I.C.H.O.R. Trust

(I)nfinite (C)ovenant for (H)uman rights, (O)bligations and (R)eparation




Back    Next    Statment's

The Court is comprised of all in attendance including the public who witness the process. The Court and the Crown prosecution service have been given a copy of this statement.

The Claimant is an employee of the Home Office attempting to commit theft of rights by deception of authority and by a FRAUD ON A DUTY OF CARE.

The Claimant is an employee of the Home Office and the Home Office is committing a fraud on a duty of care by failing to give legally sustainable replies to letters it is their duty to give and my right to be shown by them because I am a beneficiary of this trust. Therefore, the claimant having vicarious liability (liability that flows both up to his superiors and down from his superiors to him) pretends to exercise a duty of care when in reality he must first prove he is a FIT PERSON TO MAKE THE CLAIM HE MAKES AGAINST ME because if he cannot produce the authorities the trustee of the ICHOR Trust has made public that he wishes to see at ichortrust.co.uk then a fraud of authority will have unravelled the claimants authority to prosecute me for anything. And the Fraud they both commit is best explained as follows:-

When you are affected by something irrespective of whatever it is that is affecting you, you may request to be shown by the body affecting you the authority they need to affect you at your own expense.

Otherwise, it is obvious that for the service of being affected you may offer to contract unless sufficient authority is shown to make you suffer the affect in question at your own expense. Otherwise, you would be a slave forced to suffer an effect at your own expense and slavery is illegal. Therefore as rights are property one must have a right to contract for continuing to go without being shown what one has a right to see. That right, the right to see authority requested, is obviously tradable for as much as one may wish to trade it because it is a right and rights are property and possessions all in one.

A fraud on a duty of care and deception of authority is proven when authorities relied on cannot be shown because they do not exist. And if they do exist but, are not produced fraud on a duty of care is proven when the Government refuses to admit a mistake within 40 days and so gets into debt for £900 thousand million million by accepting our take it or leave it offer for CONTINUING to go without our right to be shown by those who rely on them the authorities they must rely on.

The Crime of a fraud on a duty of care is made even more serious when victims of fraud wait almost nine years and then ask government what they have done about it and still do not get a legally sustainable reply even though they can prove fraud beyond any doubt whatsoever with documentary evidence which victims (Hosts) have put in the public domain at www.ichortrust.co.uk.

The Lord Chancellors Department actually states in a letter that it is the duty of the Home Office to reply and obviously a legally sustainable reply must be more than a mere acknowledgement because to exercise a duty of care the Home Office must answer the questions raised other wise it will always remain liable under contract law for £900 thousand million million plus 2% compound interest

Back    Next    Statment's

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |








Home | Law of contractThe CovenantStatementsLetters to | Letters from | Links | Contact Us |
You can contact the trustee at trustee@ichortrust.co.uk or
Aabbex© Computers WebMaster on 0870 803 1720 or click here