Court decisions

All info related to the new biggest hoax of our time.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Court decisions

Unread post by rachel »

Thought I'd create this for easy lookup of Covid and the courts.

Historic Decision Against Mandatory Vaccination by Italian Court + Covid Vaccine Risk to Human Genome Now Legally Established (Italy)
https://childrenshealthdefense.eu/eu-is ... ian-court/
On July 6th, 2022, the court of Florence has approved a sentence annulling the measure taken by the Order of Psychologists of Tuscany against one of its members, the reason being: ‘the suspension of the exercise of the profession risks compromising primary individual rights such as the right to a livelihood and the right to work’.

The judge ruled that the psychologist doesn’t need to be vaccinated in order to do his job by establishing that:
  • these substances don’t prevent infection and transmission. Therefore, in front of the Italian law, there can not be an obligation.
  • She also recognises that these substances provokes severe adverse events.
    Therefore, it even less legitimate to force anybody to be injected.
  • The judge put the dignity of the human being at the centre and referred twice to the period of Nazism and Fascism. Mandatory vaccination is possible if there is informed consent. For Covid injections, she explained that an informed consent is not possible as we don’t know the ingredients and the mechanisms of these substances because of industrial and alleged military secret.
This interim decision is grounded in serious conclusion: there is no right to suspend a citizen from the right to work based of this illegal request of vaccination with these experimental substances.

With this historic court decision, “the Risk to human genome is now legally established” Renate Holzeisen, Italian attorney engaged in the defense of the Human Rights, said in an interview for an Italian radio.

“This could be a milestone” said Reiner Fuellmich during the Corona Committee 113, interviewing Renate Holzeisen.

No obligation as the official data show that these experimental substances don’t prevent infection and transmission amongst people treated with 3 or more Covid shots.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

MSM, the Courts and Legal Argument

Unread post by rachel »

This is from June 2021, I think court rulings against media personalities are always enlightening as their lawyers have to leak facts to the judge.

JIMMY DORE: Rachel Maddow "Is Not News" Says Court Ruling!


I'll do a series of grabs of the Judge's ruling. She won the deformation action brought against her because the Judge basically said, 'Rachel Maddow talks bullshit, and everyone knows Rachel Maddow talks bullshit, even when she says something is "literally true"; everybody reasonably understands she is talking through her arse and it is fake news'.

ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-229.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-256.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-266.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-277.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Rachel Maddow and the Courts

Unread post by rachel »

Continuing... I like the fact it starts with "In an oddly overlooked ruling...", yep we know why.

ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-323.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-331.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-369.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Rachel Maddow and the Courts

Unread post by rachel »

The court ruling, based of the arguments put forward by Rachel Maddow's defence team. This is their argument being accepted as fact:

ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-388.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-413.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-443.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Tucker Carlson and the Courts

Unread post by rachel »

But of course, Rachel Maddow's lawyers are not the only ones to use the argument "everyone knows it's hyperbole" in court to win a case of deformation brought against them. Tucker Carlson's lawyers did the exact same thing.

ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-465.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-508.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-517.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: MSM, Russia and the Courts

Unread post by rachel »

And on to Russia, the West's favourite 'bad cop'...

ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-529.png
ScreenShot-VideoID-hDRoqIgUgEg-TimeS-554.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Lorraine Kelly, tax and Covid vaccines

Unread post by rachel »

A British one this time, a court case where HMRC had demanded a £1.2 million INCOME TAX bill from the television presenter Lorraine Kelly, because they deemed her to be an employee of ITV rather than a freelancer. This forced Kelly into a court case that she ended up winning. I'll go into the details of the ruling in the next post, but by winning her case, Lorraine Kelly proved in front of British courts that she was not an employee parroting the script ITV gave her, but rather an independent content creator who exercised autonomy in what she put out, meaning when it comes to COVID-19, the argument she used to win her case against the HMRC can also be used to convict her of misinformation about COVID vaccine safety; - information her show was putting out that directly contradicted the data UK Government agencies were publishing.

Lorraine Kelly just happens to be one of the presenters who do live daytime shows on ITV, and who in December 2021 tested positive for COVID-19 meaning ITV was forced to cancel all live broadcasts over the Christmas period. I discussed the significance of this decision in a recent Muppet Show thread post. But before anything I want to go back to December 2021 and spend a little time posting up what the UK Government was intending to put into action, because it is easy to forget where we where when it suddenly stopped.

From November 2021, the OMICRON variant was being used to increase perceived fear and reintroduce measures that had been cancelled over the summer. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were "independently" ramping up the restrictions, and as I remember, Scotland and Wales were both more draconian than England. Boris Johnson had announced a "PLAN A"/"PLAN B" strategy. Anyone aware of the scam knew PLAN A was a mealy-mouthed flannel aimed to placate, and the intention was always to move England to PLAN B before Christmas again to create the maximum amount of disruption to people trying to see relatives and loved ones during the holiday season.


