Arrested and locked up for no fishing permit

[weeandy]

Again Brian i see where your coming from , but i think the consolidation Act is just that , consolidating all the Acts together, and again , they are exactly what they seem to say , ACTS .

However , i think this section here below i could use , along with the (maxim of law that states "rivers and ports are public , therefor the right of fishing is common to all"). (also in the law of nature).

The broad principles involved are:

No one has any right to trespass upon the lands of another for the purpose of fishing;

No one, even if he is lawfully on the bank of a river or loch under a right of access, has the right to fish in the river or loch;

Members of the public, having neither title nor right, cannot establish a right by any usage of fishing for however long a period, as against a proprietor having title to the land over which the stream flows.

These are principles of civil law and can be enforced only in civil proceedings.
Apart from in the Solway and where Protection Orders are in force, there is only one case where unauthorised fishing by a trespasser can be made the subject of criminal proceedings, and this is under the Theft Act 1607. The Act applies to an ordinary fish pond, or "stank", enclosed all round where the fish may no longer be said to be feeding in a state of nature. It applies to any artificial pond or reservoir which has been stocked by the owner and which has neither inlet nor outlet. Any person removing trout from a stank without authority from the owner or occupier of the land surrounding it is guilty of theft. It is open to question whether anyone taking fish from an ordinary river or stream which has been stocked is guilty of theft.

In the case of a loch acquired by a Water Authority, a previous owner may reserve rights of fishing but the fishing must not be done in such a way that it will interfere with the purity of the water.

Public waters

Public waters are those which are both navigable and tidal. The tide must ebb and flow at the point where the right is claimed and the right extends up rivers as far as ordinary spring tides.

Unless anyone knows different , i dont think i have breached any contract under civil law and i have injured no-one or anything under common law.

Thankyou for all the input , totally appreciated.
Andy

[Freeman Stephen]

As far as I can tell, you didnt know the fish belonged to anyone else until you were informed of this. Its not so much ignorance of the law since if you were aware they belonged to someone else you would not have fished there, but since you thought they belonged to no one and as there was no notice to inform you that they did, there is no need for courts since the court itself should not be used to make a notice to someone, nor is there any need to apply a penalty to someone who was not aware that there was an owner whom an act of theft was being committed against. As far as you were aware there was no owner, as the fish seem to swin about freely and the proper procedure should have been to let you know that they belonged to someone else, rather than attempt to enrich themselves during the process of giving you such notice.

[weeandy]

Thanks Stephen , i agree with that.

The forth district salmon fishery board however , they think they own the rights to the wild salmon. Well they gave themselves that right through legislating parliam,ent if ye ask me.

I was looking on the crown estates websight.

We are sovereign right ?

IT says this.


Who owns The Crown Estate in Scotland?

The Crown Estate is the land and property belonging to the Sovereign. It is inherited with the title, but is not the private property of the individual who is Sovereign. Her Majesty The Queen cannot sell The Crown Estate, nor does she receive money from it.

Although the Government does not own The Crown Estate, since 1832 all Scottish revenue has been paid to the Treasury, for the benefit of all UK taxpayers. In return the Sovereign receives the Civil List payment.

In Scotland The Crown Estate own and manage around half of the foreshore and almost all of the seabed out to the 12 nautical mile territorial limit. This asset features approximately 900 fish farms and thousands of private boat moorings. For members of moorings associations the cost of these moorings is just 11p per day to rent.

Why is The Crown Estate not brought under the control of the Scottish Parliament?

The Crown Estate operates within the requirements of the Crown Estate Act 1961 and has a responsibility to manage the estate under those terms. Any changes to those responsibilities are a matter for the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Scotland. Under the terms of the Scotland Act 1998 the management of The Crown Estate is a matter reserved to Westminster and any change is therefore an issue for Parliament, although The Crown Estate remains subject to Scottish law and relevant regulatory matters.

