
of said higher authority." |
Mr Stanton, furthermore, at your
personal COMMAND you ordered Mr Wudy to send a letter to the
Attorney's-general of all states within which it clearly gives his
ideological religious beliefs, how 'now' do you simply 'scrub out'
all this and IMPOSE a punitive factor
when you KNOW that your activity is TREASON
of the highest 'order,' and a criminal activity
because you cannot legally use State rules in
constitutional matters.
Since this 'expose'
response is ON line, you show the whole world that you are not only
a 'mentally disturbed ERRANT of the worst kind, but also TOTALLY MAD
as are all those in the Tasmania Justice department who
'back' your findings and say NAUGHT.
Your arrogance is so
great that you see NOT that your 'reasoning's' within your
'findings' have in FACT 'convicted' YOU as well as those
'supporting' or directing you.
So carefully I prepared
Mr Wudy's submissions for him to submit to the court, BUT, - - - YOU
see NOT that IT was in FACT my 'fishing net' cast forth to
assist YOU and help YOU to do the right thing before man and
your God, and to thus PROVE that you are 'honourable' to God and
your sworn DUTY, and to thus set you FREE spiritually.
Since you refer to his
submissions in respect of his IDEOLOGY being contra to yours, you
are in FACT proving his case in that he was living in
accordance with his ideological belief and that he was living
in accordance with THE LAW of the Constitution which OVERRULES
all State 'policy' and decrees. You are now simply trying to
coerce or force him into changing his
ideological belief via PUNISHMENT and the imposition of mental and
emotional trauma, and this is ANARCHY
on your part and Treason as well.
Worse still, your
iniquitous actions TEMPT and force
the Peace Corps into joining your criminal actions as they now have
to 'back you up' if Wudy fails to OBEY your imposed punitive
instructions, which will be increased by you within 28 days if Wudy
fails to conform.
Sir, Mr Wudy is no
'puppy' and NO coercive attempts will force him to disobey God and
join your 'club.' He will remain true to his religious ideology.
Sir, in 'hearing' a
constitutional matter and inflicting punishment using your 'limited'
powers ILLEGALLY you are stating to
the public that the Constitution of your institution is null and void
and the 'government' has FALLEN. You are also embroiling the
community peace force into complicity to criminal activity.
You are illegally using
threat and coercion as you try and force a person to 'bow' to your
personal doctrine of punishment and to thus fund the coffers of your
system of belief. This is collusion with the Devil, and all who rely
on His 'forceful power' to
intimidate, enforce, control, coerce, steal
money, and abuse are IDIOTS supping on the Devil's
poisonous cup of spiritual DEATH.
You have the 'quaint'
but NASTY belief that you can impose
strictures simply because your 'office' is backed by an
armed mercenary armed force. (Police
persons who take a wage to follow orders even if said orders
contravene God's command and the constitutional Law which LIMITS
their powers)
Do the Police 'troops'
truly believe that THE PEOPLE who pay their wage to uphold
PEACE so stupid as to continue
funding their wages when in fact it is they (Police) being used
to wage war upon THE PEOPLE and
steal their money and impoverish them?
The
PUBLIC PEACE Corps is being used
criminally to enforce the high
treason of mentally disturbed magistrates who BELIEVE in their right
to JUDGE constitutional matters. This is liquid arrogance, and as I
see it 'Sir,' you have overstepped the bounds of
LOGIC, sanity, rationality and truth as
you defy and deny THE LAWS of
this land.
The 'problem' as I see
it is that all the officials of State now 'hold' the
erroneous belief that it is THEY who are the 'Sovereign Power' to be
obeyed. Gross error say I as all will soon see.
My reason for returning
to earth is not to assist those as Charles Wudy, because they are
already 'safe' in their belief as they obey God and walk
IN THE LIGHT causing NO
harm, and they are merciful,
compassionate and forgiving, so this letter is for you and IT
is not a 'debate' with you because I already know that one
cannot 'reason' with THE DARK FORCE controlling the minds of
the vain and arrogant MENTALLY DISTURBED such as yourself who
'justify' their use of the dark powers to
cause harm.
I simply TRY and reach
the 'consciousness' within the mind of the MAN (yourself) and hope
that you can overcome the vanity and power of THE DARK controlling
YOU.
