Steven Spiers 

Steven Spiers is an OPCA litigant now residing in North Queensland, after living in both New South Wales and Victoria, but is originally from the Northern Territory. His current Facebook profile Steven Spiers 1 has been discontinued due to a  ban, however his YouTube account is still active, but all videos have been removed. 2 He has since set up a website stevenspiers.com 3 so perhaps most of his content has been moved there, so “His Royal Highness” can interact with his subjects without the censorship that exists on these other platforms.

He’s been telling us for years that we’re all “fucking retards”.

1795747_721406761292784_7956961600614086867_n

He often calls various government departments and erupts in a rant about their “unlawfulness” so he can post the interaction on social media to his followers. The following video contains an incident where he was before the court in Lismore, and likewise recorded the hearing. It inevitably caused him to spend the next few months in remand in prison for contempt of court, as well as being found guilty of the offence of hinder ex parte. 4


In 2018 Steven Spiers published two OPCA-based papers “Realm and Commonwealth5 and “Realm and Man6

Click to access realmandcommonwealth-final.pdf

Click to access realmman-final.pdf


There are numerous errors and misconceptions found in his papers,  some of which I have already covered in the provided links, others too incomprehensible to understand.


The wrong Crown

The basic storyline is that Australia achieved sovereignty following WWI, by virtue of the sacrifice made by the ANZAC’s, it had forged a realm, a kingdom, under international law. This kingdom had its own throne, which was sitting dormant awaiting a king, in Melbourne’s Shrine of Remembrance.

41374795_2185694455003346_3339224866619392000_n

Since Edward VIII’s abdication, there has never been a valid monarch, so a counterfeit monarchy was introduced, with a St. Edward’s Crown and not an Imperial Crown. Successive governments have played along with this treason, including enacting the Royal Powers Act 1953 so Elizabeth II could take dominion over the Kingdom of Australia following her Coronation.

Hence, Steven Spiers insists, it is time to reclaim our “realm” from the clutches of the corporate counterfeit “foreign corporate administration” which has registered its citizenry as security under the U.S. Security and Exchanges Commission due to unpaid war debts, under it’s counterfeit Great Seal of Australia. and counterfeit blue flag.

It follows, that the fractional reserve banking system, the end of the gold standard and the floating of the Australian dollar, are in effect treason against the true realm of the Kingdom of Australia, hence gold and silver is the only lawful currency that should be used in payment of debts.

1095431gggg48_3207841062643315_969036876280027230_n

From a typical OPCA “strawman” perspective, he insists that his Legal personality as an Australian “on the citizen-ship” is outside of the true realm of the Kingdom of Australia, it exists only by way of “contract” with this “foreign corporate administration” and should be religiously shunned as God is no respecter of persons.


Biblical superiority

In this true realm of the Kingdom of Australia, there are no State borders or State parliaments, and Australia is all one kingdom under a type of absolute monarchy prior to the Revolution of 1688, or at the least, one with legal obligations to the Protestant faith under the original Act of Settlement 1700, and prior to the development of the principle of Responsible Government.

Following this notion, is the belief that the Kingdom of Australia has its own Holy See, which has allowed foreign money changers into its temple and Papists into its leadership, which needs to be purged immediately.

67506150_159813498474563_5373214901470756864_o

This is despite the prohibitions Section 116 places on the Commonwealth regarding “no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust”, and the fact the legal effect of Biblical Passages has long been settled in law, as well as the effect of the Coronation Oath, and that Quick and Garran firmly defined the passage Humbly Relying on the Blessing of Almighty God in the Preamble to the Commonwealth Constitution.

