FILE ON DEMAND Dear Sir/Madam, There are several issues caetaris paribus that have arisen to the attention of the international community that make it necessarily impossible for my acting sovereign being to comply with your commands in order to remain within my law which is my Bible that I received at my Christening on the 7th February 1970 which evidenced a Birth Certificate provided by receipt of a copy of an entry. Firstly you have been invoiced for the sum of £50 for continuing to send correspondence via the Universal Postal Union under Swiss Federal Law presuming authority under any corporate heading other than that of the Vatican. The fifty pounds is levied since the content of your communication caused me to raise my eyebrows as noted in my schedule [terms included]. Another charge is levied for £250,000 for the necessity of my supplying you with this letter that you are reading (the original copy of which I hold for proof of authenticity) also noted in my schedule. Since the One Peoples Public Trust foreclosed the corporate system run by the Rothschild dynasty et al on the 25th December 2012 following the Paradigm Report; thereby leaving only the Vatican intact as a trusted corporation, there has now been ample time for the ceasing of such claims with neither current corpus delicti nor locus standi, nor either the mens rea or actus reus demonstrated by me to you for any indictments. The Triffin Dilemma has manifested a state of slavery within the global monetary system wherein the fictitious debts of fiat values are repaid by the blood & sweat of the common people prompting the reinstitution of Common Law Authorities worldwide. It is a responsibility for every individual to appraise him or her self of the current laws and not rely on third party say so including, but not limited to, the BBC and the Houses of Parliament whom are both implicated in ongoing sexual deviance against children by participation or silence. I have no doubt, Sir/Madam, that you, the reader, yourself believe that I owe the money and that this is something you were told by a third party rather than something you yourself have ascertained by your own efforts. This alone is a dereliction of fiduciary capacity to which every human being has a duty of care, particularly so under the Geneva Convention and Nuremburg Codes by International Law, and the natural trust between each of ourselves, The Christ and God as the basis of personal Equity. As a Common Law Sheriff, I, Adam Yates, having taken public oath to uphold the Common Laws, cannot allow the imposition of this artifice into my personal realm so as to commit the crime of fraud by impersonation since the capitalised name you are referring to “A-D-A-M-Y-A-T-E-S” is a securitised entity not of my ownership nor creation at Common Law. Securitisation (the practice of dividing estates in land into legal and equitable interests to perform Usury and subvert alloidal rights of the Sovereign Domain aka “personal space” or the right to privacy) has been found to be an illegal practice and such activities have rendered the Rothschild owned society guilty of Usury which is the practice our Coventry Common Law Court Authority has been formed to oust. I, Adam Yates, herein invoke the Essene Christ; Advocate and Most Wonderful Counsellor under the Right of Special Visitation to be heard in this matter. At Common Law the Public Recorder should enter this case as an alleged mistaken identity and adjudge it as a Public Nuisance since the creators of the trust were/are the Rothschild created fiat system. As history shows, all such systems fail hence the formation and actions of the One Peoples' Public Trust. Furthermore there is an outstanding unrebutted legal claim to the seat of the Vatican since one B. Marshall currently residing Mr Brian Leonard Golightly Marshall, 103 Northshore Avenue, Toogoom QLD Australia 4655, has provided family ancestry, astrological, mathematical, chromasomal scientific and computer confirmed optical datum as evidence of Himself to be the irrefutable incorporation of Jesus Christ reincarnate and the most Royal man alive by a British birth lineage, displaced to Australia due to the Cook voyage. Now He has now returned to reclaim His Throne in Rome. At Common Law, since these claims have not been rebutted, they stand as truth in law. Mr. Marshall's documents, I, Adam Yates, consider to be binding since tacit agreement may be found from the current Vatican Administration in their omission of a public declaration on Mr. Marshall's brief. https://www.dropbox.com/s/e9suw4hf48oni2x/Fax%20sent%20to%20ICC%20and%20the%20Australian%20High%20Court %20January%202015.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/wrch9lj4at43dj9/Roman%20Pontiff%20Emeritus%20Benedict%20XVI%20Apostolic%20Letter %20Signed.