Source: 02-07-2012 UK Column Full Story
Roger Hayes Arrested, Tried In Secret Court, Imprisoned at 0930 this morning, in scenes reminiscent of Stasi East Germany, 2 police cars and 4 policemen from Merseyside Police arrested British Constitution Group Chairman Roger Hayes at his Wirral home and drove away.

The first his family heard of him was at 18:30 this evening via a telephone call from a Warder in Liverpool prison, to say that Roger had been tried and sentenced to prison.

At no time were the family or any other members of the public informed of his arrest, and it is understood that he was tried in a secret court without a Jury.

Denied the right to argue his case, denied the right to a Jury, denied the right for the public to see justice being done, Roger was imprisoned in the secretive gulag system that Britain has become in 2012.

Roger's "crime" is that he has been refusing to pay his Council tax, because along with other state taxes, a proportion of the tax revenue gathered is being sent to the European Union, used to fund unlawful wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, and promote terrorism right around the world. To pay tax under these circumstances is, at the very least, unlawful under Section 15(3) of the Terrorism Act 2000.

Full Story

Update: 03-07-2012

Update On The Arrest Of Roger Hayes

Source: UK Column Full Story

We have just learned that Wirral Council, having issued proceedings against Roger Hayes for non payment of Council Tax, recently decided to enact their right for a Committal Hearing against Roger for his continued non-payment.

On Tuesday 26 June 2012 a Committal Hearing took place at which Wirral Council state that Roger failed to appear.

As a result the Judge issued a bench warrant for his arrest, and Roger was arrested yesterday morning. The Council spokesman either did not know or refused to name the Judge.

Following his arrest Roger was brought before a Magistrate and sentenced to 21 days. The Council spokesman either did not know or refused to name the Magistrate, and was unable to say how much, if any, notice of either hearing was given to the General Public.

At this point we would like to make a correction to our initial press release, and that is:

Roger Hayes "WITHELD" his Council Tax rather than "refused to pay" as we reported. This has important implications in his legal case.

The most important fact in Roger's arrest, trial and imprisonment is that nobody knows the detail of what happened to him. What were the names and numbers of the police officers? What was the Court? What was the number of the case? Who was the Magistrate or Judge? Were any public present to see justice being done?

Full Story

What the fuck?

I'm speechless.

Doesnt suprise me - I am sure hayes knew full well what the process is for those who do not pay council tax - it isnt as if he hasnt had chance after chance to state his case in court. He has lost on the grounds that he argued that he should not pay - The rhetoric in the above is somewhat hysterical and inaccurate.

Does our council tax actually go to the eu? anyone got any proof to substantiate that claim?

thoreau wrote: I absolutely support anyone who withholds or refuses to pay any tax to a treasonous government. If our local councils weren't complicit in the gross act of treason, they would be using their (our) financial funds and legal departments to challenge the national government, and the their policies both domestic and foreign.

Withheld or refused is just more legal BS! No one should be paying a penny to these people unless they agree with the policies of these extremely dubious organisations orchestrating this total system failure. Local government are nothing more than the foot soldiers of national government, responsible for running the extortion racket at a local level. Contributing to the waste of resources, sweeping reductions in services and accepting vast increased cost both direct and indirect on rate payers, to the incompetent, negligent, non-responsive in effective local official government departments is a criminal act which enables them to carry on year in year out. It's time we brought this farcical nonsense to an end.

£2000 a year to have a bin bag taken away once a fortnight is robbery.

Frog wrote:
The way you do that is leave the country

Frog wrote:
I agree.

andyh wrote:
Or just not pay it.

Way things are heading, it's not going to make much difference what country you're in.

To be honest he should of paid. We live in a corrupt world with gangsters running each country. These gangsters do not care about the legality of anything . I know its not right but what else can we do?

nirvana wrote:
Considering his position on the issues it's hardly surprising that he is making a stand! The Lawful Rebellion, The British Constitution Group, A Case for Treason and the UK Column groups are actively seeking solutions. These guys are walking the talk and they are making waves not that you will hear about it in the MSM.

andyh wrote:
When do you stop running? I'm not too sure heading to Ireland is exactly a step up from the UK especially over the last three years or so.

