MENZ Issues

The Killing of The Sovereign

The Killing of the Sovereign – too much of a spoiler? You knew where I was going with this didn’t you?

This is the third post on this topic. To catch up on the story you need to read, England – A Terrorist State of Law then Prosecution of the Fantasy, and also the comments on both.

These two posts are about an English court case where a poor commoner, Mark Pearson stood accused of the sexual assault of an actress, but proved his innocence.

There is a fourth post A Woman’s Allegation now outweighs Hard Evidence, which discusses the ‘allegation’ and suggests that the actress made up this ‘allegation’ because Mr Pearson did not move aside for her when they passed each other on a railway platform.

The first two posts take a different approach and suggest that there was no ‘allegation’; and that there was a claim that the actress was sexually assaulted, and there was no identification of ‘a defendant’ and it was the Crown’s Prosecutors who accused Mr Pearson.

There is a different theory floating around in my head, and it is my unproven assertion, that there was a conspiracy in the Office of Crown Prosecutors, to legally go where no woman has gone before and kill the Legal Sovereign of England in the name of Feminism.

What I am suggesting is that the Crown Prosecutors used this 60 year old actress, to act out their plot, and that Mr Pearson was an innocent victim caught up in this act of terrorism.

The judge in this trial was obviously uncomfortable about what was unfolding in front of him, and suggested the prosecutors withdraw, but no, ‘they insisted’ on finishing what they came to do, and ‘ they persisted’ in bringing this court case to a conclusion.

It will be interesting to see if anyone in England makes the same allegation, and whether or not there is an inquiry – a good aspect of the Westminster System which helps preserve the system; when you suspect that someone is trying to Scotch the system.

If the Sovereign wasn’t killed and it came to light that Mr Pearson was actually the hero, the man on the spot, that foiled this plot; and it was only through what became a determined, painstaking, and drawn out battle to defend his innocence, that we ‘could see’ what these traitors were up to and that they may be hiding evidence of their crime in the mind of the woman concerned, gosh, if that were the case, there might be a financial reward for Mr Pearson, or even a knighthood for such an honourable and courageous defence of the realm.

Surely this question would have been asked in the actual court case. No, Mr Pearson was not there to question the motives of the accuser/s, but to defend his innocence.

Let’s not forget too, that reinforcements arrived just in the nick of time. If it were not for the jury and their 90 minute battle for truth and justice, the hero in this story may have died alongside the Sovereign.

It could have been a greater tragedy if our hero had died during the proceedings.