Since we hope that public servants read OLO we ought to tell them what will happen when one State, and it might even be Tasmania, the Northern Territory or the ACT, wakes up to the fact that we are being governed not by Parliament but by lawyer/Judges, and restores honesty and integrity to their legal system, just how this will improve their cash flow.

Until 1970, in NSW anyone could sue anyone else in a Ch III court, to enforce any Statute law whatsoever. That Statute Law included the Constitution and all the hundreds of wonderful Statutes, that precluded governments from intruding into private lives. In 1914, the Fisher Labor Government, in the paramount Parliament of the Commonwealth enacted the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) and each and every Judge and Magistrate in Australia who sits without a jury was made answerable to the common people by S 13 of that Act. By S 15F of that Act a civil proceeding is authorized, and by S 43 Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) the crime of attempting to pervert the course of justice in respect of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth was made punishable by five years imprisonment.

Under the common law there was no profit in sending people to gaol. So the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) has enacted a formula to convert prison time to dollars. Five years imprisonment converts to $33,000 for a Judge or Magistrate, and $165,000 for a corporation, and the common law split the blood money between the Sovereign/Crown, and the prosecutor fifty fifty; The original Private/Public Partnership. This law is still in force in New South Wales, in S 122 Fines Act 1996, and in Sections 42 and 43 Acts Interpretation Act 1954 in Queensland, and has its roots in the Imperial Statutes. Not only has this law been passed as Federal Statute, another Federal Statute the Judiciary Act 1903 has made every State Court a goldmine with untold potential to restore good government and accountability to the whole of the Commonwealth. Remove the cartel powers from lawyers/Judges, and get some prosperity going

Do feel free to babble on endlessly, Peter - but what does any of it have to do with the topic of the thread?

Now I am started lets hope the CEO’s of the big Banks and insurance companies are listening too. The Parliament of the Commonwealth has provided that when a corporation offends the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) it is subjected to a daily penalty, and each and every one of Australia’s lending institutions is a criminal and insured. They are using State laws, to repossess homes from Australian subjects of Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, without providing access to the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth. They are using State Judges and Magistrates to pervert the course of justice in respect of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth, using illegal State Laws made over property that the State has no jurisdiction to make. At $165,000 a shot, made applicable as a daily penalty by Section 4K (2) of the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) they should start to sit up and listen.

Lets hope some of the lawyers who loll around their offices read OLO too. They should remember Arthur Anderson and Co; the auditors of Enron. Every partner in Arthur Anderson lost all their assets and was sent bankrupt, by the negligence of one partner. The great Taj Mahal like offices in Sydney’s CBD could be used for more that just accommodation, by lawyers, and they may take the option one took of attempting to fly. Gravity won. Sharpen up, ladies and gentlemen.

I recently argued with a very dumb Federal Court Judge, that section 268:10 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) is now law and applied to him. He was so dumb he failed to read or understand that when he sits without a jury he is a criminal, and is acting as a slavemaster and exercising ownership rights over another human being. He was so dumb that even though he was taken to the Dictionary in the Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) : he refused to accept its authority, which defined him and myself as equals, and he really deserves all that will one day come his way. The penalty for that is $165,000 thank you very much

Under OLO Law this is the last post for 24 hours, so I will make it a good one. In S 268:10, Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) a person, the perpetrator commits an offence if he exercises any or all of the powers of ownership over one or more persons, and it is part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population. Subsection 2 defines what the words mean, and rights of ownership over a person includes purchases, sell, lends, or barters a person, or imposes on a person a similar deprivation of liberty and also includes a power arising from a debt incurred or contract made by a person.

Every Judge and Magistrate who sits without a jury and sentences anyone to prison offends this Act, including the bod who sent Marcus Einfeld to prison. The Magna Carta prohibits a Judge from sentencing anyone, and this Statute reenacts it. Further in Section 13.6 of this Act any averment that could lead directly to prison is made illegal. They have been what one of my atheist Law Professors called Struthious. We went rushing for our Dictionaries, as good little Law Students are taught to do, and found it means making like an ostrich and burying your head in the sand.

The widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Australia has been conducted by the legal profession since 1949, in the service of the sector that pays them the most money; accused criminals like Richard Pratt. The worst of course was Abe Saffron who bribed the Premier to repeal the laws that would have curbed his illegal activities, and nobble the Supreme Court in not only New South Wales but Victoria and Queensland. Another very prominent lawyer/teacher said follow the money, and thats what one government must do in Australia. The ill gotten gains accumulated by the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity should all be returned to the public coffers, and the homeless housed. S 268:12, declares the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to be law also. Wakey Wakey Time, lawyers

PtB

I'm sure you are having a sensational time there in your world, but thought I'd interrupt your stream of whatever, for your edification.

This thread is about surfing the net at work. The issue arising from this practice is whether surfing net at work interferes with productivity or provides a break from possible tedium.

Capiche?

Fractelle,
Well he enjoyed himself.I lost the plot about the time of the mention of Joh. And he used up his quota on this thread so go for it girlfriend. :-)