Is this a real law court or a legal simulation?

North Cumbria Magistrates don't abide by their own law — making them a fraud

While I was away in America I received the above form in the post. I am sure you have received many official forms and letters in your life. What do you immediately notice about it that makes it somewhat unusual? Take a moment to think, it’s not a trick question.

The answer is: the form lacks any obvious sender. It is normal to put your details at the top of any letter, and if it is a form you include a cover letter that is signed. There is nothing of the kind here. Maybe it’s at the bottom of the page?

Nope, nothing there, either! Now, it does say who to send the information to:

Just that this isn’t necessarily the same as the sender. Which man or woman is responsible for asking me to complete this form, and which legal entity is holding my personal data? After all they seem to be asking for some sensitive information:

Actually, I am not lawfully required to send in any statement of means before conviction. This is a form of intimidation to get information out of me.

Would you send your income details to an unknown entity? Now, the context does matter here. This is a continuation of a legal simulation being run by Cumbria Constabulary, and is a criminal fraud upon the public, as well as misconduct in public office. You can read up more in my previous article on Why are Cumbria Constabulary so shy?. The situation is as follows:

• I parked on the street at Appleby fair in June, following official signs to park to avoid congestion in the village.

• I came back to see the whole row of cars had a penalty notice stickers, including mine, regardless of whether they blocked the road or not.

• The paperwork inside was not compliant with the format for fixed penalty charges, and contained no legal person it was from.

• The parking prohibition notices were all covered by vegetation, and very obviously so, rendering all penalties void — something any police officer would know.

• On this basis, I had every reason to believe this was an unlawful entrapment operation, as nobody wished to take responsibility for it.

• Subsequent letters from Cumbria Constabulary gave the impression of being official, with a logo, URL, name of Chief Constable, but lacked the name of any man or woman, the actual name of the legal entity itself, a proper signature, and the lawfully required registered office address. It unlawfully uses a PO Box, obscuring who is receiving the data. Again, this appears to be a legal simulation, which is a crime of fraudulent misrepresentation of authority.

• I wrote to the Chief Constable alerting him to this potential legal simulation and crime, and seeking validation of the authenticity of these purported notices. I got no response, which didn’t surprise me, as predatory policing for revenue (and not public protection) is business as usual.

• For the final notice seeking my personal details, I declined on the basis that I could not supply my personal data to a legal non-entity whose identity was not disclosed. In other words, I am upholding the law — it is wrong for me to engage with and support a criminal fraud.

The letter that allegedly comes from a court says I have been charged with a parking offence (obstruction — relatively trivial) as well as failing to disclose my details (which is more serious and raises your insurance by about 50% and gets you close to a driving ban). This is self-evidently a malicious prosecution and legalised harassment, as I cannot be compelled to give my information to the invisible man or law enforcement fairies. Now we can see why our (ignored and unenforced) constitution says all fines and forfeits need a jury of your peers, as the temptation to steal from the public is too high.

I have learned a few things doing this anti-corruption game, and the key is not to get angry, but to get even. Conditionally accept even unlawful offers, based on them returning to lawfulness. So I have sent this back to the clerk of the court, making it their problem to properly disclose who I am giving my data to, and who can be sued in a personal capacity for acting ultra vires. It was written with the aid of ChatGPT, which is a superb legal assistant, as it leaves aside emotive appeals for the essence.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing in response to the form I received in relation to the above-referenced case. While I am committed to engaging with this process in good faith, I note significant deficiencies in the correspondence provided, which prevent me from fully complying at this stage.

Concerns Regarding Form Deficiencies

1. Lack of Sending Institution and Accountability

The form lacks identification of the legal entity responsible for issuing it. There is no named sender, no signature, and no registered address, only a reference to a court office. Under Section 86 of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, all formal correspondence must include a valid registered address and identifiable sender to establish accountability.

2. Failure to Verify Authenticity

Given the absence of these mandatory elements, I cannot reasonably verify the authenticity of the correspondence or its lawful authority. My previous attempts to obtain clarification or authentication from Cumbria Constabulary have been ignored, further compounding the issue.

3. Non-Compliance with GDPR

The form requests financial information via a "Statement of Means," which constitutes sensitive personal data under Article 4 of GDPR. Without confirmation of a compliant data controller or lawful processing basis, I decline to provide this information at this stage to protect my rights under the Data Protection Act 2018.

Conditional Acceptance

I am willing to engage with this process on the following conditions:

1. Verification of Authenticity

Please provide evidence of the lawful authority of the issuing institution, including:
· The name of the institution responsible for issuing the form.
· The name and position of the sender.
· A registered physical address for correspondence.

2. Confirmation of GDPR Compliance

Provide details of the data controller and the lawful basis for requesting sensitive financial information, as required by GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.

3. Statement of Means

I decline to provide financial information at this stage, as it is not legally required unless and until a conviction is secured, at which point I will comply under appropriate safeguards.

Plea and Reasons for Contesting

To avoid any delay or misunderstanding, I confirm the following:

1. Plea: I plead Not Guilty to the charges.

2. Reasons for Contesting:

Charge 1: The alleged obstruction did not occur. My vehicle was parked in a widened section of the road where traffic could pass freely. The parking restrictions were not enforceable due to obscured signage.

Charge 2: The notice issued was procedurally defective and unauthenticated, making it invalid. My attempts to clarify its legitimacy were ignored.

Request for Confirmation

Please confirm receipt of this letter and provide the requested information regarding the authenticity of the correspondence and data handling compliance. Until this is resolved, I reserve my legal right to withhold sensitive financial and personal data.

Declaration

I confirm that the above information is accurate to the best of my knowledge.

Magistrates’ courts are all unconstitutional and are being used to asset strip the public. They only exist as Parliament has declared itself sovereign, becoming the master of the people, not their servant. After the debacle of Covid, which exposed that the legal system acts on behalf of belligerent occupying powers, we have a moral right to demand that they themselves adhere rigorously to the law. This includes the natural justice of knowing who your accuser is, which in this case I do not, other than PC 2275 SMITH has made a statement that isn’t supported by the photographic evidence.

Whether I have parked legally or safely isn’t the issue here: if I had made an honest mistake I would gladly accept the punishment for it. This whole process is nakedly corrupt, and the time for tolerating such abuse is over. My hope is that we get a special Christmas present of the abolition of unconstitutional courts of revenue, and that everyone playing these treasonous games is held to account. The time for fake fines, fake police, and fake courts, all stealing real time and energy, needs to come to an end, and soon. We have suffered enough tyranny over the last four years; pretending to be law enforcement or a court of justice when you are not is a serious criminal act. Failure to participate in the crime is praiseworthy, not punishable.

Many individual law enforcement officers are wonderful and I appreciate them.