MATRIXFREEDOM MEMBERS NOTICE

FCA PUBLIC NOTICE

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPLE

RESPONDENTS:

  • ALLEDGED JUDGE BAUMGARTEN
  • PIETRO BOFFA
  • NICK CLARK
  • MATTHEW STONE
  • THE DIRECTORS OF THE FCA
  • SIMON GOLDBERG
  • SIMONE MARSHALL
1.

i am a Private Member of MATRIXFREEDOM and have firsthand knowledge of the services offered since the inception of MATRIXFREEDOM.

2.

i have attended multiple webinar presentations hosted by :iain-clifford; stamp, the Chairman and founder of MATRIXFREEDOM.

3.

i have read iain’s ebooks, the Commerce Game, The Roadmap to freedom and Living Privately.

4.

i have reviewed the contents of the MATRIXFREEDOM private members platform.

5.
i say here and should it be necessary i will swear under oath and penalty of perjury that Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP, :iain-clifford: stamp nor any other member of MATRIXFREEDOM purport to or do provide to MATRIXFREEDOM members the regulated services of:
  1. Claims Management.
  2. Debt Counselling.
  3. Debt management. or;
  4. Issue investment financial promotions.
6.

i am a sentient being and creditor to the bankrupt United States of America Incorporated, i am the Holder in Due Course of the credit transmitted into commerce via the artificial person MEMBERS NAME that created BANK payments, loans and mortgages.

7.

As a creditor and beneficiary i have the right to recoup my credit in accordance with House Joint Resolution 192 (HJR 192) of 1933 as described in IRS Publication 1212.

8.

i have signed the MATRIXFREEDOM constitution and have service contracts with iain’s administrative and tax filing service companies.

9.

i am relying on these contracts to facilitate the ongoing recoupment of my abandoned credit and other membership benefits that iain’s companies provide, such as:

  1. Bank Payment Recoupments.
  2. Currency Creation.
  3. Debt securities Recoupment.
  4. Status and Standing correction.
  5. Common Law Private Trust setup.
  6. Independent Nation.
10.

It is public knowledge that The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) operating as a UK Corporation commenced an investigation in 2021 into MATRIXFREEDOM and The Ens Legis Mr IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP.

11.

The FCA's presumes it has jurisdiction to investigate under section 168 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA), which purports to provide that the FCA may appoint investigators to conduct investigations on its behalf where there are circumstances suggesting that an offence under FSMA 2000 or specific provisions of other legislation may have been committed.

12.

In May 2023, the FCA’s made an Ex Parte application to alleged Judge Baumgarten of Southwark Crown Court as a UK Corporation, and stated:

  1. “The investigation is into whether individuals including Mr Stamp and corporate entities are conducting regulated activities country to section 19 and 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).
  2. The activities under investigation relate to claims management, debt counselling and making unauthorised financial promotions to UK consumers”.
  3. “The FCA also consider that misleading statements to consumers have been made country to section 89 of FSMA (para 16-17)”
  4. Mr Stamp has obtained over £1m in connection with the offending from the MF-PMA group of companies.
  5. That Mr Stamp lives a criminal lifestyle.
  6. There is a real risk of dissipation.”
13.

The FCA persuaded Judge Baumgarten of Southwark Crown Court to unlawfully issue Southwark Crown Court Order No 34 2023 on 7th June 2023, the order amongst other things:

  1. Constrains all bank account in the name of the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP.
  2. Sanctioned by warrant the arrest of Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP.
  3. Sanctioned by warrant the search and seizure of property belonging to Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP.
14.
However, on 8th March 2021 the FCA wrote a letter to SENJ Ltd, the principal provider of administrative services to MATRIXFREEDOM members until July 2022 and a corporate member of MATRIXFREEDOM, the FCA letter stated:
  1. “the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) is satisfied that SENJ Limited (“SENJ”) is breaching sections 19 and 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA”)”
  2. SENJ, through the websites at www.mortgagefree.info, www.naturaljustice.info and www.sovereignreserve.info (the “Websites”) is purporting to carry on regulated activities that would require authorisation by the FCA or exemption, namely (i) seeking out and identification of claims or potential claims in relation to financial services or products; (ii) advice and investigation in relation to financial services or product claims; and (iii) debt counselling. As explained in that same correspondence, section 19 of FSMA expressly provides that purporting to carry on regulated activities is a criminal offence. SENJ is not authorised by the FCA to engage in any regulated activities. Therefore, from the information available to us, SENJ is breaching section 19 of FSMA.
15.

