In May 2009 Graeme Delglyn wrote to Chichester District Council agreeing to pay Council Tax what he lawfully owed upon the following conditions:

1. Proof of claim that there existed a lawfully binding, bilateral contract that met the four essential conditions of such a contract.

2. Proof of claim that Graeme: of the Delglyn Family, actually consented, in writing.

3. Proof of claim that Graeme: of the Delglyn Family, was in any way bound by the jurisdiction of Chichester District Council

4. Proof of claim that Graeme: of the Delglyn Family had no lawful remedy in Article 61 of Magna Carta.

The reply from the CDC dated 3 June 2009 ignored every point raised and referred to some accounting errors. During July 2009 a COUNCIL TAX REMINDER NOTICE was received indicating that recovery action would be taken unless prompt payment was made.

On the 4th of August Graeme: of the Delglyn Family wrote back to CDC stating that the CDC had not replied to his original letter within the stipulated 7 day period and that the CDC was in estoppel. Also that no further correspondence should be entered into and that CDC must now address all correspondence to Graeme: of the Delglyn Family rather than the legal fiction MR GRAEME DELGLYN.

On 11 August 2009 CDC resent a copy of their letter dated 3 June 2009 believing …”this now clarifies the situation.”

Further correspondence was entered into between Graeme: of the Delglyn Family and the CDC. As Graeme: of the Delglyn Family served notice to the CDC that the name GRAEME DELGLYN and all derivatives was now in copyright/ Between September 2009 and November 2009 the CDC addressed correspondence to Graeme: of the DELGLYN FAMILY, before flagrantly breaching copyright and reverting to . MR GRAEME DELGLYN thereafter. (notice the DOT in front of the name!)

On 7 April CDC wrote to . MR GRAEME DELGLYN (why the dot preceding MR?) stating that a total of £3451.15 was now payable of which £1641.45 was subject to court proceedings.

On 24 March 2010 a SUMMONS FOR NON-PAYMENT OF COUNCIL TAX was sent to the legal fiction . GRAEME DELGLYN together with a covering letter signed by David Bathurst the Sussex Magistrates’ Courts Committee giving until the hearing on 20 April 2010 to pay or …”the Magistrates will be requested to issue a Liability Order against you.” (Notice the use of the word ‘requested’).

The ‘summons’ issued was without the Royal Seal or a ‘wet’ signature and thus a unlawful (or fraudulent?) document.

Graeme: of the Delglyn Family rebutted this summons delivering it to the Chichester Magistrates Court together with e NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF PAPERWORK. A copy of this document was also delivered by hand to the CDC, together with a SCHEDULE OF FEES. No reply was made by either party.

On 20 April 2010 Graeme of the Delglyn Family together with Raymond of the St Clair Family and six witnesses arrived at the Chichester Magistrates Court to keep an appointment on behalf of the legal fiction MR GRAEME DELGLYN.

On arriving they proceeded to the reception desk to notify their arrival. When asked if one of us was MR GRAEME DELGLYN Raymond: of the St Clair Family stated that he was there as a third party to assist the court in settlement and closure of this account.

The Magistrates did not honour their appointment and the party was kept waiting for half an hour.

When the Magistrates entered the court room to commence proceedings, the Clerk of Court instructed “All rise!” The 6 witnesses remained seated.

When the Magistrates invited the legal fiction MR. GRAEME DELGLYN into the court room, Raymond of the St Clair Family requested that we entered into the room with all our inalienable Common Law rights intact. This request was ignored by the Magistrates and Raymond of the St Clair Family repeated his request. Still no reply so Raymond of the St Clair Family and Graeme: of the Delglyn Family entered the room stating that entry was made “with all our inalienable Common Law rights intact.”

The legal representative of the council, Mrs Robinson, a young and clearly inexperienced lady read through her statement detailing what amounts were unpaid and that correspondence has been returned to the CDC with ‘Return to Sender – No Contract’ written on the envelope. What Mrs Robinson failed to state was that the envelope also had a sticker on the reverse stating “Whistlebowers wanted. Are you fed up with the way your company or organisation treats people then contact us on freedomrebels@gmail.com”

Her oath? Raymond : of the St Clair Family requested a Mrs Robinson for a copy of her oath ….

