Common Law

John is currently preparing a reply which will be documented shortly on TPUC. In the meantime enjoy a brief audio commentary as I attempt to explain what I understand about this confusing, unhelpful and downright deceptive system which we are all subject to... if we consent to it.

Article 61; Lawful Rebellion is a ‘LAWFUL ACTION’ under the common law and can be invoked by anyone who resides in this country. This article does not give precedence to where you were born it gives’s precedence to where you live and if you live in this country then you can use it. This article is for all the people without exception and allows for lawfully;

1. To hinder the people of miss governance in anyway - strictly without the use of violence.

Imagine if our country was a ‘car’. Who would be the engine? And what happens to the car if the engine stops working?

Everything in this country is operated by the people of this country, everything is in ‘OUR’ control; every mode of transport, every mode of communication, every watt of electricity and every mode of essential service, EVERYTHING is in the control of the people and everything can ‘STOP’ at the will of the people.

Who really has control of this country; the government or the people?

Article by John Harris

Ask yourself this; why is it called a ‘dock’ where you stand in a court of law?

As far as I can tell ‘Fleet law’ has been installed in this country since around 1189 and remains to present day. The question is; what has fleet law got to do with constitutional law? Well the answer is quite simple. For as far as you want to go back you can see the deliberate manipulation of constitutional law to keep, the unwanted necessity, the people of this country enslaved. All through history there is evidence of this, with Magna Carta 1297 and the Bill of Rights 1689 (statutes)(constitutional law) being prime examples.

One of the points that Sonia Bonici makes quite clear in the phone call made by Brian Gerrish is the fact she states quite adamantly that the Queen is only a ‘Constitutional Sovereign’. This is very interesting when you understand what a Constitutional Sovereign basically is and the limited role they actually play, as just a figure head, her role politically is simply to; guide, warn and be consulted, with absolutely ‘no’ power according to the Constitutional Law.

I have just been reading a very interesting court case from 1670, and it just goes to show the power of the Jury and the corruption of the bench. Also shows why the current Government doesn't want trial by jury.

Some one recently asked me the question; what is Lawful Rebellion?

Rebellion in itself has a number of different meanings and is in fact quite close to another word that seems to be on everyone’s lips; Revolution.

With the simple understanding of the 1911 Parliament Act and the two crucial elements changed within this Act namely;

1. The presumption that the royal assent would always be presumed to be automatic- no Sovereign would be allowed an opinion nor could they act as the Constitutional safe guard with this presumption.

2. The removal of the Lords powers of Veto against all taxation bills with subsequent effect of the full destruction of the Lords powers.

Following the sending of my Constitutional Lawful Affidavits to Her Majesty the Queen regarding the miss-governance of our country and subsequent third party reply I received from senior correspondent Mrs. Sonia Bonici, Brian Gerrish a dear friend of mine decided to telephone Buckingham Palace to ask Mrs. Bonici a few questions relating to these matters.

What you are about to listen to is the conversation between Brian Gerrish and Mrs. Bonici, which to say the least, is quite revealing concerning my Affidavits, how they have been dealt with by Buckingham Palace and the subject of how this country is being sold out by Parliament to the EU.

On the 22nd day of March 2008 I, John James Harris went to Buckingham Palace to serve a Lawful Constitutional document upon her Majesty Queen Elizabeth; by way of a Lawful Affidavit invoking Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215.

I simply asked for the dismissal of all the traitors that reside within the parliament of this country, giving a Lawful time period of just 40 days, and if my grievance does not receive redress within the time period I have stated, then by way of serving my second Affidavit, I am then entitled to enter into Lawful Rebellion which I have done.

Following the incident On Saturday 10th May 2008 where I was arrested then de-arrested for not wearing a seat belt and for refusing to give my name, I set about informing the Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall Police and the Clerk to the Justices Plymouth HMCS of my Freeman status by way of recorded letters.