V for Vendetta or J for Justice?

> Main Page | 7/7 | Elizabeth 2 Go | The Nazi Banksters' Crimes | Testimonials | Examples of How to Use the Defence

> Yvon's Testimonial about Muad'Dib's bullet-proof defence:-

> Hi Muad'Dib

> Back from Court

> Let me start by thanking you for supplying me with such valuable knowledge. I just could not find the time to get back to you before court.

> It was a win but a bittersweet win. I did all I could for the past 2 year to keep the justice system from dropping the charges without them pronouncing themselves on something that could have been useful to us the people, but in vain.

> Here is a resume of how it went.

> The judge without asking, as usual, to identify myself started by asking if I was ready to proceed with preliminary inquest, to which I replied: no, that I was challenging their authority, specially, the jurisdiction of the Queen where all of their power came from.

> At that point the judge told me he was going to end the reading of the roll and he would get back to me. I walked out while he was going through this. About 30 minutes later everybody walked out for what I was told was a 15mins break. When we went back in, the judge started with a case where the accused was not there, but was represented by a lawyer who was also challenging the jurisdiction of the court. The judge went, in-depth, through Supreme Court jurisprudence about the power of the judge in preliminary inquest. He ended by ordering the arrest and detainment of the accused, till he was brought before a judge.

> The lawyer tried to say something, but the judge would not hear a word, and that was the end of that. The lawyer looked dumbfounded. (That lawyer was in court every time I was there since the second time, when the judge tried to get me to take him as my lawyer. They got him, on 2 other occasions, to try to deceive me into accepting their jurisdiction. After we'd speak he would walk in and plainly lie in my name. Did not work but they gave it a try).

> Then they started proceeding with my case without calling me. (Guess they wanted to pull the same thing as the previous case with me). When I realized it was about me, I moved forward telling them I did not consent. Started by filing your "lawful Argument Against Jurisdiction & Sovereignty" of the Queen that the judge and crown read in its entirety. He (judge) went on to say that what he had been through for the previous case applied and he 'tried', at least started, to argue your file, trying to legitimize the role of government while downgrading the power of the queen, to find out I was not about to let him argue by himself, and that I knew what I was taking about. As soon as I mentioned the Constitution Act of 1867, and that it was never amended as to remove the power of the queen, it was the end of that discussion. I ended up telling him I wanted a jury of my peers to hear this because his powers came from the queen, so his authority was also in question, and I was not about to participate in anything else any longer.

> Judge then decided to proceed with preliminary inquest restating SC jurisprudence that stated he was not there to judge, but only to see if the crown had a case they could bring to court and no matter what motion the accused had taken the preliminary inquiry must go on.

> Judge then ORDERED me to stay in the court-room. At that point I reminded him he was the trustee, there to serve the people and I wanted the truth to be heard. They started divulging the proof, I just could not keep myself from making the cops and crown look stupid, so I opened my mouth. Told the judge I would ACT but under duress. I did too good, for OUR good, the cops and crown ended up with red faces and the judge mad at them for not filing the proof I lived in the house they busted. The hick! It was served to me (Bills in my name) but I did not have it with me and the judge would not let me confirm the fact, even if I spoke a lot louder them him.

> In his final address, judge went on and on about the proof that was presented to him by the crown, then told me he had *taken the last part of my file in consideration* and dismissed the case, based on the fact it was all "oui dire", because the crown had not filed the proof I was residing in that house. AND ordered everything destroyed.

> To which I objected, because I wanted my equipment back (400W and 1000W transformers and lights and a balance) to which the crown agreed.

> Quoting the judge "Mr. Denis I have taken the last part of your file in consideration" Don't know what to make of this. They never called their witnesses, the whole thing looked like it was all planned in advance. It was a pathetic fallacy. Thanks again, very much appreciated. Hopefully I will get to meet and speak with you one day, it would be an honor.

> May God be with you,

> Yvon

> PS. I believe my brother now has the courage to move with your challenge in his case.

> Daniel's Testimonial about Muad'Dib's bullet-proof defence:-

> " It is now five years since one of the major defining moments in my life occurred, when I was able to see first-hand for myself, how afraid the 'System' is of Muad'dib and His rock-solid defence. An acquaintance of mine and myself were in my car one night, driving along and having a nice conversation, and passing a marijuana cigarette to and fro. We were flagged down by two Policy-enforcers ('policemen') impersonating Law-enforcers, who treated us like criminals and shouted at us to get out of my car. After hesitating, my acquaintance and I decided to step out of the car. The Policy-enforcers then searched my car, and found the nearly spent marijuana cigarette.
> http://jahtruth.net/syst.htm

> One of the two Policy-enforcers drove to the Policy-enforcer's Station in the transit van with my acquaintance in the van's passenger seat, whilst the other got into my car, in the car's passenger seat, and accompanied me as I drove to the Policy-enforcer's Station. I remember thinking, how come he's letting me drive if he believes that smoking marijuana before/whilst driving is dangerous? Wasn't he actually committing an offence under their legislation in aiding and abetting me in committing what they call a crime - driving whilst under the influence of drugs? And also, that he didn't have anything negative to say about my driving. We struck up a conversation. I asked him if he really believed what he was doing was right, since we had not harmed anyone, and they had just come along and disturbed our peace. He just said, "Possession of marijuana is 'against the law'," not really answering my question. I then told him, feeling inspired, that everything happens for a reason. And, as it turned out, this was very true.

