Wayne Glew explains important law facts 24th May 2023

Wayne has studied the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution 1900 UK for over 30 years and has many years experience as a police officer in Western Australia.
He is taking lawful action to help us clean up the mess of treason in this country, and educates us on some crucial points of law/history that have been overlooked for decades.
The Constitution has not been upheld and great harm has been done to the people as we have been administered by corporate bodies which do not have our best interests guiding them.Show more

Transcript:
...No-one else can touch it, any letters patent. So, Queen Victoria added letters patent to the office of governor, instructions and advice to the governor, and then she added 9 clauses. Clause 2 locks in the claim (of?) laws validity act – very applicable in our whole system.
What they tried to do is lie and cheat the country by putting in a bodgy constitution of Western Australia. There’s 32 sections missing. Because it wasn’t constituted, we’ve never had a lawful state. In August 1902 New South Wales removed its state constitution and put another one in. 1922 Queensland removed its upper house. 1934 South Australia and Tasmania removed their constitutions and put a bodgy one in. 1975 Victoria did.
So when you look at what I said earlier with the conferrable parliaments of all the states, the commonwealth could exercise authority it had at federation... not only did the constitution say they didn’t have any, they couldn’t have any because where did they get the conferrable authority for all of the states? They didn’t exist. They get the constitution, that’s the only authority for a parliament, and for the courts. So we have no parliament at state level, no courts, and because we need the representatives of 6 states to create the federal parliament, we’ve got no federal parliament. None. Nor could we ever have one.
Now my argument was when I put all this into their so-called courts, I put it in as a challenge to their jurisdiction based on that so they could never deal with it in their court, it had to go to the higher court. And then we locked the higher court out, by filing it into the house of lords.
Every time we file into the house of lords, the documents we filed, we filed into the court next time I went in there. The magistrate worked out straight away what I was doing. ..Angus hopperman(?).The barrister in England knew what we did the first time -who taught you to do these documents? – same people who taught you. But you didn’t bother to teach us and if you know, that knocks you out of the jurisdiction.
Now we fought that case based on the constitution and previous decisions of the high court, and one decision of the supreme court on the 8th December 2022 I filed the decision of Jenkins in the supreme court, 2010, he ruled there was no such lawful entity as WA police... the 1892 facts. So I wrote over the top of it in a cover note before I handed it up, there is no 1892 act, as of the 1st January 1901. because of clause 7 of the constitution says on the proclamation of the constitution, 9th July 1900, the old entities known as the Australasian council and the colony ceased to exist. So did all their laws.
That’s why I showed you 51,38 there are seven legislative areas, and they were all contained in section 51 of the constitution. Where in section 51 did they get the authority for executive powers?
Clause 7 takes out the Australasian council and the colonies. It takes out all their laws.
The Constitution alteration act 1899 of Western Australia is gone. Every state had an 1893 transfer of land act, that went too...they didn’t have legislative authority, if they did, show me in section 51 where it is. If it’s not there it doesn’t exist. Where did they have the authority of the constitution? Show me in 51 where it is. Because if it’s not there it doesn’t exist. Where did they have the authority to alter the constitution? Show me in 51 where it is. Doesn’t exist. Where did they have the authority to set up a police force? Again, show me in 51 where does it exist? It does not.
Where do police come from? Imperial law. As police constables.
And I was in the police force, lot of people say I never was, I did all my exams, for first class constable and senior constable and blocked them from giving me a position as a third-class sergeant which is the next one up.
First I told them to shove their freemasonry because it’s not my religion I don’t have to adhere to it, I’m not going to. And that’s a requirement. So I said I’m not doing it. Then I went back and got in their face and I said; I’m lawful and I’m going to stay there. There were two reasons I did that. One – I had to stay inside the law, and two – I love working with people in the street and that’s why I did it.
But, I realised the first time that I went before the court and had a look at the parliament and everything, the biggest criminals in this country sit in our parliament. And they sit in our courts. Those judges.
I’ve never gone after the magistrates to charge them with anything, just to pull them in line. We need brains. Even if the brains need scrubbing out cleaning and refurbished, we need their brains, they’ve got good brains. Society would be absolutely stupid to wipe them all out and leave us with nobody with the academic ability to sit in that court and know the procedures that it should be, because they do know it. So it’s up to us to teach them but jail the ones above them. Every single one of them.
