A Question of Law: The Case for Perjury Plus Treason Committed by the UK Police
By The Expose
Within this current manufactured crisis, we have witnessed disturbing actions undertaken by the Government’s phalanx of underling enforcers whether controlled directly or indirectly.
One of the most enthusiastic enforcers of this New World Order (NWO) ethos being the UK Police. On numerous occasions, within the last two years of misery, innocent people have suffered whilst attending lawful demonstrations expressing their legal right to protest plus importantly to lawfully petition the Government about its own ongoing legally suspect activities.
This most visible NWO oppressor repeatedly exercising brutal conduct and jettisoning a once globally respected policing reputation. These paramilitary style operations are repeatedly televised to a worldwide audience. This is indicative of a dystopian government working in conjunction with an indifferent police service management having voluntarily decided to sacrifice this reputation.
Situations have degenerated into grotesque spectacles of people hauled violently from peaceful marches by caricatures of third world paramilitaries. A caricature that reflects the new thinking by this global cabal to conduct itself in a manner clearly alien to the ‘policing by consent’ philosophy our democracy had developed. When their policing operation does not apprehend prey there is the intimidatory sight of semi-military adorned scowling functionaries lurking for testosterone fueled ‘action’ whilst they strut around the public as if overseeing a cowered slave colony.
This unnatural situation, alien within a mature democracy, has undermined the moral standards to which law enforcement agencies were formerly held.
The Police Federation’s own publication available to all their staff titled: “The Office of Constable the bedrock of modern-day British policing” states upon its opening page:
“Every constable is an independent legal entity; the public’s guarantee of impartiality…”
Page two of this document further explains: “On appointment each police officer makes a declaration to “faithfully discharge the duties of the Office of Constable”.” Further stating: “Each sworn constable is an independent legal official and each police officer has personal liability for their actions or inaction.”
Page two of this document further states:” It is from the Office of Constable that each officer derives their powers.”
Here is clear reference to their expected behavior, obligations and responsibilities plus referencing the combined role of being a lawfully operating Constable plus a legally empowered corporation police officer. The underlying Office of Constable must remain untainted as being the base from which the derivation takes place to then provide for policing officer powers.
Within this Government’s so-called pandemic has there been something most basic and important overlooked that undermines their whole pantomime? Are we witnessing within their obscene haste to worship at the feet of their Big Pharma Baphomet, conflicting positions within the long-mangled role of a Constable and a Police Officer by an ignoring of law?
The Constable oath of office
’I………………..of………………..do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will, to the best of my skill and knowledge, discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.’
Point 1: ‘solemnly and sincerely’ is an absolute.
Point 2: To break an oath is an act of perjury.
Point 3: ‘well and truly serve the Queen’ is an absolute.
Point 4: ‘fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality’ is an absolute.
Point 5: ‘upholding fundamental human rights’ is an absolute.
Point 6: ‘prevent all offences against people’ is an absolute.
Point 7: ‘according to law’ is an absolute.
Following on, the law of the Act of Union 1707 – Article 4 contains absolute rights to unhindered travel unless otherwise expressly identified within that Act.
The Act of Union 1707 – Article 4
“That the Subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain shall from and after the Union have full Freedom and Intercourse of Trade and Navigation to and from any port or place within the said United Kingdom and the Dominions and Plantations thereunto belonging. And that there be a Communication of all other Rights, Privileges and Advantages which do or may belong to the Subjects of either Kingdom except where it is otherwayes expressly agreed in these Articles.”
Point 1: Refers to ’Subjects’ and not ‘persons’.
Point 2: Refers to ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain’ as a geography not a PLC (i.e.in capitals).
Point 3: Therefore, it refers to the common people of this Land.
Point 4: ‘full Freedom’ is stated as an absolute.
Point 5: ‘any port or place’ is an absolute.
Point 6: ‘thereunto belonging’ refers to rights already existing and is an absolute.
Point 7: ‘thereunto belonging’ refers to existing Common Law rights and privileges as an
Point 8: ‘except where it is ‘otherwayes expressly agreed’ is an absolute.
Point 9: ‘in these Articles’ defers to no other law, regulations or guidelines and is an
Point 10: ‘Communication of all other Rights, Privileges and Advantages’ is an absolute.
Point 11: It is the foundational document for the UK plus the basis of the Crown’s authority.
Point 12: Is a recognized internationally Treaty and remains unamended and an absolute.
Point 13: A Constable oath of Office is to uphold the law and is an absolute.
Point 14: A Constable oath of Office is vitiated if the absolute of upholding law is violated.
Point 15: A Constable oath of Office is to serve the Queen and is an absolute.
Point 16: A Constable oath of Office is vitiated if the absolute to serve the Queen is violated.
Point 17: A Crown organization, individual or servant that violates this Article is
Point 18: Any Crown organization, individual or servant that violates this Article vitiates their authority.
Therefore, has this continued use, or misuse, of the Office of Constable by the NWO enforcers resulted in both lying under oath plus treason by these individually responsible legal entities?
The violations of the constitution of this land plus their own sworn oath thereby vitiates the fundamental underlying authority of those constables. Those who have willingly chosen to enforce, whether knowing the correct law or not, are conflicted. By having elected to just follow orders of government guidance, rules or, mandates instead of the actual law and henceforth restrict travel for lawful protesters, petitioners, and travelers they have voluntarily taken a contrary position to their sworn oaths to serve the Queen solemnly and sincerely.
The question: have the two extremely serious crimes of a perjurious breach of oath, therefore lying, with its potentially unlimited sentencing length, alongside the criminal act of treason with its similar incarceration possibilities now accelerated the potential for a newly cleansed and purged Constable service operating within common law jurisdiction and not the piratical mercantile maritime subterfuge for the long term benefit of the law-abiding men and women? Hopefully so.