> Upon arrival at the Station, each of us was taken to a cell. I was told to strip, so they could search me. The Policy-enforcer who searched me even asked me to pull my foreskin down, to make sure I wasn't hiding any marijuana there. I remember thinking, that even if I had hidden anything there, that should definitely be just my business, and not his/theirs. Besides feeling abused, I felt sorry for everyone else who is subjected to that indignation, now knowing how they must feel, and thinking that if this is what policemen are expected to do, perverts and bullies are bound to be attracted to that job. I also felt sorry for the Policy-enforcer doing the search, since he seemed a lot more embarrassed than I was. I felt like a slave without any rights, without any privacy, as if my body was their property, and I knew in my heart (and so did this Policy-enforcer whose guilt showed on his face) that what they were doing was a lot more evil than what I had done.

> Then we were charged and released on bail to attend court at a later date. It was then that I was able to e-mail Muad/Dib, whom I had met previously, and He began to send me all the documents I needed to defend myself according to God's Law, the ONLY legal and binding laws on this planet. He also began to coach me, free of charge.

> As I began to see the wisdom of what Muad'dib was saying, I thought of my acquaintance. Would he perhaps like to join me and defend ourselves according to God's Law? So I spoke to him, and invited him to join me. But this he rejected, instead seeking to persuade me to join him and his team of lawyers from the most 'prestigious' law-firm in our town. I declined his offer.

> When we went to court the first time, I made it clear to them that under God's Laws, mankind is prohibited from legislating, and they basically got a good idea of what my defence (Muad'dib's really) was going to be. Then they adjourned.

> And the second time we went, what happened was that my acquaintance was advised by his 'prestigious' lawyers to plead guilty and his lawyer/s gave a speech of how clean his track-record was etc., so that the 'judge' would take that into consideration. My acquaintance, upon pleading guilty, was given a six-month suspended sentence.

> Then it was my turn. But the prosecution spoke, and said that they had decided to drop the charge against me. The 'judge' said I was free to go. It was then I remembered that I had spoken to another lawyer I knew, in the halls of the Court, before my case was heard, and he had told me, in a whisper, that there was going to be a private meeting prior to my appearing before the Court, where it would be decided what to do in "my case".

> I realised then that the decision they had taken to drop the charge against me; even though it was the same charge my acquaintance had pleaded guilty to and received a suspended-sentence for; was because they did not want to allow me to use Muad'dib's defence in my trial, and for it to receive any publicity.

> I began to feel really good about sticking with Muad'dib's defence, and turning down the offer from my acquaintance to be "defended" by his lawyer/s. But before leaving, I was inspired to speak up about something.

> I told the 'judge', that if I was free to go, and the charge had been dropped, could I please have my marijuana back then?

> The 'judge' tried to stifle a laugh and remain serious, turned to the prosecution lawyer, and asked him if they could return my marijuana. The prosecutor became nervous and said that this would not be possible, because it had been destroyed whilst testing it.

> So the 'judge' turned back to me and said, "Sorry". But I wasn't finished there. I told him that if my property could not be returned to me, then that meant that the Policy-enforcers (policemen) were guilty of wrongful arrest, theft, and destruction of property.

> And the 'judge' smiled and said, "You are free to attempt pressing charges if you like". At that point, my supporters in the Court began to cheer, and we all left with our heads held up high. My acquaintance, who had been advised to plead guilty, could not believe what had happened.

> And all because of the rock-solid defence that Muad'dib has meticulously prepared to be used in any British (or British overseas) Court.

> After exiting the Court, some of my friends who had attended the hearing, spoke to a reporter for a local paper, and told him what had happened. The reporter approached me and asked if it was true, that my charges had been withdrawn whereas the other accused person had received a six-month suspended sentence.

> I said it was, and told him to go and confirm this in the Court. Later on we met again, and he said that he had been told at the Court, that I had received a six-month suspended sentence as well. I couldn't believe it for a moment, and asked him if they had shown him the transcript of the hearing. He said they hadn't. I then went again to the Court and asked for the transcript and was made to write out the reason I required it, so I wrote a letter to them and have never heard back from them.