I think i should send my letter to the pf and if need be , go to theyr court to defend my rights.

[brianb]

think your going down the wrong line, pun, with this and your going to lose,

if you go through the stuff you've posted and ive posted, youl see, you have a very good case to at least severely limit the charge, the consolidation act expressly excepts line fishing from its provision and so, to my reading you have not committed the offences as charged and you should be able to swap this for lesser offences if not get them dropped altogether

however, it seems you want to pick a fight with them over fishing rights in general,,, now I think you have a moral case,,, but absolutely NO legal one

if this is your intention, il leave you to it

[weeandy]

Brianb , so if i just went into court , standing for myself , and said , where is the contracts ive breached ? , then they would see i havent , as i havent made any contracts.... Havent consented.

I found this http://www.copfs.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/13547/0000410.pdf

Just incase it gets wiped , ive copied it.

It says if they cant get you on a statute they switch to common law . So if i havent breached a statute by not giving consent , and i havent broke common law as there was no injury , maybe ill be ok after stating this.. Highly unlikely but what have i to lose.

Will need to read yopiur posts again , though i have taken stuff out that you wrote and added it to a letter. Deciding what to take out and keep in , and was gonna wait till they send a summons and respond with that... Unl;ess i just chance my mit on the day and tell the truth as above.

Cheers bri

[weeandy]

Read a copy of the bail papers i have here which i had to sign before they would let me out the cells. They have conditions. Ok , well i have a few conditions of my own.. As i didnt sign the release papers with the corporate name , and they were not witnessed and countersigned in wet ink by three people im thinking they dont stand up in civil court.

I sent the pf a notice for clarification upon proof of claim i am a person and not a natural man etc etc., that i would conditionaly attend court upon proof of claim they know what it means , legaly speaking.

He replied by telling me theyd sent it to my solicitor telling me i should instruct them on it.

I sent a leter back telling him to answer it as it is addressed to him and that im not instructing a solicitor.

As yet he hasnt answered that letter.

I did hear through the grapevine the fishing club said what are they gonna do about me. Its been suggested to someone in the hope it got back to me that if i write a letter of apology then they might drop the civil complaint. Aye right , like thats gonna happen right enough , admit guilt when im innocent.

Anyhow , will keep ye posted all. By the way , the police broke the protection of animals act too after they assaulted me.

Fuckin terrorists !

[weeandy]

Court trial , 3rd October 2011 @ Edinburgh Sherriff Court , 10am. And ill be doing the talking as ceo and president of the corporation they are claiming a violation against !

[Jafaman]

Hey, how did the court hearing go? Which plan of attack did you finally settle on?

[weeandy]

M'lord , are governments and courts established to maintain and protect individual rights ? Yes Mr Weeandy.
M'lord , am i entitled to a fair hearing today ? Yes Mr Weeandy.
M'lord , who does the prosecutor represent ? The crown Mr Weeandy.
M'lord , can i get a fair hearing if there is a conflict of interest ? No Mr Weeandy.
M'lord , who do you represent here today ? Im now sitting under common law Mr Weeandy to protect you in court


And so it was that after being found guilty of denting 2 salmon fishery board bailifs and 2 policemens ego's , the judge decided all he could do was fine me until i reminded him that i was there in court for the 5th time to settle the matter , that there had been a mistake , and that id like to deal with the matter honourably so there is no injured party.

Judge defered till march for continued good conduct and will admonish me on all charges,
1) Unlawful posession of fishing rod.
2) Having an instrument that could have been used to take salmon or sea trout.
3) Hindering 2 bailifs in there duties ( denting there ego's )
4) The police scotland Act 1995 ( denting the 2 policemans ego's )
5) Resisting arrest.

The trial lasted from 10 am until 5.30 pm during which the 4 prosecution witneses were torn to bits in the witness box and left red faced after being exposed as incompetent liars

[weeandy]

And the judge suggested i should take a civil action out against the Salmon Fishery Board !