The FCA published a warning NOTICE on its website relating to SENJ Ltd on 08.03.2021 and updated the warning NOTICE on 10.07.2023, the warning says:

  1. SENJ Limited (Seychelles) / Mortgagefree / Natural Justice / Sovereign Reserve / Matrix Freedom.
  2. This firm may be providing financial services or products without our authorisation. You should avoid dealing with this firm and beware of potential scams.
  3. Name: SENJ Limited (Seychelles) / Mortgagefree / Natural Justice / Sovereign Reserve / Matrix Freedom Address: Suite 3, Global Village, Jivan’s Complex, Mont Fleuri, Mahe, SEYCHELLES Telephone: 01372610073, 02039837668, 02039838186. Email: admin@mortgagefree.info, support@naturaljustice.info, support@sovereignreserve.info, iain.clifford@mtrxf.org, Website: www.mortgagefree.info, www.naturaljustice.info, www.sovereignreserve.info, mortgage-free.info, natural-justice.info, sovereign-reserve.info, matrixfreedom.life
16.
SENJ Ltd is independent of :iain-clifford: stamp and traded as Mortgagefree, Natural Justice and Sovereign Reserve.
17.

Neither Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP or :iain-clifford: stamp held any shares in or acted as a director of SENJ Ltd.

18.
SENJ Ltd responded to the FCA letter in March 2021 requiring the FCA to provide its evidence that SENJ Ltd was breaching sections 19 and 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA”)”
19.
The FCA never did provide SENJ Ltd with any evidence.
20.

In the Arrest warrant it states that Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP via the brands Mortgagefree, Natural Justice and Sovereign Reserve may be providing:

  1. Claims Management.
  2. Debt Counselling.
  3. Debt management. or;
  4. Issue investment financial promotions.
21.

The brands Mortgagefree, Natural Justice and Sovereign Reserve belonged to SENJ Ltd not Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP or :iain-clifford: stamp.

22.

The FCA’s allegation that SENJ Ltd was breaching sections 19 and 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA”)” via the brands Mortgagefree, Natural Justice and Sovereign Reserve clearly has nothing to do with Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP or :iain-clifford: stamp.

23.

Despite the FCA’s statement made to SENJ Ltd in 2021 that SENJ Ltd was breaching the General Prohibition it now speculates that Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP and MATRIXFREEDOM may be breaching the General Prohibition, which is it?

24.

Despite the statement made by the FCA to SENJ Ltd and the alleged FCA investigation into MATRIXFREEDOM and Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP starting in 2021 the FCA has brought no evidence or charges Against Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP.

25.

:iain-clifford: stamp is a sentient man and the Authorised Representative of IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP the artificial person.

26.
Via a NOTICE served on the same Respondents to this NOTICE by :iain-clifford: stamp on 31st March 2024, iain says:
27.

:iain-clifford: stamp is the sole shareholder in IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP LTD 15132951, IAIN STAMP LTD, I C STAMP LTD 15133342, I STAMP LTD 5132822 and hold Copyright and Trademark over the name IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP and all derivatives of the name.

28.

Canon 3228 (vi): :iain-clifford: stamp is not “corporate property or a thing” and Southwark Crown Court is not and was not an elected as the “Custodian” under a constructive trust known as Southwark Crown Court Order 34.

29.

iain-clifford: stamp has corrected his status with the King, Prime Minister and Secretary of State via a Notice of Understanding Intent and Claim of Right in May 2023.

30.