> I told the reporter that there were many witnesses inside the Court-room who heard the prosecution drop the charges, and the judge say I was free to go, including an army officer, so why didn't he go and talk to those people and ask them what really happened, but he just skeptically smiled at me, as if trying to get me to admit I was lying.

> It was another instance of "great reporting" from the mainstream media. Where the reporter simply accepts one party's (the more socially empowered) side of the story without any proof whatsoever.

> This is what these people are capable of doing. To lie and break their own rules when it suits them. And then they order people to tell nothing but the truth inside their Courts.

> Approximately two and a half years later, in 2004, I received a Court summons for an alleged charge of "exceeding the speed limit". I ignored it. A few months later, still in 2004, I received another summons, saying basically "you better appear this time or else". I ignored that too.

> It's now February 2007. They have never followed it up.

> I don't wear the seat-belt in my car, because I prefer to trust in God for my protection, and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay a £100.00 fine for doing so. When I drive, I watch the road, not the speedometer. I believe that this is how to ensure driving safely AT ALL TIMES, and I have never injured anyone as a result, and therefore will keep doing so, God-willing. I also do not smoke marijuana anymore, but not because I now fear and obey men. The Truth, and (real & strong/tough) Love are better than any substance, whether artificial or natural.
> http://jahtruth.net/drugs.htm

> The Sword * has risen and been picked up again. And the good thing is, we can use it too.

> * www.myspace.com/jahtruth

> Long Live The King. Down with Big Brother.

> Danny Napoli. "

> Gareth's Testimonial about Muad'Dib's bullet-proof defence:-

> Dear Reader,

> I hope this finds you well and in good spirit.

> Please allow me the time to inform you of my own battle with the system that concerns the use of Muad'Dib's defense package. It is a battle that is still ongoing, so you will see how it unfolds in time.

> A month ago now, this body's sister was giving birth at a hospital a few towns away. Compelled to show my support for her, I began my journey there by car. The baby had been delivered as I arrived, and for the next couple of hours me and the family kept mother and child company, until the hospital ward closed for the night.

> On my car journey home that night I accidentally ran a red light. This, to the majority of brainwashed people, is an obvious "crime" and that being so, I should be punished for it. But wait a minute. If it is a "crime" where is the victim?

> A few minutes prior to the "offense" I had carried-on at a traffic light junction, where I was supposed to turn left. The car behind (that was making the same journey) had given a headlight flash to show me I was in error, if I carried on. It was no problem turning around and getting back on route, but I wanted to make sure the other car I was traveling back with knew I was back on the right path. So, I was trying to catch up with the other car. I'm sure most drivers have been in a similar situation.

> So now I'm onto the right road and not wanting to lose the car in front, because they knew the way and I didn't. I noticed the many speed cameras that I was warned about, the scores of cars all keeping the pin nicely resting just below 40mph. On coming is a set of traffic lights that had just turned amber, that I thought I had time to make it through without having to brake sharply, but they just turned red as I just crossed the line.

> Flash!

> Just over a week later I am informed by post that the car I own was used to commit an "offense" (1.1 seconds into a red. 1.1 seconds!) And that I, or who ever was driving the car, had to admit to it and then receive punishment for the "crime".

> I informed Muad'Dib what had happened and that I wanted to fight them using the only way possible for success. Father's way - The defense pack.

> After my decision to fight, Muad'Dib went over the newly acquired defense pack with me.

> This was kindly done so Muad'Dib would know that I knew and understood its contents and was able to apply it properly. Having studied it in depth, I am absolutely convinced it is bullet-proof and so decided to go ahead and use it to defend myself.

> First I wasn't to admit to the "offense" (Admitting to it meant I believed I had committed a crime, when in fact I hadn't and didn't).

> I sent them (THEY) back their letter not completed with a cover note attached merely stating that there is no case to answer as QE2 is not the legal Monarch and the legislation under which the case is being brought is fraudulent and unlawful and therefore null and void.

> I have received a reply from the Camera Enforcement Office, stating falsely that through my "refusal" to name the driver, I, the registered Keeper may be convicted of refusing or failing to provide them information and could be robbed by them of my money and given added extra penalty points on my license.

> This is a joke, as I have already said that I merely stated that there is no case to answer.

> Now my case has been forwarded and is pending with the CPS for refusing/failing to supply driver information, which is a lie.

> Muad'Dib is helping me every step of the way. He also wants to help the many thousands of victims of these fraudulent acts by the fraudulent Crown.
> http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm

> His help can only come to those who send off for the defense pack and the only chance of them sending for it, is if they know about it via the jforjustice leaflet that we need everyone to start helping to deliver, so everyone can use it to defend themselves too.

> Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not ADD unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the Commandments of the "I AM" your God which I COMMAND you.

> Long live the Fighters,

> Gareth Hoskins.