BOOZE BUS BLITZ NABS SIXTY NINE DRIVERS

Sue Hewitt From: Sunday Herald Sun February 26, 2011
Analysed and broken down for public consumption by Michael Byers, Editor-In-Chief The Mikiverse February 27th, 2011.

A BIG booze bus blitz hit Melbourne's inner suburbs last night, catching 69 drink drivers including a learner driver, and one drug using motorist.

Police caught one man in a stolen car who had burglary gear, as well as 17 speeding drivers, 13 unlicensed drivers and 13 suspended drivers among the 6303 motorists breath tested.

This means that 1.09% of inconvenienced motorists were defined as "drink driving", which also means that 98.91% of inconvenienced motorists had their time wasted, AGAIN, by revenue raising police corporate officers.

They were aiming to reduce alcohol related accidents through Operation Norwester with booze buses or breath testing stations in Ascot Vale Moonee Ponds, Brunswick, North Fitzroy, Pascoe Vale and Northcote.

The highest reading was recorded by a man at 0.156 in Sydney Rd, Brunswick, while a learner driver blew 0.119.

Police also nabbed seven motorists for mobile phone offences, another seven for seat belt offences and 13 for disobeying traffic signals and signs.

Road Policing Acting Inspector Ross Burbidge said the operation had one aim - to remove drink drivers from our roads.

If this was anything other than corporate spin to justify the police's outrageous breach of people's civil liberties, there would be no other revenue raising activities taking place. The fact that there are OTHER REVENUE RAISING ACTIVITIES TAKING PLACE SIMULTANEOUSLY illustrates that Ross Burbidge is LYING.

"We placed our booze bus and breath testing sites in targeted areas to catch people as they head out of city, or head off from an inner-suburban pub to their homes in the suburbs,'' he said.

"The risk that drink drivers impose on the wider community can not be tolerated.

Can not be tolerated by whom? Here the Police think that THEY are the decision makers in the wider community. This bloated arrogance is symptomatic of how certain segments of the Australian community feel that they can interfere in other peoples lives. Whether its a carbon tax, a flood tax, an income tax or a road usage tax. Whether its supplying your children to be vaccination guinea pigs, or being force fed uranium, fluoride, GM foods, the will of the few are being imposed on the many.

This is really simple folks. WE, THE COMMUNITY, ARE THE MASTERS. Not the police, the courts, the government, the multi-national companies, the corporate media or the military, but, WE THE PEOPLE.

So, it is actually, about, what WE WILL TOLERATE. Not the police corporate officers.

"We all know the risks yet some people think that it is still okay to drink and drive. We are here to say no it isn't - and we will continue to target those who put innocent road users at risk.''

In that case, they should be targeting themselves for their continual harrasment of innocent road users in their lustful pursuit of revenue.

UNHAPPY NEW YEAR PROMPTS POLICE CLAMP

Katherine Firkin From: Herald Sun February 26, 2011 12:00AM

Police plan big traffic operations in the next few months. Source: Herald Sun

A POOR start to the year on the state's roads has prompted a series of police blitzes.

Huge traffic operations are planned for the next few months.

Melbourne's northwest suburbs were hit last night. Booze buses and extra police crews were set up in Moonee Ponds, North Fitzroy, Brunswick, Coburg and Northcote.

The tough measures come after more than 200 drivers were caught in an operation in Bulleen on Thursday night. Another 72 drivers were caught speeding on the Geelong Ring Rd in a two-day blitz.

Victoria Police spokesman Marty Beveridge said the operations were triggered by the high road toll so far this year.

"It was disturbing to start the year tracking so poorly in comparison to the previous year," Mr Beveridge said.

"So it's been a concerted effort to tackle road trauma.

"We're putting a lot of resources to this."

Mr Beveridge said the huge result from Operation Mermaid II in Bulleen on Thursday night showed there was still more to be done.

Police issued 212 notices for offences, including drink-driving, unlicensed driving and driving an unregistered or unroadworthy car.

Nine people were charged with immigration offences.

"We're going to continue with these operations until everyone in the community gets the message," he said.