Now we can’t have a lawful commonwealth until every single state puts its state constitution in place. So how did they block us out? With the electoral act. They can’t have an electoral act because of chapter one of the constitution. The governor and the state must select a large pool of people, we vote for one person once for the lower house and (in?) the state parliament, one person once for the upper house. They represent the whole state. Because under clause 8 they can’t have an electoral boundary or any other boundary.
Now, when you do it at federal level it’s even better because section 8 of the constitution prohibits you from voting for more than one person once for the senate. Section 30 prohibits you from voting for more than one person once for the house of representatives. Why do you have preferential voting when you’ve got to vote for 12 or 20 or 15? Because they’re breaking the law. Do they know it? Yes.
The electoral act and electoral commission is the biggest criminal organisation in this country.
Now we crack down, the electoral commission, they live on a vacant lot at Lakes Entrance on the South-East coast of Victoria. My mate lives just up the road and he went and had a look and took a photo. This is ‘their land’. It’s not, it belongs to a private person, but that’s where they are registered. Another fraud.
Now, I’m going to turn around and step right back to the 1600s. Your favourite subject -Magna Carta.
Magna Carta 1215 and 1297 and the modifications up to the 16th century were all done, everybody says King John went to the pope and he threw it out and all that- all lies.
Now the King James Bible was put together by King James and presented as a translation into English and registered to the throne of England. The throne at that time was Catholic. 1611. They put it in place with the letters patent and locked it in. Irreversible, irrevocable letters patent. It became part of the coronation oath. They must swear to uphold it. So all these little people who say they took it all out, go to your colonial validity act, they can’t touch it. It’s certainly not a colony. But let’s go back to that, what I was saying, in 1640 they put in the act of Habeus Corpus to knock out the star chamber, the synagogue of satan where a single judge gets to decide any case. There goes your magistrates, they can’t sit. Cannot sit.
Where does a magistrate come from? Has anyone read the constitution and looked for them? They’re not in there. So where do they come from? They’re actually in the letters patent for the office of governor. But there’s not the word magistrate. What’s in there, the governor, section 9, must select all judges and all justices of the peace, and they must swear the oath in the constitution. The law, Imperial law, cannot be removed.
And this is where the trouble starts; where does the magistrate come in? after 5 years of service – dually or triply on the bench - he can then be selected by the governor to select as a magistrate under Imperial law. What Imperial law? The 1611 King James Bible – there’s 9 verses in there that establish magistrates under ecclesiastical law. Why? Because they’re courts of petty session. Or local courts. They deal with simple offences only. They cannot hear a case. That’s all there in Imperial law and they try and overlook this. That’s why you need the knowledge when you go in there – they don’t exist in law. You have the right to challenge them for that reason, but you don’t you use that, you use their own law against them to do that, being what I’ve already told you. (?)
Now, you get back to them, a magistrate can say; ‘sergeant read out the offence’, and it has to be the sergeant or a senior constable it should be, but you can say the sergeant. He reads it out, do you agree with that? No. so what do you want your plea? Not guilty. That case must be handed back to the police to investigate and bring the charge on indictment. Is that confirmed by the high court? Yes. CLR 189 and 1996 Kable vs the DPP, paragraph 52 says; all courts are part of a federal judicial system with the high court at its summit. There’s the separation of powers, upheld by the high court. But it is on page 703 of the constitution and 704, it’s on there about all courts being part of the federal judicial system. That’s in chapter 3. It’s a separation of powers that must be between the legislative authority of a government and the judicature, which administers that authority.
Now who sits in our courts? Judges – plural. Coram? Judges must be.. no not a coram. Coram is an unelected judge, a person impersonating a judge who isn’t one under the supreme court act no decision of them can ever be used against you.. you understand that? it says it.
They’ve been pulling the wool over your eyes saying oh they’re beautiful people they’re not, they’re lying thieving traitors.
Now you get back to the fact that they cannot sit in judgement of you. Only 12 of your peers.