Dear Sir, whether you
are president Trump OR yourself, you need to understand that
before you place your 'signature' upon a
punitive decree, that there are far reaching
consequences that do affect many others and also yourself,
and that as soon as your signature is emplaced, there is NO 'return'
factor to IT but, - - - most certainly the immutable 'Law of
God' is invoked and ahead, in this world or the next 'realm' you
WILL SUFFER ALL YOU IMPOSED through
your arrogance in assuming that YOU are 'as' God. (Above the law of equal
return)
When you sign any
document authorising 'pain and suffering and
loss' etc., you are no different to a 'rifleman' pulling the
trigger of his gun, and regrettably for you - you are not even
authorised to 'act' in this case which you should have sent to the
appropriate higher authority.
Sir, you chose :
1 – To
exceed your LIMITED mandate.
2 - To be a treasonable anarchist.
3 - To 'lie' in your judgement.
4 - To
use your 'signature' illegally.
5 – To ignore the Sovereign Constitution.
6 – To interfere in a situation that was not your 'business' to so
do.
7 – To
deny a peaceful citizen his Civil constitutional and God given
Rights.
8 - To force the community peace corps (police) to back your
criminal activities.
9 - To defy your God and be merciless and dispassionate towards a
man of God.
10 - To
take a false wage to prove to all and sundry that your personal
'powers' are 'limitless.'
11 – To attack Mr Wudy a peaceful person in an attempt to get him to
'change' his ideology and follow yours.
12 – To threaten Mr, Wudy in stating that he must
"Capitulate or DIE"
to your
punitive demands within 28 days
because, IF he does not comply, it is your INTENT to
'attack' his sanity again by imposing
even more punishment as added
coercion, and this is a
pre-meditated criminal and
treasonable activity in an
attempt to satisfy your vanity,
arrogance and INSANITY.
You Sir need to
understand that you are 'permitted' by the Freedom of
Religion acts of the Constitution to hold your unconscionable
beliefs however, the 'provision' being, that you do not disturb the
peace nor carry out any immoral activities because if you do, then
punitive State law/rules applies to you. Your actions are
proven to be immoral and you are
disturbing the peace of THE
PEACEFUL.
WOE indeed when
not far ahead, you 'fall' to join very
dark demonic forces
who are ALL totally merciless and punitive.
Generally speaking,
most persons in positions of power and authority become
uncouth, rude, arrogant and unconscionable if their conduct
is 'challenged' in any way, this is because they are backed by force
of arms and they are vain and they hold THE PEOPLE in disdain due to
their belief in their superiority.
It is my pen 'God's' to
now dispel this long term myth being that emperors, queens and kings
and other dictators are of 'royal blood' and are thus somehow
'god's' or God's chosen to be adored.
All the 'pretenders' to
God's THRONE will now be cast aside forever as reality comes to this
shore (earth plane) and no more will armed men roam the loam and
cause havoc and destruction. All these and their 'masters' are now
to be swept away into the abyss of MISERY.
Why not AWAKEN from your
reverie and come and visit me?
Terence - God's
Plenipotentiary
Please READ
Clemencia's article:
~ The
Conflict of Resolution Paper ~
http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com/clem/forgive/conflict.htm
&
The facts of spiritual LIFE:
http://www.the-testament-of-truth.co.uk/truth/web/life.htm
The same judgement of God
imposed upon Magistrate Brown is now imposed by God upon Magistrate K. Stanton on 8th May 2018
http://www.the-testament-of-truth.co.uk/truth/web/judgement.htm
Page 2
Subject:
Letter to all Attorney's-General
attorney@ag.gov.au
;
martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au
;
cronulla@parliament.nsw.gov.au
;
minister.fyles@nt.gov.au
;
attorney@ministerial.qld.gov.au
;
john.quigley@mp.wa.gov.au
;
Attorney-General'sDepartment@agd.sa.gov.au
;
enfield@parliament.sa.gov.au
;
magistrates.court@justice.tas.gov.au;
marlene.crawford@justice.tas.gov.au
;
rene.hidding@dpac.tas.gov.au;
Open
letter
to
all
Australian
Attorney's
General
~ Questioning the powers of the Australian Constitution ~
Dear honourable members, (Attorney-Generals of all Australian states) In the Tasmanian court case: 31785/17/ 2017 Charles Anthony Wudy.
Magistrate KT Stanton of the Launceston Court in Tasmania has asked me to write to your good selves and to thus clarify for him my constitutional 'rationalising,' and he asks for your clarification of the below constitutional Acts in that: "If you believe that they grant me 'immunity' from his judgement, then he is 'happy' to have the matter at hand moved from his Court of Petty Sessions to the High Court for their verdict."
The defendant (Charles) myself is seeking immunity from State prosecution in using the CIVIL RIGHTS granted unto those absolute pacifists such as myself, and to all 'pacifist' Australian citizens within the Freedom of Religion Acts given below.
