Star Chambers & Re-Presentations

Chapter Version 1.1 [21MAR2013]

In a previous Chapter I said that you can't play Chess without understanding the layout of the board, and the attributes of each Chess Piece. (I could have added that you also need to understand the ultimate objective of all of your Chess Moves, of course).

The 'layout of the board'

This is really the same thing as saying "What does the board consist of?" or, in the context of what we call 'Courts', "What do the Courts consist of?". And the answer has - to some extent - already been give in a previous Chapter i.e. in a Common Law Court, with a Petty Jury of 12 people, you have a Court of Law.

For this reason Common Law Courts i.e. Courts of Law, can often be known as Courts de jure (Courts of Justice).

Other 'Courts' - which deal with "Legislation", as opposed to "Law" (again, previously explained), are not dealing in "Law", so they can't accurately be called 'Courts of Law', can they?

Even though they are called 'Courts of Law' in general parlance - but that is purely by deceptive consensus.

What they actually are, is better described as 'Star Chambers'. Places ('rooms') where, historically, tyranny reined full swing.

Causing such abominations to be banned.

You can fully read up on Star Chambers by clicking here. (Please note that Wikipedia just parrots a 'normal objectively-written' description and definition. If the Writers of that article had ever been taken to, and 'processed' in, a real, historic, Star Chamber, it is possible that their description would have been 'slightly less objective', and considerably more 'subjective').

Nevertheless that article does point out that Star Chambers were banned, henceforth, in 1641.

So, there must have been something seriously wrong with them, I suggest. What was wrong was, of course, the construction of them i.e. those who ran them, and the way they were run. Which was a recipe for tyranny.

Now where did I read the phrase 'recipe for tyranny'? Yes ... it was in a previous Chapter!

Magistrates Courts and County Courts are simply Star Chambers under different names. Which is the usual trick. Ban something, and then just slowly feed it back into the system, under a different name - and NO-ONE NOTICES!

In a similar manner to Courts of Law being known as Courts de jure, these erstwhile Star Chambers as often described as Courts de facto (Courts 'of fact'. Courts that just 'exist' without rhyme or reason. A 'de facto standard', is a standard that just simply exists, as an accepted fact of life).

The 'attributes of each Chess Piece'

Judges, Lawyers, Barristers, Solicitors, Magistrates, Clerks are 'Officers of the Court', by definition. Now, it may be reasonably assumed that their PRIMARY PRIORITY is 'to apply Justice'.

But, unfortunately, it isn't!

Their PRIMARY PRIORITY is 'to the Court' (whatever that may mean!)

Their SECONDARY PRIORITY is 'to the General Public (again, whatever that may mean!)

In the case of Barrister and Solicitors, their THIRD PRIORITY is 'to the Client' (you know - the one pays their wages?) And, because their FIRST PRIORITY is 'to the Court aka Star Chamber', if the Star Chamber says "Jump!", they will respond "How high?". They will not respond "It's not in my Client's best interests for me to jump".

I hope, by those examples, the situation is being made clear?

But, there's more.

What, exactly, is the status of 'the Client', anyway? And the answer to that is "A Ward of the Court aka Star Chamber". A 'ward', whose GUARDIAN is the Barrister or Solicitor.

Children are made 'wards'. And adults are made 'guardians' of those children.

When you go into a Star Chamber, represented ('re-presented to the Star Chamber in a different way') by a Barrister or Solicitor, you are being re-presented as a child - no matter what your age, in years, may be.

You are being re-presented as a child who 'doesn't understand what's going on around them, and requiring an adult guardian, in the form of the Barrister or Solicitor, to protect them, and interpret things for them'. In other words you are being re-presented as 'an imbecilic child!'

The 'Chess Moves'

When you are re-presented by a Barrister or Solicitor, they are responsible for the 'Chess Moves'. And, remember their priorities, that will determine their 'moves' - 'duty to the Star Chamber', 'duty to the General Public' ... finally 'duty to you as their Client'. But, of course, their overriding duty, will be to themselves - to make as much money, as possible, for themselves, from what transpires.

The solution is simple. Represent yourself. As a Litigant-in-Person, whose sole duty is to themselves. And learn how to do that, by understanding the Chess Board.

Previous Chapter : Next Chapter

(This page produced in its entirety on Veronica's Local Web Organiser Veronica: of the Chapman family, 2006-2013)