It is well recognised by the courts that appeals to scripture, that is to a moral principle higher than parliamentary sovereignty, is “out of line with the mainstream of current constitutional theory as applied in our courts” (See BLF v Minister for Industrial Relations (1986) 7 NSWLR 372 at 384 per Kirby P.) See also Gargan v Director of Public Prosecutions and anor [2004] NSWSC 10 and BarrettLennard -v- Bembridge [2015] WASC 353: “Any moral principles derived from scripture do not detract from the sovereignty of Parliament.” citing Lord Reid in British Railway Board v Pickin (1974) AC 765(at 782): “…since the supremacy of parliament was finally demonstrated by the Revolution of 1688 any such idea has become obsolete”


The “break in sovereignty” argument

Steven Spiers’ basic contention at it’s core, is overruled by Joosse v Australian Securities and Investment Commission [1998] HCA 77 which explored the concept of sovereignty and the effect of the Treaty of Versailles.

“The immediate question is what law is to be applied in the courts of Australia. The former questions about the likelihood of Imperial legislation and of international status can be seen as reflecting on whether Australia is an independent and sovereign nation. But they do so in two ways: whether some other polity can or would seek to legislate for this country and whether Australia is treated internationally as having the attributes of sovereignty. Those are not questions that intrude upon the immediate issue of the administration of justice according to law in the courts of Australia. In particular, they do not intrude upon the question of what law is to be applied by the courts…. Covering cl 5 provides that the Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution are binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth. None of the points that the applicants seek to make touches the validity of any of the laws that are in question or would make those laws any the less binding on the courts, judges, and people.”


Hang all the politicians and police

Steven Spiers and many of his followers, like his loyal subject Juha Kulevi Kiskonen, erupt in anger towards those not supportive of this “Kingdom of Australia”, often making threats that they will see them “hung for treason” under R v Casement 1917. In late July 2020 Steven threatened to have myself and a magistrate we both know hung until dead for daring to mention the decisions of the High Court.

“DO YOU COMPREHEND WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE YOU TREASONOUS PIECE OF SHIT.  ROB SUDY MARK MY FUCKING WORDS ITS NOT OVER YET DUMB ASS AND IM NOT STOPPING NOW WHEN IM DONE YOU WILL HANG AND YOU WILL HANG NEXT TO DAVID HEILPERN REMEMBER THOSE WORDS YOU ARE A FUCKING TRAITOR TO YOUR COUNTRY YOU ARE IN TREASON AND MARK MY WORDS I WILL NOT STOP UNTIL I SEE YOU STAND BEFORE ME AND YOU WILL FACE YOUR CRIMES KING V CASEMENT 1917.

MARK MY WORDS YOU WILL HANG FOR YOUR CRIMES ROB SUDY HANG YOU ARE IN TREASON YOU ARE A TRAITOR YOU ARE AIDING A FOREIGN POWER YOU ARE TRADING WITH AN ENEMY YOU ARE A TRAITOR KNOW THAT NOW THIS ISNT GOING AWAY 

I JUST ACCUSED YOU DIRECTLY OF TREASON YOU PIECE OF SHIT I ACCUSE YOU DIRECTLY OF AN ACT OF TREASON TO THE REALM AS PER KING V CASEMENT 1917 GO CHAT THAT OVER WITH DAVID HEILPERN AND REALISE I ACCUSE HIM DIRECTLY OF TREASON TO THE REALM. AS PER KING V CASEMENT 1917 THATS TWO ACCUSATIONS NOW PUBLICLY THAT YOU TWO ARE TRAITORS TO THE REALM AND IN FULL TREASON TO THE REALM AND NOW ATTAINTED TREASON FOR KNOWING OF TREASON AGAINST THE REALM.

I ACCUSED YOU OF TREASON. AND SAID YOU WOULD HANG FOR YOUR CRIMES. WHAT I DID WAS PROMISE TO SET UP GALLOWS PUT YOU THROUGH A TRIAL FOR TREASON ACCUSED YOU OF TREASON ACCUSED YOU DIRECTLY ACCUSED YOU UNDER KING v CASEMENT 1917 AND SAID WHEN FOUND GUILTY WOULD HANG UNTIL DEAD.