The Magistrates then turned to ask if Mr. GRAEME DELGLYN was present. Raymond: of the St Clair Family replied stating that he was acting as authorised and duly contracted agent for the legal fiction MR GRAEME DELGLYN in this matter. The Magistrates asked if MR GRAEME DELGLYN was present. Raymond: of the St Clair Family replied that the legal fiction MR GRAEME DELGLYN was present and displayed the Birth Certificate - Raymond: of the St Clair Family then addressed the Magistrates stating:

“Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath. I accept your Oath and I acknowledge it. And I hold you to that Oath, and now we have a binding contract. You are sworn to serve and protect me, and I appointed you to your office, in these affairs, to uphold all my indefeasible Rights, and to protect me from the criminal conversion of the civil statutes of the State of England. Are you prepared to do that, or to recuse yourselves?”

The head Magistrate tried to prevent him from continuing without success and then tried to shout him down. At this point the Clerk of Court suggested they leave the court. Graeme: of the Delglyn Family asked if they were abandoning the court. The clerk of the court said “No”.

After a short break the Magistrates returned and tried to recommence proceedings by trying to establish whether MR GRAEME DELGLYN was present. Raymond: of the St Clair Family held up the legal fiction (birth certificate) and declare that MR GRAEME DELGLYN was indeed present.

The magistrates were non-plussed and looked to the Clerk of Court for guidance. The Clerk of Court threatened to call the police. Raymond: of the St Clair Family instructed one of the witnesses to call the police immediately as the Magistrates were not prepared to prove their oath.

Before the police arrived the Court Security moved to escort Raymond: of the St Clair Family out of the room. They were politely told that they would be liable for Common Law assault if they touched anyone. They understood, moved away and acted in an exemplary manner thereafter.

When the police constables arrived Raymond: of the St Clair Family and Graeme: of the Delglyn Family left the room with them to explain that there was no breach of the peace and that they were merely exercising their lawful right to establish that the Magistrates were indeed what they claimed to be before any discussion could take place. Graeme: of the Delglyn Family explained that in their place of business it was inexcusable for Magistrates not to evidence their qualifications or license. At all times the police constables acted in an exemplary manner and within Common Law.

All parties then entered into the courtroom and the Magistrates once again tried to establish whether MR GRAEME DINNEN was indeed in the court room.

Raymond: of the St Clair Family continued to request whether the Magistrates were recusing themselves. He also pointed out that the Fairness in courts and tribunals (July 2004) stated that courts must “get names and modes of address correct by asking parties how they wished to be addressed” and that repeatedly asking Graeme: of the Delglyn Family if he was MR GRAEME DELGLYN was in breach of their code of practice.

The police asked if Raymond: of the St Clair Family would speak with them privately outside. He agreed.

The Magistrates once again asked if MR GRAEME DELGLYN was present. Graeme: of the Delglyn Family held up the Birth Certificate stating clearly that MR GRAEME DELGLYN was indeed present. As the Magistrates rose to leave the room once again one of the witnesses stood and declared “I can confirm that MR GRAEME DELGLYN is present in the court as can be seen from that piece of paper that has just been shown to you”. The Magistrates then left the room.

For about 10 minutes the Magistrates were out of the room. Graeme: of the Delglyn Family addressed the witnesses explaining that the reason for them running from their oaths was because this mockery was not a properly convebed court. The CDC has merely issued their own Summons (perjury and breach of the Administration of Justice Act), rented a room in a court building to give the illusion of a court room (more deception) and had paid the salaries of the Magistrates and Clerk of Court for the day. It was a Council Tax rubber stamping exercise and was clearly not lawful.

Graeme: of the Delglyn Family also explained to the witnesses that the Magistrates would in any case issue a Liability Order because that is all they know to do. But in fact no Liability Order will be issued, only the threat of one because only courts can issue Liability Orders and this wasn’t by any description or definition a court.

The Magistrates returned and stated that as Mr GRAEME DELGLYN was not present they would issue a Liability Order. They then left the room to execute that.

Graeme: of the Delglyn Family stated that for the record that the Magistrates and Clerk of Court were Public Servants and that he, Graeme: of the Delglyn Family was a Member of the Public and therefore the highest authority in the courtroom AND that the case was dismissed. Graeme: of the Delglyn Family instructed the Clerk of the Court for and on the record to record that. The Clerk of Court replied that he didn’t have to do that. Graeme: of the Delglyn Family explained that there were witnesses.

As the case was dismissed Graeme: of the Delglyn Family and the witnesses departed from the courtroom. As one witness exited, the noticed the Magistrates had returned and were asking if the defendant had abandoned the court. For the defendant to abandon the court, that defendant had to be present in the first place.

By the end of the day the CDC and the Magistrates were guilty of conspiracy to defraud, dereliction of duty, deception, obstruction, perjury, treason and wasting police time.

At no stage did the Magistrates or Clear of the Court take the Birth Certificate to inspect it.

A VIDEO OF THIS UNLAWFUL COURT  FARCE IS TO FOLLOW …