REPRESSION, THE MEDIEVAL BANISHMENT
“ IGNIS ET AQUAE INTERDICTIO”
At the conclusion of the various farces, two of them concluded into thin air and for the first one the amendment trial will take place, Hullin’s “ Pretium sceleris” ( evilness’ price) was the “REFOULEMENT”, thanks to his “Animus locupletandi” ( his advantage through false).
It is like the so- called pain “ acquae et ignis interdictio” which means the exclusion of water and fire, which means banishment, to be exiled as the worst criminal. It’s like going back to ancient times, to the dawn of civilization in the meaning of upholding our rights.
The “REFOULEMENT” is the extra punishment which is inflicted, adding a further punishment, it’s the total devastation of one's activity, one’s family and of what was created over many years of work.
Obviously such punishment is only for foreigners , and it’s not important if they have been there one day or an entire life . The condition of “resident privilege” is simply an euphemism , we are only guests until when , unfortunately, we fall into the machination of a justice farce.
The result is sure and prearranged ! We must hope in finding strength and luck to meet honest judges who will bring law to uphold our rights.
Under this further oppression, it’s possible to appeal to the Minister of State ( French officer out of the Principality, elected by the Prince and helped by the Government council , according to the 1930 Convention) . In the case of a refusal, it’s possible to appeal to the “ Supreme Tribunal ”.
Hearing of June 3 rd 2008
After having chosen as " magistrat rapporteur" Judge Frederic ROUVILLOIS, lawyer Yann LAJOUX held forth through the present documentation, and at the same time the Parisian lawyer tried to hold forth through falsehood. In fact a verbal trial which was falsified by Inspector Tiberti, an accusation for forgery was presented. According to what lawyer referred to me, such circumstances provoked the following reaction : "un étonnement des magistrats lors de mes explications contre cet argument fallacieux" (magistrates were really astonished when faced with my explanations regarding these fallacious subjects). Is justice maybe awaking?
The consequent answer to laywer Yann LAYOUX’s email on 17 June 2008
Following the request to know something, the verdict answer was : “Malheureusement, le Tribunal Suprême a rejeté votre requête. Je reste dans l'attente de recevoir l'Arrêt afin de connaître exactement la motivation, et ne manquerai pas de vous l'adresser pour information." translation : Unfortunately, the Supreme Court refused your request. Awaiting for the final verdict to know the motivations, I will send to you a copy for your report “ It’s obvious that it was necessary to read the motivations to know the certainty of the doubts, the falsehoods they would tell and the documental manipulations that would emerged.
Examination of the Supreme Court on 17 June 2008
On 24 June 2008 lawyer Layoux sent me the verdict. Four pages, in which the main point was about Hullin and Tiberti’s falsehood. It’s obvious that if I were right, they would have disproved Judge Landwerlin, who showed off his being judge : he supported Tiberti’s falsehood, he invited the witnesses to stay in the Court Room during the audience, modified the bills of indictment and furthermore he tried to find the whole rogatory in Rome of which he had only 24 pages instead of 1,400 of the whole dossier. This is the confirmation that justice works through FALSEHOOD !
|