Dear Adrian,
Section 92 of the Australian Constitution does not guarantee "Freedom of Passage" - it guarantees that "On the imposition of uniform duties of customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse (social communication, dealings, between individuals - Concise Oxford Dictionary) among the State, whethere by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free".
This UPMART nonsense about "Common Law Licences and Registration" is totally unacceptable to the ordinary People of Australia. Therefore, these money-making shonks would be severely dealt with by any Jury....which, ironically, is what Jerry must demand as his Right.
Unfortunately, Jerry is a victim of McClure's scams - but he doesn't deserve to be the victim of infinitely more evil-doings at the hands of "Magistrates" (ie: fraudulent ones, at that) nor the Police nor any other oppressive and malicious agents.
It's a funny way it has come about - but Jerry's case does serve to expose the corruption and treachery that have taken over our Courts.
Yours sincerely,
John Wilson.
Dear Friends,
A Student of The Common Law has been imprisoned unlawfully for
wearing alternative number plates on his vehicle. Jerry
Koblski has been imprisoned for 6 months and there was not even
a court hearing!!! He urgently needs our support. You can do
this by copying the letter of the above Attachment, type in your
name, and send it to him. Our Civil Rights are quickly being
usurped from us. He is, in a sense, a martyr, being the first to
openly contradict the existing law system and be jailed.
The Common Law challenges Statutory Law. The Courts have made a
ruling to stamp out anyone that quotes from the Constitution or
goes under the banner of Common Law. In this case, Section 92 of
the Australian Constitution grants you Rights of Passage, ie,
free travel anywhere throughout the Commonwealth.
I, (and many others), have been charged and penalised for a
similar offence and am appealing for a rehearing in the Courts.
Without support, I will be the next to be fined heavily or jailed.
I will keep you informed of the next Court Hearing so that if
you are in the area, you will be able to attend and witness and
ensure the Protection of your Human Rights.
Regards, JAIN
VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS BY COURTS AND POLICE IN AUSTRALIA.
Some crimes that are regularly committed by state police
are:
- Assault
- Damage to personal property.
- Theft of personal property
- Trespass on personal property
EXAMPLE OF MATTERS DEMONSTRATING THE AFORESAID
VIOLATIONS AND CRIMES BY MAGISTRATES AND POLICE.
1. 2004-09-31, Jerry KOBYLSKI vs POLICE,
SUMMARY OF FACTS:
In the Magistrates' Court of Queensland sitting at
South Port.
Magistrate John Costello.
Jerry KOBYLSKI in court for the mention of a minor
traffic matter, being an allegation against him
that he is driving an unregistered vehicle.
The matter was called at approximately 11:40 am.
(Mention is a preliminary proceeding which is
generally used to confirm a date for a future
hearing or to table preliminary arguments, voire
dires, whether or not witnesses are to be called
and how many witnesses etc).
Jerry is self represented. Jerry says his vehicle
is registered and wants to defend his matter.
John Costello tried to convince Jerry to use a
barrister or solicitor. John COSTELLO then asked
Jerry "what is your position today" Jerry replied
that because he did not have a brief of evidence
that the matter must be set down for mention." Mr
COSTELLO rejected that position, because it had
been previously adjourned and said to a solicitor
"Mr Cooper, can you speak with Mr KOBYLSKI" A
solicitor who was conveniently close at hand said
"Yes, your worship" Mr COSTELLO said "I'll stand
the matter down until you speak with a solicitor
and tell me what you propose" John COSTELLO
temporarily adjourned the proceeding in order for
Jerry to talk with the solicitor. During the
discussion with Mr COOPER, the position of the
solicitor was revealed. "You won't get the
statements of the police until you list the matter
for hearing" Jerry was not happy with this
position and returned after adjournment and says
he still wants to represent himself. Jerry then
read the headers of his points of law, which are
to be dealt with at the contest mention. Jerry
remained determined to represent himself.
.
The first point that Jerry raised was that he had
not received a Brief of Evidence, and that there
was no evidence before him that demonstrated that
there was any substance to the allegations against
him. The police officer allegedly making the
allegations was not in court. (At common law an
allegation only has substance if it is accompanied
by sworn testimony supporting the allegation. In
this matter, it is only by the witness of persons
that an allegation may be made and may be said to
have merit or substance. Without sworn testimony
the matter is only hearsay at best. It is Jerry's
right to know the nature and substance of the
allegations made against him and who is making
those allegations.)