Magistrate KT Stanton needs to know if the words of the Constitution below "Says what it means or, means what it says:"
I trust that the constitutional acts submitted will assist your good selves.
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (9th July 1900) section 116
"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, - and
The Constitution Act 1934 (Tasmania) states:
This document includes a legal guarantee of the religious liberty and equality of Tasmanians. Every citizen is guaranteed freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion under Section 46(1) of this Act.
Part V - General provisions - Religious freedom
46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.
(2) No person shall be subject to any disability, or be required to take any oath on account of his religion or religious belief. |
|
Note: State constitutional Acts apply equally to all states of Australia. |
References
Note: What is or is not ones 'Religion'?
|
Ones religion is ones specific ideological code of conduct Policy. A doctrinal Policy followed with great devotion in relation to a ‘way or order’ of existence. Ones religion is espoused by ones 'faith or belief' in the requirements of a supernatural being (God) or other Force. An example of this is evidenced by whether individuals choose to 'follow or engage in' WAR or PEACE. |
The Constitution LIMITS and RESTRICTS the powers of lower courts whose activities are to always be subject to the constitutional authority. Quote:
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 51
Legislative powers of the Parliament [see Notes 10 and 11]
The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
|
(xxiv) the service and execution throughout the Commonwealth of the civil and criminal process and the judgments of the courts of the States;
(xxv) the recognition throughout the Commonwealth of the laws, the public Acts and records, and the judicial proceedings of the States; |
PLEASE NOTE - Section 51 above states: All State rules/decrees/dictates ARE subject TO the Constitutions of Australia and Tasmania given above. Any State Constitutional Act applies equally to all States or territories. |
It is VERY clear that it is the duty of Magistrates to never 'hear' cases in respect of 'Freedom of Religion' because matters of 'conscience, faith, ideology' are a constitutional matter which can only be legally 'heard' in the High Court. Regrettably, it is widely known and recorded that all magistrates totally ignore the above and simply 'hear' all cases presented to them by State prosecutors who have 'no' idea even that their own 'powers' are granted and limited by THE CONSTITUTION.
JUDICIARY ACT 1903 - SECT 78B
Notice to Attorneys-General
(1) Where a cause pending in a federal court including the High Court or in a court of a State or Territory involves a matter arising under the Constitution or involving its interpretation, it is the duty of the court not to proceed in the cause unless and until the court is satisfied that notice of the cause, specifying the nature of the matter has been given to the Attorneys-General of the Commonwealth and of the States, and a reasonable time has elapsed since the giving of the notice for consideration by the Attorneys-General, of the question of intervention in the proceedings or removal of the cause to the High Court.
|
My 'English' comprehension gives me the 'constitutional' understanding that if I wish to follow my God-given conscience and the Command of my God: "Love one another," that said Constitution grants me ITS protection from persecution so long as: "I do not disturb the peace nor carry out immoral activities."
My absolute pacifist religious ideological BELIEF precludes me from supporting or condoning or funding persons or 'systems' of government who have the CONTRA ideology or belief in; control, subjugation, monetary extortion, causing of harm, invasion, punishment and waging of war.
The 'charges' against me are as follows:
Complaint No 31785/17 - Charge: Refuse breath test - Breach of : Section 14 (1) (a of Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs)
Particulars: You are charged with on the 27th March, 2017 at Launceston in Tasmania, being a person having become liable to undergo a breath analysis by virtue of Subsection 1 , 2 or 3 of Section 8 of the Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs Act, 1970 you refused without reasonable excuse to comply with the requirements of a Police Officer to undergo a breath test at or near the place where the requirement was made.
AND FURTHER: 2. -
Charge: Drive whilst not the holder of a drivers licence. - BREACH OF: Section 8 (1) Vehicle and Traffic Act, 1999.
PARTICULARS: You are charged with driving a motor vehicle on the 27th March 2017 on Lilydale a public street at Launceston in Tasmania, when you were not the holder of a driver licence under this Act authorising you to drive a motor vehicle of the relevant class.
Addendum to the charges: The arresting police officer stated in court (under oath) on 29th November, that he did not see the need to escort me to the police station for further breath analysis, as he believed that I had not been drinking.
|
In order for me to fulfil my 'promise' to my conscience and our God, I can ONLY support, condone and fund benign community effort. Thus I am unable to pay any 'licence fee' demanded by 'supporters' of said contra doctrine, being officers of State who are of the belief that State 'rules' overrule the Sovereign Constitution. I believe that having received a 'pass mark' for my driving test that IT is what qualifies me to drive, rather than an annual 'licence fee payment as validation.
