BREAKING PRESS ALERT EU REFERENDUM WILL BE UNLAWFUL WHETHER THE RESULT BE REMAIN OR LEAVE DL 4PAGES 22 JUNE 2016 0410

Download …

BREAKING PRESS ALERT EU REFERENDUM WILL BE UNLAWFUL WHETHER THE RESULT BE REMAIN OR LEAVE DL 4PAGES 22 JUNE 2016 0410

THE UK EU REFERENDUM WILL BE UNLAWFUL WHETHER THE RESULT BE REMAIN OR LEAVE

 

Applied I F Limited ( AIFL ) #QUIXOTE INTERIM REPORT

22 JUNE 2016 04.44 UK BST

 

  1. Whatever the outcome of the EU REFERENDUM , REMAIN OR LEAVE, the Election itself will be UNLAWFUL
  2. The Applied I F Limited #QUIXOTE Interim Report of a Politically Independent and Ongoing National Pro Bono Forensic Investigation into Electoral Voting Irregularities including Alleged Fraud by Added False Votes ( Ghost Votes ) at the 2015 General Election, allege that the RESULT of the Referendum will be ULTRA VIRES
  3. This is because the Voting COUNT MODEL created and used by the Electoral Commission as its own yardstick in claiming to Regulate the forthcoming UK EU Referendum on 23 June 2016 does not itself comply with Electoral Law and is in Alleged Breach of a number of Acts of Parliament and the Link to the Electoral Commission’s own Voting COUNT MODEL on their Web Site follows in Paragraph 4
  4. http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/our-work/our-research/electoral-data
  5. Public Disclosure in the Interests of Justice and in the Public Interest has and is being made upon the two WordPress Blogs by Applied I F Limited
    1. http://www.sleazeexpo.wordpress.com
    2. http://www.wirralinittogether.wordpress.com
  6. Since the AIFL #QUIXOTE Forensic Investigation realised as early as June 2015 that the Electoral Commission’s own COUNT MODEL ( Labelled by #QUIXOTE as the “ BLUE SEWER ”  ) was not fit for purpose, an alternative COUNT MODEL had to be created in order to be used as a Forensic Tool and which was capable of being used to both AUDIT and to test for, and examine, PERCIEVED Electoral Irregularities, including Fraud
  7. The Electoral Commission’s own Voting COUNT MODEL, labelled the BLUE SEWER has been disclosed upon the above two Blogs and the Link is :-
  8. https://sleazeexpo.wordpress.com/blue-sewer-model/
  9. Such a Methodology and any Analytical Interrogatory Tests, had to be designed to be able to cope with any added False Votes or Unlawful Removal of Legal Votes, ( Vote Rigging ) and to be able to deal with any illegal tampering of the Election Voting Process
  10. Unlike the clearly apparent failings of the Electoral Commission’s own Voting COUNT MODEL, such an alternative had to accurately reflect, and be compatible with, Statutory Acts of Parliament
  11. Thus an alternative Voting COUNT MODEL and which did not breach Electoral Law was created and was labelled by #QUIXOTE as the “ GREEN TARGET ” Voting COUNT MODEL
  12. https://sleazeexpo.wordpress.com/green-target-model/
  13. In Fact 4 Separate Stand-Alone Tests were devised by AIFL #QUIXOTE, which are to be Disclosed on the two Election Fraud Blogs
  14. Using these Tests, AIFL #QUIXOTE has already confirmed the views of District Judge Richard Mawrey QC that postal vote fraud was occurring on an industrial scale
  15. Disclosure of such evidence has already begun and is being Publicly disclosed online within the two WordPress Blogs in Paragraph 5 above
  16. One example Disclosed upon the sleazeexpo.wordpress.com Blog is the Proof of the Rigging of the Election Result of the Rochester & Strood Seat, Associated Press Reference Number 475
  17. The Link is here :- https://sleazeexpo.wordpress.com/quix-excel-475-constituency-rochester-and-strood/
  18. This is just one example of a #QUIX XXX EXCEL TEST, where in this case XXX is 475

RELEVANT ACTS OF PARLIAMENT USED TO CREATE GREEN TARGET VOTING COUNT MODEL There are Three ( 3 ) Acts which AIFL #QUIXOTE conclude are necessary and sufficient to explicitly Define how a Legal COUNT MODEL should have been defined by the Electoral Commission and the Links to these Acts are shown as follows in Paragraphs 17 to 22

19. Statutory Declarations Act 1835 > 1835 c. 62 (Regnal. 5_and_6_Will_4)

20. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/5-6/62/contents

21. Ballot Act 18 July 1872 > [ 35 & 36 VICT. ] Parliamentary and Municipal Elections [ CH . 33 ]

22. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/35-36/33/contents/enacted