"We remain vigilant in trying to get these road toll figures down. We won't be patting ourselves on the back until the road toll reaches zero."

Members of the Geelong Highway Patrol were shocked with the number of speeding motorists detected on the Geelong Ring Rd.

Operation Hawk caught more than 72 drivers speeding, four of them doing 40km/h over the 100km/h limit. They could lose their licences for six months.

firkink@heraldsun.com.au

3500 SPEED FINES EVERY DAY

Peter Rolfe From: Sunday Herald Sun February 26, 2011

Hu Hu Chen is infuriated after getting a fine for doing 54 km/h in a 50km/h zone at Oakleigh. Source: Herald Sun

LEADFOOT motorists have poured more than $200 million into State Government coffers with new figures showing 146 drivers an hour are caught speeding on Victorian roads.

A comprehensive breakdown of every speeding fine issued in the state, released exclusively to the Sunday Herald Sun, paints a clear picture of how infringements are handed out from mobile and fixed speed cameras and on-the-spot police.

More than 3500 speeding fines were issued every day - 1.2 million in total - delivering $227 million to the Government last financial year.

But almost three-quarters of the fines were for the slowest possible category of offence - driving at less than 10km/h over the legal limit.

More than 923,300 speeding drivers - 72 per cent - booked were travelling less than 10km/h over the limit.

Fines for the lowest offence netted the Government $137 million.

Motorists stung by low-range speeding fines said the findings proved road users were being used to fill government coffers.

Truganina motorist Hu Hu Chen received his first and only fine for travelling at 54km/h in a 50km/h zone at Oakleigh last year and said he was still infuriated by the experience.

"I thought it was pretty harsh," he said. "I had no idea until I got the fine in the mail. It's not like I was hooning around. If I had braked a second earlier, I wouldn't have even been fined."

A Northcote resident, who asked not to be named, said speed restrictions in Melbourne's northern suburbs were getting out of control.

"I am hardly what you would call a hoon driver," he said. "But if I get one more fine I will probably lose my licence for having accumulated so many points.

"And each fine has been for exceeding a 50km/h restriction by six-or-so km/h."

There were 146 speeding fines issued every hour on average, according to the statistics. That is 2.4 a minute.

The Government also cashed in on increases in speeding offences, collecting an additional $4.6 million by increasing the cost of individual fines by between $3 and $17.

But Police Minister Peter Ryan defended the level of revenue raised.

"Those who choose to exceed the speed limit do so with the knowledge they will be penalised," he said.

"Speed and red-light cameras save lives, but the Coalition understands Victorians need to believe cameras are reliable, accurate and operate fairly."

Victoria Police Road Policing Superintendant Neville Taylor welcomed community debate, but said police made no apologies for booking motorists just over the limit.

With speed attributed to 30 per cent of road deaths last year, he warned that police would fine even more speeding drivers this year to bring down the road toll.

"Often the attitude of people is 'I was just a little bit over' but it's our goal to change that behaviour," he said. "Our clear message is that if you're a couple of kilometres over - or a lot over - we will get you."

Supt Taylor said there would be a 20 per cent cut in fatalities and a 14 per cent drop in serious injuries if all motorists slowed by 5km/h.

The data also reveals the extent of offences committed at the other end of the scale.

More than 2160 hoons were caught speeding at 45km/h or more over the speed limit last year. Police booked 806 drivers for racing at speeds of 20km/h or more above the 110km/h limits.

Total revenue from speeding and red-light camera fines was about $315 million last year.

rolfep@heraldsun.com.au

FREEMAN NOT SO FREE

Southeast District,Traffic Services and Michael Byers, Editor-In-Chief; Mikiverse Law.

File # 2011-02-172011-02-17 12:42 PSTfree

A 57 yr old Penticton man spent two nights in jail this week, by his own volition and is facing obstruction charges for refusing to identify himself to police at roadside. The man who sought to exercise his rights under the “Freeman’s Society” got a reminder that although well within his rights to exercise his personal beliefs, those beliefs did not exempt him from the law under the BC Motor Vehicle Act nor the Canadian Criminal Code.

