Servant Of The Light

Version 5 – 6^th May 2013

Part One - Establishing a Substantive Moot of Inherent Power

he  rit

1.     The modern Writ system has passed down from antiquity and still mimics in some respects the old model, described below is the only structure that would support the natural innate inherent power of the individual, integrating all the fragments of the system that have survived the purge of Church and Crown corporations.

2.     The origins of the writ are based within the axioms of the land which are establish through reason and the soul’s innate nature; this was used within Albien for centuries before the invasion of the Roman Catholic Church Corporation.

3.     The history of Britain is founded upon the stories of the Roman Catholic Church corporation, much like the stories of the American Government corporation with the events of 9/11, or the British Crown corporation on the events of the Titanic or 7/7; they spin a web of lies that fail to hold up to any reasoned investigation, yet through the domination of institutions they maintain these inventions. The archaeological sites around Britain demonstrate that in the 6^th century the population of Britain who had for centuries lived in skilfully built stone houses, with under floor heating, tiled roofs and cobbled roads, had almost overnight return to a primitive state of subsistence living, and the corporations suggest a history of the Romans holding Britain as a colony and abandoning it, the indigenous population were ‘SO STUPID’ in comparison to their masters they instantaneously began to live in simple stick and mud dwellings, scratching an existence from the land, losing any knowledge of masonry, plumbing, roofing, metallurgy, or glasswork.

4.     There is evidence to support a different version of events; in 562 a meteor strikes the North Sea transforming society.

5.     This catalyst exposed the frauds of sovereignty, and religion, forcing those who survived the natural disaster to take stock and establish a system founded on equity and community, not sovereignty and religion.

6.     It is this natural prescriptive equity system that will be explained with this essay and those that follow.

7.     The courts, called in some areas moots, were public assemblies of common souls and neighbours. The administrators of the moots did not expend their efforts on creating or codifying as is the practice with positive law (See: The Law, Courts and Jurisdiction). As it was based on a permanent solution through relief not punishment, this meant the victim was the judge of what they felt to be an encroachment; they through the moot sort relief, and the jury of their peers arbitrated their alleged tort.

8.     The axioms of the land are based on simple principles evident to all, universal truths that are unalienable and immutable.

9.     The first principle is ‘you must do all you have agreed to do’; this is the foundation of all agreements whether verbal or written.

10.  The second principle is ‘you cannot encroach upon another living soul’; this is the foundation of all torts in arbitration.

11. The outcome of a dispute turned entirely on the facts of the case, a fact being that which both parties in dispute agree is true, which were usually established through oath-giving within written affidavit.

12. The disputants first swore to their accusations and denials. Each party then called on oath helpers (witnesses to any relevant events, and members of their surety groups in support of their good character) to back up these allegations with written oaths of their own.

13.  The establishment of a natural tortious system hinges upon the writ system and the surety bond. 

14.   A Writ is a ‘Letter of Action’, a written letter of one who is appointed as an administrator of the moot, as an order issued pursuant to relief before the facts (precept) under seal (meaning signed and witnessed) of summons to stand before a jury of your peers to arbitrate the dispute.

15. The accuser, known as the plaintiff (complainer) in modern courts, who believed they had suffered an encroachment, sued (to make petition or appeal to) the moot for a writ of action again the committer or retorter.

16. The writ has the details of both parties if known, the outline of the complaint and the relief sort by the complainer, with a date and time to appear for arbitration by a jury of your peers.

17. The accuser takes the writ and hands it to the party accused, this must be witnessed or a signed acceptance given by the retorter of the encroachment, an encroachment is known as a tort, which meant ‘a wrongful act’; the retorter has three choices:

a.     The retorter can accept the writ and apply the relief demanded, so accepting the tort was committed.

b.     They can accept the writ and defend themselves in the moot to establish the truth in retort.

c.      They can refuse to accept the writ. If the writ is refused the accuser must find themselves a rex, a title which means ‘to put right’, the modern equivalent of a rex is the Sherriff of the court, who is in the modern system the highest authority in the land; anyone the accuser considers capable of successfully enforcing the writ could be the rex.

18. The rex takes the writ to the moot who issued it, the administrator of the court writes a warrant ‘to guarantee as true’ the writ.

19.  If the encroachment was committed by an unknown party, a writ is made and the complainer selects a rex to establish through investigation, if possible, the identity of the retorter, the rex applies the same method of seeking a warrant to guarantee the writs truth.