:iain-clifford: stamp has corrected his status in accordance with Cestui Que Vie Act 1707 with the UK Coroner, :iain-clifford: stamp has returned from the sea, reclaimed his dominion rights and estate and is not dead.

31.

:iain-clifford: stamp is a Secured Party and Creditor having filed a Uniform Commercial Code One (UCC1) lien in twenty, twenty three over the IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP Cestui Que Vie trust with reference number NH 43 80 40 D.

32.

:iain-clifford: stamp has sworn an Oath to the Barons that invoked Magna Carta Article 61 in two thousand and one, :iain-clifford: stamp has lawful excuse to distress the Crown and to comply with any Acts that allegedly received Royal Assent since 2001 is an Act of Treason.

33.

By complying with The Financial Services and markets Act 2000 or The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 :iain-clifford: stamp would be committing treason.

34.

:iain-clifford: stamp rebutted the 12 Presumptions of the private Bar Guild within his Notice of Understanding Intent and Claim of Right served on the King and Prime Minister in May twenty , twenty three:

  1. 1. Public Record
  2. 2. Public Service
  3. 3. Public Oath
  4. 4. Immunity
  5. 5. Summons
  6. 6. Custody
  7. 7. Court of Guardians
  8. 8. Court of Trustees
  9. 9. Government as Executor/Beneficiary
  10. 10. Agent and Agency
  11. 11. Incompetence
  12. 12. Guilt
35.

:iain-clifford: stamp has the right to justice under the Magna Carta Articles 39 and 40.

  1. “No free man shall be seized, imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, exiled or ruined in any way, nor in any way proceeded against, except by the lawful judgement of his peers and the law of the land”.
  2. “To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice.”
36.

:iain-clifford: stamp did not consent to the Ex Parte proceedings that persuaded alleged Judge Baumgarten to issue Southwark Crown Court Order 34, :iain-clifford: stamp was not afforded his inalienable rights to rebut the 12 Bar Guild presumptions.

37.

Due to the unlawful Ex Parte presentment made by the FCA and alleged Judge Baumgarten’s unlawful acceptance to proceed with the matter in :iain-clifford: stamp’s absence, :iain-clifford: stamp was excluded from his unalienable right to reject the contract offered known as Southwark Crown Court Order 34.

38.
:iain-clifford: stamp did not, and will not accept or consent to Southwark Crown Court Order 34.
39.

:iain-clifford: stamp was not summoned or invited to attend the Ex Parte hearing as the FCA knew that the witness statement presented by Pietro Boffa lacked fact and substance and provided no evidence that supported the FCA’s speculations that MATRIXFREEDOM or the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP had been or were conducting regulated activities country to section 19 and 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).

40.

Canon 3228 (v)

  1. The Presumption of Summons. If :iain-clifford: stamp had been summoned to the proceedings that took place on 7th June 2023, :iain-clifford: stamp would have rejected the offer of summons via an Abatement.
  2. By continuing the proceedings Judge Baumgarten violated :iain-clifford: stamp’s inalienable rights as :iain-clifford: stamp was unable to rebut the Bar Guild presumption of Summons or present an Abatement.
41.
Canon 3228
  1. (i): The Presumption of Public Record in any matter brought before a lower Roman Court is a matter for the public record, when in fact it is presumed by the Private Bar Guild as private business.
42.
Via a NOTICE served on the same Respondents to this NOTICE by :iain-clifford: stamp on 31st March 2024:
  1. :iain-clifford: stamp states he would not have recognise/d the Courts presumed jurisdiction.
  2. :iain-clifford: stamp states that he requires that matter to become a matter of Public Record and does not consent to the matter being treated as Private Bar Guid business.
43.
Canon 3228 (ii), (iii) and (iv):
  1. The Presumptions of Public Service; Oath and Immunity.
44.
Southwark Crown Court Order Number 34 is ultra virus due to:
  1. lack of Southwark Crown Court jurisdiction.
  2. the proceedings should have taken place on the Public Record.
45.
Judge Baumgarten, as a member of the Private Bar Guild was acting in the capacity of “a public official” and swore a solemn public oath and remained bound by that oath and, therefore, bound to serve honestly, impartially, and fairly as dictated by his oath.
46.
Judge Baumgarten violated his public service Oath and has no judicial Immunity.
47.

