Royal Commission, Contempt Claim Fraud 2020 000286, Polite Notices and Request, and Reasonable Suspicions Notice

To: House of Commons Speaker, Prime Minister, Cabinet Officers, Privy Councillors, MPs, State Lawyers, Law Court Judges and Journalist Mr Rozenberg

Polite Notice to Journalist Mr Rozenberg that the Royal Commission Emails give Citizen Case Papers to the Cabinet and Parliament at the same time as they are served on the State or filed in the Law Courts. It enables Honourable Parliamentarians to conduct Corruption Investigations and discover what the State and Law Courts did with them. It is Totally Predictable that Corrupt Officers commit Evidence Destruction Frauds and Computer Record Frauds.

Polite Notice to Journalist Mr Rozenberg that Citizen Papers in the Corruption Remedy Process use the Citizen Oriented Style. The Familiar Phrases are identified by Capital Letters. Use of the 3rd Person eliminates the need for Jurors to convert the 1st and 2nd Person into the 3rd Person in Jury Discussions. The Familiar Phrases and use of the 3rd Person assist Jury Findings by Lord Bishop Jurors in Parliament Courts and Lay Jurors in Law Courts.

Polite Request to Journalist Mr Rozenberg for Trial Misconduct Evidence against 2020 000286 Trial Judge Mr Jay for the Stated Reasons that Trial Misconduct Article of the Journalist appeared on 15th June 2020 in the Law Society Gazette and there are Reasons Suspicions of a Fall-Guy Conspiracy against Trial Judge Mr Jay by Corrupt Parliamentarians and Appeal Lord Justices who are Investigation Targets in the Corruption Remedy Process.

Fall-Guy Conspiracy Reasonable Suspicion Notice and Remedy-Only Jurisdiction Limit Acknowledgment from Equity Lawyer Mr Ellis to 2020 000286 High Court Mr Jay

  1. Contempt Claim Fraud 2020 000286 Recusal Refusal and Trial Direction Orders dated 3rd November 2020 were followed by the Recusal and Direction Confirmation Order dated 9th November 2020 by Trial Judge Jay. The Conflict Recusal was valid. The Trial Confirmation Orders are invalid. Justice Mr Jay has a Remedy Only Jurisdiction Limit for the Equity Lawyer against the State and Remedy Advice from the Equity Lawyer to use it.
  2. The Citizen, Crown and Lord Bishops have Justice Responsibilities known as the Equity Monarchy Trusts. They have Corruption Control Jurisdictions that govern Parliament Session Powers. They were dormant for 45 years. In 2004 Prime Minister Mr Blair joined a Criminal Conspiracy by European Leaders to commit Referenda Election Frauds. It got Fraud Proof Sets and use of them to revive the Equity Monarchy Trusts. It got a Corruption Remedy Process that has continued ever since.
  3. The Parliament Session Agreement in December 2019 between the Crown and Prime Minister required that a Royal Commission get Corruption Remedies before the Session End. The Default Penalty is a Parliament Session Refusal and Forced General Election with Mass Publicity for the Corruption Proof and Remedy Denial Fraud Proof. On 19th December 2019, the Queen announced it in the Parliament Session Opening Speech.
  4. Honourable Parliamentarians needed Criminal Conspiracy Proof to silence Corrupt Parliamentarians until Unfitness Cases got Corruption Findings and Dismissal Decisions against Top Judges. Citizens got it.
  5. Corrupt Officers tried to defend themselves by use of Evidence Destruction and Computer Record Frauds that are Forgery Proof and Perjury Proof against the Law Courts and the Ministry of Justice. It created the need for Audio Records that are Personal Responsibility Proof against Identifiable Individuals.
  6. Citizens had Corruption Cases with Hearing Events. Most of them lacked the Management Capacity to cope with Hearing Frauds Conspiracies by Qualified Lawyers and Law Court Judges. The case of Equity Lawyer Mr Edward William Ellis was an exception. He provided Investigation Services for the Crown and Lord Bishops. The Protection Fraud Network needed Protection Frauds to reassure Corrupt Officers they were safe. The planned to do it by use of the Contempt Claim Fraud 2020 000286 for an Imprisonment Fraud against the Equity Lawyer. He planned use of it to get Audio Records of Trial Frauds by the State Representatives and Trial Judges.
  7. Corrupt Parliamentarians and Appeal Lord Justices made a Damage Limitation Plan for themselves. It needed a Fall-Guy Conspiracy against a Lower Rank Judge. High Court Justice Mr Jay was excellent for the purpose.
    1. On 19th July High Court Justice Mr Jay sat for Short Notice Hearings of Restraint Applications by the State against Citizens. He reassured himself that he had Statutory Immunity for Court Frauds by referring to a Justice Act in the 1940’s. It was a Protection Fraud by Parliament for the State against War Damage Victims. Hearing Judge Jay used the Public Gallery Witness Status of Equity Lawyer Mr Ellis for a Restraint Breach Investigation Order Fraud against him. It used a Party Status Denial Fraud, Notice Denial Fraud, Hearing Denial Fraud and Jurisdiction Usurpation Fraud. It got Contempt Claim Frauds and General Civil Restraint Frauds and the Restraint Breach Imprisonment Committal Trial. The Crown and Lord Bishops issued Case Management Orders that enabled each stage of the case to service Corruption Investigations of the Law Courts for the Remedy Process. The result was a 4 year and 4 months’ delay between the Investigation Fraud and the Trial Fraud.
    2. His Intelligence and Self Defence Capacity were Totally Compromised by Arrogance and Dishonesty.
  8. The Set-Up Conditions needed:
    1. Reliance on the Equity Lawyer to use the Trial Fraud to get Proof Sets for the Unfitness Case
    2. Trial Misconduct Findings in the Defamation Trial Fraud Appeal Judgment in the case of Polish Claimant Mr Serafin v Polish Editor Mr Malkiewicz
    3. Profession Press Publicity for the Trial Misconduct Findings in an article by Journalist Mr Joshua Rozenberg on the Law Society Gazette
    4. Repeat Protection Breach Contempt Fraud and Trial Listing Fraud
    5. Conflict Qualification Fraud to get the Trial Allocation Fraud to Justice Mr Jay
    6. Trial Bundle Omission Frauds by the State Lawyers of Relevant Evidence created between June and November 2020
    7. Forgery and Perjury Allegation Frauds by the State Advocate against the Receipt Stamps given by the Sussex Crown Prosecutors when acting as Receiving Agent of Official Records for the Parliament Session File kept by the Director of Public Prosecutions held on trust for the Prime Minister to give the Crown when needed for Parliament Session Decisions.
    8. Contempt Immunity Frauds by Justice Mr Jay for the State Lawyers and the State Advocate
    9. Use of the Parliament Session File in Parliament for a Misrepresentation Fraud Finding and Contempt Fraud Finding against the State Advocate
    10. Use of the Contempt Fraud Finding for a Contempt Immunity Fraud Finding against Trial Judge Mr Jay