20.   A Warrant is the extension of a writ, a Warrant is a written letter of one who is appointed as an administrator of the court, directing the doing of an act, addressed to a man or woman capable of doing the act, and affording them protection from damage, detriment or injury sustained by the retorter for doing so, within the constraints of the duty of care each soul has for their neighbour. And may require them to arrest the body of a soul therein named, and bring them before the moot.

21. A warrant is issued on the refusal of a writ, the refusal of a relief or the inequitable detention of a living soul, a warrant is a physical demand of the moot. Every soul  has an unalienable reciprocal obligation and responsibility to liberty, if this is denied you can demand a prerogative writ initiated by any living soul on your behalf if you are restrained from obtaining one yourself, this functions by empowering with the axioms of the land, the individual in holding, making accountable the exercise of the societies and communities around them, from inequitable imprisonment, through improper executive, judicial, or private restraints of  confinements within incarceration facilities labelled, prisons, jails, camps, hospitals, re-education facilities, mental institutions, or whatever form it may take, all used to restrain others inequitably. Protection of liberty demanded through the writ of ‘Habeas Corpus’ (held body) from the moot, which is an ancient axiom of the land prerogative writ - an equitable procedure to which you have an undeniable reciprocal obligation and responsibility. It is an extraordinary relief in equity. Upon proper application, or even on naked knowledge alone, every equitable moot or court is empowered, and is duty bound, to issue the Extraordinary Writ of Habeas Corpus commanding one who is restraining liberty, so holding imprisoned another, to forthwith produce before the moot the living soul, who is in custody and to show cause why the liberty of that living soul is being restrained, and if the moot finds no just cause, relief must be established for the victim of that inequitable restraint. The term imprisonment usually imports a restraint contrary to the wishes of the prisoner; and the writ of habeas corpus is designed as a relief for them, to be invoked at their insistence, to set them at liberty, not to change their keeper. In the case of an infant or a child of tender years that is detained improperly from the living soul holding the honour of their custody and guardianship, that being sufficient ground to invoke and maintain the writ of habeas corpus.

22.  A Rex was not a king, but an aspect of the equitable system. Souls aided a Rex voluntarily. A Rex who could be any competent soul and had to offer battle gear, and food, to get others to follow them into battle, more importantly, all souls volunteered to champion the cause of the weak -- for a ‘fee’ meaning they had a share in the wite, as no soul can equitably be bound with any sovereign, and under natural prescriptive equity through axioms of the land, no sovereign or state can equitably exist to compel.

23. Another function of those who were willing to champion the cause of the weak, acting as a rex, was the enforcing of verdicts of the jury, for example to take back stolen resources and return it to the equitable possessor as the jury of a moot established. 

24. The retorter, who had failed to honour the writ, would have to pay all the costs of the rex, this surcharge was called the ‘wite’, and made serving the community through putting right wrongs in equity a profitable business for a soul serving as a rex.

25. If the retorter could not pay the relief or the wite, the burden of payment would fall to the surety bonded-soul/s that the retorter held in reciprocal agreement.

26. The retorter would be obligated to repay his bonded-soul/s as soon as possible. Within the system of tortious relief, only the surplus fruits of the labours of the retorter could be seized, all resource are allodially held, therefore no judgement can be made upon a souls land, home, furnishings, tools, or their ability to sustain themselves and those who they support, only the disposable produce that is available for sale or exchange as a surplus to their essential needs , or their stored labours, or silver or gold or whatever store of intrinsic resource is available, could be considered in relief. If they could not satisfy the relief due, then their future labours would be bound to honour their debt.

27. This is a victim empowered system, focused not on punishment of the culpable but relief for the victim, free to the victim to seek and establish relief, and is based upon the principles of the axioms of the land unalienably bound to the inherent power of the individual, founded on protection not subjugation.

28. With the arrival of the Roman Catholic Church Corporation over 20 year Albion suffered a genocide instigated by Pope Alexander II and executed through the agents of the Church Corporation, lead by Guillaume le Bâtard, commonly known as William the Conqueror, which placed the simple trust of ownership upon the land, its people and its resources, through the force of arms, this reversed the equitable system and imposed a legal system, which functions to a great extent in opposition to the equitable model.

29. The Moot court system was adapted by those who subjugated the population and much of its structure has remained, passed down to the present day, the court issue writs, warrants, prerogatives, and subpoenas, which are all forms of writ, but now it is through the invented authority of the corporation not the victim, the relief is removed and revenue for the corporation is generated under the guise of punishment.

Part Two - How a Court of Prescriptive Natural Equity Through Axioms of the Land Functions