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/gsb3x815qd4g0zv/Vatican%20III.pdf This is not currently being reported on by any mainstream news outlets since those too are owned by the snake with two heads. Mr. Marshall's legally noticed document entitled VATICAN III is now my guide in full renunciation to involve myself with former cestui que vie allonge particulars such as yourselves as directed by Admiralty Insured Oleron Principles built around the Lex Rhodia, wherein I invoke right to eject the cargo, and; in Common Law I consider an Action of Devastatit against HMRC and all other national bodies, in particular the BBC and Houses of Parliament for their roles in the trafficking of narcotics, child sex commodities and procuration of funds for foreign wars under the Rothschild dynasty against the rules within RICO. You, acting on behalf of Her Majesty's Government CIK: 0001452617 c/o Davis Polk and Wardell, 99, Gresham Street London EC2V7NG X0 00000, IRS No.: 000000000, and; the United Kingdom Fund Inc. CIK: 0000732892, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY10020, IRS No.: 133418823, SIC: 0000, both being situated as securities in the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, are termed as 'unseated creditors' and if you continue to pester me then we will initiate action against yourselves under both 2007 Anti Money Laundering legislation as well as the Theft Act 1968 S.17 “false accounting” and attempting to gain money by deception (see relevant section) in the UK and under RICO 1977 in all other jurisdictions. The existence of the IRS itself was not ratified by Congress and represent the criminal organised gang behind the creation of the IRS Trust Funds in the Philippines and in Puerto Rico and The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, also created without Congress approval. http://www.usa-the-republic.com/revenue/BATF-IRS%20Criminal%20Report.html Thus a money laundering operation is in effect since revenue is attorned between a land mass and an island into trust funds. For you to continue contacting myself in these matters constitutes harassment at Common Law and charges against you personally FILE ON DEMAND [the reader] for psychiatric damages may arise at your own liability. I enclose a copy of my schedule for every further communication I am sent from you, my former Masters. Constitutionally, the Bill of Rights 1689, guarantees me that the threat of harm or loss over a monetary debt voids the debt, thus the debt, as you see it, is now settled under the British Constitution. The Forcible Entry Act 1381 forbids the raiding of the property at which I take up housekeeping under derivative entitlements under the Human Rights Acts that render the actions you are planning to be illegal in pursuit of a monetary debt in the first instance. There has been no public complaint made against me therefore no police report nor license granted by Clerk of Record for any forcible coercions exists meaning due process has been roundly sidestepped by the sending of the letters in the first place and their existence is evidence of fraud by menace posing as a public authority with impersonators of Police Constables as Enforcers, or common assault. Parliament of England Chapter 5 Ric 2 St 1 c 7 Repealing legislation The Criminal Law Act 1977, ss. 13(2)(a) & 65(5) & Sch. 13 Status: The Forcible Entry Act 1381 (5 Ric 2 St 1 c 7) was an Act of the Parliament of the Kingdom of England. It created a statutory offence of forcible entry which superseded the common law offence.[3] It is written in the Anglo-Norman language. It has been translated as follows: “And also the King defendeth, that none from henceforth make any entry into lands and tenements, but in case where entry is given by the law; and in such case not with strong hand, nor with multitude of people, but only in [peaceable][4] and easy manner. And if any man from henceforth do the contrary, and thereof be duly convict, he shall be punished by imprisonment.[5]” There were doubts about the interpretation of this Act. It has been suggested that the words translated as "that none from henceforth make any entry into lands and tenements, but in case where entry is given by the law" should be construed as making any unauthorised entry an offence, even where peaceful. It appears that this was not the intention of those responsible for the Act, and the courts did not at any time construe it that way.[6] Halsbury's Statutes, Third Edition, volume 18, page 405 1. The citation of this Act by this short title was authorised for the United Kingdom by section 5 of, and Schedule 2 to, the Statute Law Revision Act 1948. Due to the repeal of those provisions, it is now authorised by section 19(2) of the Interpretation Act 1978.