WHAT I PROMISED YOU WAS. YOU WILL HANG UNTIL DEAD. YOU WILL THINK ABOUT WHAT A REALM IS. AS THAT NOOSE TIGHTENS AROUND YOUR NECK. YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO THIS COUNTRY. YOU ARE IN TREASON TO THE CONSTITUTION. YOU ARE IN TREASON TO THE REALM. AND MY WARNING WAS CLEAR.

YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO YOUR OWN PEOPLE. AND YOUR LAW ISNT GOING TO SAVE YOU WHEN IT COMES TO THE REALM CALLING YOU A TRAITOR AND IN TREASON TO THAT REALM. CALLING THE LAWYERS AND MAGISTRATES YOU BUDDY UP TO TRAITORS AND IN TREASON TO THAT REALM. ALL OF YOU SHOULD BE HUNG UNTIL DEAD.”

Like most Australian OPCA adherents, Steven Spiers claims that the Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 was given assent by the Queen of Australia, after the unlawful Royal Styles and Titles Act 1973, so the repeal has no effect, and the original provisions for treason are still very much valid and enforceable. He believes the decision in King v Casement 1917 establishes that allegiance to the Queen of Australia is a breach of allegiance to the indivisible Imperial Crown in section 117 of the Constitution.

Despite his fantasies, there are laws preventing both capital punishment and threats of murder, that is the reality. There is no provision in law to rely on to have anyone killed for any crime. And reality is what he will have to inevitably face. The reliance on R v Casement in 1917 is very irrelevant and obscure to say the least, it was a common law decision that has long been overwritten with subsequent changes over time.

In 1917 we were still part of the British Empire, it was before the divisibility of the Crown was recognised at the Imperial Conferences starting with the Balfour Agreement 1926, recognised in the Statute of Westminster 1931 adopted here in 1942. The empire collapsed and each executive government of the former dominions had by default a Crown that was “an entirely different and distinct legal personality” from the Crown of England. Gaudron J. found this notion to be “implicit in the Constitution.” in Sue v Hill [1999] HCA 30, See also Re Patterson [2001] HCA 51. The divisibility of the Crown has also already been upheld by the UK High Court in R v. Foreign Secretary ex parte Indian Association of Alberta [1982] 1 QB 892 and in relation to Australia in Fitzgibbon v HM Attorney General [2005] EWHC 114 (Ch).

The decision in Re Stepney Election Petition; Isaacson v Durant (1886) 17 QBD 54 established the rule that a natural born subject becomes an alien when the sovereign ceases to have dominion over the territory in which the person resides. Lord Coleridge CJ said (at 65-66): “…as the statutes referred to the Crown and not the sovereign, allegiance was due to the King in his politic, and not in his personal, capacity.” In relation to this case, on page 386 of “Constitution of New South Wales“, Anne Twomey notes that  “As the body politic was a creation of law, then allegiance could be changed by a law-making authority.”

This case is also reviewed in Singh v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] HCA 43, in relation to the definition of an allegiance. The body politic that is the Crown in relation to Australia is the Queen of Australia.


Obscurity

It appears that the following typos in news articles are enough proof for Steven Spiers that there exists a hidden “Kingdom of Australia”:

67376609_470458210474592_5571703580945022976_n

A newspaper article from the Townsville Bulletin in 1938, clearly stating “The High Commissioner for the United Kingdom of Australia”, is an obvious typographical error of the journalist that wrote the article. What a silly sausage. I wonder if the paper offered a correction, or sacked the editor for not picking it up before final print.

If you look up any information on Geoffrey Whiskard, 7 you will find he served in the office of “High Commissioner of the United Kingdom to Australia“. 8

From the beginning of the British colonisation in 1788 and after Australia’s federation in 1901, the Governor-General of Australia and the various state governors had been the official representatives of the British government, as well as the crown. Following the 1926 Imperial Conference and the subsequent Balfour Declaration an Australian, Isaac Isaacs, became Governor-General in January 1931. Being an Australian, it was felt in London he couldn’t properly represent the British Government. They thus appointed their Representative for Migration in Melbourne Ernest Tristram Crutchley as their first Representative of His Majesty’s Government in Australia, pending the nomination of a high commissioner, on the Canadian model.