I am also of the belief that no person has the right to bring my vehicle to a halt and interfere in my life or make demands upon me if I have not disturbed the peace.
IF the Constitution is 'weak' because those empowered to uphold IT are failing in their DUTY to their Sovereign, and thus the 'voice' content of the constitutional wording is IGNORED, then 'naturally,' State officials defy IT and deny IT and they persecute those as me using threat, coercion, jail and other punishment as they attempt to coerce me and thus force me to fund and support their CONTRA 'punitive and warring' ideology.
This 'aggressive' ACTIVITY is in FACT in direct conflict with the wording of the Constitution and most certainly is TREASON of the 'highest' order IF the Constitution is VALID and having 'substance.'
Magistrate KT Stanton has advised me to write to you 'Sir/Madam' (Attorney's general) asking whether or not the Constitution 'stands' because, - - - IF it so does through your 'clarification' of its words, then said magistrate will release me a man of peace with the 'direction' to the prosecution that their 'case' against me be directed to the appropriate High Court authority for its judgement.
IF the 'honourable' Attorney-Generals believe that there is NO 'validity' to the POWERS of the Constitution above, then magistrate KT Stanton will CHOOSE to also ignore ITS 'rules of engagement' and he will also "Go against its authority" and punish me in his 'Court of Petty Sessions' as all prior magistrates have done in Tasmania.
Please therefore give your 'own' personal clarification to the constitutional words below and respond individually to me so that your individual decisions can be seen 'openly' by every CITIZEN of this land for their personal attention VIA the auspices of the EXAMINER newspaper:
| A - "The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, - and
B - Every citizen is guaranteed freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion under Section 46(1) of this Act.- and
Part V - General provisions - Religious freedom
C - 46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.
D - (2) No person shall be subject to any disability, or be required to take any oath on account of his religion or religious belief. |
IF your 'conclusion' is that; the Sovereign Constitution 'wording' is irrelevant today it means that:
1 - The government has fallen. 2 - Anarchy and Treason reigns.
IF your 'conclusion' is that; the RULES given in A-B-C-D are the words of the Sovereign Power, and still have the RIGHT to RULE or LIMIT the actions of State officials, then;
XX - It also means that a pacifist cannot and must not be coerced or forced to fund the coffers (coin of the realm) of Caesar. (State) Neither can they be punished, for in so doing, it is coercion and TREASON against THE Sovereign Powers.
XXX - It also means that absolute pacifists as myself are only required to fund the benign aspects of community services provision that they use or choose to support, such as schools, hospitals, roads maintenance, unarmed peace keeping corps etc, and the education of and rehabilitation of those who do disturb the peace.
Pacifists such as myself (Charles) are eternally obedient to God and thus they: "Render unto God that which is God's." Obedience to God's "Love one another" Command unto death. Pacifists have the divine right to NOT fund the 'war machine' nor to be COMPLICIT to the causing of harm to others because voters funding the State by licence 'fee' are complicit to:
|
The control over others - the punishment of others - the causing of harm to others - the invasion of others lands - the killing or maiming of others - the destruction of the property of others etc.
Thus ACCORDING TO MY RELIGIOUS BELIEF they accrue a 'spiritual due of suffering' within the immutable 'eye for an eye' Law of God. |
IF there is any 'doubt' as to the 'authenticity' of MY RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGICAL belief, then the matter should be referred to the High Court by the prosecution for the 'judgement' of said higher authority.
Note: Protection of the Australian Constitution by the Queens representative: His Excellency General the Honourable Sir Peter Cosgrove.
Section 61 of the Constitution provides that:
The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen’s representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth.
In essence then, the Governor-General’s role is to protect the Constitution and to facilitate the work of the Commonwealth Parliament and Government.
|
Note: Protection of the Tasmanian Constitution by the Queens representative Governor professor Kate Warner:
|
The Governor is the Queen's representative in the State of Tasmania and is authorised by the Australia Act 1986, s7 to exercise all the powers of the Queen.
Constitutional powers & duties: Essentially the Governor's role is to safeguard the Tasmanian Constitution and the democratic parliamentary system of government that Tasmania and the other Australian States enjoy.
|
Please send me your decision as soon as possible so that I can present it to the magistrate at the next hearing.
Sincerely - Charles Wudy
Charles Anthony Wudy
Unit 1/137 Talbot Road, South Launceston, Tasmania 7249NOTE:
Request by Magistrate KJ Stanton that I apply to all Attorneys Generals in relation to the freedom of religion act, in writing within 1 week.