By handing down Southwark Crown Court Order Number 34, Judge Baumgarten breached his public oath to :iain-clifford: stamp and by upholding his Bar Guild oath there was a obvious conflict of interest.

48.

Judge Baumgarten was acting as an agent for the Crown Corporation, a nameless, faceless corporation and is wholly and personally responsible for his actions on behalf of the corporation as established within the Nuremberg Code. All actions incurring any degree of injury will incur Notice of Injury, including a severe financial penalty.

49.
Judge Baumgarten cannot stand under his Bar Guild Oath as it is a presumption and, by definition, has no standing or merit in presentable or material fact.
50.

MATRIXFREEDOM is a Private Members Association (PMA) and the neither Southwark Crown Court of the FCA have any jurisdiction over members of the PMA.

51.
Following my review of the website www.matrixfreedomreview.com, I have also reviewed the White Rabbit Trust Facebook page, YouTube account, www.empowerthepeople.earth, and numerous other websites created by Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall.
52.

The FCA apparently employs Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall to undermine iain's reputation.

53.
The FCA appears to use MATRIXFREEDOM members' contact data unlawfully obtained by Simone Marshall and Simon Goldberg to harass MATRIXFREEDOM members.
54.
Simon Goldberg and Simone Marchall appear to have immunity against prosecution following the strike out of iain's libel case against Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall filed at the King's Bench in 2023.
55.

Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall violate iain’s Trademark over the name IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP and all derivatives of the name via their libellous media publications.

56.

Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall have caused reputational damage via their libellous media publications to Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP and :iain-clifford: stamp.

57.

Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall appear to have conspired with and aided and abetted the FCA in the FCA's trespass against :iain-clifford: stamp and the FCA's tortious interference into the contracts i hold with iain's administrative service companies.

i’s REQUIREMENTS

58.

i require Judge Baumgarten to immediately rescind Southwark Crown Court Order Number 34 as it is unlawful, and it tortiously interferes in i’s contract of membership of MATRIXFREEDOM and the contracts i hold with iain’s administrative and tax filing service companies.

59.

i require Judge Baumgarten to immediately rescind Southwark Crown Court Order Number 34 and remove all constraint orders over Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP via Southwark Crown Court Order 34 is unlawful and ultra virus, due to:

  1. :iain-clifford: stamp has jurisdiction over the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP and has claimed the name via IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP Ltd.
  2. :iain-clifford: stamp rebuttal of the 12 Bar Guild Presumptions in May 2023.
  3. :iain-clifford: stamp sworn Oath to the Barons under Magna Carta Article 61 and iain will not commit treason by complying with any Act or Statute.
  4. Neither Southwark Crown Court nor the FCA has jurisdiction over :iain-clifford: stamp.
  5. The proceedings that took place on June 7th at Southwark Crown Court that culminated in Southwark Crown Court Order 34 were unlawful as :iain-clifford: stamp was denied his unalienable rights and the proceedings should have taken place on the Public Record.
  6. Alleged Judge Baumgarten continued with the proceedings in direct conflict to his Public Oath and moved the matter in the Private business of the BAR and upheld his BAR Guild Oath that conflicts alleged Judge Baumgarten, had :iain-clifford: stamp had been invited to the Ex Parte hearing :iain-clifford: stamp would have recused Alleged Judge Baumgarten.
60.
i require the FCA to immediately cease its unlawful investigation into Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP and MATRIXFREEDOM and return :iain-clifford: stamp property and remove the restrictions over the bank account in the name of Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP.
61.
i immediately require all warning notices removed from the FCA’s website that relate to all companies that Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP acts as shareholder.
62.
i require Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall to immediately takedown all media publications that review or discuss the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP (and all derivatives of the name) MATRIXFREEDOM and all derivatives of the name.
63.

i require Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall to immediately cease their apparent conspiracy with the FCA to trespass against the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP (and all derivatives of the name) MATRIXFREEDOM and all derivatives of the name.