According to this logic, an Act of Parliament is a law. It is not. An Act of Parliament is a statutory law that has the full force -or energy- of a law, but isn't a law. An Act of Parliament requires your consent. In Australia, a law gains it's force from the combined weight of the majority of Australian's in a majority of states granting its mandate to the proposed law.

On February 14th 2011, the RCMP South Okanagan Traffic Services -Orwellian language- were conducting a stepped up enforcement day in Penticton focusing on distracted drivers using handheld devices while driving. Two points. 1. Orwellian language; How do you focus on "distracted drivers"? This is the R.C.M.P's attempt to gain a legitimate excuse for stopping and harrassing people. 2. This is a common tactic used by police corporations the world over -who share information with each other- to attempt to raise revenue from innocent people. During the daylong campaign, Lawrence Earl Sukow of Penticton, was stopped for displaying a fake licence plate on his vehicle -presumptive logic that his plate was fake and that he was controlling a vehicle- . Sukow refused to identify himself when the officer began dealing with him. THIS REFUSAL DREW HIM INTO CONFLICT, WHICH GAVE THE CORPORATE POLICY OFFICER AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH HIM IN CONFLICT.

The officer was left with little choice -more Orwellian Language- other then to arrest Sukow, who was then returned to the Penticton detachment where the investigating officer twice attempted to release Sukow by way of a Promise to Appear. Sukow did have a valid BC drivers licence however denied being the person identified on the licence and refused to be served with the process. Sukow then declined being heard by a Justice of the Peace for a proper bail release hearing. This left the investigator with his last option and that was to hold Sukow in order for him to physically appear before a judge in court. We do not know, if this account is accurate or a propaganda exercise. Maybe, Sukow offered to perform acts upon presentation of proof that he was his name in all caps. Maybe not.

“Mr Sukow spent Valentines Day evening in the care and company of the Penticton RCMP and appeared in court before Judge Cartwright in Penticton on Tuesday morning February 15th, where he again refused to identify himself stating he was “No Name” -it is dangerous to testify in court, it raises the appearance of consent. It is much better to ask the claimant to prove their claim that he is his corporation. A lawful hearing can't begin until jurisdiction to hear is agreed upon and consent is granted. In addition, adjudication cannot commence in a civil matter until discussion takes place to find a remedy. . Mr Sukow was remanded into custody for a second night and appeared in court on the 16th, at which time he conceded to the fact -more Orwellian language; it isn't a fact, it is an opinion- that in order to be released from custody that he would need to identify himself. Mr Sukow was then released and is set to appear before the courts in the near future to face the obstruction charge along with his receiving the violation ticket for driving without insurance. Here is the rub. He WASN'T charged with being a distracted driver, nor with using a handset whilst driving so the reason for interacting with him is a clear violation of the R.C.M.P's stated reason for interacting with the public. There a claim of a fake plate, yet no charge for it. This is all about trying to extort him for money and to bully and harrass good people. We were getting a little concerned for him, as he had refused to eat since his arrest. There are a number of cases where we have come across individuals who have laid claim to exercising their rights as part of the “Freeman Society”, but this one in my recollection is the first one where the individual tested the system to the point of standing before a provincial court judge” stated Cpl Dan Moskaluk.

Released by:
Cpl Dan Moskaluk
"E" Division Strategic Communications Section
Senior Media Relations Officer
Southeast/North Districts
c:250-863-7433
follow Cpl Moskaluk on Twitter @CplMoskaluk

Released by

Cpl. Dan Moskaluk
"E" Division Strategic Communications Section - Senior Media Relations Officer
South East and North District
1168 Main Street, Penticton B.C. V2A-5E8
Office: (250) 492-4300
Cell: (250) 863-7433
Fax: (250) 492-4851
Email: dan.moskaluk@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG

Roger Hayes

Teaser:

The story so far: The council have demanded council tax from me, which I have refused to pay for 3 years ...

This article is a continuation of the non-payment of council tax saga... now in its 3rd year.