That I submit a Copy of my charge/summons sheet to them. (A copy of letter to Attorneys General to Magistrate K T Stanton )
ADDED NOTE
I Charles Wudy State that according to the RULES of the Constitution of the land, NO State law/rule/acts overrule the Acts of the Constitution, and ONLY if or when a person has 'disturbed the peace' do they 'void' their constitutional immunity and ARE then 'subject' to State law/rules/decrees.
~~~
|
Page
3
admin@govhouse.tas.gov.au<admin@govhouse.tas.gov.au>;
Subject: Open letter to Governor
Kate Warner
~ Open letter to Governor Kate Warner ~
Dear Madam,
Reference: Constitutional impropriety, Treason and Anarchy
Since you represent the highest authority in this land and in fact you also ‘unknowingly’ represent our Sovereign Lord God who rules everyone through the auspices of the RULE OF LAW as contained within the Constitution, it behoves me a 'simple' citizen to report that treason and anarchy exist at the highest levels in Tasmania, and that the 'peaceful' such as myself who do live within the LAW are being persecuted and prosecuted by treasonable magistrates, prosecutors and the police who it appears are all in total defiance of THE superior LAW of the Constitution.
I note that your Primary role is - - - “the primary role of the modern Australian governor is as a form of insurance. It is a hedge against constitutional impropriety."
So 'what' is the constitutional impropriety of which I speak? It is where the peaceful (pacifists) who do live within the "subject to proviso" of the Tasmanian Constitution and who are simply living in accordance with their own conscience, faith, belief or religious ideology, who are 'guaranteed' immunity from persecution and 'protection' by the Constitutional authority are in fact being threatened and coerced into supporting a contra religious ideology. The contra ideology of control, interference, extortion of money, punishment, causing of harm and even killing.
Madam, if the Rule of Law is not being upheld by you or your 'clerks' then it is sad indeed because our God sees and knows 'who' is not only taking a FALSE wage, but the common people of this land need to also be advised via the media that even if they DO go about their daily business PEACEFULLY within THE LAW as commanded by THE Constitution and by their GOD, that they will still be harassed, fined and even jailed by arrogant or very ignorant PUBLIC officials.
I need to advise you that this constitutional impropriety of itself is a contravention of the "subject to proviso" of the Constitution which clearly states that 'quote': "Subject to public order and morality." Why is it a contravention? Because since the peaceful are being intimidated and persecuted, it follows that all complicit to this attack upon their peaceful ideology ARE 'disturbing their peace' and ARE also 'carrying out an immoral ACT.'
I am aware that your 'office' has received such notification in the past but chose to not only ignore it, but that the PEACE force (Police) were actually sent to the 'door' of the complainant to 'warn off' said person from 'ever' writing to your office again. Madam, this is a very deplorable state of affairs. I do believe as said that THE PUBLIC need to know if YOU are competent and capable of carrying out your duties or NOT.
I write this to you because I am again in Court on an illegal charge, and since the matter is one of "Freedom of Religion" being a constitutional matter, it is TREASON and Anarchy for IT to be even 'heard' in the Launceston Court of Petty sessions. Maybe your advisors need to advise the public prosecutor of his error and ask that the case be redirected to the appropriate High Court or, - - - you might like to address the matter and have it immediately 'quashed.'
Madam, my spiritual and constitutional consultant/advisor advises me that "As long as" I am living within the constraints of God's Command unto man as well as within the 'constraints' of the "subject to" proviso of the Constitution, that NO State rule/law/act applies to my living ways, and that it is TREASON against God and the Constitution to impose any State laws/acts UNLESS I lose my constitutional protection through my 'disturbing the peace or carrying out immoral activities.'
I attach and send to you some information sent out to State 'Attorney's-General' at the request of the Magistrate.
Sincerely - Charles Wudy
Constitutional powers & duties
Essentially the Governor's role is to safeguard the Tasmanian Constitution and the democratic parliamentary system of government that Tasmania and the other Australian States enjoy.
Community duties
It is part of the Governor’s duty to interact with the community and to try to emphasise that the things that bind the community are stronger than the things that divide it; to encourage the enduring values of right thinking people, such as mutual respect, tolerance, support and goodwill.
|
Page 4
Submission
Sir, I have asked my constitutional counsel to assist me with a final submission for your consideration.
Dear Mr Charles Wudy.
The solution to this case is quite CLEAR to anyone who can read and comprehend the English language.