23. Representation of the People Act 1983 > 1983 c. 2

24. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/contents

25. Whilst these 3 Acts of Parliament are sufficient, there are numerous further Acts which are Associated with the Electoral Process, many which utilise and incorporate various aspects of these 3 particular Acts

26. For the convenience of Editors, Recipients, and Electoral Fraud Regulators of this Press Alert, a convenient List of some of these Associated Statutes and Legal Electoral References can be provided free of charge upon request

27. It is not claimed that the List of Statutes nor the Alleged Breaches are exhaustive

28. Taking the Ballot Act 1872, whilst this is shown on the Parliamentary Archives as the Ballot Act, and when the Act is sourced, and the image is downloaded, the full Title is shown as:-

29. [ 35 & 36 VICT. ] Parliamentary and Municipal Elections [ CH . 33 ]

30. Relevant Pages and Sections from the 54 Pages of the Ballot Act which for convenience have been Listed as follows :-

A. Page 24 Sections 14 to 15

B. Page 25 Sections 16 to 23

C. Page 26 Sections 24 to 26

D. Page 27 Sections 27 to 30

E. Page 28 Sections 31 to 36

F. Page 29 Sections 37 to 40

G. Page 30 Sections 41 to 43

31. To Sum Up the relevant Sections, these are Sections 14 to 43 of 7 pages in length

           EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

32. AIFL #QUIXOTE Allege that, whatever the Result of the EU Referendum, either or both of the two opposing sides will each be in a position to Legally challenge the other, and Lawyers are invited to examine the Legal Remedies which appear to be available

33. It is respectfully suggested that any such Remedy should not be restricted to Judicial Review, but would almost certainly appear to Applied I F Limited to require Remedies for alleged Criminal Offences, these being in addition to any Remedies which might be sought via Civil Actions

34. Indeed, the remarks made on 1 June 2016 by District Judge Justin Barron at the Folkestone Magistrate’s Court should perhaps be borne in mind by the Appropriate Regulators, the Link is shown in the following Paragraph 31

35. http://www.thanetgazette.co.uk/kent-police-granted-bid-extend-tory-election/story-29348758-detail/story.html

EXECUTIVE PRECIS

36. It is alleged that the pending EU Referendum Election will be

A. UNLAWFUL and ULTRA VIRES, and

B. FRAUDULENT

ADDENDUM > BEING COPY OF EMAIL TO GS  AIFL DATED 7 JANUARY 2016 > FROM MR FRANK PIKE OF HM POLICE COLLEGE > FOR AIFL #QUIXOTE TO WORK JOINTLY WITH DCC GARETH CANN, NATIONAL LEAD FOR THE AUTHORISED PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE APP  ( COVERING 45 POLICE FORCES IN ENGLAND AND WALES ) FOR POLICING ELECTIONS AND THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION

37. Here is the Verbatim Email

From: Frank Pike <Frank.Pike@college.pnn.police.uk>
Date: 7 January 2016 at 17:03:32 GMT
To: “gsgeofstansfield@icloud.com” <gsgeofstansfield@icloud.com>
Subject: Policing Elections APP

Dear Mr Stansfield,

I have been passed your details by a colleague, ( Name redacted ) . I have also been passed, in confidence, your email correspondence regarding alleged voting fraud and concerns regarding the current process / systems for identifying and tackling this issue.

To introduce myself, I was, in a previous role, responsible for the development and publication of Policing Elections APP. I still have some responsibilities in this area, albeit my involvement is more around maintenance of the content in partnership with the National Policing Lead (ACC Gary Cann) and the Electoral Commission. I am not a practitioner nor expert in this field of policing (we acted as facilitators to bring together the expertise in this area of policing).

In terms of the issues you raise…. With regards to the allegations of voting fraud, my advice would be to report your concerns and findings to your local force in the first instance. You may already plan to do this as I believe you’re meeting your local force in the near future? 

In terms of the process for introducing new systems / models / amending the APP…

The content (including amendments) is signed off by the National Policing Lead. I meet periodically with his staff officer and members of the Electoral Commission to discuss any APP content issues / suggested changes which require attention. Since the publication of the APP, we have only had to make minor amends (eg, changes to contact details).

What you are proposing sounds like a fundamental change to process and policy.

In terms of progressing, I would suggest that your model would need to be tested in terms of application and efficacy compared to current methods.

If you are agreeable, I can raise this with Mr Cann’s staff officer and my contacts at the Electoral Commission and maybe we could collectively work through next steps?

Best wishes,

Frank 

Frank Pike
Counter Terrorism Policing Standards Manager 
Crime & Criminal Justice 
College of Policing 
Leamington Road, Ryton-on-Dunsmore, Coventry, Warwickshire. CV8 3EN 
T: +44 (0)7770 597341  Frank.Pike@college.pnn.police.uk  www.college.police.uk
Applied I F Limited

21 June 2016 UK BST 03.03

ALL WORDS INCLUDING TITLE ETC 579