Justice Musikanth made a decision in relation to Kelly v Fiander 2024 WASC 275. We (the Royal we) presented/appeared as a living woman. He accepted that the appellant describes herself as a ‘living, breathing, sentient’ woman. He did not accept that Dawn Michelle was a living woman and proceeded in PERSONAM, the corporatisation of the living, a trespass on the legal name. An act of personage and barratry, bondage and debt slavery.
FUN FACT: This matter was proceeded as if it were a criminal trial and yet listed as civil, see the transcript cover page.
Justice Musikanth completely disregarded my oral submission and in his decision he dismissed my argument as pseudo-law gobbledygook. I have shared an excerpt of the transcript and I invite you to read Justice Musikanth’s decision.
I was put on a 45 minute time limit, marginalised and rushed. The disrespect and distain from Justice Musikanth was abhorrent. Repugnant to fair and equitable treatment of a self-litigant – right of audience in support of Magistrate Young who was practising law from the bench. Magistrate Young directed Officer Fiander not to answer questions put to him in cross examination essentially shutting down my defence. On the face of it, he had already made his decision.
We have arrived at the conclusion that the courts can only rule on statute law compliance breaches. Any arguments presented that challenges the narrative of corporate government is shut down and the self-litigant is labelled pseudo law supporter, an OPCA litigant and a Sovereign Citizen even if they refute that assumption.
The real pseudolaw is perhaps the categorising of a civil breach of statute into a criminal classification, the denial of the constitution and the entrapment of personage and barratry. Deception is afoot, corporate gaslighting at an epic scale.
Criminal is defined as an individual v the state. An individual is prosecuted without a verified victim. The states coffers cannot be the injured victim.
Civil is defined as an individual v an individual (or corporation) seeking compensation and damages.
We cannot share my entire transcript at this point in time as we intend to appeal in the Supreme Court of Appeals.
It was a very proud moment in the Supreme Court when the living woman, Dawn-Michelle held up the 1901 federal land flag in court and educated the Justice that this was not a sovereign citizen banner but the flag our ANZAC fought and died under.
Excerpt of Dawn’s Oral Submission
Dawn Michelle Kelly and Owain Fiander Transcript Pages 19 – 23
Evidence presented at trial stating Owain Fiander labelled the accused as a sovereign citizen, being the Suzuki Grand Vitara displaying sovereign citizen banners, being the 1901 federal land flag, the flag our Anzacs fought under, which is this flag here. This is what he’s calling – this is what police and governments call a sovereign citizen banner, and it is not.
Okay, lawful authority citations. We’ve got the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act. Anyway, I’m not going to go into that too much here. Actually what I will say that relates to this, the corporatised governments of Western Australia, being the Magistrates Court and the Supreme Court, have erred in judgement and opinion, and as a consequence of perpetuating a damning culture of implicit bias, discrimination, and prejudicial attitudes, in this case specifically, Vandongen Js judgment in Kelly v Fiander 187, wrongly labelled myself as a pseudo-law devotee.
That then created an avenue for Young M to place an estoppel on my defence case, resulting in a perversion and miscarriage of justice. This widespread and dangerous level has far-reaching consequences in how groups of people are perceived. My personal treatment by police, judges and magistrates, government employees and society support this culture of discrimination and implicit bias vacuum, a systemic structural bias against certain groups resulting in trespass of my lawful rights.
It would appear that justice has been intentionally denied in a strategic unified approach of the political party legislators, a private militarised police force militia and corporatised judiciary to maintain their position of power and control over we the people of the Commonwealth. Where is the separation of power and accountability?
This erroneous blanket of labelling sovereign citizen is a strategy used to target individuals as domestic terrorists and suppress common law. ASIO uses the term sovereign citizen to clarify a group of people, just as Owain Fiander did, and police do in general. The website states:
A growing number of individuals and groups no longer fit into the right-wing spectrum rather they are motivated by fear of societal collapse and social economic grievances of conspiracy. As we predicted when we updated our language protests in Australia and overseas are being driven by anti-vaccination agendas conspiracy theories and anti-government sovereign citizen’s belief.
In trial Owain Fiander described the red 1901 federal land flag, the flag our Anzacs fought and died under. The very same flag that I had displayed on my car at the time of arrest as a sovereign citizen banner. On page 47 of the transcript we asked Owain Fiander: So in your incident report you’re saying that we are a sovereign citizen?—That the Suzuki Vitara station wagon displaying sovereign citizen banners on the windows.
Can you explain what a sovereign citizen banner is? Was this his opinion alone or is this a systemic indoctrination of bias used to identify alleged criminals without a crime ever being committed? A crime cannot exist without a victim. In trial, Owain Fiander did not produce a victim. The mere breach of a statute does not constitute a crime. The prosecution resulted in a conviction forced upon the decedent legal name, a trespass on the Dawn Michelle Kelly estate named in trust having real life-damaging consequences to the living woman forced into incorporation of the legal name by deceit.