All of it was a Sabotage Fraud against the Remedy Process. The Sabotage Remedy needs a Conspiracy Warning and Remedy Proposal by the Equity Lawyer that gives Trial Judge Mr Jay the choice of creating Damage Mitigation Proof for himself or creating Aggravated Contempt Fraud Proof against himself by failing to do so.

  1. Use the Validity Presumption for the Equity Lawyer to require Rebuttal Proof from the State.
  2. Use the Validity Presumption and Bundle Omission Fraud Allegations by the Equity Lawyer for an Evidence Audit Order against the State.
  3. Use a Polite Request for Audit Assistance by the House of Commons Speaker, Prime Minister, Cabinet and Privy Councillors.
  4. Use the Validity Presumption and Crown Prosecution Service Receipt Stamps on Citizen Papers and the Stamp Forgery Representations by the State Advocate for a Rebuttal Proof Disclosure Order against the State Representatives and State Advocate.
  5. Use the Validity Presumption and Health Fraud Allegations by the Equity Lawyer for a Medical Records production Order against NHS Trusts and Ministry of Health.
  6. Use the Fraud Appeals for a Superior Jurisdiction Protection Admission and Remedy Only Jurisdiction Limit Admission and Contempt Case Reference to the Court of Appeal.
  7. The Case Reference to the Court of Appeal will give Appeal Lord Justices the choice of creating Damage Mitigation Proof for themselves or creating Aggravated Contempt Fraud Proof against themselves.
  8. The Damage Mitigation Proof requires Full Disclosure who in Parliament provided Protection Frauds.
  9. The Remedy Process needs a Settlement Negotiation Meeting between the Equity Lawyer, Cabinet and Prime Minister to decide what to do with the Damage Mitigation Proof or the Aggravated Contempt Fraud Proof.

The Contempt 2020 000286 Trial Directions Order dated 3rd November 2020 evidences the Refusal Decisions against the Remedy Proposals dated 31st October 2020 but omits the Medical Records Production Refusal. The Proposals and Orders dated 3rd and 9th November 2020 are attached.

Equity Lawyer Mr Ellis




Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.