Donna Bugat -v- Stare of Victoria, Australia & Ors: I have inviolable… choice to personally renounce adoption & draconian adoption legislation that would otherwise remain even if I renounced citizenship/s (& evidence is BBC knowingly published false information in UK on Mothers Day 2006 & State Opening in 2010 they knew they could not repeat in any court, incl with a civil jury, that De Santis, a Florida governor & Guantanamo & Iraq War lawyer in United States tried to use to turn into legislation !! while Victorian Premier Andrews & Australian PM’s incl Rudd & Gillard et al complicit in chicken-feed Johnson’s premeditated political torture & attempted murder of me in UK along with illegally concealing reports written by public officials in London at Australian High Commission) (19.12.2022)
My own identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression and legal right like anyone else to self determination.
The British and Australian politicians know I have an inviolable right to personally renounce adoption and draconian adoption legislation that would otherwise remain, even if I renounced citizenships or had citizenships illegally removed. The British and Australian politicians know it was illegal to refuse to hand over the CCTV of the premeditated political torture and attempted murder of me over my High Cour Habeas Corpus Court Order from 16th April 2008 over Mothers Day 2006.
The British and Australian politicians and BBC et al know (that apart from the fact they illegally leaked my adopted name) they could never go before a court, including a civil jury and say what they published as facts about my arrest was true which is why no-one ever produced an Inspector Lyons or a witness statement because all that was discussed was my lawsuit:
Brian and myself having to go to Hendon Police Academy:
The British government were squeamish about any violence against us being seen publicly (and did resort to D-notices to illegally try and stop anything being publicly shown like the attack on Brian after I ‘won’ the decisive legal ‘victory’ in Southwark Crown Court on 13th December 2007 about all the government dicking and diving to illegally try and avoid Mothers Day 2006 ):
The Baron Prescott was purporting he could give away public land in return for a peerage while perpetuating the political lie that someone labelled adopted is never ‘allowed’ to speak for ourselves:
The government later went to extreme lengths to illegally try and conceal the premeditated political torture and attempted murder of me, which they would only do by illegally refusing to hand over the CCTV to me.
The reality is it is self evident the British government needed to go to a court to get a search warrant to use prior to a pre-planned public event, like their State Openings (which were just another day like any other to us) and that the obvious question would be what made it necessary to repeatedly just get a search warrant against the same people who were already under 24 hour surveillance including thermal imaging, along with sniffer dogs routinely being used in the entire area.
(The only reason the government were able to try and illegally overtake our civil jury lawsuits was because a senior partner at Bindmans called Tony Murphy who was supposedly dealing with our lawsuits jumped ship from Bindmans, leaving us in the lurch. A Chez Cotton who replaced him and is now at Gold Jennings Solicitors in the City of London, illegally gave Brian a Hobson’s choice she knew he could not possibly agree to, that she would only deal with his lawsuits if he could “persuade” me not to go ahead with mine. So we had to pick up the pieces and progress them ourselves when Brian was forced to fire Mike Schwartz from Bindmans who is now at Hodge Jones & Allen, after he didn’t get the CCTV of the torture and attempted murder of me. The Australian government were also at very serious fault because they have always been completely complicit and have not kept proper records, which they are legally obliged to do.
The shocking miscarriages of justice could have not have all happened if I was not adopted because it was the fact a civil jury lawsuit would not just nullify ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 locally, but draconian adoption legislation too more widely, was what politicians and the press resisted.
Labour Baron Prescott buys a peerage:
The monarch was professionally embarrased by the violent Baron Prescott who punched me after illegally purporting he could give away some of the public space in return for a peerage:
They had covered up my really having the eyesore after I was violently punched in the head, before they nearly smashed Brian’s camera into his eye:
A person the British government claimed was called Mrs Karen Lewis who was supposed to be their ‘star witness’ resulting from their illegal search before a State Opening on 18th November 2009 (the malicious prosecution of that was illegally adjourned on 29th April 2010, before the general election and State Opening on 25th May 202) maliciously said she wanted me unlawfully arrested because and I quote “if she doesn’t like the Queen she should be sent back to wherever she came from” which was, any reasonable, rational and responsible adult would know, legally problematic for a number of reasons.
