"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1901, Section 109 states… When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid. Common Law and the Commonwealth of Australia Act 1901 Constitution guarantee the right of citizens to go about their lawful business unhindered by the police or anyone else as long as you are not suspected of committing a crime. Common Law is the highest law in the land and therefore all State laws must be consistent with Common Law. 

The State Acts that the police rely on to justify stopping drivers for a Random Breath Test (RBT) are inconsistent with the law of the Commonwealth and Common law, and that makes them invalid.

Being pulled over for a Random Breath Test does not constitute a crime. Therefore, the police have no right to pull you over without due cause, or to make any demands on a citizen, as confirmed in these court decisions. We repeat: The following judgments make it very clear that the police do not have the power or authority to stop you for any reason unless they suspect you have committed a crime.
 

Fines and Infringements, and the law

 

Did you know that Section 8, sub-section 12 of the Imperial Acts Application Act dictates that “All promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void”?

Quite simply, that means that, until you have been convicted of something by a court of competent jurisdiction, ALL fines are illegal.

 

That means speeding fines, parking fines, red light camera fines, infringement notices, expiation notices, failure to vote fine, failure to register dog fines and ANY other type of fine you can name, are ALL completely illegal!

 

Yes, the Imperial Acts Application Act is an Act of the Parliament of Victoria but if you go to our Commonwealth Constitution 1901 and refer to Sections 116 and 117, you will see that ALL states have to give full force and effect to the Victorian Act, and you cannot be punished or penalised because you live in another State that does not have that same Act, has repealed it, or has changed it in some way.

 

And, furthermore, even if there was no such thing as an Imperial Acts Application Act, the Imperial Acts would still apply anyway because, again, as is stipulated in the Commonwealth Constitution, all the laws that applied in England at Federation still apply today, because only the UK Parliament can repeal them.

 

We would also like to point out that any fine is issued to your ALL CAPS name or CESTUI QUE VIE TRUST, and not you, and that is another major argument that you need to get your head around.

 

Non-Driver - Traveller Card

Start filming - Wind the window down slightly
Policy enforcer - Do you know why I pulled you over?

Man - "I stopped because you had your emergency lights on, what is your name, badge number and insurance details please?"

"Did you put your emergency lights on?" Ensure he answers the question so he understands what he has done.

"Are you not aware that those lights are only to be used in an emergency situation? What is the emergency?"
 

Policy enforcer - Give me your license now for purposes of identification. Are you refusing to give your license and identify yourself?

Man - Exercising your right to silence, you can respond with "I don't answer questions"
& "You must have me confused with someone that answers questions"
 

At this point you can hand over your NON-Driver Traveller Card.
This card stipulates all the case law that sets precedent over any Legislation, Act, Statute, Rule or Mandate that may give police the impression they have the right to detain you for purposes of seeking identification detail.
 

Here is where you must stay on point. He/she will say many words to confuse you, intentionally or not, he will be upset you are not conforming to his authority.
 

Stay on point always. You have rock solid case laws to refer back to. 
 

Regina v Banner (1970) VR 240 at p 249 - the Full Bench of the Northern Territory Supreme
Court In this judgement, the NT Supreme Court handed down a ruling that,

"(Police officers) have no power whatever to arrest or detain a citizen for the purpose of questioning him or of facilitating their investigations. It matters not at all whether the questioning or the  investigation is for the purpose of enabling them to ascertain whether he is the person guilty of a crime known to have been committed or is for the purpose of enabling them to discover whether a crime has or has not been committed. If the police do so act in purported exercise of such a power, their conduct is not only destructive of civil liberties but it is unlawful."

Andrew Hamilton Vs Director of Public Prosecutions - Justice Stephen Kaye - Melbourne
Supreme Court ruling - 25 November 2011

"It is an ancient principle of the Common Law that a person not under arrest has no obligation to
stop for police or answer their questions. And there is no statute that removes that right. The
conferring of such a power on a police officer would be a substantial detraction from the
fundamental freedoms which have been guaranteed to the citizen by the Common Law for
centuries."

 

Magistrate Duncan Reynolds - Melbourne - July 2013

"There is no common law power vested in police giving them the unfettered right to stop or detain a person and seek identification details. Nor, is s.59 of the (Road Safety) Act a statutory source of such power."


NOTE: None of the above precedents have been overturned on appeal or in the High Court. They still stand today and you can point out to the police that they are acting unlawfully if they continue to detain you without due cause to believe you have committed a crime.


 

Constitution s109 - State law inconsistent w law of Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former invalid.

Right to remain silent - Baff v NSW Police Commissioner

DPP (vic) v Hamilton - 2011

Ibitt v NSW police - RBT’s illegal

Kaba v Vic Police - Right to travel unmolested

 

Probable Cause - Crimes Act 1958 s456AA - No legal requirement to give name & address

 

IF VIEWING ON MOBILE DEVICE SCROLL TO THE  VERY  BOTTOM FOR PROBABLY CAUSE!