The story so far: The council have demanded council tax from me, which I have refused to pay for 3 years - on the grounds that there is no lawfully enforceable contract between me (Roger Hayes) and the council. The council is refusing to provide me with a lawful contract because they think they have the right to demand that I pay council tax... which they do not. I am happy to pay my council tax – but only when the Council has agreed to provide me with a lawful contract... this is my right. The benefit of a contract is that it makes the council agree terms and conditions with me and prevents them acting in an arbitrary fashion i.e. it brings power back to the people.

The fact is that the council has no right to demand council tax from me (Roger Hayes) - but they DO have the right to demand it from the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES... but that isn’t me. If readers are not familiar with the legal fiction – please refer to previous articles or the UK Column web site www.ukcolumn.org [2].

On the 11th January 2011 in the county court of Birkenhead, in front of witnesses, the court conceded to the right of Roger Hayes to act as ‘third party representative’ for MR ROGER HAYES. In essence the court agreed that they they were two entirely separate entities. This is an extraordinary development to put it very mildly.

The court did not however concede without putting up a very vigorous fight... this is how events unfolded in the court room.

Judge: Can we first find out who is in the court... is MR ROGER HAYES in the court?

Me: Sir, I am third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES.

Judge: Are you MR ROGER HAYES?

Me: No sir, I am the third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES... you may address me as Roger.

Judge: I will not address you as Roger, I will call you MR HAYES

Me: Sir, I am not MR HAYES, the court is required to address me as I request and I request that you address me as Roger. (NOTE – court protocol dictates that a defendant or respondent can be addressed the way they choose – the Judge then referred to me as ‘the gentleman’ but avoided referring to meas MR HAYES).

Judge: If you are not MR ROGER HAYES then I will take note that MR ROGER HAYES is not represented in court.

Me: In that case sir, you will have to also note that the council is not represented in court.

(NOTE. This would mean that the case would have to be dismissed, finding for the defendant, because the plaintiff had not appeared)

Judge: I can see that that the council has representation in the court.

Me: Then you will have to acknowledge that MR ROGER HAYES has representation in the court. We are all equal in the eyes of the law... if council has third party representation then so does MR ROGER HAYES. The council is a corporation and so is MR ROGER HAYES.

Judge: MR ROGER HAYES is not a corporation.

Me: Yes it is.

Judge: No it isn’t, it is a PERSON.

Me: A PERSON is a corporation.

Judge No it isn’t.

Me: Define person.

Judge: I don’t have to.

Me: Then let me do it for you sir. A PERSON is a corporation (NOTE: This is defined in a law dictionary) Sir, are you familiar with the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666?

Judge: I am familiar with many laws.

Me: Sir, I asked if you were familiar with the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666, if you are not Sir, then with respect you are not competent to judge in this matter and that gives rise to a claim of denial of due process.

Judge: Let’s hear from the council.

Me: Sir we can only move on to the council’s presentation when the court has confirmed that MR ROGER HAYES is represented in court.

Judge: Fine.

And the case continued.... with me (Roger Hayes) acting as third party representative for the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES and with the judge eventually telling the council to go away and prove its case. The Judge was obviously very keen to avoid a charge of denial of due process i.e. a challenge to his competence. It was much easier for him to side with me and pass the buck back to the council.

Smart judge.

So what does this all mean? Well In very simple terms, it is SEISMIC i.e. extremely significant. It means that the court has accepted that the council’s claim is against the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES and not me the flesh and blood man Roger Hayes. The court has also accepted that I (Roger Hayes) can act as a third party representative to defend the claim against MR ROGER HAYES.
The legal fiction cat is now truly out of the bag (although for me this is the second time I have achieved this in court). If the council goes on to win its case, then the court will find against the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES, but significantly, they will not have found against me Roger Hayes... because as the court agrees... MR ROGER HAYES is a corporation... which isn’t me. One important thing is now clearly established - I, Roger Hayes, am not liable for council tax. AND NEITHER ARE YOU.

http://www.ukcolumn.org/articles/cat-out-bag