ARM Scotland

Perceived Issues With The Legal System. What do you think?

—

by

admin
in
  1. The Judiciary doesn’t follow due process of law or the rule of law, especially in the lower courts. It focuses on procedures and evidence before it ONLY. Even if this is to the detriment of justice.
    1. Unless it doesn’t suit their cause then the Judge/Sheriff will use other case law or their discretion to make their judgement.
    2. Sheriffs/Judges may choose to respond to a subset of arguments/craves/productions rather than the full list presented at court. This may lead to a skewed judgement (possibly deliberately so) and the prejudice of one party over the other. If one of the parties is a government body then they will most likely be favoured.
    3. Sheriffs/Judges are allowed to use their discretion. This generally favours the authorities and in many cases at the expense of justice. They appear bias towards collecting money for the Government or Government agents at the expense of all others.
  2. The Judicial processes followed by the lower courts is not lawful :–
    1. They don’t allow you to question their processes.
    2. Timescales, especially in Appeals can be extended beyond reason and viewed as being unjust.
    3. Strict adherence to the process does not take into account the doctrine of substance over form and may lead to an unfair judgement. This is especially apparent in the lower courts.
    4. There are many instances where the lower courts don’t even follow their own processes as seen in PCN and Council Tax cases, especially around costs and expenses.
    5. They are relying on technicalities of law to convict. Did you speed – yes, therefore guilty. But if the reason for speeding was to save a life ie that of your unborn child and/or pregnant wife and nobody else was around in the middle of the night, is it fair to convict? The lower courts do not apply reason or equity. They mostly rely on process and legislation.
    6. They don’t allow recordings in the lower court which a breach of the defendants rights to collect evidence thereby prejudicing one side over the other and perverting the course of justice. This also constitutes contempt of court.
  3. The process of relying on previous case law and/or common law precedence, sounds reasonable in that it pools on previous experience and judgements to decide outcomes for the case at hand, however, if these previous judgements were made based on legislation alone then they are bias towards this legislation, thereby not being impartial, fair or just.
    1. Judges/Sheriffs/Lawyers/Solicitors often go against their oath which should bind them to act according to the rule of law. In Scotland this is defined in 4 parts as Common Law, Customs, Institutional Writings and Legislation/Acts/Statutes and is our birth right.
    2. If Governments are allowed to create “law” on their own then they will continue to increase their own powers until the population are under total control or have no other option but to revolt. This so called “law” that they create is actually legislation and nothing more than their opinions giving rise to Acts following Royal Assent. If it was law these documents would be called “Laws” not Acts and would essentially render the courts obsolete.
  4. The separation of power between Parliament/Government and the Judiciary has been eroded resulting in the Judiciary (the Police and almost everyone on the planet) believing that Legislation is law which it isn’t. Law is made in the courts but only through a fair equitable trial in front of a jury.
  5. Politicians, Police and the agencies that regulate them (PSD, PIRC, ICO etc) are all Government departments which results in a conflict of interest, giving rise to potential corruption. They are not impartial, fair or just with little to no penalties for officials who abuse their power rendering them, in reality, unaccountable.
  6. Police do not know the law nor listen to those who cite it. They have been misled by their superiors and further education.
    1. They continually adjudicate on the street. This leads to false accusations, arrests and processing of individuals, unlawfully and illegally.
  7. The “law” can never be completely specific in all instances, although it tries to be in places but generally leaves too much ambiguity that is abused by the Authorities.
    1. Judgements generally come down to opinion, interpretation and subjectivity – all of which are open to abuse. Is it possible to create a law for every human activity, interaction and thought? Should we even try?
    2. These Judgements (arguably most of them) are usually made by Judges/Sheriffs in the lower courts, therefore much of case law is decided by individuals with targeted training rather than common people of the land as stated in legislation – we are all entitled to a trial by jury of our peers.
  8. Legislation, which is taken as law, is extremely complex and is impossible for anyone to know it all intimately, which makes a mockery of the statement “ignorance is no excuse of the law”. Law can be summed up simply by causing no harm, loss or injury.
    1. Legislation is far too complicated for the layman to understand so how can they be expected to abide by it, be ruled by it and argue their points based on it. If a piece of legislation can have multiple different meanings then how do you know which one is correct?
    2. Interpretation of legislation should be possible by those with an average or even below average education (the majority of UK Citizens) ie minimum School leaving age English. Yet, it is ambiguous and difficult to interpret even by qualified legal experts.
  9. Judges, Sheriffs, Solicitors etc are all part of the same BAR Guild which obviously presents a conflict of interest.
  10. Bailiffs/Debt Collectors/Sheriff Officers, Councils, Courts and Police hide behind processes that prevent them from carrying out their lawful job. As we know from the Nuremberg Trials, simply doing your job is not a legal or lawful defense.
  11. The court experience is deliberately designed to be very intimidating with Police and Officers of the Court blindly taking orders from the judge/Sheriff, regardless of whether these orders are legal or lawful.
  12. If a summons or summary warrant is not signed by a named individual and their name is not clearly shown, then it can only be assumed that no living man has signed it and the jurisdiction is corporate commerce. Hence, if no contract exists then there is no cause of action and no case to answer. There is no such thing as an anonymous Public Servant.
  13. Often Judges/Sheriffs make comments in judgements that are misinterpreted by solicitors as the foundation of the case. These may then be relied upon in future cases. This twists the meaning of the judgement and allows for case law to be misrepresented and moulded to suit the arguments. There may be instances where this is intentional in order to influence a decision of the court. This gives rise to the comment – justice can be bought in Scotland.
  14. Courts/Cases often have a pre-determined outcome and look for evidence to support it, tripping and coercing the other party into giving them what they need to conclude their case. This is the adversarial nature of the hearing.
  15. If the court makes an order for immediate execution, but the respondent/defendant wishes to appeal, they only have 14 days to submit it. How then, can you appeal something that comes into immediate effect or requires a complex and/or lengthy response?
  16. The use of portals and digital forms force the applicant to respond in a way that, although may seem to follow procedure, denies them the right to use their own paperwork and language.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *