Protest closes courtroom
Published on 30/07/2024, NZ time
Protesters gather outside the Hawera District Court.
LATEST: The courtroom where about 80 people were this morning protesting the arrest of a Hawera woman has been cleared.
The protesters have moved outside the courtroom itself but are still refusing to leave the premises.
The court session has resumed, but the public gallery is still closed.
Kiri Campbell has been charged with four counts of using a document to gain a pecuniary advantage.
She was due to appear in the Hawera District Court this morning but her supporters turned out in force and caused the shut down of the courtroom.
A Taranaki Daily News reporter in the court said the media had been asked to leave for their own safety.
One man in the court was waving the Maori flag of the United Tribes and would not stop when asked, saying: “I do not consent to what you say, sir,” whenever approached by a court officer.
The judge refused to begin proceedings until the flag was removed.
Campbell’s plight has gained traction over the last few days on social media and has been associated with the Maori sovereignty movement.
She was an administrator of The One People Aotearoa-New Zealand Facebook page, which is linked to a “sister site” called Mortgage Terminators.
- © Fairfax NZ News
_____________________________________________________________________________
Protesters shut down court
A group of 200 protesters forced the Hawera District Court to abandon proceedings this morning.
Judge Allan Roberts was to hear several cases as part of a standard police list day, but supporters of Kiri Campbell, who was due to appear on charges of using a document for pecuniary advantage, forced him to remain in his chambers.
The public gallery was packed with people, some even having to sit on the floor. One protester was waving a flag and Judge Roberts, through police, requested the flag be removed but the protester refused.
About six police and court security officers entered the courtroom at 10.15am to ask the protester to remove the flag a final time but he refused, and court officers including media were escorted from the courtroom.
Campbell could be heard in the cells screaming, prompting supporters to call out to her.
Campbell was taken from the courthouse in a police vehicle and the protesters held an impromptu hui outside the court.
- WANGANUI CHRONICLE
The judge can not proceed as long as the sovereign flag it being held it court!!! He HAS NO jurisdiction. THE PEOPLE in the court can have the judge arrested as long as the sovereign flag is flown. People of New Zealand keep the flag flying!!!!!
Quoting from those articles:
Taranaki Daily News
“A Taranaki Daily News reporter in the court said the media had been asked to leave for their own safety.”
Wanganui Chronicle
“About six police and court security officers entered the courtroom at 10.15am to ask the protestor to remove the flag a final time but he refused, and court officers including media were escorted from the courtroom.”
Is anyone surprised that the media were escorted away, so they could not speak with the protestors to get a broader understanding of what’s going on?
Is anyone else outraged by that deliberate manipulation by the purported authorities?
This is too SWEET! WE the PEOPLE are gonna win this one. Kiri we love you so. ALL is ONE=ONE is ALL. 🙂
WPU #150, Tariki, Stratford New Zealand
KEEP IT CIRCULATING!! WHY WAS SHE DETAINED FURTHER WHEN SHE IS NO THREAT TO HERSELF OR THE COMMUNITY AND HOLDS NO FLIGHT THREAT OTHER THAN TO TORTURE AND TREAT HER INHUMANELY IN HOPE SHE WILL BREAK!! WAKE UP SLEEPING GIANTS AND TAKE YOUR PLACE IN HISTORY ON FRIDAY!!
KIRI CAMPBELL: KANGROO COURT IN NZD, HAWERA
Today we attended the Hawera court and witnessed a Kangaroo court in action as representatives of the World Public Union of Taraiki Stratford to support OPPT.
Despite the media being present, they were asked to leave by 4 police agents, soon thereafter another 8 police agents entered the court room. A chilling sound entered the court room as Ms Kiri Campbell’s pleading, begging, screams and bangs could be audibly heard in the public gallery by all present - including the Police agents. Witnesses heard Ms Campbell screaming “Help me…. Help me they’re [the police agents] are beating me”. The public gallery then witnessed family members console her mother and family members who became visibly distressed upon hearing Ms Campbell’s pleas for help.
What the media further failed to report, was the Magistrate was directed by Ms Campbell’s lay representative, Ms Claire Muncaster, to present himself under Common Law. The Magistrate refused to enter the court under the rouse of there being present another flag in the court room… HOWEVER, this does not negate the matters pertinent to the Magistrates actions. Being, ANY Magistrate who is requested under common law to present themselves MUST do so under obligation to honour their oath. FURTHER Upon request from Area Commander Frank Grant as to “what authority do you [Ms Muncaster] had?” to which she rebutted by requested of the crown - directing the police enforcement officer Area Commander Frank Grant, to obtain from the Magistrate evidence of the Magistrates Oath. Under Common Law MUST be presented upon Demand. This was not presented to Ms Muncaster.
NEITHER OF THESE COMMON LAW STATUTES WERE OBSERVED IN THE HAWERA DISTRICT COURT TODAY.
Despite the threatening presence of the police enforce and making statements - inviting people to leave the court to see “what would happen”, they were then APPOINTED as PEACE OFFICERS by Jay a Maori male holding the sovereign flag. This was then supported by the people in the gallery regarding this common law - and the police ceased from enforcing their threats to seek commerce as Policy Enforcement Officers.
AS SUCH under the Magna Carta, Article 61, we (the common people) have the right to arrest a judge who refuses to present himself under oath; and to seize a court where we deem that court to be unlawful. This request was put to the Area Commander and they turned their backs to the gallery and proceeded to converse amongst themselves. Another officer was observed to take photo’s of the persons in the gallery WITHOUT permission.
IF A MAGISTRATE refuses to honour their oath and attestation to the crown as we witnessed by approximately 80 common persons and Sovereigns, they DISHONOUR their OATH and ATTESTATION to the QUEEN to uphold the law of the land, and of course - those who have sought to uphold and preserve the law of the land; and customs; and traditions of that country.
COMMON LAW is to be upheld and is a GREATER law than legislation, policy, process and statutes (Acts), at every matter then you are in breach of the peace yourselves.
AS SUCH ALL CROWN REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTED TREASON AND BREACHED THE PEACE, AND FAILED TO UPHOLD COMMON LAW (NOT COMMERCIAL LAW WHICH THEY EXERCISED).
IN FACT whilst the Magistrate REFUSED to attend to his post, he DIRECTED to the Court Registrar the court be closed for the remainder of the day. HOWEVER, this was another ROUSE as the matter proceeded later in the day in a CLOSED COURT where it is my understanding Ms Campbell was the only person present to represent herself in her matters.
Of further interest, the ministers in cabinet were not available to the public on this day.
IF YOU WERE IN COURT TODAY - PLEASE WRITE A LETTER OF COMPLAINT TO THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LAW SOCIETY AND THE QUEEN!!
Ron what a fantastic update and account of the dishonest ways in which our so called governments and law makers (breakers!) seem to think they are over an above their own laws, they quickly forget who they are suppose to be working for (the people). your sham is now exposed and it is spreading like wildfire. its time to stop these corporations taking control and the slavery of the human race. People power is coming!! our thoughts are with you KIRI. Stay strong you have many behind you!!
pecuniary adj. relating to money. There is no reference to this in the blacks law legal dictionary. It is a old law from England and Wales and Northern Ireland.
Here is a link to the definition of obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception, which is very vague.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obtaining_pecuniary_advantage_by_deception
Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception[1] was formerly a statutory offense in England and Wales and Northern Ireland. However, the offense still subsists in certain other common law jurisdictions[which?] which have copied the English criminal model.
Section 16 was repealed on 15 January 2024 by Schedule 3 to the Fraud Act 2006.
Mens rea
There are two elements to the mens rea of this offence:
1 There must be a deliberate or reckless deception (see Deception (criminal law) and Obtaining property by deception#By any deception)
2 The defendant must be dishonest (see Dishonesty and Obtaining property by deception#Dishonestly)
I think she was not deceiving anyone, she was transparent and open.
It did say in Section 16(2)(b) “Where the pecuniary advantage is the obtaining of an overdraft facility at a bank, it is only necessary to show that the facility was granted, not that the defendant actually used the facility.”
I personally do not think this applies to her, I wish Heather would comment on the charge.