Now you read section 80, it says this section does not authorise your right to go to trial by jury because it doesn’t need to, the Great Charter does. And it talks about a large jury which is 23 persons or more. Persons under the constitution are living breathing people, not their version so don’t worry about that.
Now, what happens then, I invoked the jury from my case at least 23 sitting with 2 justices of the peace. We found 2 that were lawfully sworn in before the alliance came out in 1979. So we had what we needed. They knew, so they withdrew the case. Because the jury would have to find, in relation to the constitutional issues we put to them, which means the whole lot would stand trial for treason.
So they ripped it out. As soon as they filed to remove it I filed to lock it in again, and he said I’ve signed it you’re free to go, I said; ‘but you’re not. I’m coming back and you’re going to jail for life. I’m going to make sure of it.’
At the end of the day, no magistrate singly can sit in judgement of anybody.
When I joined we had Anton in Middlin(?) he’s a really good bloke, but he never sat without a justice of the peace. In 1979 when Brian Burke and his labour morons took over, they changed the status of justices of the peace and magistrates, from stipendiary to magistrates able to hear cases – it’s unlawful. Everything further after that...
You need to learn the law. It’s easy for me to say because I’ve spent years learning it. But I got paid to learn it which helped as well. But I already was studying the constitution. What I want people to do but, is spend the time and learn. Because going back to 1600s, 1640, there was no-one on the throne from 1658 until 1670. No-one, it was vacant. No-one was allowed to sit on the throne because the bishops of England went to Italy and told the pope, you’re not God on Earth, stick your catholic religion, we are going to have our own.
They didn’t call it protestant, they called it the Church of England. And they created it, they came back as Archbishops. Obviously, they were against the bishops of Rome. But they still held to the King James Bible as common law. The Catholics then removed (the line) in the Lord’s prayer; ‘for thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory,’ because they don’t recognise that, they recognise the pope as having the power and authority. So you can look at what they did even then changing things.
Now, prince William the third was the prince that was in line for the throne and to join Scotland to the British throne they put in princess Mary as the queen. First time in British history they had a king and a queen. They have a king and a consort, queen-consort, or they have a queen and a duke. That was the first time in known history they had it. To take the throne they had to set up the oath for the coronation. The oath was that they would uphold the faith and be defenders of the faith, all those things that they have to say, and you can look that one up. But they then put in the law prior to them being crowned king and queen. They put in a law that every single public servant before taking a position, it didn’t matter if they were shovelling sewerage, every single one had to swear the oath to the reigning monarch. That was 1 Will Mary, William the 3rd and Mary, that was the actual act 1678.
Now, when they were coronated they brought in a huge amount of acts. They locked in Magna Carta and all those acts into the coronation oath. Magna Carta, 1688 bill of rights which they put in place 1700 act of settlement which they put in place, habeus corpus 1671 which they put into place, they put in Horsley’s laws of England, Chalice rule copy which deals with your property, and there’s definition of fee simple, it’s all in there. And the King James Bible. All acts sworn to by every reigning monarch and they can’t get out of them. They would like to think they can. They would like to think they can change anything.
In this country, as a self-governing colony of England, the colonial laws validity act applies. Page 703 says; even if that act had not been enacted, no colony of England has the power to change an Imperial act. And then it goes on and explains why. The commonwealth parliament if it was established would be a subordinate parliament to the British parliament. Then if the state parliaments, if they were lawful, they would be subordinate parliaments to the federal parliament, and their laws would be by-laws, or laws made pursuant to the constitution under the authority granted subject to the federal law under 109 of the constitution which they contravened as federal one and the state ones would be wiped out.
So your by-laws are approved. Now, is local government in the constitution? Yes. Page 935-936. All the legislative authorities exclusive to the federal parliament, exclusive to the states and jointly exercised by the states and the commonwealth. They’re there. Always was. When I read that in the court they said there’s no such thing as local government in the constitution, so I read it out, it says there. It says municipal authority(/ies?) and local government. 2 separate entities. The local government being the state parliament, laws made by them being by-laws, are by-laws because they are only passed, subject to the powers granted by the constitution and subject to the overriding authority of the federal parliament’s laws.
Now if you go to page 794...
But how does that help us?
