Transport Minister's Office Replies (Australia)

[coderipley]

Hello everyone,
I've been following several threads here and in the other categories, and have been looking into Robert-Arthur: Menard's work as well.

Australia has common law remedies available for freemen/sovereigns under the terms "lawful excuse" and "claim of right". Under these two terms we can disobey court orders and ignore statutory obligations and restrictions (Criminal Code Act 1899 of Australia).

I had sent out an initial Claim of Right before, to 4 people (Transport Minister, local Police, Police Commissioner and local M.P.) and today received a response to a residential address that I never gave them (at least, I can't remember doing so, I always use general delivery aka poste restante).

Here is the original letter I sent to them on the 28th August 2007:

Notice of Understanding and Intent and Claim of Right

I, Martin-Andrew: (family's name), a Freeman-on-the-Land in this common law jurisdiction, do hereby make my Oaths and having been duly sworn, claim the following as complete truth and law and as of right:

Whereas it is my understanding that Australia is a common law jurisdiction where equality before the law is paramount and mandatory, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that Sections 275 and 278 of the Criminal Code Act 1899 of Australia establishes a claim of right as a lawful excuse, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that Sections 204 and 205 of the Criminal Code Act 1899 of Australia acknowledges the right to disobey court orders and statutes if one has a lawful excuse, or a claim of right, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that I am free to consent or not consent as I see fit, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that without my consent I cannot be lawfully governed, regulated, ordered or judged, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that if anybody does attempt to enforce statutes or court orders against someone who has a lawful excuse or claim of right, they are guilty of committing an unprovoked assault, and,
Whereas I do hereby unequivocally, clearly and specifically claim the right to disobey court orders and disregard statutes, regulations, and orders emanating from those who are merely human beings playing roles, as they all need my consent and I do hereby deny consent to be governed, regulated or ordered and,
Whereas with this claim of right I claim the right to exist freely and peacefully and with complete disregard for the wishes and desires of those who seek or claim authority through either the courts or the government, institutions to which I neither enjoy full access nor represents me or my best interests, and,
Whereas this course of action is completely lawful and intended to benefit My Self and my fellow man and this Country I love:
Therefore be it now known to any and all that this Claim of Right becomes law in ten days (10 DAYS) if not publicly disputed under Oath and upon full commercial liability.
Anyone wishing to dispute this Claim of Right and the rights within it that are claimed, must do so by way of a sworn counterclaim published in the (newspaper) claiming the right to govern, regulate and order their fellow man without the benefit of the consent of the governed, regulated or ordered.

Failure to do so will result in permanent estoppel by acquiescence forever barring any court or government agent from interfering with the rights herein lawfully claimed.

Use of a Justice of the Peace is for lawful attestation, identification and verification of process purposes only and does not constitute adhesion or joinder alter status or standing in any way.

These rights are hereby claimed by Martin-Andrew: (family's name) a Freeman-on-the-Land in the interest of justice, equality, positive and peaceful social change and as a result of an Oath to God.

Claimant: _________(signed)__________________

Duly Sworn and Lawfully Witnessed before me while I was acting as a Justice of the Peace in Queensland.
Justice of the Peace: (signed and stamped)


I carefully watched for any response in the legal or public notices in the newspapers. No response.

Here is their reply, received on Monday 17th September at a "military address" I did not give them (see attached).

I have since started using my true name as I have already experimented using the common redemption re-write of my name (first-middle: last) and found always the colon was completely ignored, and many times so was the "-middle" part as well.

Anyone have any opinions? Ignore it, write "refuse for cause" on it and send it back? challenge them to get them to prove how those laws apply to me, etc?

I just want to send them a subtle hint that I'm not just going to bend over for them.

Martin.

edit: spelling

[robhalford88]

First thing is you are getting your federal and state jurisdictions confused. There is now another criminal code for the commonwealth, too.
Secondly, you are giving testimony, rather than using negative averments. BAD idea. You should do everything in the negative.
Thirdly, what you are trying to do is notice the government that you are NOT a person and don't wish to access the government supplied privilege of driving, is that correct?
If so, I believe you are using the wrong approach.

[coderipley]

Originally Posted by robhalford88

First thing is you are getting your federal and state jurisdictions confused. There is now another criminal code for the commonwealth, too.

I was just working from:
http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/Ac.../Acts_SL_C.htm

Secondly, you are giving testimony, rather than using negative averments. BAD idea. You should do everything in the negative.

Will see what I can uncover from that perspective.

Thirdly, what you are trying to do is notice the government that you are NOT a person and don't wish to access the government supplied privilege of driving, is that correct?
If so, I believe you are using the wrong approach.

Something along those lines.

I had already sent a letter a while ago, via registered post, claiming my right to travel in a non-registered automoble/privately owned conveyance without a licence, with a time allowed for dispute and clause of default if no response. I have never received a response to that and already have the Affidavit of Default ready.

I was trying to send through a Notice and Claim as per Criminal Code Act 1899 (which I believe incorporates common law) which still applies in Queensland to give me lawful excuse and declares a Claim of Right.

But if there's an alternative remedy I can use with evidence of it's success, I'll be more than happy to look into it.

Martin.

[andrewmitch]

My guess is that in the South East, Alabama would be a good place to live because I think, there is no property tax, I think. Then you could place your assets in a legal entity in ANY State - I would suggest looking at Nevada or Delaware. I think if you did these 2 things you would regain much of your freedom, depending on what your freedom goals are (No Property Tax and Asset Protection are a couple of mine).

If it isn't Alabama, I think it may be Arizona.

"Free-er" states seems to be Nevada, Texas, NH, Vermont, maybe Oregon.

Communist states are California, New York, New Jersey, Virgina, DC, Mass, Ohio

My state, Connecticut, is somewhere in the middle.

[robhalford88]

Originally Posted by andrewmitch

My guess is that in the South East, Alabama would be a good place to live because I think, there is no property tax, I think. Then you could place your assets in a legal entity in ANY State - I would suggest looking at Nevada or Delaware. I think if you did these 2 things you would regain much of your freedom, depending on what your freedom goals are (No Property Tax and Asset Protection are a couple of mine).

If it isn't Alabama, I think it may be Arizona.

"Free-er" states seems to be Nevada, Texas, NH, Vermont, maybe Oregon.

Communist states are California, New York, New Jersey, Virgina, DC, Mass, Ohio

My state, Connecticut, is somewhere in the middle.

Did you reply to the wrong thread? The thread is about Australia, Queensland to be specific.
If I am getting you wrong, then don't be offended.

[andrewmitch]

You are right. Not sure how that happened. There was a thread where someone was asking where locations were "freer" than others.