64.

Should alleged Judge Baumgarten fail to immediately rescind Southwark Crown Court Order number 34, i will put this matter on the Public record and join together with other members of MATRIXFREEDOM to convene a Common Law Court as described in schedule one of this NOTICE and put alleged Judge Baumgarten on trial to prove his innocence for the crimes of trespass and harm caused against :iain-clifford: stamp and its obvious tortious interference into my contracts with MATRIXFREEDOM and iain’s service companies.

65.

Should the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone fail to immediately cease its unlawful investigation and or lay charges against Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP or take any other action that damages my prospects as a member of MATRIXFREEDOM, i will convene a Common Law Court as described in schedule one of this NOTICE and put the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone on trial to prove their innocence for the crimes of trespass and harm caused against :iain-clifford: stamp and its obvious tortious interference into my contracts with MATRIXFREEDOM and iain’s service companies.

66.

Should Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall fail to immediately takedown all media publications that review or discuss the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP (and all derivatives of the name) MATRIXFREEDOM and all derivatives of the name and fail to immediately cease their apparent conspiracy with the FCA to trespass against the Ens Legis IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP (and all derivatives of the name) MATRIXFREEDOM and all derivatives of the name, i will put this matter on the Public record and join together with other members of MATRIXFREEDOM to convene a Common Law Court as described in schedule one of this NOTICE and put alleged Judge Baumgarten on trial to prove his innocence for the crimes of trespass and harm caused against :iain-clifford: stamp and its obvious tortious interference into my contracts with MATRIXFREEDOM and iain’s service companies.

67.

Should alleged Judge Baumgarten not take part in a Common Law Court process, alleged Judge Baumgarten, by tacit acquiescence, has failed to prove his innocence and will be duly convicted of the crimes of trespass and harm caused against :iain-clifford: stamp and its obvious tortious interference into my contracts with MATRIXFREEDOM and iain’s service companies.

68.

Should the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone not take part in a Common Law Court process, the directors of the FCA, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone, by tacit acquiescence, have failed to prove their innocence and will be duly convicted of the crimes of trespass and harm caused against :iain-clifford: stamp and its obvious tortious interference into my contracts with MATRIXFREEDOM and iain’s service companies.

69.

Should Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall not take part in a Common Law Court process, Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall by tacit acquiescence, have failed to prove their innocence and will be duly convicted of the crimes of libel, trespass and harm caused against :iain-clifford: stamp and its obvious tortious interference into my contracts with MATRIXFREEDOM and iain’s service companies.

70.

Should alleged Judge Baumgarten not take part in a Common Law Court process i will by way of restitution, file a Commercial Lien of £10,000,000 listed separately against alleged Judge Baumgarten. The lien secured against alleged Judge Baumgarten’s Public and Private Estate via a Uniform Commercial Code (UCC1) listing.

71.

Should the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone not take part in a Common Law Court process i will by way of restitution, file a Commercial Lien of £10,000,000 listed separately against the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone. The lien secured against the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone Public and Private Estate via a Uniform Commercial Code (UCC1) listing.

72.
Should Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall not take part in a Common Law Court process i will by way of restitution, file a Commercial Lien of £10,000,000 listed separately against Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall. The lien secured against Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall Public and Private Estate via a Uniform Commercial Code (UCC1) listing.
73.
Should alleged Judge Baumgarten not satisfy the £10,000,000 Commercial Lien by transferring physical Gold or Silver to an account of i's choosing i will employ the US Secretary of the Treasury and IRS to satisfy the £10,000,000 Commercial Lien by collecting against the alleged Judge Baumgarten’s Public and Private Estate which may bankrupt the Judge Baumgarten’s Public Estate.
74.