That helps you a lot, because there’s a lot of laws passed by the states which were done like local government acts in 1979. Well how can they when the constitution authorised states to set up local government, not to pass acts setting them up. And when we said ‘no’...
What they tried to say Wheeler Paul (?) and Bus 2006 on the 6th November when I was before them, they tried to say the states existed before federation, and the federal constitution just came along and sat over the top of them, enhancing it. That was Christine Wheeler, Pawn? and a judge named Bus. At the end of their little spiel of garbage I served a warrant for their arrest to appear in Victorian Supreme court for treason.
Then they came back with the biggest load of rubbish so I filed back into the high court because HCA 48 in 1996 McGinki put that same crap to the high court but it was rejected, an said they didn’t exist, and started at paragraph 17 clearly explains the meaning of 106, 107, 108 and 109 so it’s worth reading.
Gini (?) had his tailfeathers chopped but he’s a bit weird because he likes homosexuals because he is one. Not a problem, he can be whatever he likes as long as he stays away from me.
Fact of the matter is, local government was put to the people in 1974. No. 1979. No. they do not pass, that is a load of crap. We either say yes or say no. 1988 referendum was 4 questions. The 2 most important; Do you approve the continuance of local government? No. do you approve the establishment of local government? No. it didn’t just not pass, we said decidedly No. why did it continue? Blatant treason.
They tried to get it through by establishing COAG – commonwealth organisation of Australian government. In the 1999 referendum they kicked themselves in the butt because they thought, the first question was; we accept that Aboriginals were the first inhabitants of Australia and we accept the rule of law. The rule of law is the Roman rule of law which means you’re guilty until you’re proven innocent. The rules of presumption apply.
Now, because we said no to aboriginal persons not (?) being the first inhabitants of Australia, the actual Egyptians were, then there was Nordic races, then there was negritos, and then these mob come along. Let’s stop the lies, let’s put them where they belong, give them their sacred sites. Queen Victoria knew because it was reported to her that all the inhabitants of this country which you call natives were starving. They couldn’t get enough food to feed themselves. If they’d been here for 40 or 50,000 years, or a million years or all the other crap they come at, why are they still living in bark huts and throwing spears at each other? Because they weren’t.
Now I’m not out to criticize the from that point of view, I’m out to criticize the red-over-black machine that’s trying to take this country so the reds can have it. (Commies I guess). China. You’re not getting it. Aboriginal people are not getting it. Queen Victoria cemented into the state constitution; every native will be fed. Every native will be clothed. Every native will be housed. Every native will be given a small sum of money and taught to assimilate or go their own way in this country. I have no problem with them living in communities and living their own way in the bush. But how dare they go out there demand a car, fuel, food produced by us and sit around doing nothing? That’s not what it was established for. It was established, they were under our constitution as Australians. Part of the commonwealth. Today they are part of the commonwealth, the 26 million people that make up the commonwealth. And that’s exactly how they are in our system. 1967 referendum was not just to give them a couple of rights. It was to give them every single right that we have. That the labour party put that referendum up didn’t want them to have anything and thought we’d vote against it. But 90.2% of this country voted to give it to them. Why don’t they have it? Because all we’ve got sitting in our parliament is a bunch of lying, thieving traitors. Who are all there to line their own pockets. Why are they there? What does your constitution say about a politician? It says when you put them into the parliament, the governor of the state(s?) select 10 from the lower house, eight from the upper and form the executive government. He does, that is the executive, because we have executive, legislative and judicature. Now he gives each of those selected members a portfolio, not the premier, he’s not in the constitution and nor is the prime minister. The premier is the foreman of the state parliament, the prime minister is the foreman of the federal parliament. That’s it. Anything else is a lie.
Now, the big problem we have is McGowan is the executive head of the parliament of western Australia. [resigned now?] He put it on Wikipedia. I put it in the court and the judge just looked and chucked it because it was crap. He did the right thing, he should have kept going over into the bin.
The fact of the matter is, the executive government is the governor, and the 18 people he selects. The attorney general is a legal practitioner, not a lawyer of more than 5 years service, and he sits and together that executive parliament along with the attorney general puts legislation together. Where do they get it from? We give it to our representatives at a state level, they take it to our parliament and from the initial meeting they put it to the executive. They then go home. They don’t sit there, they’re not on a weekly wage, they’re not on a yearly wage, they’re on a wage for the time they spend in the parliament. Nothing more. Read your constitution, it’s clear, it’s there. Both at state and federal level. Why are we paying a ridiculous amount of money? They’re stealing it. Yes.