The enforcement of corporate government breaches of clauses of a contract, being the act, forced upon us can only apply to the word person written in the act. The joinder of the legal name being the living breathing woman or man in deceit. Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators which we talked about earlier.
Pseudo-law. Gas lighting by corporate judiciary and the creation of the pseudo-law concept jurisdiction is perhaps the real crime. As mentioned earlier, there can be no crime without a victim. I think I’ve said that a lot. The State cannot be the victim. The State is hiding the jurisdiction truth that traffic breaches of statute without a victim is not criminal, it is in fact civil jurisdiction. Magistrate Young said:
Stop, stop. I’m making a comment here, please. The Supreme Court concerning yourself, make some comments.
Sorry, I’m trying to imitate his accent:
What was described by His Honour as pseudo-law that is described by His Honour correctly as well. I can’t recall the word, but nonsense. We will probably cover it. I’m bound by that. I agree with that. We are not going to get into those issues today.
The misguided, bigoted justice and the magistrate, in this case, quote Glenn Cash’s paper, delivered by the Queensland Magistrate’s State Conference, “A kind of magic, the origins of pseudo-law.”
The learned magistrate, or justice, Glen Cash, who should know better, states that Christian identity is a religious ideology popular in extreme right-wing circles. A prejudicial bias. An abuse of position and power. An opinion only, blanketly citing discrimination against Christians.
Christianity is the foundation of English law in this country. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 preamble is the founding document of our nation humbly relies on the blessings of Almighty God. Authorised King James Version Bible, a royal-assented law book used in all courts to swear an oath to God. Why is a judge labelling Christians as right-wing sovereign citizens?
The Supreme Court is an ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as so stated in the Supreme Court Act of 1935, part 3, Jurisdiction and Law Division 1, Jurisdiction section 16, General Jurisdiction Subsection 1A, the Supreme Court Ordinance, 1861. The Supreme Court Ordinance Act of 1861, that the said Supreme Court shall be a court of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, God, grantor of dominion, Genesis, authorised King James Bible, and God said:
Let us make man in our image after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the fowl of the air, and the cattle, and over all of the earth, and over every creeping living thing upon the earth. For now, for though the law, I am dead to the law, I might live unto God.
That’s Galatians 2, chapter 2, verse 19. So it says in the point 1 of our appeal, a divine special appearancementioned in the transcript, the living woman.
MUSIKANTH J: Madam Appellant, it is time now. I will give you another two minutes.
KELLY, MS: Okay. So essentially, your Honour, I really wanted to highlight the error in judgement that Vandongen J referred to, which has harming and damning consequences. So I would like to explore the equal opportunity. Glen Cash’s paper outlines judicial gatekeeping management strategy used to control the narrative of an erroneously labelled pseudo-legal commercial argument, OPCA self-litigants, non-bar member lawyers who have been discriminated against by corrupted judiciary pushing their own agenda, such as putting time limits on evidence or appeals, contrary to the Equal Opportunity Act of 1984, gender discrimination.
A woman – section four of the Equal Opportunities Act, a woman is defined as a member of the female sex irrespective of age, a man is a member of the male sex irrespective of age. Interpretations Act, section five, defines a person as a company, an association or body of persons.
We have first-hand experience of religious discrimination by magistrates and justices recycling Glen Cash’s assortment of bias to maintain their own seat of power and control over the court system. We have the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion as per the human rights website.
The acts – so who is the man that – this is an interesting – actually you can’t stop me now. The Glen Cash relies heavily upon in his “A kind of magic” speech, according to ResearchGate.net slash profile slash Donald Netolowski. Donald Netolowski states that he’s a microbiologist masquerading as a lawyer. He’s not interested in law, legal theory, etcetera.
He measures court processes and activities. He states that he investigates anti-authority, false law, pseudo-phenomenal. Pseudo, a prefix that – it’s pretend or not real. Glen Cash – in Glen Cash’s conclusion he quotes Netolowski, the microbiologist who uses works like potential host, disease of ideas, hybridisation. I mean, how ludicrous.
You guys are relying on this guy who’s a pseudo-lawyer, who writes about pseudo-law and you’re labelling me as an OPCA nutjob essentially. That’s my experience. So the elitist attitude towards self-litigants by the unlawful shutting down of defence the not – sort of nonsense you’re getting into about pseudo-identities or whatever else you’re going on about is surely utterly irrelevant to this charge. So this is what Young said. So essentially – – –
MUSIKANTH J: All right. Madam Appellant, I think we’ve done – it’s time.
Please note that this decision does not effect Kelly v Fiander 2023 WASC 187.
Magistrates and Judges cannot dismiss your appearance. This decision was not over-ruled. Kelly v Fiander 187 ruling means that Magistrates cannot say that you did not appear if you don’t answer to the legal name. Don’t let Magistrates gaslight you, stand your ground!
https://dawnkelly.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Kelly-v-Fiander-2024-WASC-275.pdf
Recent Comments