This is an important guide, how to fill out & present an ‘Affidavit’…
Including some additional information re: the authenticity & authority of ‘Magna Carta 1215’.
Also, a very important link, to an interview conducted with the late ‘John Hurst’ R.I.P. of the ‘Magna Carta Society’ Hurst, a retired police constable of the Old School.
By that I mean that when he joined in 1978, constables were taught the law of The Constitution and Sir Robert Peel’s “Principles of policing” which were based on the common law.
It contains very interesting, important & informative information… with additional links should they be required…
Two pages. Very short read. Please keep a copy for further reference.
Here is the authority for ‘Article 61’ -‘Magna Carta 1215’… "Diffidatio: diffidation
noun
Formal relinquishment or renunciation of faith, allegiance, or amity: solemn defiance of an enemy; declaration of hostilities: as, to send a letter of diffidation.
“ A metrical chronicle (4) records the threat to depose the King, (John) unless he fully amended the law and furnished undoubted guarantees for a lasting peace.
On 5th May, the barons went through the ceremony of diffidatio, or formal renunciation of allegiance,(1) a recognised feudal right, and not involving treason if justified by events and properly intimated to the overlord.(2)
(4) Chronica de Mailros, sub anno 1215. 1. Blackstone, Great Charter, p. xiii, citing Annals of Dunstable (p. 43), says they were absolved at Wallingford by a Canon of Durham. 2. Cf. Adams, Origin, 181 n.; 306, 312; cf. also infra under c. 61…”.
Note the words “ Properly intimated to the overlord…”.
That means a sworn affidavit signed in front of a Crown Official and served on The Queen.
The complicated alternatives made up by the likes of the Common Law Court and 38 pages of incoherent ramblings by David Robinson on the subject are just wrong.
If you want the protection that ‘Article 61’ gives you the presently accepted form of an affidavit is contained in the ‘Civil Procedure Rules’...
There is nothing here that is inconsistent with the ‘English common law’...
A copy of your affidavit should be served on the last known address of The Queen by Royal Mail Registered Post.
If there is no satisfactory response after 10 days another affidavit stating that you have had no satisfactory response should be sent.
If there is no response after 3 days the matter is closed. Keep your proofs of posting and original copies of the documents.
https://daddydragon.co.uk/2020/09/28/john-hurst-a-defense-at-common-law-the-real-common-law-in-a-real-court
Including some additional information re: the authenticity & authority of ‘Magna Carta 1215’.
Also, a very important link, to an interview conducted with the late ‘John Hurst’ R.I.P. of the ‘Magna Carta Society’ Hurst, a retired police constable of the Old School.
By that I mean that when he joined in 1978, constables were taught the law of The Constitution and Sir Robert Peel’s “Principles of policing” which were based on the common law.
It contains very interesting, important & informative information… with additional links should they be required…
Two pages. Very short read. Please keep a copy for further reference.
Here is the authority for ‘Article 61’ -‘Magna Carta 1215’… "Diffidatio: diffidation
noun
Formal relinquishment or renunciation of faith, allegiance, or amity: solemn defiance of an enemy; declaration of hostilities: as, to send a letter of diffidation.
“ A metrical chronicle (4) records the threat to depose the King, (John) unless he fully amended the law and furnished undoubted guarantees for a lasting peace.
On 5th May, the barons went through the ceremony of diffidatio, or formal renunciation of allegiance,(1) a recognised feudal right, and not involving treason if justified by events and properly intimated to the overlord.(2)
(4) Chronica de Mailros, sub anno 1215. 1. Blackstone, Great Charter, p. xiii, citing Annals of Dunstable (p. 43), says they were absolved at Wallingford by a Canon of Durham. 2. Cf. Adams, Origin, 181 n.; 306, 312; cf. also infra under c. 61…”.
Note the words “ Properly intimated to the overlord…”.
That means a sworn affidavit signed in front of a Crown Official and served on The Queen.
The complicated alternatives made up by the likes of the Common Law Court and 38 pages of incoherent ramblings by David Robinson on the subject are just wrong.
If you want the protection that ‘Article 61’ gives you the presently accepted form of an affidavit is contained in the ‘Civil Procedure Rules’...
There is nothing here that is inconsistent with the ‘English common law’...
A copy of your affidavit should be served on the last known address of The Queen by Royal Mail Registered Post.
If there is no satisfactory response after 10 days another affidavit stating that you have had no satisfactory response should be sent.
If there is no response after 3 days the matter is closed. Keep your proofs of posting and original copies of the documents.
https://daddydragon.co.uk/2020/09/28/john-hurst-a-defense-at-common-law-the-real-common-law-in-a-real-court
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment