1. Castle Doctrine and Defence of Habitation
- Definition: The Castle Doctrine (also known as Castle Law or Defence of Habitation) is a legal principle affirming that individuals have the right to defend their home or legally occupied space (e.g., a vehicle or workplace) using reasonable force, including deadly force, against intruders without facing prosecution.
- Historical Roots:
- Originates from English common law, famously summarized in the dictum: “An Englishman’s home is his castle.”
- Codified in English law by jurist Sir Edward Coke in The Institutes of the Laws of England (1628).
- Adopted and adapted in the United States and other jurisdictions as the “castle doctrine.”
- Philosophy: The doctrine emphasizes the sanctity of one's home and the right to repel intrusions, based on natural law and self-preservation.
2. Self-Defense as a Natural Right
- Core Principle: Self-defense is described as an inherent right rooted in survival and nature, transcending legal frameworks.
- Legal Context:
- Under the Castle Doctrine, force can be used with immunity if the occupant reasonably fears imminent harm or death.
- This aligns with the broader principle of justifiable homicide in many legal systems.
3. “An Englishman’s Home is His Castle”
- Meaning: A metaphorical statement asserting that a person's home is their sanctuary, and they have absolute control over who may enter or remain within it.
- Legal and Social Context: Historically invoked to assert rights against unwarranted intrusions by authorities or individuals.
- Modern Implications: While still symbolically significant, contemporary legal systems have introduced exceptions, such as law enforcement or bailiff powers under specific legal circumstances.
4. BDW Affidavit and Exhibit “G”
- Affidavit Context: The BDW Affidavit, authored by Baron David Ward, challenges the legitimacy of government and authority structures. Exhibit “G” specifically appears to reference:
- The Castle Doctrine and its historical and legal roots.
- A legal position arguing against governmental and crown authority over private property without explicit, signed agreements.
- Assertion: The affidavit claims:
- Government and crown authorities lack legitimate power without consent.
- Any unauthorized entry onto private property constitutes an “act of war.”
- Occupants defending their property bear no legal culpability for consequences arising from such defense.
5. Tyranny vs. Freedom
- Philosophy: The document contrasts two states:
- When people fear the government, it is characterized as tyranny (a loss of freedom and accountability).
- When the government fears the people, it fosters freedom and accountability.
6. Bailiffs and Crown Authority
- Challenge to Authority:
- The content asserts that bailiffs, as representatives of the crown, have no power of entry unless backed by a legal agreement signed by both parties.
- It emphasizes the absence of material evidence of such agreements granting authority.
- Case reference (WI 05257F): A cited tribunal ruling is presented as evidence that crown authority lacks legitimacy without mutual consent.
7. Legal and Philosophical Assertions
- Act of War: Unauthorized entry onto private property is equated with an act of war.
- Use of Force: It is argued that the occupants defending their home may use equal or greater force with impunity.
- Legal Immunity: The defense of the home is framed as an inherent right, beyond the scope of legal prosecution.
8. Broader Context
- The language in this document emphasizes:
- A libertarian philosophy of minimal government intrusion.
- A deep reliance on historical and natural law traditions.
- A rejection of modern interpretations of authority when they conflict with personal sovereignty.
In summary, this document blends historical legal principles (like the Castle Doctrine) with modern libertarian and anti-establishment assertions to argue for the sanctity of personal property and the right to defend it against unauthorized intrusion. It challenges the legitimacy of government and its agents without explicit, mutual agreements granting them authority.