Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria Case 352: In the matter of my informed consent for my injunction to stop the crime of my adoption, because I have never given my informed consent as a child or adult, for my adoption (02.11.2020)

 

 

... my name is donna...

 

IN THE MATTER OF MY INFORMED CONSENT FOR MY INJUNCTION TO STOP THE CRIME OF MY ADOPTION, BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER GIVEN MY INFORMED CONSENT AS A CHILD OR ADULT, FOR MY ADOPTION         (CASE 352) 

   

 

 

                                                                                                                

 

1. I have given my informed consent for my injunction to stop the crime of my adoption (involving the highest echelons of the British and Australian intelligence services who posed as my parents and godparents) because I have never given my informed consent as a child or adult, for my adoption.

 

The Registrar in the County Court in Melbourne is legally obliged to provide me by email with a court stamped copy of my injunction, to stop the crime of my adoption, and provide me with my compensation.

 

2. It is also a matter of public record, I never gave my informed consent in 'satellite litigation' to:

 

a) ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 in the UK, no member of the public ever complained about being repealed

 

Tucker v Director of Public Prosecutions [2007] EWHC 3019 (Admin) (30 November 2007)

 

... thomas and gross et al... the same circle of 'judges' who all refused me legal representation...

 

 

 

b) the refusal without lawful excuse of courts etc to keep accurate and contemporaneous records of legal proceedings that sought to ‘make an example’ of me ‘pours les autres’ (to deter others) within the British Commonwealth and Europe

 

Haw & Anor v City of Westminster Magistrates' Court [2007] EWHC 2960 (Admin) (12 December 2007)

 

 

... thomas and gross 'sidestepped' courts admitting they refused without lawful excuse to keep accurate and contemporaneous records of legal proceedings...

 

(that involved the same circle of ‘judges’ who all refused me legal representation)

 

etc etc

 

3. I have obviously similarly never given my informed consent for politicians in the UK and Australia to:

 

a) torture and attempt to murder me

 

b) and cover up the CCTV that does exist (while the former unAustralian PM Rudd, for example, took a $1.4 billion bribe from British politicians on all ’sides’) that led to

 

c) my exile in France in Europe, etc etc, although I do entirely naturally choose and remain legally entitled to also peacefully return to live in my own home in an autonomous region in a Mediterranean country to in some way have the ‘lived experience’ of my Mediterranean culture too

 

4. The narrow prism of ‘politics’ around the world can look very different from the perspective of an adopted person, compared to someone who is not adopted, because so many countries are involved in the global ’social experiment’ of ‘adoptions’ that is not legally sustainable, without any ‘informed consent’ from the adopted person as a child or adult.

 

The legal reality remains the onus is entirely on the states and ‘Central Authority’ of every country involved in national and international adoption, to prove beyond all reasonable doubt they have the informed consent of every single adopted child and adult to their own adoption, or the adoption is, like in my case, beyond any reasonable doubt, a crime, that I can never have any civil, criminal or other sanctions imposed on me, or be prosecuted over, in any court, anywhere.

 

5. All the countries involved in adoption can agree to my overseeing a voluntary non profit, register of adoptions and DNA, funded by them, so people can confirm in confidence whether or not they have given their informed consent to their adoption, and who, if anyone, they would like that information passed to.

 

6. The informed consent of adopted children and adults is a fundamental legal necessity, so that adopted people can also give inextricably linked informed consent to any healthcare, which is obviously particularly important during natural disasters, wars and global pandemics, when families can become (further) separated.

 

7. I am personally claiming $3 million dollars in compensation from the State of Victoria, that includes the costs of my injunction to stop the crime of my adoption as a child and adult, because the State of Victoria do know the physical and emotional harm the crime of my adoption has caused me.

 

The State of Victoria will also pay any ‘excess’ costs of any global fully comprehensive health and insurance policy of my choosing, that comes with legal representation to cover the ‘pre-existing’ crime of my ‘adoption’.

 

8. It is self evident the peace and harmony of the rule of law is entirely natural for most people, regardless of our politics, race, religion, or nationality.

 

... donna bugat, formerly known as babs tucker...