Should the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone not satisfy the £10,000,000 Commercial Lien by transferring physical Gold or Silver to an account of i's choosing and make a Public Apology to i with full admittance of the crimes of trespass and human trafficking, i will employ the US Secretary of the Treasury and IRS to satisfy the £10,000,000 Commercial Lien by collecting against the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone Public and Private Estate which may bankrupt the directors of the FCA, Pietro Boffa, Nick Clark, Matthew Stone Public Estates.

75.

Should Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall not satisfy the £10,000,000 Commercial Lien by transferring physical Gold or Silver to an account of i's choosing i will employ the US Secretary of the Treasury and IRS to satisfy the £10,000,000 Commercial Lien by collecting against Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall’s Public and Private Estate which may bankrupt Simon Goldberg and Simone Marshall’s Public Estate.

Schedule One

Common Law Court Process

Step One

Compiling the Case.

A Statement of Claim must be produced by those bringing a case, known as the Plaintiffs. Their Statement sets out in point form the basic facts of the dispute, the wrong being alleged, and the relief or remedy being sought. Next, the Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim must be accompanied by supporting evidence: documents and testimonies proving their case beyond any reasonable doubt. This evidence must be duly sworn by those not party to the dispute in the form of witnessed statements; and it must consist of the original documents themselves, and not copies. As well, anyone whose testimony is used in this body of evidence must be willing to come into Court to testify and affirm their own statement.

Step Two 

Seeking the Remedy of a Common Law Court:

Filing a Notice of Claim of Right After gathering his case, a Plaintiff must then seek the aid of a Common Law Court and its officers. Such a Court can be brought into being by publishing a Notice of Claim of Right (see Appendix B, “Court Documents”), which is a public declaration calling for the assistance of the community in the asserting of the Plaintiff’s right under Natural Justice to have his case heard through the Common Law, by way of a jury of his neighbors and peers. Such a Notice can be published in local newspapers or simply notarized and posted in a prominent public location, like a town hall or library.

Step Three

Forming a Common Law Court.

Within 24 hours of the issuing of such a Notice of Claim of Right, any twelve citizens of a community can constitute themselves as a Common Law Court and its jury, and must then appoint the following Court Officers from their ranks: – a Court Adjudicator, to advise and oversee the Court – a Public or Citizen Prosecutor to conduct the case; this person is normally the Plaintiff himself or someone he authorizes to advise but not represent him – a Defense Counsel to advise but not represent the accused – a Court Sheriff, either elected from the community or delegated from among existing peace officers – Bailiffs, a Court Registrar and a Court Reporter It is assumed that people with knowledge of the Common Law and legal procedure will act in these capacities. And, as mentioned, a Common Law Magistrate or Justice of the Peace may also initiate this formation of a Common Law Court. 

Step Four

Swearing in and Convening the Jury and Court Officers:

Oaths of Office.

Upon the appointment of these Court Officers, the Adjudicator (a Justice of the Peace or a comparable Magistrate) will formally convene the Court by taking and administering the following Oath of Common Law Court Office to all of the Court officers: I (name) will faithfully perform my duties as an officer of this Common Law Court according to the principles of Natural Justice and Due Process, acting at all times with integrity, honesty and lawfulness. I recognize that if I fail to consistently abide by this Oath I can and will be removed from my Office. I make this public Oath freely, without coercion or ulterior motive, and without any mental reservation. After taking this oath, the Jury members, Court Counselors, Sheriffs, Bailiffs and Reporter will then convene and receive instructions from the Adjudicator concerning the case. The Adjudicator is not a presiding Judge or Magistrate but an advisor to the Court, and has no power to influence, direct or halt the actions or the decisions of the Jury or other Court officers, except in the case of a gross miscarriage of justice or negligence on the part of other Court officers. Thus, the Court is self-regulating and dependent on the mutual respect and governance of all the Court officers and the Jury. 

Step Five

Pre-Trial Conference.

The Adjudicator brings together both parties in a pre-trial conference in an attempt to settle the case prior to a trial. If a settlement is not achieved, both parties must then engage in a mandatory Examination of Discovery, in which the evidence and counter-evidence and statements of both sides will be presented. After a period of not more than one week, this pre-trial conference will conclude and the trial will commence.