1 - The Magistrate needs to comprehend that it is a criminal ACT and a 'Sin' to inflict punishment upon a peaceful person who has NOT disturbed the peace and who thus is living within the 'constraints' of God's Command unto man: "Go your way in peace" and who is thus also living within THE LAW of the Constitution and who thus has NOT contravened the "Subject to" proviso of the 'Freedom of Religion' Acts. (46. (1)
|
The Constitution Act 1934 (Tasmania) states:
This document includes a legal guarantee of the religious liberty and equality of Tasmanians. Every citizen is guaranteed freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion under Section 46(1) of this Act. |
Part V - General provisions - Religious freedom
|
46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.
(2) No person shall be subject to any disability, or be required to take any oath on account of his religion or religious belief. |
|
|
Since the defendant has NOT 'disturbed the peace of the land,' nor carried out any immoral activities, being the 'proviso' clause of the Constitution for guaranteeing the liberty of the individual to live by his own conscience, ideology, belief or faith, it follows that the matter at hand is a constitutional matter and thus it cannot be legally heard or judged in this Court of petty sessions.
Secondly, if the Magistrate is honourable, and wishing to uphold THE LAW of the land, then he must simply state to the prosecutor that there is NO case to answer in his court, and if the prosecutor wishes to pursue the matter further, then the prosecution must submit his complaint to the appropriate High Court authority because only they have jurisdiction to hear constitutional matters of conscience.
Signed - Terence (Constitutional consultant)
Submitted by Charles Wudy
Unit 1/137 Talbot Road, South Launceston. 7249
|
Page 5
~ Original Defence submission paper ~
Summons Complaint No:31785/17
Dear honourable Magistrate, I refer to being chased and stopped by a police officer (27th March) when I turned off the main road at Lily dale on seeing a road block ahead.
I wish to advise you that I am an absolute pacifist, and I try and stay away from confrontation with armed men. That is the reason why I did not initially proceed through the 'check point.' It is because my ideological belief and conscience is different to that of the police officers. (They believe in punishment, I only believe in mercy and education)
I knew that there would be problems through police ignorance of my CIVIL RIGHTS. Police officers of today believe that they are entitled to interfere in the lives of the peaceful who have NOT disturbed the peace and their intent is to cause me harm.
At the time of my arrest I asked the officer if I was disturbing the peace in any way and he replied: "No." It is my belief that the role of the Police service is to uphold the peace of the land. I did not wish to nor need to breath in the 'offered' breathalyser machine because I had been stopped for no 'good' reason and neither had I been drinking.
I was also advised by the officer that he 'could' arrest me and take me to the police station for a breath test to which I would have had to agree to but he decided that I had not been drinking and let me go, so I do not know 'why' he now seeks to include that 'test' aspect today? It appears to be a purely vindictive decision. Maybe he is hoping that you will crucify me?
I advised the officer that I was within my constitutional rights to use the public road, and my religious ideology (belief) precluded me from funding any punitive or warring system by any 'annual' licence 'fee' as was my right. I only fund what by my conscience is perceived as being a benign or educative community effort.
The complainant of the Northern district prosecutions services has issued an illegal summons upon myself. This summons is illegal because:
|
1 - I have not disturbed the peace of the land.
2 - I am living in a peaceful manner as commanded unto all mankind by our God, and I have never disturbed the peace of the land.
3 - I am living in accordance with my conscience, as also granted unto me within the 'Freedom of Religion' Acts of the Tasmania Constitution. References below.
4 - I have in no way contravened any State laws applicable to myself.
5 - The prosecutor Moore is exceeding the mandate granted unto himself by the Constitutional authority.
6 - Since the matter is one of 'faith, doctrine, belief and religion,' it is not a matter for the Court of Petty Sessions. It is an illegal and criminal matter to 'hear or judge' a High Court matter in the lower State Court before a Magistrate. |
The prosecutor and (CDR Brett Smith) have both been advised of their limited powers as granted within the Constitution, and since I am living within the constraints of the Constitution, NO State rules/laws/decrees apply to me unless I DO 'disturb the peace' or carry out immoral activities.
Within my ideological system of BELIEF, doctrine or Religion, I cannot support, condone or FUND any person or institution whose officers bear 'arms,' invade, interfere, control, threaten, coerce, punish, injure or kill.' This means YOUR 'system.' Why is my belief 'so'? Because said ACTIVITY is a complete contravention of God's DOCTRINE of peace, love, mercy, compassion and forgiveness commanded unto man. A doctrine that is reiterated to the global community via the 'Testament of Truth' web site.
