Читать книгу Your Majesty, please open your eyes! Your lords are lying to you. They are using you to crush the system - Elena Vassilieva - Страница 3

Actually, by making the title «YOUR MAJESTY, PLEASE OPEN YOUR EYES! Your lords are lying to you. They are using you to crush the system», I was not addressing today’s King, but his late mother, Queen Elisabeth.

The book was planned to be published in April 2021, when the Domestic Abuse Bill, approved by both houses of parliament, was sent to the Queen for signature. At the same time, I uploaded a draft on Amazon and even set the date for release, but then I changed my mind.

Now, for various reasons, I decided to return to this topic. During this time, the matter raised by me in 2020—2021 has not lost its relevance, but on the contrary has increased.

From the way the title is worded, it is clear that the author is trying to intervene, to warn, to stop events from happening at the last moment, before it’s too late and irreparable damage happens. The author sort of shouts «SOS».

It is also clear from the title that by the time the work was written, the author had already tried all possible methods to draw the attention of the members of Parliament to this subject. It is clear that the author has already tried unsuccessfully to attract the attention of both Houses of Parliament to the risks contained in the law they were approving. In the title, the author named the main risk inherent within, namely the DESTRUCTION of the SYSTEM of BRITISH LAW.

And indeed the legal system is being destroyed by the new law. Elements of the establishment of a regime defined as «totalitarian» are increasingly manifesting themselves in the UK.

It may seem strange that the only person who warned in advance about the risk of the emergence of elements of a totalitarian regime in the UK came from a foreigner living abroad. In fact, the alarm came from Moscow addressed to British law makers, who were «making» something irreparable.

Why would I state that the «system is crushed»? Someone could say that apparently the way the law system is performing is the same as it has always performed.

I want to draw attention to a strange phenomenon: among the documents published in preparation for the discussion of the Bill

1. THERE WAS NO DOCUMENT THAT WOULD ANALYZE THE LAW FROM A LEGAL POINT OF VIEW RATHER THAN EMOTIONAL.

2. There is no police statistics which would justify the importance and urgency of criminalization «crime of abuse».

The shocking fact is that while «abuse» is criminalized, it is not legally defined. This means when somebody is accused of «abuse», they are not given any option to prove their innocence. Any action/omission of action results in criminal prosecution and results in an automatic guilty judgement.

For example. Let’s say an innocent person is accused of some kind of crime, such as threat, robbery or fraud. Defending himself, he points to the law, in which the elements of this crime are prescribed. In the event that there is no corpus delicti in the actions of this person. Having found no elements in his actions, as described in the law, the judge will find him not guilty of the crime. In case of allegations of «abuse», the judge has no legal instruments to produce a not guilty sentence. Someone accused of «domestic violence» has a small chance of being declared not guilty, while allegations of «domestic abuse» leads to an automatic guilty judgement.

People always knew that they do not run risk of being accused of committing a crime unless they commit some action prohibited by the law. Since «abuse» is not defined, people do not know what actions they should avoid in order not to be accused.

People will always live in constant fear of accusation and conviction.

In other words, «abuse» is nothing but a tool of intimidation.

Interestingly, the British parliament is still the only one in the world to criminalize «abuse». No any parliament of the world has assumed risk of criminalizing «abuse». Neither Canada, nor the USA, nor Australia, nor New Zealand, nor small island states.

I AM PUBLISHING THE DOCUMENTS IN ORDER TO SHOW THAT I HAVE WARNED MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT ABOUT THE RISKS INHERENT WITHIN CERTAIN ARTICLES. I START FROM THE VERY LAST DOCUMENT

.