The BBC knew they could never repeat the lies they published on 25th May 2010 in any court including before a civil jury:
The government’s complainant was clearly maliciously… discriminating against me not just because I am not a monarchist etc) but because the complainant was not being searched but wanted me treated differently and to be illegally searched, on the grounds that if I didn’t like the Queen, I should be sent back to wherever I came from. In fact, the government didn’t like me complaining about being discriminated against including with illegal searches, where all sorts of perjury was being committed to also try and pretend we campaigned with people we did not.
The BBC were seriously squeamish about publishing the real headline that even their own recording proved !! government agents posing as protesters calling themselves Democracy Village conspired with Met Police and chicken-feed Johnson to make a false and malicious allegation against me/us to have me/us unlawfully arrested while Iam holding the previous perjured witness statements. It was a case that sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction.
The BBC were completely compromised by Mothers Day 2006 which they did not want to be found out to have lied about… as well.
The undeniable evidence is the State Opening extravaganza in 2010 was designed to try and give a public appearance there was none of the discrimination over the illegal searches etc and the reason for them that I was on record, complaining about:
The government had to keep trying (once ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 was rendered useless) to find excuses to be near us for long enough to bully and harass us, to unlawfully arrest us on false and malicious allegations.
Exactly like my getting unlawfully arrested inside the County Court in Melbourne on 21st December 2021. That happened because the government are illegally refusing to actually make a formal record of my renouncing adoption and draconian adoption legislation, not because it is unlawful for me to do that, but just because it doesn’t suit politicians for me to do that.
I clearly wasn’t voluntarily in Australia or at the County Court on 21st December 2021.
There was no difference between the Labour & Tory Mayors of London Livingstone & chicken-feed Johnson who were bosses of the top cops, all of which meant that Livingstone groupies like Corbyn and Pilger who stayed silent about what the not all antiwar Livingstone did to Brian and myself in Parliament Square, Central London, were completely compromised by their own dishonesty by the time Johnson was opportunistically jumping on board, to profit from saving Livingstone’s bacon. The monarchists were muttering but not about the fact it was the Labour Deputy PM and now Baron Prescott who illegally purported he had the legal authority to hand over part of Parliament Square to the monarch with the GLA Act in 1999. The referendum on having a Mayor of London was not based on having a majority of registered voters agreeing, but instead having any kind of majority from those who did vote, which means politicians would have said they had a mandate if even just one person had voted and for having a Mayor of London. No-one voted to hand over any public land to the Queen. One of the bureaucrats involved in drafting that legislation who is called Mr Weimar, who left London while an investigation was taking place into his involvement with financial irregularities with Serco, now claims to be organising a sporting event in Victoria, Australia.
The chicken-feed Johnson was illegally on a retainer from the Barclay Brothers to be a hitman while posing as a journalist, because one of the many hats he wore with his multiple conflicts of interest included being boss of the top cops:
The politicians in Westminster couldnt hand out enough peerages to keep up with all the corrupt people wanting them to illegally help legislate… the cover-ups.
This was a shocking abuse of any and all due process overtly discriminating against me while hiding the true facts in a phoney Judicial Review that didn’t iinvolve me that was illegally trying to overtake my High Court civil jury lawsuit that had been filed:
It’s very serious that the BBC illegally published false information about 25th May 2010, too when what -I- did manage to say on 21st June 2010 in the High Court on oath on the witness stand before the court was ‘suddenly’ closed etc, completely contradicted what the BBC who did not produce a journalist in court to be cross examined, had illegally published.
I remain entitled to a free of charge transcript of what -i- said on 21st June 2010 in the High Court. The combination of the lies on Mothers Day and then the State Opening in 2010 went way beyond mere harassment by the BBC et al:
It was absolutely unlawful for the BBC to publish information from the British government on 25th May 2010 they did beyond all reasonable doubt know from their own recording by the BBC was not what I said when I was unlawfully arrested:
The BBC claimed they recorded what they published so the BBC who were there in Parliament Square as it unfolded did at all times know that what they published was untrue and that Johnson’s Metropolitan Police et al were lying. What none of them knew at the time, was that the video recorder Brian passed to me that was then grabbed off me was still recording what police and agents of the state posing as protesters said among themselves after both of us were unlawfully arrested.