DALY STAR, 30 NOV 2021
Omicron anagram sparks wild conspiracy Christmas will be cancelled
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest ... t-25580467
'Omicron no Crimbo' conspiracy theory
In an strange finding, conspiracy theorists have discovered that Omicron is actually an anagram for 'No Crimbo'.
The 'b' is said to come from B.1.1.529, the name scientists first gave to the variant.
It is also said that Omicron it is an anagram for 'moronic'.
The bizarre rush of people voicing their Scrooge-channeling theories is a reminder of how easily the internet can jump on a trend without any evidence to back it up.
NO-CRIMBO.jpg
NO-CRIMBO.jpg (23.88 KiB) Viewed 1245 times
OMICRON-MORONIC.png

And sure enough the PM had moved England to PLAN B on the 8th December. This is the press release, I am posting it in full because it's worth looking at its content, as it is the blueprint they will use the next time. And next time it won't be the Prime Minister saying this, it will be coming from the mouth of the World Health Authority. And we know they are intending to change UN definitions and remove the idea of "informed consent" as covered in this thread - International Health Regulations. If they pass, governments, without recourse, will be able to make dissidents disappear just like the Nazis did.


UK GOV PRESS RELEASE, 8 DEC 2021
Prime Minister confirms move to Plan B in England
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prim ... in-england
Prime Minister Boris Johnson has announced a move to Plan B in England.

omicron.png

The Prime Minister has today [Wednesday 8 December] confirmed that England will move to Plan B following the rapid spread of the Omicron variant in the UK.
Urgent work has been ongoing to understand the impact of the new variant with regards to vaccines, treatments and transmissibility. Early indications showed a large number of concerning spike protein mutations as well as mutations in other parts of the viral genome.
On Saturday 27 November, the government acted quickly to slow the spread of Omicron while more data was collected and assessed.
The most recent data suggests that Omicron has a very high growth rate and is spreading rapidly. S-gene drop out cases have grown from 0.15% of cases during the week of 21st November, to 3.3% of cases since 5 December in England. There are currently 568 cases confirmed across the UK and early analysis from the UK Health Security Agency suggesting the doubling time could be as little as 2.5 to 3 days.

As seen in previous waves, a swift rise in cases can lead to a rapid rise in hospitalisations, which will quickly lead to pressure on the NHS. The data in South Africa is showing a rapid increase in hospitalisations.
As a result of this concerning data the Prime Minister has acted quickly and with caution, confirming Plan B measures will come into force while more data on vaccine efficacy and disease severity is assessed. Plan B was set out in September and will help to slow the spread of the variant and reduce the chances of the NHS coming under unsustainable pressure, while buying time to deliver more boosters.
While it is likely there is some level of reduced vaccine effectiveness against Omicron, it is still too early to determine the extent of this.
The government will continue to look closely at all the emerging data but vaccines remain our best line of defence and it is now more vital than ever that those who are unvaccinated come forward, and those eligible for their boosters book when called.

Today the NHS confirmed a huge expansion of the booster programme, with the National Booking Service now open to all those aged over 40 to book their jabs. The dose interval has also been shortened from six months to three months, with those eligible now able to book a month in advance – two months after their second dose.
The vaccine programme will be supported by the continued development of world-leading treatments. Today the Prime Minister confirmed a new national study that will see 10,000 UK patients at risk of serious illness from COVID-19 given the treatment molnupiravir to treat their symptoms at home.
Testing will also be a vital tool in controlling the spread given the likely increased transmissibility of Omicron. As there is now demonstrated community transmission of Omicron, we intend to introduce daily contact tests for contacts of confirmed positive cases instead of the ten-day self-isolation period.
Everyone should test using a lateral flow device, particularly before entering a high-risk setting involving people you wouldn’t normally come into contact with, or when visiting a vulnerable person. Lateral flow devices remain free of charge and can be collected from local pharmacies.

From Friday 10 December, face coverings will become compulsory in most public indoor venues, such as cinemas, theatres and places of worship. There will be exemptions in venues where it is not practical to wear one, such as when you are eating, drinking or exercising. For that reason, face masks will not be required in hospitality settings.
From Monday 13 December, those who can will be advised to work from home.
From Wednesday 15 December, and subject to parliamentary approval, the NHS Covid Pass on the NHS App will become mandatory for entry into nightclubs and settings where large crowds gather – including unseated indoor events with 500 or more attendees, unseated outdoor events with 4,000 or more attendees and any event with 10,000 or more attendees.
People will be able to demonstrate proof of two vaccine doses via the app. Having considered the evidence since the emergence of Omicron, proof of a negative lateral flow test will also be accepted.

Introducing Covid-status certification from next Wednesday will give businesses a week’s notice, as promised in the government’s proposals for introducing mandatory certification published in September.
A full list of guidance on these changes will be available on gov.uk in the coming days. Face covering regulations will be laid in parliament tomorrow, with the remaining regulations laid on Monday 13 December.
Parliament will debate the measures next week, with a vote expected to take place on Tuesday 14 December.
The government will keep the data under constant review. The regulations set to expire six weeks after implementation, with a review after three weeks.

Taken together, the government is hopeful these measures will reduce transmission and slow the spread of the Omicron variant, and will continue to urge those eligible to get their boosters when called.

