The option to have a charter and therefore be represented as a group with an “Artificial Personality” is redundant as we did not have one at the time the eviction notices were issued and cannot be done retrospectively. We may still decide to have a charter at a later date.

In order to challenge the COL in court, ideally 20 named individuals as representative of OLSX.

Clarification – why do we need to be named?

Paul – our solicitors and counsel need to be instructed by someone in order to act

NELLY ADDS: THE JUDGE EVEN SAID HE COULDN’T CONTINUE WITHOUT NAMES SO THEIR CASE WOULD HAVE BEEN THROWN OUT…

Point – with no name we have no rights. No name means no identity which means the COL will win by default.

NELLY ADDS: WHAT THEY WANT IS AJOINDER TO A LEGAL PERSON (SEE BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 9TH EDITION FOR FULL CORRECT DEFINITION OF THE WORDS)

Paul – Solicitors ideally want to meet people before court appearance and have a duty to represent their clients

Up to the judge to decide whether or not named individuals can come forward to be named after the first hearing. Solicitors will try to keep list open but entirely up to judge.

Clarification – what status do you need to have to be named? Have a tent? Full time camper? Come here once?

Paul – anyone who identifies themselves as being part of OLSX can be named

Facilitator – 3 points on this matter

Ben – have been thinking about this for the last week, I have assets and feel it is important that we have a range of people who are named including some who are prepared and able to put assets on the line. I have been inspired by Martin Luther King’s quote in reference to the Vietnam War “times come when silence is betrayal”.

Point – John Cooper is a freeman of the City of London there are concerns this may be a conflict of interest

Point – Cooper may have had to say all sorts of things to be a QC, I had to swear to die for the Queen to become Australian, I never meant it but I had to do it for my nationality

Point – he has not denied he is a freeman, would we have a banker represent us?

Point – have any of you considered that he may be getting a lot of grief from City types for representing us?

Paul – John Cooper has been with us from the start. He is committed but cannot “join” OLSX as this would be a potential conflict of interest in the eyes of the law. He has made it very clear that his first duty is to the law and his second duty is to his clients. Nothing else matters. He must also be prepared to put himself into conflict with the court to represent his clients. JC is not charging us a penny and though I have healthy scepticism about lawyers I am more than satisfied that he is a good man and we can trust him. He is a top gun lawyer and we are fortunate to have him on our team.
The GA last week approved him and Karen????? Solicitors to represent us.
We have 12 named people so far. Talk to me if you are prepared to be named.
There is a principal about the straw man, it would be mean and vicious to bankrupt individuals.

NELLY ADDS: SOMEONE SAID OATHS AREN’T IMPORTANT.. WHAT ABOUT THE OATH THE JUDGE SWEARS TO UPHOLD THE LAW… ISN’T THAT IMPORTANT?

I AM CONCERNED THAT WHEN I WENT TO THE WORKING GROUP LEGAL TEAM MEETING.. THERE WAS ONLY ONE PERSON THERE… AND HE WASN’T PREPARED TO LISTEN TO ANY VOICE OTHER THEN HIS OWN.

I BELIEVE THAT ALL LEGAL DEALINGS SHOULD BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT… NOT SHROUDED IN SECRECY WITH ONLY ONE PERSON CONTROLLING THINGS… THERE ARE SOME VERY TALENTED COMMON LAW SPECIALISTS AMONGST US.

The oath he swore…

“I do solemnly swear that I will be good and true to our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second; that I will be obedient to the Mayor of this City; that I will maintain the Franchises and Customs thereof, and will keep this City harmless, in that which in me is; that I will also keep the Queen’s Peace in my own person; that I will know no Gatherings nor Conspiracies made against the Queen’s Peace, but I will warn the Mayor thereof, or hinder it to my power; and that all these points and articles I will well and truly keep, according to the Laws and Customs of this City, to my power.”

Interesting note that The Lord Mayor of London is also a St Paul’s Trustee. ex officio.

One thing, could you please reference why you say “potentially violently” (end para 1) as it sounds a little like spin with no verification?