Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: My Universal High Court ‘Habeas Corpus’ Court Order from 16th April 2008 peacefully & legally ends political science of legally unjustifiable adoption legislation, so I was illegally stopped from giving evidence on 21st June 2010 etc, because political scandal involves/d British Tory (Coalition) & Australian Labor political administrations incl. Sir Ken Jones (ACPO in UK & DAC in Victoria) & so called opposition while everyone argues over taxes in Old City in Jerusalem (11.10.2021)
My identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression.
I am completely blameless because I never chose to be adopted as a small child but all the politicians et al did choose as adults to be politicians et al.
There has never been any genuine privacy protecting adopted people’s personal information.
The politicians et al would find it a legal impossibility to persuade a jury they care about the peaceful freedom of expression of all adopted people, and particularly in the public space of a court, including with a jury.
It is self evident a jury would agree it is… legally unworkable for the revolving doors of politicians and robber media barons to illegally leak my adopted name along with false information on Mothers Day 26th March 2006 in the UK, before dodging my High Court ‘Habeas Corpus’ Court Order from 16th April 2008 that undeniably led to premeditated torture and attempted murder of me, because I would not need to pay money to and have the permission of a court for my identity of Donna Bugat to be “officially recognised” in the UK, with my Universal High Court ‘Habeas Corpus’ Court Order from 16th April 2008, which also means I do not need to pay money to and have the permission of a court in Melbourne, for my identity of Donna Bugat to be “officially” recognised.
No-one ever sought, or obtained my informed consent as an adopted person to adoption, despite the fact there is the reasonable and proportionate alternative of legally reviewable care arrangements until adulthood for vulnerable children separated from their own families for any reason.
My own case highlights there is obviously a very serious legal problem with adopted people who entirely naturally reject the political science of legally unjustifiable adoption legislation effectively being disenfranchised from peacefully participating in democratic politics.
The fact the revolving doors of politicians and robber media barons illegally leaked my adopted name along with false information on Mothers Day 26th March 2006 before politicians et al were illegally trying to dodge my High Court ‘Habeas Corpus’ Court Order from 16th April 2008 is obviously why Australian politicians hired Sir Ken Jones from ACPO in the UK as DAC in Victoria, which undeniably led to the premeditated torture and attempted murder of me etc.
I remember it was a very traumatic experience for me, when I started trying to speak on the witness stand in the High Court in the UK on 21st June 2010, and I was immediately interrupted by the judge as a whole row of lawyers also started standing up, before the judge exited the court, all of which must have been planned, before a journalist from the Daily Mail illegally tried to door-stop me in the lift when I was then leaving the court, and I told them to leave me alone because they were part of everything, which they later admitted in a round-about way outside court proceedings was true. I was then illegally denied legal representation on 23rd June 2010 by the judge (who obviously had no legal authority to do that) who said for public consumption he was closing the court to the press (but not really) and the public (which he was because I am a law abiding private citizen)
It is notable that Sir Ken Jones was not giving evidence against me in the UK, because of course he was hiding away behind a publicly funded entourage of lawyers while posing as the DAC in Victoria.
I didn’t choose to be adopted as a small child.
It’s obviously not legal to stop a law abiding private citizen giving evidence in a court, because it causes a political scandal.
There is obviously no jury anywhere who would ever believe it was a mere ‘co-incidence’ that Sir Ken Jones was Head of ACPO etc in the UK before becoming DAC in Victoria where I just happened to be born, after my adopted name was illegally leaked on Mothers Day 26th March 2006 in the UK before everyone was illegally trying to dodge my ‘Habeas Corpus’ Court Order from 16th April 2008 that all undeniably led to the premeditated torture and attempted murder of me.
It is obviously strange but true, and even to me, most of all, that I was illegally stopped from giving evidence in ‘satellite litigation’ in UK on 21st June 2010 etc because that would not only have ended adoption legislation, but because the political scandal involved British Tory & Australian Labor political administrations & so called opposition et al incl, Sir Ken Jones fmr ACPO in UK & DAC in Victoria, and also ‘professionally embarrassed’ the BBC & Murdoch et al because of everyone dodging my Universal High Court ‘Habeas Corpus’ Order from 16th April 2008 over Mothers Day 26th March 2006 that undeniably led to premeditated torture & attempted murder of me, while everyone argues about taxes in the Old City in Jerusalem.