In reading that, it is worth revisiting posts by @xileffilex about the Behavioural Insights Team and Nudge Theory to link two. Also, The Lockdown Files Psyop article by Iain Davis, where he examines how the the UK media is currently attempting to reframe the COVID years to justify a decision to wholesale handover PANDEMIC POWERS to the WHO.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Lorraine Kelly, tax and Covid vaccines

Unread post by rachel »

Before going back to Lorraine Kelly, let's just pick out some points from that press briefing.

We start with the PM stating that urgent work is in progress to understand the impact of the Omicron variant, and that it is very concerning the very high growth rate. He is trying to impress upon us the importance of time, - "doubling time could be as little as 2.5 to 3 days", and as stated in the Midazolam Murders thread, this is more than double of what was claimed a year earlier before any vaccines were administered.
rachel wrote: Wed Apr 12, 2023 6:26 pm 2020: "doubling every seven days"
2021: "doubling time could be as little as 2.5 to 3 days"

The government then uses data outside of its jurisdiction to create fear. If the data is fake, then the government has the get-out clause, 'we received it in good faith'. The thing that is important to keep in mind, a country's courts cannot lawfully reach outside of their own jurisdiction;- therefore the whole purpose of creating the League of Nations which became the UN, and the creation of the European Union was to be outside lawful accountability. Both organisations should therefore be seen as criminal endeavours in the first instance and dismantled. Any law they seek to pass is null and void as they work by deception only. The jurisdiction that stops us from pursuing them logically also stops them from having any lawful authority over us. To function, they rely on sleight-of-hand and criminality by traitors from within.

And this brings us to Lorraine Kelly and why I suspect from the government announcing "From Friday 10 December, face coverings will become compulsory in most public indoor venues, such as cinemas, theatres and places of worship..." etc, etc, full Nazi state, to cancelling it all and starting the fake Ukraine war.


20 Dec 2021 - BBC, ITV and Channel 4 cancel shows
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/tv ... c-22525573

With hindsight, do we think all these live shows were cancelled because the MSM feared a virus they hadn't feared for the last two years, or do we think these people saw what the government required for them to say via super-injunction if they went live on air? The only other choice was to walk out and use the excuse they tested positive for COVID.

I think a mass walkout of media people in the UK is actually what stopped COVID. Because lockstep, once one of the Five Eyes nations fell, the other cowardly bastards toppled. We take down the traitors in Britain, we take down them all, because the rest comprise of jellyfish. And I suspect one big reason why presenters walked out is because of Lorraine Kelly's court case win.


Lorraine Kelly wins £1.2m tax case after court rules that her chatty ITV persona is a "performance"
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/entertain ... -itv-case/

There was a big kerfuffle some years back regarding self employment in the UK. If you work for someone you are on a PAYE scheme, pay-as-you-earn. This means the government takes tax and national insurance from you via your employer before you see it. However, if you are self-employed, the company pays you an agreed fee and you file tax returns yourself. Invariably your tax burden is lower if you are self-employed. But if you are working as a subsidiary of a company are you employed by that company or are you self employed? This was where the government made changes in the law, probably around 2016, making more people fall into the employee definition, even for short-term contracts. Because Lorraine Kelly supplied a show long term to ITV, the government deemed her an employee, recalculated her tax contributions as if she was on PAYE and then sent her a tax bill for £1.2 million, the article reports.

In defeating the government her lawyers made some interesting arguments. I think I'll stop here as I need to reacquaint myself with the case. But it is ultimately to do with where liability lays.
Marfer
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2022 2:09 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 92 times

Re: MSM, the Courts and Legal Argument

Unread post by Marfer »

Essentially 'Lorraine Kelly' was determined to be a persona or actress and won an appeal against a £1.2m tax bill based on self employment earnings.

We did not accept that Ms Kelly simply appeared as herself; we were satisfied that Ms Kelly presents a persona of herself; she presents herself as a brand, and that is the brand ITV sought when engaging her. All parts of the show are a performance, the act being to perform the role of a friendly, chatty and fun personality. Quite simply
put, the programmes are entertaining, Ms Kelly is entertaining and the “DNA” referred to is the personality, performance, the “Lorraine Kelly” brand that is brought to the programmes. We should make clear we do not doubt that Ms Kelly is an entertaining lady, but the point is that for the time Ms Kelly is contracted to perform
live on air she is public “Lorraine Kelly”; she may not like the guest she interviews, she may not like the food she eats, she may not like the film she viewed but that is where the performance lies, as no doubt with other entertainers such as Ant and Dec or Richard and Judy. For that reason, we have no hesitation in concluding that Ms Kelly is a “theatrical artist” and the legislation is satisfied such as to make the
expenses deductible.

Conclusion

10 194. The appeal is therefore allowed.

http://financeandtax.decisions.tribunal ... C07045.pdf
napoleon
Posts: 3725
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 3:23 pm
Has thanked: 1664 times
Been thanked: 664 times

Re: MSM, the Courts and Legal Argument

Unread post by napoleon »

marfer your are the sneakiest t.v. licence investigator going ,

all this and she's on itv

i do understand just playing , do we have a t.v. licence section ,i love them adverts with the spacevans
Post Reply