The second point that Jerry raised was that he
required that the matter be set down for a contest
mention on points of law. Jerry then tabled an
outline of the points of law as follows "I
require" said Jerry "that this mention be
adjourned to a contest mention on points of law
that shall demonstrate to the court that my
vehicle is lawfully registered and that there is
no matter before the court that I need answer to
or appear upon. The headers of my points of law
include but are not limited to sections 92, 116
and 117 from the Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution, and common law grounds and other
grounds pursuant to various federal and state
legislation's regarding monopolies and
restrictions on monopolies"
Immediately when Jerry finished this submission
John COSTELLO said, "These are serious arguments,
take him into custody. Court will resume at 2:15
pm.". Eight members of public witnessed Jerry
being taken into custody and were shocked by what
they heard and saw. No ground was stated by John
Costello as to why he was taken into custody.
There was no reason either implied or stated. The
witnesses themselves had seen many matters, but
none could recall a person ever being taken into
custody because points of law were serious or
complex!!
There were eight persons who Jerry had asked to be
there who witnessed this event. The legal view is
that the proceeding was only a mention. No
evidence had been heard. Points of law were being
tabled according to the procedures of the court.
Jerry was then taken into custody. The time he was
taken into custody was 12:15 pm. and he was then
kept in custody for over 2 hours over lunch and
brought back at 2:15 pm. No food was given to him
during this period. Jerry has a high metabolism,
and suffers migraines if he does not eat at
regular times.
The public view of the 8 witnesses is that it is
Jerry's has a right at common law to raise points
of law and headers of law and it is also his right
to represent himself.
When he appeared in court again he was in
handcuffs, and he appeared with 5 other men. John
COSTELLO again tried to persuade him to be
represented by one of the courts solicitors or
barristers, or by some other solicitor or
barrister. Jerry said he is able to represent
himself. (Jerry had already represented himself on
an earlier matter and even had cross examined the
police who were in the witness box). Jerry replied
"These solicitors are not knowledgeable in
constitutional law and are no good for me" John
Costello set the matters down for hearing on 15,
16, 17th March 2005. Costello then asked Jerry to
sign an undertaking that he would turn up to court
and that he would not drive his car. Jerry agreed
that he would turn up, but would not sign an
undertaking to not drive his car because firstly
that would be the execution of a sentence and a
punishment before conviction and the matter as yet
has not been heard. This amounts to fines and
forfeitures before conviction and it is unlawful
for the magistrate to coerce an undertaking. A
person is Innocent until proven guilty and remains
innocent until all avenues of appeal are
exhausted. Secondly he has a right of passage to
go to work, and must use his car to go to work.
John Constello ordered Jerry back into custody to
reconsider his position. While in custody the
police tried to coerce Jerry into getting a legal
practitioner who is a member of the bar. They
brought to him a list of solicitors on a piece of
paper and the Yellow pages. The police said "pick
one". Jerry replied the same as before and did not
shift from his position. . The court was then resumed.
Jerry returned into court, and maintains his stand
that he wants to represent himself. Jerry is again
taken away in custody in handcuffs and is again
locked up, in an apparent attempt by the court to
make him change his mind. Magistrate John Costello
then adjourned the court and police asked for "all
to stand". The eight witnesses in the court
refused to stand in protest of the denial of
Jerry's rights and the inhumane and unwarranted
treatment that he had received. Magistrate says
"are they all Polish, don't they understand
english" Magistrate John Costello then asked
Malcolm McClure why he does not stand. Mr McClure
replied that "you have denied Jerry his rights,
you are trying to coerce him" Magistrate John
Costello then said "take them all into custody".
All eight witnesses were then taken into custody
and locked up for about half an hour and then
released.
Magistrate Costello made a directive that the
eight witnesses were to be refused access into the
court. When court again resumed, Jerry was forced
to go back into court by himself without witnesses
to view the proceedings. Malcolm tried to get
access into the court and said to the guard who
prohibited access, that he was concerned for
Jerry's rights because his Right to fair trial is
the right to a hearing which is fair and public.
The Guard went and passed message onto Magistrate
Costello and upon his return confirmed that
magistrate Costello still refuses to allow the 8
witnesses to enter the court. Jerry appeared in
court. The Magistrate said that he was driving an
uninsured vehicle. Jerry had the documentation
with him to prove that his vehicle was insured (he
had the insurance certificate) but John Costello
refused him permission to produce the documents.
He was not allowed to give evidence. The
Magistrate ordered that he sign an undertaking not
to drive an uninsured vehicle until the matter is
heard in March 2005. Jerry is again taken away
into custody. While in custody police say to him,
if he does not sign an undertaking that he will be
kept in goal all night. Jerry is worried for his
mother and worried for his work and under duress
is forced to sign. Jerry says he does not consent
to what he is being forced to sign. The police
then added an extra condition on the undertaking,
that he also agree not to drive an unregistered
vehicle. Jerry replied that this matter is about
registration and that is what the dispute is
about. He said his vehicle is registered. He also
said to the police that this addition to the
undertaking to not drive an unregistered vehicle
was not within the orders of the Magistrate and
that this addition is unlawful and is contempt of
court. Jerry said he has a right to drive to work.