The government thought they had destroyed the tape on the video recorder, but a professional film-maker restored the video and the time stamps are used to synchronise our footage with the government footage. The video shows when other police question Cole over his arrest of me (because police are all wired so my arrest would seem odd even with their wide ‘margin of appreciation’ they give themselves) Cole admits he was trying to set me up and explains how he was supposed to do that (which needed the government agents from Democracy Village to keep hanging around while Brian and myself were being illegally searched) but then lies about how even that had failed, which the BBC knew about too because they were… also recording. The videos prove that Cole unlawfully arrests me for an alleged s5 Public Order Act and when I point out he doesn’t have a complainant he then goes looking for a complainant and of course the only complainant he can come up with is an agent of the state posing as a protester who the government illegally refuse to name, provide a witness statement for or produce in court.
The BBC illegally publish what they know is untrue because they know a) I was albeit unlawfully arrested for an alleged s5 Public Order and not alleged obstruction b) which the police illegally came up with a complainant for after I was unlawfully arrested and complained they did not have a complainant who they would name, or produce a witness statement from or to be cross examined in any court.
The govt’s complainant (the government had unusually completely closed off public access to the square, so the only two members of the public who were already there at that time, were Brian and myself, because the govt didn’t want to risk members of the public seeing the phoney protesters being used to illegally arrest Brian and myself) is heard saying they did not want me complaining about Brian and my being illegally searched that was none of the business of the ghoulish Democracy Village who were standing around the illegal search of Brian and myself like hyenas. The male the BBC refer to as Phoenix in their report (who later went on to be one of the organisers of Occupy London too) at all times covered up someone campaigning with him was a malicious complainant against me. Phoenix admitted in court, having a meeting with Johnson as Mayor of London to agree who the Mayor of London could use from Democracy Village to bring the malicious prosecution against Brian and myself. The person called Phoenix was not a genuine campaigner but instead illegally worked with the politicians and police to physically harm genuine campaigners he would work to have unlawfully arrested. I am not the only woman to have complained about Phoenix, who like Johnson actually enjoyed women being physically assaulted. I was actually filmed with and recorded explaining a perjured witness statement from the same Cole from the illegal search at the previous State Opening.
On April 10th 2013, my boyfriend at that time, Neil was kidnapped with a fraudulent warrant that could never have been issued for an alleged non-imprisonable offence people do not have to attend court over:
The City of London police were recorded having it explained to them it was illegal to issue warrant for an alleged offence someone could not be forced to go to court over, so City of London police did unlawfully arrest and illegally detain Neil knowing the arrest warrant was fraudulent and was intended to be witness intimidation because City of London were… already involved in a High Court civil jury lawsuit filed in the High Court over 16th January 2012:
In the United States, a Florida State governor called DeSantis who was a Guantanamo and Iraq War lawyer passed legislation trying to replicate the British government maliciously claiming the government could join civilians with anyone in court proceedings. The reason the government could not just join us in court proceedings with whoever they wanted was because that just gives a green light to illegally using government agents.
It is similarly true that just because one person like the Victorian Liberal MP who claims to be adopted, and wants draconian adoption legislation imposed on him, does not mean it can be arbitrarily imposed on anyone else who is labelled adopted.
It is legally problematic for politicians to claim adoption and draconian adoption legislation can be used to arbitrarily… remove citizenships. The Australian politicians illegally tried to use draconian adoption legislation to falsely claim I was not an Australian citizen. It’s not possibly to go along with draconian adoption legislation if you believe in genuine choices because even a revocation leaves any choice up to effectively politicians and courts, and not the person labelled adopted etc etc etc.
My lived experience of being labelled adopted which happens purely for political reasons highlights there is a very serious legal problem with those same politicians claiming they can use draconian adoption legislation to… arbitrarily change people’s citizenships/s, and refuse to issue passports etc etc etc etc.
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
Donna Bugat 