I am an entirely law abiding private citizen.
It is really the accumulation of political lies over the political science of legally unjustifiable adoption legislation that caused the political scandal.
It is clearly more sensible for politicians to acknowledge the peaceful and legal end of the political science of adoption legislation than harming adopted people that can cause political scandals.
Everyone obviously knew they could not possibly ‘win’ the further ‘satellite litigation’ of HQ11X00563 in the UK, that involved Sir Ken Jones and Australian politicians.
It is true that everyone argues over taxes in the Old City in Jerusalem.
No jury could possibly seriously consider I needed to pay money to and have the permission of a court to have my own identity of Donna Bugat “officially” recognised because of the political science of legally unjustifiable adoption legislation.
I am legally entitled to be able to collect a diplomatic passport in my identity of Donna Bugat (the County Court in Melbourne is legally obliged to “officially’ recognize” without my paying money to or needing the permission of any court) along with $1 billion dollars compensation for me from Australian politicians at the County Court in Melbourne so I can peacefully get on with my own life.
The legal reality will always be, the political science of adoption legislation is legally unjustifiable.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
___________
Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: The State Premier who has an entourage of publicly funded lawyers, does not contest in any court, the political science of man-made adoption legislation, incl. torture & attempted murder of me is legally unjustifiable, that also means I am legally entitled to collect diplomatic passport & $1 billion dollars tax free compensation from administrative office in County Court in Melbourne without any further legally unjustifiable delay (13.10.2021)
My identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression.
I did not choose as a small child to be adopted but politicians did choose as adults to be politicians.
The politicians know the political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable could not continue forever.
(The evidence is politicians are obviously not unbiased about the political science of man- made adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable because they employed Sir Ken Jones from ACPO in the UK as DAC in Victoria in the full knowledge of my Universal High Court ‘Habeas Corpus’ Court Order from 16th April 2008 over Mothers Day 26th March 2006 etc etc)
The State Premier does not contest in any court, the political science of man-made adoption legislation and the torture and attempted murder of me is legally unjustifiable. He obviously knows he could not possibly stand in a court including in front of a jury and honestly claim I need to pay money to and have the permission of a court for my identity of Donna Bugat to be “officially” recognised because of the political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable. The political science of adoption legislation really means that politicians are saying adopted people need to pay money to and have the permission of a politician for our own identity to be “officially” recognised, including regardless of whatever else is done to us, by politicians, and including during a global pandemic, all of which is obviously legally unworkable.
It is not the case that anyone can just vote for whatever political science of adoption legislation they want, to do whatever they like to someone else, regardless of it being legally unjustifiable, or that the political science of adoption legislation is the only legislation in the world that can’t be legally challenged including by the adopted person, who is the person most affected by that legislation.
There are no known legal including in particular health grounds to continue the political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable because adults who want to care for or are already caring for vulnerable children who are separated from their own families for whatever reason, can simply transition to the reasonable and proportionate alternative of legally reviewable care arrangements until adulthood. The transition to legally reviewable care arrangements for vulnerable children separated from their own families for whatever reason until adulthood, should help to change a focus from arguments in courts about which groups of people can adopt, to which adults are interested in providing responsible care arrangements for vulnerable children until adulthood, without changing the identities of vulnerable children to whatever suits anyone else, including forever and without any informed consent from the person directly most affected as either a child or adult. The legal reality is politicians cannot legally change or erase the existing nationalities and citizenships of vulnerable children in care either, but could confer on any vulnerable child in care in their own right, any additional nationalities or citizenships that only the person they were conferred on could renounce, to match those of an adult carer/s. The only purpose of a reasonable and proportionate alternative to the political science of adoption legislation, of legally reviewable care arrangements for vulnerable children separated from their own families for whatever reason until adulthood, is to focus on and provide the best possible outcomes for all vulnerable children separated from their own families for whatever reason.
The adults who have been adopted and the adults who were their carers could obviously make whatever legal agreement they wish among themselves like any other adults in any other social situation do, in the absence of the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable.