January the 1st 1946. There was a law passed that they would take 7.5% of all taxes for your pension. It’s not a privilege, it’s a right that we pay for. It’s a right because we pay for it, it’s a right. It belongs to us. I don’t care if you get 50 million dollars a year, if you want to be greedy and get the pension they have to pay you. Law. Not means tested. If it was means tested why aren’t the politicians means tested? Because they are thieving, lying mongrels. Literally. What else do you call them? Scum? Maggots cos they crawl in the sewer? They’re all of those things because they have no lawful right to exist.
We have to, as humans and as part of the Commonwealth, stand up and take this country back. Who for? Us. For our kids. For our grandkids. I’ve got a score of grandkids already. (woman;) ‘we better get a big Eventbrite thing out for you then because we need to teach a lot of people.’ It’s a lot to be taught but, there’s a heap more.
(man;) ‘The governor and governor general is supposed to be picked by the monarch’, yes and approved by the monarch. Now in relation to the governor and the governor general you go to page 702. It says the exercising of authority by the governor general is absolute under the crown. And it must be noted that the governors of each state exercise the same level authority at the state level. So they have exactly the same level authority right across. Now who told the parliament they could take control and make members of parliament? Blatant treason. What’s being done about it? Nothing. And that’s a problem.
We just say; ‘oh yeah it’s gotta be right, cos the government says so’. They’re not the government. They’re a parliament, they’re one third of the actual governing body which is executive, legislature and judicature. What is the legislature? It’s the body of people that debate and pass the law according to the constitution. The only time they can spend time in parliament is there debating and passing the law. No other way. They’re not there, they go on holidays or don’t appear in the parliament half the time, they stay at home and watch it at home on the compute. I don’t care if they’ve got computers, they want to get paid, go to the parliament. Cos my book is if you’re not sitting there then you’re not entitled to get paid. You’re not doing what we told you to do. And worrying about who screwed who in the back room, which is what they’re doing, is not what we’re paying them to do.
Debate and pass laws according to our constitution, that’s what we’re paying them to do. Not their crap. We have to stand up to them.
(woman;) ‘On the ACT government website is the 1297 Magna Carta. And if you read it, it’s written on there, it says that the king might have died but the Magna Carta never died with him. And article 39 which is very much for our courts right now, which they are breaching every day, it states that ...
The magna carta, even though it’s the parliamentary rewrite...’No free man shall be taken, imprisoned, stripped of his rights, or possessions, outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we proceed against or prosecute him except by the lawful judgement of his peers and by the law of the land. This passed in law on the 15th of June 1215 and remains on the statute books today. And it’s still on the ACT parliament website for everybody to read. We have to remind them of that too, right?
Yes because they can’t remove any of the Imperial law. And that’s why chief justice frank said all those laws are valid today and must be complied with. There’s no exception to it.
There are also treaties...you see the treason they are committing is not under our law
(talk about doing this in talk then q&a format, bible..). psalms 8(2?);5 you made him a little lower than the angels, psalms 82.6 ye are goods, you crowned him with glory and honour by giving him a nature but a little short of the divine, and put on him a crown of glory... Isaiah 62.3 crown of glory in the hand of the lord and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God. James 1;12 - the reason she is quoting Bible verses is because our Bible made our law through court for the royals – for when he is tried he shall receive the crown of life, that’s where we’re all at now – so when you are in court you have to use your King James bible as well as your Black’s law dictionary – the man who endureth, the man who turns away from temptation...Genesis 1;29 -31 , Genesis 2;7... 1 John 5-5;15 we are all children of God. We are above the government.

Chatting, woman; Stuff happening behind the scenes, good news coming out through the White hats, sg anon, they’re giving the uppers 4 hours to vacate their chairs, and have gov ready to step in, sheriffs...
Coronation was fraud.
Challenge the jurisdiction only, don’t worry about their acts, and they have nowhere to go.
Dawn Kelly challenged the jurisdiction and...