He'll still be required to pay the tax. That's the thing. I applaud his taking a stand, but I can't see how he can win - he can only make a martyr of himself if he continues to with-hold the money, because they'll continue to penalise him one way & another until he does.

Frog wrote:
Anythings a step up from the UK imho
In the UK I'd have no work, here my phone never stops ringing and thats for starters...

1 thing is deffo the same and thats the weather :p

Gilly wrote:
Well it's a numbers game all it takes is a big enough number of people to stand up. The vast majority of the population are totally predictable. They will accept the abuse of a few individuals as lawful in the full knowledge that it is anything but! This keeps the majority cowering in fear and eager to pay for the privilege of being screwed for generations to come. Where is the line?

Frog wrote:
A lot of people won't bother to look at the bigger picture. Their attitude will be that they have to pay the tax, so he should have to aswell.

I don't think people would credit how ruthless the authorities are.

A few years ago, I wrote a letter to the council, stating I'd temporarily stopped my monthly DD for council tax, and would resume paying once they'd informed me how much of it was ear-marked for Common Purpose training activities.

I got no response whatsoever - none - but a few weeks later (weeks, note - not months) my husband phoned me from work to say that to his confusion, annoyance, embarrassment and concern, he'd just been informed by his secretary that his employer had received attachment of earnings documentation for the council tax bill! He'd called them up straight away and paid the year's bill with his switch card.

Complete and utter bastards!

Gilly wrote:
This is correct. It leads on to the logical conclusion that one would spend the rest of one's life in jail if one didn't cough up the CT.

I don't see any alternative for the government to be honest. If they'll jail you once for it and you continue to not pay, they really must keep returning you to jail. If RH sticks to his guns and takes the gov down that route, then he really will have achieved something

The latest annual cost I can find for jailing a low security "offender" is circa £15k.
A quick bit of maths puts that at RH's stay of 21 days costing the taxpayer around £1k. Then of course one has to add in the costs incurred in hassling him and getting him to court etc. I'd suggest that the first month in jail costs far more than say the 12th month due to these other costs. So let's for argument's sake say the cost of his stay at HMP is £1500. Roughly equivalent to a year's CT for a 4 bed house down in Somerset.............Economic madness eh? Let alone anything else.

EDIT: Just noticed that I'd misread the annual cost of jailing someone. Apparently there is another 0 on the end So multiply the insanity by 10

Gilly wrote:
Perhaps the best approach would have been to take the employer to court for breaking your rights to withhold payment. The company should have with held the payment from both parties until the matter was settled. Effectively the government have circumvented the legal process and the compliance of the company makes them guilty by association.

The Common Purpose Exposed website is back up on line cpexposed.com/

I withheld my payment of Thatchers Poll Tax. (which was implemented in Scotland a year before the rest of the UK btw)
I stuck with that as long as possible/feasible.
Eventually I was served with a court order for a warrant sale.
We had two young kids and I'll admit to folding rather than put them through that turmoil.
To further complicate thing my salary was paid from a council grant to the voluntary organisation I worked for.
It was possible they would cease funding the salary and kill the project. They had already suspended a councillor for speaking against the tax at a meeting in the Centre we ran. We were on their radar.
They'll get you whichever way they can.
I did however go to the Sheriff Clerks/Bailiffs offices and paid the full amount, (for a couple of years plus), in single pound notes.

The tax eventually fell and there's more chance of catching a wild haggis than bumping into a Tory MP in Scotland since.

It's also worth mentioning the bogus and unlawful summonses that are sent out by councils when you fall behind.

For them that don't know, only a court can lawfully issue a summons. Councils regularly issue them on their own headed paper .Oh the mirth I've had on the tellyphone pointing that one out to the poor innocent receptionists Not one of the council reps I've chatted to has had the slightest inclination that they're being implicated in what is a highly unlawful act on a daily basis .

You raise a good point Dubmeup, but would Joe Public care enough to do anything about it? I don't wish to be negative, but I really don't think so.

The employer isn't allowed to play arbitrator, Froggy. If they hadn't sighted proof from him that he'd paid in full, they'd have been liable for prosecution for failing to comply with the garnishing order.

Gilly wrote: Sadly I'm in complete agreement....


(you can call me dub if you like, it saves on the Carpal Tunnel Syndrome )