This means that an extraordinary onus will no longer be improperly imposed on an adopted person to pay money to or have the permission of any court or anyone else, including politicians, to entirely naturally reject the political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable, that will no longer exist.
(The former Labour PM in Australia who publicly grandstanded with political language about ‘forced adoptions’ notably did not then go on, including with so called opposition politicians, including in Victoria, to actually legally address that situation because it was at best, like inquiries, only about the revolving doors of political damage limitation)
The political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable, is unfairly biased in so many ways, against an adopted person who entirely naturally rejects the onerous and extreme political science of man-made adoption legislation that is not legally justifiable.
There has also always been a serious legal problem about all adopted people being able to freely participate in democratic politics. The political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable means an adopted person who rejects the political science of legally unjustifiable adoption legislation is (like we proved with the political science of the also legally unjustifiable ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 etc legislation in Parliament Square, Central London in the UK) illegally prevented from freely participating peacefully in democratic politics, because an adopted person who rejects the political science of adoption legislation because it is legally unjustifiable can only participate in democratic politics by going along with the political science of adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable. It is obviously seriously perverse that a politician who promotes the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable can hide behind a publicly funded entourage of lawyers, while a law abiding private citizen who is adopted and entirely naturally and legally rejects the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is not legally justifiable is illegally denied legal representation.
The State Premier who has a publicly funded entourage of lawyers, also does not contest in any court, that I am legally entitled to collect a diplomatic passport in my own identity of Donna Bugat along with $1 billion dollars compensation from the administrative office in the County Court in Melbourne without any further legally unjustifiable delay, so I can peacefully get on with my own life.
It’s fair to say my own peaceful out of court settlement can only help focus political minds on a peaceful transition from the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is not legally justifiable, to a reasonable and proportionate alternative of legally reviewable care arrangements until adulthood for vulnerable children separated from their own families for any reason.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
___________
Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: P.S: State Premier obviously has no legal right to ignore, the fact he knows he does not have informed consent from me as an adopted person to the political science of man-made legally unjustifiable adoption legislation, because that is a ‘politically inconvenient’ reality for him (13.10.2021)
The State Premier obviously has no legal right to ignore, the fact he knows he does not have informed consent from me as an adopted person to the political science of man-made legally unjustifiable adoption legislation, because that is a ‘politically inconvenient’ reality for him.
It’s self evident it is a law abiding private citizen who is adopted and rejects the political science of man-made adoption legislation because it is legally unjustifiable, who should not be inconvenienced by a politician and what suits that politician.
It is not the case that a law abiding private citizen who is adopted and rejects the political science of man-made legally unjustifiable adoption legislation can legally be inconvenienced in any way by a politician, which is what is happening, purely because there is never going to be a politically convenient time that suits the State Premier.
I have provided the necessary statements of truth that are not contested including in any court by the State Premier so I do reasonably expect to be able to collect a diplomatic passport with my own identity of Donna Bugat, along with $1 billion dollars tax free compensation from politicians, from the administrative office of the County Court in Melbourne, without any further legally unjustifiable political delay.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
________
Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: State Premier has already proved he will illegally hide political man-made torture & attempted murder of me as Australian citizen adopted in Victoria, so I clearly do not need his consent to my reasonable self defense of collecting diplomatic passport & state budget (to take $1 billion dollars tax free compensation for me & release rest to interim caretaker government) from administrative office in County Court in Melbourne, without further legally unjustifiable political delay (14.10.2021)
My identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression.
I have only ever been legally obliged to provide an oral or written statement of truth all publicly funded politicians and their public officials have always been legally obliged to acknowledge in a timely manner.
The benefit of a transition from the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable, to the reasonable and proportionate alternative of legally reviewable care arrangements for vulnerable children separated from their own families for any reason until adulthood, which could happen to anyone, is immediately obvious.
It is harder for politicians who are unscrupulous to intentionally cause life threatening and prolonged physical and emotional harm to people, with legally reviewable care arrangements until adulthood for vulnerable children separated from their own families for any reason, which could happen to anyone, because it limits the involvement of politicians who are unscrupulous.