That same year, the Statute of Westminster made easier the creation of such high commissions in the Dominions but as the Australian Government delayed its ratification, the United Kingdom had to wait until 1936 to appoint a high commissioner to regularise the role of the Governor-General in Australia, six years before Australia’s actual ratification of the Statute.

BRITISH MIGRATION POLICY. HIGH COMMISSIONER. Sir Geoffrey Whiskard. 9

“Stating that the creation of the new office of High Commissioner in Australia was a tribute by the British Government to Australia’s progress, Sir Geoffrey Whiskard, the British High Commissioner, who reached Sydney from London on the Oronsay yesterday, emphasised that his appointment did not imply that he was to exercise any supervision here or even to act in a critical capacity.”

67318757_2386257414796762_1373093798921371648_n

This Thailand article is identically a typo. The “United Kingdom of Australia and India” is not intelligible. It is merely saying… that Thailand informed the United Kingdom, Australia and India. Even the very next paragraph states “the British, Australian, and Indian governments…”


The King of Australia

In mid-2020 Steven Spiers declared himself “King” of the Kingdom of Australia, (Steven R) and began issuing various proclamations and rewriting various constitutional enactments. 10

105455643_295176034938308_8944459970320275933_o

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
SATURDAY 20th JULY 2020
BY THE KING
A PROCLOMATION
STEVEN R

WHERE We be justly and rightfully King of our realm of Australia, and ought to have the title, style and name thereof by right and inheritance, and non-use thereof in our style hath caused much disobedience, rebellion, dissension and sedition in our said realm, to the great impoverishing and peril of destruction of the same, if we had not for the redress thereof put to our kingly hand, as we have done, in such wise, as by reason thereof our said realm, blessing to Almighty God, is now brought and reduced to better order, peace and civility than it hath been in many years past;
And forasmuch as our loving subjects of our said realm, both prelates, nobles and commons, do think and determine, that the good estate, peace, and tranquillity, wherein our said realm once standeth, shall the better and longer continue, if we would as we ought of right, accept and take upon us the title and name of King of the same; which to do all our said subjects, of our said realm, by their mutual assents, by authority of parliament holden within the same, have agreed and assented unto, and most instantly desired us, that the said title and name of King of Australia, together with our said whole realm, should be united and annexed to our imperial crown of our realm of Australia:
To which their desires and humble requests, for the better conservation of the good peace of our said realm, we have assented, and have caused for that purpose our style to be created and formed, in the English tongue, as hereafter following, Steven I, by the grace of God King of Australia, Defender of the Faith, and the Holy See of Australia and also Australia in Earth the Supreme Head.
And to the intent that our said subjects should not be ignorant of the creation of our said style, in form as is aforesaid, we have caused this present proclamation to be made, and by the same will and command all and singular our officers, justices and ministers, and all other our subjects and residents within this our realm of Australia, and elsewhere within any of our dominions, that they shall accept, take, and use our style, in form above written, in like form, as they used and accepted the style of King George V, King of Australia before this creation. Nevertheless, to the intent that no discord, variance, occasion, trouble, impeachment, or molestation should be had or made to any of our justices, officers, ministers, and other our subjects or residents, before they may have convenient knowledge of this creation of our style; we are therefore pleased and contented, that none of our said justices, officers, ministers, subjects, or other residents within our realm of Australia, the dominion of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Western Australia and the Northern Territory, for omitting of our said title and name of King of Australia in writs, patents, process, or other writings, to be passed under any our seals, or for non-acceptation or mis-acceptation thereof, or for any offense toughing the same, done or committed, or to be done or committed, before the last day of July coming, shall be vexed, troubled, impeached, or by any wise molested or troubled, but that all writs, patents, process or other writings that be passed or shall pass under any our seals, before the last day of July, wherein shall happen our said title and name of King of Australia to be omitted, shall be taken, construed, accepted, and admitted to be of the same force, strength, quality, and condition in all thing, as they were before the said title and name of King of Australia was annexed to our style. And that the non-acceptation or mis-acceptation of our said title and name of King of Australia, or any acts or things done, or that shall chance to be done, before the last day of July, by any our subjects or residents, touching or concerning our said title or name of King of Australia, shall be construed and expounded any offense or occasion of trouble to any of our said subjects or residents; anything contained in this proclamation, or anything that shall be expressed in the same, or other thing or things to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding.
Given at Our Court at St Steven, this Twentieth day of July in the Year of our Lord, Two thousand and twenty, and in the first year of Our Reign.
GOD SAVE THE KING!”

“PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
SATURDAY 20th JULY 2020
BY THE KING
A PROCLOMATION
STEVEN R
STEVEN THE FIRST, by the Grace of God of the Kingdom of Australia and His Other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth of Australia;
TO ALL to whom these Presents shall come,
GREETINGS:

WHEREAS it is desirable that there be established a n Australian society of honour for the purpose of according recognition to Australians in lineage of their forefathers, as sons of the Commonwealth of Australia and for achievement or for meritorious service:
KNOW YOU that We, by these Presents, do establish a society of honour to be known as the “Most Noble Order of the Desert Flame”:
AND WE DO ordain that the Order shall consist of the Sovereign, Our Governor-General and such members and honorary members as Our Governor-General, with Our approval and in accordance with the Constitution of the Order, shall appoint:
AND WE DO further ordain that the Constitution of the Order shall be the Constitution set out the Schedule:
AND WE DO hereby command that a seal be engraven, that that seal shall be the Seal of the Order, that the Ordinances of the Order shall be signed by Our Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia and sealed shall have the same force and effect as if they had been recited in these Our Letters Patent and given under the Great Seal of the Commonwealth of Australia.
IN WITNESS whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent.
Given under the Great Seal of the Commonwealth of Australia at Our Court at St Stevens on 20th of June in the 2020th year of our Lord.
GOD SAVE THE KING.”

Despite the many misconceptions in his papers, a obviously narcissistic attitude, and very extreme absurdities in his ideology, Steven Spiers still managed to gain a following, and started a cult known as the United Kingdom of Australia. It is quite concerning that many of his followers actually believe he is the King of Australia, and pledged their loyalty to him. In return for his words, they regularly send him donations to continue his “reign”. It goes to show once more that gullibility is such a plentiful resource.


Steven Spiers arrested

Steven Spiers wrote that he was arrested in August 2020 after refusing to undergo a roadside breath test in Cairns, and he was bailed to appear at court in September. 11

“GOT ARRESTED BY A WAR CRIMINAL WHO THEN LEFT ME GO TO APPEAR IN COURT IN TWO MONTHS. I REFUSED TO ACCEPT A WAR CRIMINAL ENFORCING MEDICAL PROCEDURE ON ME. I WAS TAKEN BACK TO A STATION WHERE THEY AGAIN TRIED TO ENFORCE MEDICAL PROCECURE ON ME. I DECLINED. THEY TRIED EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO GET A DATE OF BIRTH. I GAVE THEM A LOT NUMBER AND HE SAID I NEED A SPECIFIC PLACE I CANT FIND YOU. I SAID YOU CANT GET MORE SPECIFIC THAN A NUMBERED BLOCK OF LAND. HE ASKED ME IF I WAS A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN. I SAID. YOU ARE THE SOVEREIGN CITIZEN. YOU ARE THE CITIZEN ATTEMPTING TO ACT IN A SOVEREIGN CAPACITY WEARING A BADGE ON YOUR SHOULDER. BASICALLY WASTED MY TIME. THREATENED ME WITH VIOLENCE AND KIDNAPPED ME ONLY TO LET ME GO AFTER I REFUSED TO PLAY BALL. THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING. LIKE LAST TIME. I WILL NOT PUT UP WITH THESE LIES AND BULLSHIT ANYMORE. TIME TO RISE PEOPLE. THESE POLICE ARE A JOKE.”

.