IF I am proven to be living within the constraints of the constitutional 'Freedom of Religion' Acts, then it is clearly obvious (to me anyhow) that all involved in my persecution are in VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
Since the prosecutor has been advised of his ERROR 'under' the Law of his own institution, his decision to proceed with the summons and ignore the constraints of the Constitution shows his liquid arrogance. Not only this, but he is attempting to 'thwart the course of Justice' and is 'drawing' the police and magistrate into complicity to treasonable ACTIVITY.
I believe and I am entitled to so believe that my 'qualification to drive' is my drivers 'pass mark' received at the time of the driving test. I do not believe that I must fund your system any annual 'tax fee.'
I Charles Wudy further State: It is my belief that I have no case to answer in this court because I am living in accordance with the constraints of:
A - The Command of our Sovereign Lord God and;
B - The Freedom of Religion clause set out in the Constitutions of Tasmania and of Australia, which clearly state that I am a protected person within this clause. Within the framework of said Constitution in so far as that concerns the Freedom of Religion clause, I am also legally beyond the jurisdiction of this Court of Petty Sessions.
These Rights also preclude me from being ‘tried’ in any court such as a Magistrate’s court because it has NO ‘jurisdiction’ to try me because the High Court alone deals with matters as mine being one of ‘Conscience & religious ideological BELIEF.’ I further State:
I am NOT using the 116 clause of the Australia Constitution solely as my defence because my defence in fact rests 'upon or within' my conscience and my ideological religious BELIEF in absolute pacifism. It is my belief and understanding that:
C - The content words of 116 and the Tasmania Act 1934 above are directed to and directions to you and other officials of State rather than only to the public.
D - The content directions of 116 and Act 1934 are what have been enacted to LIMIT THE POWERS granted unto State enforcers by GOD as well as by those who invoked said 'acts' in the first instance.
E - Section 116 does NOT 'limit or restrict' the conscience or living ways of the peaceful who have an ideology of PEACE and who do not disturb the peace.
Section 116 simply RESTRICTS and limits state officials the use of forceful powers because God via 116 protects the peaceful of moral standing from HIS enforcers. I give this Act 116 for your consideration only.
F - If it had been the intent of God or those who raised UP the Constitution of your institution to give State officials UNLIMITED POWERS then there would have been NO need for the provisions given in 116 and 46.1.
These provisions were granted so as to PROTECT the peaceful of moral standing and to 'permit' them to live in peace as they obey their God and do NOT fund the coffers of warring tribes. (Every government on earth is a 'warring tribe' as they all have armies and other armed enforcers and all wage war upon others when their 'leaders' so decide to.)
G - The right to use God's forceful power as granted unto State officials by THE Constitution ONLY applies to those who do NOT have a peaceful ideology but who have the punitive and warring ideology of retribution, and who therefore believe in their right to DISTURB THE PEACE.
H - The 'proviso' granting the High Court the POWER to persecute, prosecute or punish or NOT, rests in the clause Part V 46.1 - General provisions: < Subject to public order and morality > This means that within the constraints of 116 of their Constitution, State officials can prosecute ANYONE of ANY belief or ideology who is of immoral activity or who disturbs the public peace.`
Further to the above it is my belief and understanding that: All subsequent State decrees, rules, laws invoked are ‘subject to’ and 'limited by' the rules as contained in the 'Freedom of Religion' Acts of the Constitution, because IT is the overriding Sovereign Authority of the LEGAL system of the land which as said, grants limited powers of prosecution, persecution and punishment.
It is my considered opinion that when State enforcers ignore the constitutional authority with its 'religious' limitations, and illegally use State decrees to steal money from the peaceful, that it is purely and simply modern day "Highway Robbery" backed by the armed forces. (Police - community PEACE Service)
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (9th July 1900) section 116
"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, - and
The Constitution Act 1934 (Tasmania) states:
This document includes a legal guarantee of the religious liberty and equality of Tasmanians.
Every citizen is guaranteed freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion under Section 46(1) of this Act.
Part V - General provisions - Religious freedom
46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.
(2) No person shall be subject to any disability, or be required to take any oath on account of his religion or religious belief. |
If for ANY reason a person chooses to ignore the constitutional Authority and place a case before a Tasmanian Magistrates court and a punitive judgement is imposed, then it is surely proof that there is an absolute disregard to the Constitution of the land and thus:
1 - There is NO 'honesty,' sanity or legal validity in this land and all involved are a 'common' criminals.