Jerry signed the undertakings under protest.
A few days later (Saturday 9th Oct 2004) police
come and arrest Jerry and lock him up on grounds
of breach of bail. An unmarked police car and its
plain clothed officer were waiting
Jerry has remained in prison without trial since
the day of his arrest, until present day.
It was
the orders of Magistrate COSTELLO, THAT HE REMAIN
IN REMAND= CUSTODY=PRISON=INCARCERATION=DENIAL OF
HIS FREEDOMS UNTIL THE MATTER IS HEARD IN March
2005. A legal person will tell you that CUSTODY is
different from INCARCERATION. At common law, and
common sense, there IS NO DIFFERENCE. HE HAS BEEN
DENIED HIS FREEDOM. WE THE COMMUNITY SHARE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DENIAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS TO
THE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.
Jerry is being held at,
ARTHUR GORRIE CORRECTIONAL CENTRE,
VISITATION TO: 3068 Ipswich Rd, WACOL
MAIL TO: PO BOX 1300, RICHLANDS, QLD, 4077
PHONE: General enquiries, 3212 0411
PHONE: Visits, bookings, 3212 0472, Fx 3212 0415
JERRY IS IN GAOL FOR EXERCISING HIS RIGHTS. HE IS
ENDURING FOR OUR RIGHTS.
A VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ONE PERSON, IS A
VIOLATION OF RIGHTS FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY.
Although the process to free Jerry is not
difficult, because the persons who want to help
him are not qualified legal practitioners and
members of the legal bar for Queensland, they are
refused access to see Jerry in the capacity of his
legal representative, and also cannot obtain the
Magistrates' orders for arrest, and other
documentation on his behalf that is necessary to
free Jerry.
Lets keep Jerry's situation in perspective.
1. His matter is a minor traffic offence, where
there are no victims. 2. His matter has not been
heard but, by orders of the magistrate, he is to
be incarcerated for over 6 months, which is a very
severe sentence, which is more severe than that
received by criminals for serious assault. 3. He
is incarcerated without his matter being heard. 4.
The allegation of breech of bail is bogus and
fails at law, because police changed the bail
conditions without authorization from a magistrate
and also because it was signed under duress. 5. HE
IS BEING PUNISHED BEFORE CONVICTION. 6. HIS MATTER
HAS NOT BEEN HEARD. 7. If John COSTELLO keeps him
in prison he will have endured a punishment far in
excess of what is warranted for a summary traffic
infringement. In fact the summary matter of which
he is charged is punishable by way of fine.
INHUMANE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS. It is the orders
of Magistrate COSTELLO to incarcerated JERRY on a
minor traffic matter or bogus breach of bail for 6
months.
LET US NOW CONSIDER THE BREACH OF HUMAN RIGHTS
EXPERIENCED BY JERRY IN GAOL. FOLLOWING ARE THE
CONDITIONS AND RULES THAT HAVE BEEN IMPOSED UPON
JERRY. IT APPEARS THAT NOT ALL THESE CONDITIONS
ARE IMPOSED UPON ALL PRISONERS.
1. He is not permitted to have a pen and paper
duriing visits. IT IS A BASIC RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO
MAKE NOTES. JERRY IS DENIED THIS RIGHT.
2. He is not permitted to keep a diary
3. A visitor cannot take him a note, other wise
the visit is terminated.
4. Visitors must book 24 hours in advance.
5. Upon visiting the centre, visitors must provide
photo ID and must empty pockets, belongings are
checked and must be placed in a locker. Shoes must
then be taken off and the visitor then walks
through a detector. Pockets are then turned for a
second time. Police then escort the visitor to a
holding bay and are lined up five in a row.
Sniffer dogs then go up and down the line 3 times
and sniff pockets and feet. All then proceed to
the contact area. Visitors are assigned to a table
number. One women had a lolly to give to her
inmate, the visit was terminated. Time is called 5
minutes prior to termination of the visiting time.
6. Maximum of 2 hours of visitation per week. That
is 2 HOURS TOTAL
7. NO PHONE CALLS CAN BE MADE TO JERRY.
8. Jerry can only make phone calls to numbers
where Jerry has identified the phone number, the
name to which the number is registered, and the
address where the phone number is registered.
9. Jerry CANNOT MAKE PHONE CALLS TO MOBILE PHONES.
10. Jerry is NOT PERMITTED TO HAVE HIS DIETARY
SUPPLIMENTS.
If you would like to support Jerry please print out
,sign and post letter attached.
Click here for further information on our rights visit
www.upmart.org/
Regards
A member of the Community
Back to top of document