A State Premier hiding behind a publicly funded legal entourage, including in a court, while illegally denying a law abiding private citizen who is adopted, legal representation would not be a good public image of democracy.
I clearly do not need the consent of a State Premier who has already proved he will illegally hide the political torture and attempted murder of me, because it will always be politically inconvenient for him, for my reasonable self defense of being able to without further legally unjustifiable political delay, collect from the administrative office in the County Court in Melbourne, a diplomatic passport in my own identity of Donna Bugat along with the State budget that I would take my $1 billion dollars tax free compensation from. I would release the rest of the state budget to an interim caretaker government, in for the avoidance of any doubt, what would then be a state free from the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is legally unjustifiable.
It is obviously a legal impossibility for the State Premier to contest my claim in court, or legislate against my peaceful out of court settlement.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
___________
Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: State Premier legally obliged to stand down from politics because he is also personally liable for my compensation, because he knew he could not contest my unprecedented lawsuit in court or legislate against me, because he is already illegally covering up political torture & attempted murder of me etc, because political science of man-made adoption legislation is legally unjustifiable (15.10.2021)
The reason British and Australian politicians illegally leaked my adopted name with false information to the press on Mothers Day 26th March 2006 was to illegally try and stop the due process of an unprecedented jury lawsuit. That jury lawsuit would have not only stopped the political science of ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 legislation then, that we proved was legally unjustifiable, but it would also have naturally stopped the political science of man-made adoption legislation that is also legally unjustifiable.
(The political science of man-made adoption legislation was constructed to try and avoid lawsuits and particularly with a jury, that was shown to clearly not be legally workable when I was entitled to a jury lawsuit over the political science of ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 legislation. It obviously cannot legally be that a person is legally entitled to a civil jury lawsuit over some but not all political legislation that is legally unjustifiable)
The State Premier is legally obliged to stand down from politics because he is also personally liable for my compensation too, because he knew he could not contest my lawsuit in court or legislate against me, because he has already been illegally hiding the inconvenient political truths of the political torture and attempted murder of me etc, because the political science of adoption legislation is legally unjustifiable.
I am obviously legally entitled to a diplomatic passport in my own identity of Donna Bugat and $1 billion dollars compensation, because I need to be able to get on with my own life and improve my own health and well-being.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
________
Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: State Premier cannot legally hide behind political science of man-made adoption legislation from state of origin that is onerous & unnecessary, to claim I need as Australian citizen born and adopted in Victoria, to have his political permission that is not based on any health or legal grounds (& while he is already illegally hiding political torture & attempted murder of me) to have my own identity !! etc incl. regardless of where I live (15.10.2021)
My own identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression.
It was absolutely unlawful to illegally leak my adopted name along with false information to illegally try and hide political science of man-made adoption legislation that is intended to be forever, is legally unjustifiable.
It is bad enough when politicians try to exploit vulnerable children, before continuing to try it on when we are adults.
It would be a legal impossibility for the State Premier to claim he speaks on behalf of or instead of me because he is legally obliged to stand down because he is also personally liable for my compensation.
I am a law abiding private Australian citizen who is not the property of the State Premier or State of Victoria.
I am obviously legally entitled to a diplomatic passport in my own identity of Donna Bugat, and $1 billion dollars tax free compensation so I can get on with my own life and improve my own health and well-being.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
_______
Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria & Ors: The political torture & attempted murder etc of me happened because wholly unnecessary adoption legislation is legally unenforceable, so I am legally entitled to reasonable & proportionate alternative of legally enforceable out of court settlement with diplomatic passport in my own identity of Donna Bugat & $1 billion dollars tax free compensation, without further legally unjustifiable political delay (16.10.2021)
My own identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression, and legal right, like anyone else, to self determination.
The political torture and attempted murder etc of me happened because wholly unnecessary adoption legislation is legally unenforceable, so I am legally entitled to the reasonable and proportionate alternative of a legally enforceable out of court settlement with a diplomatic passport in my own identity of Donna Bugat and $1 billion dollars tax free compensation, without further legally unjustifiable political delay.
The State Premier et al obviously cannot contest my case in court or enact legislation against me to try and avoid it.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
Donna Bugat 