2 - The 'claimant' is seeking to contravene the Constitutional Act (9th July 1900) section 116 and < prohibit the free exercise of any religion >
3 - The 'claimant' is seeking to contravene the Constitutional Act 1934 (Tasmania) and defy the < legal guarantee of the religious liberty >
4 - The 'claimant' is seeking to contravene the Constitutional Act 1934 (Tasmania) and deny the < guaranteed freedom of conscience >
5 - The 'claimant' is seeking to contravene the Part V - General provisions and deny the < guarantee to every citizen >
6 - The 'claimant' is seeking to contravene the Part V - General provisions) and deny the < No person shall be subject to any disability >
I trust that the honourable magistrate will find that there is no case to answer in this court. I stand at the Mercy of God –
Charles Wudy
additions:
Your Honour, my ideology is different to that of the police 'officers' and other State operatives and I state:
It is my firm belief and considered opinion that for me to deny or defy our Creator, (God) that it would of itself be an Act of anarchy and treason and an 'abomination' because I 'owe' my eternal existence to Him my Creator.
It is the time for the Police officers, elders, prosecution and Magistrates to see that the use of State rules in a Court of Petty Sessions is denying me my constitutional Rights. It is also denying me the God-given Right to use my own conscience and obey God and never fund any punitive organisation.
If I am punished in a State court then that is an act of coercion in an attempt to force me to change my ideology. That is an act of Treason and anarchy on the part of all complicit in my 'trial' in a Court of Petty Sessions.
1 -Since I am a pacifist, I cannot support any person or institution that causes harm to other people. I can only support, condone or fund benign community activity. I seek to educate persons who disturb the peace.
2 - I do obey Gods Command and I also live in accordance with the 'Freedom of Religion' act of the Constitution of your institution..
3 - The Police disobey Gods Command and they also interfere illegally in the lives of the peaceful using State rules in defiance of the Freedom of Religion act of the Constitution. The constitution legalises but limits Police authority to that of 'upholding the peace.'
4 - The facts are that neither the police, prosecutor nor magistrate can use their own conscience nor obey their God because the State rules RULE their interaction ACTIONS.
5 - The fact is, that it is the 'job' of the High Court to prove or disprove whether or not the individual 'arrested' has disturbed the peace or is carrying out immoral activities in contravention of the 'subject to' clause:
46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality.
|
Note: What is or is not ones religion?
|
Ones religion is not any of the 'named' organisations such as Islam or Christianity or Buddhism, nor is it the named individuals such as Buddha, Muhammad or Jesus espousing the Policy purportedly ordained by the invisible God.
Ones religion is ones specific ideological code of conduct Policy. A doctrinal Policy followed with great devotion in relation to a ‘way or order’ of existence. Ones religion is espoused by ones 'faith or belief' in the requirements of a supernatural being (God) or other Force. An example of this is evidenced by whether individuals choose to 'follow or engage in' WAR or PEACE. |
The Constitution LIMITS and RESTRICTS the powers of lower courts whose activities are 'supposed' to always be subject to the constitutional authority. Note:
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 51
Legislative powers of the Parliament [see Notes 10 and 11]
The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
|
(xxiv) the service and execution throughout the Commonwealth of the civil and criminal process and the judgments of the courts of the States;
(xxv) the recognition throughout the Commonwealth of the laws, the public Acts and records, and the judicial proceedings of the States; |
PLEASE NOTE - Section 51 above states: All State rules/decrees/dictates ARE subject TO the Constitutions of Australia and Tasmania given above. Any State Constitutional Act applies equally to all States or territories. |
It is VERY clear that it is the duty of magistrates to never 'hear' cases in respect of 'Freedom of religion' because freedom of religion is a constitutional matter which can only be legally 'heard' in the High Court. Regrettably, it is widely known and recorded that all magistrates totally ignore the above and simply 'hear' all cases presented to them by arrogant prosecutors who have 'no' idea even that their own 'powers' are granted and limited by THE CONSTITUTION.
JUDICIARY ACT 1903 - SECT 78B
Notice to Attorneys-General
(1) Where a cause pending in a federal court including the High Court or in a court of a State or Territory involves a matter arising under the Constitution or involving its interpretation, it is the duty of the court not to proceed in the cause unless and until the court is satisfied that notice of the cause, specifying the nature of the matter has been given to the Attorneys-General of the Commonwealth and of the States, and a reasonable time has elapsed since the giving of the notice for consideration by the Attorneys-General, of the question of intervention in the proceedings or removal of the cause to the High Court.
|
|
~~~
ENDS
|
|