Step Six

Issuing of Public Summonses.

No person or agency may be lawfully summoned into Common Law Court without first  receiving a complete set of charges being brought against them and a formal Notice to Appear, or Writ of Public Summons. Such a Summons outlines the exact time, date and address when and where the trial will commence. 

The Public Summons is applied for by the Plaintiff through the Court Registrar. The Summons will be issued under the signature of the Court Adjudicator and delivered to the Defendant by the Court Sheriff within 24 hours of its filing in the Court Registry by the Plaintiff. The Sheriff must personally serve the Defendant, or post the Summons in a public place and record the posting if the Defendant avoids service. The Defendant has seven days to appear in Court from the date of service.

Step Seven

The Trial Commences: Opening Arguments.

After an introduction by the Adjudicator, the trial commences with opening arguments by first the Plaintiff or Prosecutor, and then the Defendant. The Adjudicator and both Counselors will then have the chance to question either parties for clarification, and to make motions to the Court if it is apparent that the proceedings can be expedited. Note: Step Seven can still occur even if one side, usually the Defendant, is not present in Court and refuses to participate. Such a trial, being conducted “in absentia”, remains a legitimate legal procedure once the Defendant is given every opportunity to appear and respond to the charges and evidence against him. An In absentia trial will commence with the Plaintiff presenting his opening argument followed by his central case. The Court-appointed Defense Counsel will then be given the chance to argue on behalf of the absent Defendant, if that is the wish of the latter. It is often the case that a non-response or non-appearance by the Defendant can result in the Adjudicator advising the Jury to declare a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff, on the grounds that the Defendant has tacitly agreed with the case against himself by not disputing the evidence or charges, and by making no attempt to appear and defend his own good name in public.  

Step Eight 

The Main Proceedings.

Assuming the proceedings are not being conducted in absentia and the Defendant is present, the main proceedings of the trial then commence with the Plaintiff’s presentation of the details of his evidence and argument against the Defendant, who can then respond. The Plaintiff may be assisted by the Citizen Prosecutor. After his presentation, the Plaintiff is then cross-examined by the Defendant or his advising Counsel. Following cross-examination, the Defendant presents his case, with or without his advising Counselor, and in turn is cross-examined by the Plaintiff or the Citizen Prosecutor.

Step Nine

Closing Summaries and Arguments to the Jury and final advice by the Adjudicator After the main proceedings, the Adjudicator has the chance to further question both parties in order to give final advice to the Jury. The Plaintiff and then the Defendant then have the right to give their closing summary and argument to the Court. The Adjudicator closes with any final comments to the Jury.

Step Ten

The Jury retires to deliberate.

The Court is held in recess while the twelve citizen jury members retire to come to a unanimous verdict and a sentence, based on their appraisal of all the evidence. There is no time restriction on their deliberations, and during that time, they are not allowed contact with anyone save the Court Bailiff, who is their guard and escort. The Jury’s verdict and sentence must be consensual, non-coerced, and unanimous.

Step Eleven 

The Jury issues its unanimous verdict and sentence The Court is reconvened after the Jury has come to a verdict. If the jurors are not in complete unanimity concerning the verdict, the defendant is automatically declared to be innocent. The Jury spokesman, chosen from among them by a vote, announces the verdict to the Court, and based on that verdict, the final sentence is also declared by the Jury.

Step Twelve 

The Court adjourns and the Sentence is enforced Following the announcement of the Verdict and Sentence, the Adjudicator either frees the Defendant or affirms and authorizes the decision of the Jury in the name of the community and its Court, and instructs the Sheriff to enforce that sentence. The Adjudicator then dismisses the Jury and formally concludes the trial proceedings, and the Court is concluded. The entire record of the Court proceedings is a public document, accessible to anyone, and can in no way be withheld, altered or compromised by the Adjudicator or any other party.

I want to protect my membership benefits and register my interest in taking action against the FCA, Simon Goldberg and Others