🚀 go-pugleaf

REF: 3415969

FA SALLY JENNINGS
TCCC=OPERATIONS MONITERING CENTER


Dear Sally Jennings, 10417


RE: CONCERNING THE MANUFACTURING AND TRANSMISSION, USING THE
INTERNATIONAL YAHOO BACKBONE; licensed to AUSTRALIA, OF AARON SIMMONS
DOCUMENTS ALREADY IN YOUR possession, TO COMMIT CRIME.

I am bringing to your attention a transmission of agent Terry Baker
questioning how I was in possession of commonwealth and state
documents of Aaron Simmons.

Based on this admission and my reply I believe you have jurisdiction
to prosecute those involved in the transmission of these documents.

I am now in including from the Crimes Act the relevant portions so
that you can better understand and have full knowledge through the act
itself and jurisdiction over the prosecution of this complaint.

I will also include NSW AND QUEENSLAND state crime overlap if you wish
to complete your understanding and information.


FIRST

AARON SIMMONS documents were transmitted using the Yahoo Interface.

I have checked with Yahoo in America to see if they gave special
permission to Australia to bypass the criminal aspects of the license
issued.  I will email you the relevant portion in the next email after
consulting with Yahoo America Legal and they study the documents and
give a formal written opinion.

I am venturing to guess that these documents were transmitted from
TWEED HEADS WEST NSW but I am not quite sure until Yahoo America and
Attorney General In America confirm. but the data is transmitted back
and forth between  NWS into Queensland.

Yahoo America will locate the ISP and heard pen registers and I will
send you that data at a later date.
The data from the document and its use is included as a State Federal
Interface,

One use of the data document is the illegal transportation of my Child
Nara from Queensland into NSW and A police report stands clear in
Maclean NSW but not in Pottsville NSW.  I have already sent you this.


3AA  State offences that have a federal aspect
Object
	(1A)	The object of this section is to identify State offences that
have a federal aspect because:
	(a)	they potentially fall within Commonwealth legislative power
because of the elements of the State offence; or
	(b)	they potentially fall within Commonwealth legislative power
because of the circumstances in which the State offence was committed
(whether or not those circumstances are expressed to be acts or
omissions involved in committing the offence); or
	(c)	the Australian Federal Police investigating them is incidental to
the Australian Federal Police investigating an offence against a law
of the Commonwealth or a Territory.
State offences that have a federal aspect
	(1)	For the purposes of this Act, a State offence has a federal
aspect if, and only if:
	(a)	both:
	(i)	the State offence is not an ancillary offence; and
	(ii)	assuming that the provision creating the State offence had been
enacted by the Parliament of the Commonwealth instead of by the
Parliament of the State-the provision would have been a valid law of
the Commonwealth; or
	(b)	both:
	(i)	the State offence is an ancillary offence that relates to a
particular primary offence; and
	(ii)	assuming that the provision creating the primary offence had
been enacted by the Parliament of the Commonwealth instead of by the
Parliament of the State-the provision would have been a valid law of
the Commonwealth; or
(c)	assuming that the Parliament of the Commonwealth had enacted a
provision that created an offence penalising the specific acts or
omissions involved in committing the State offence-that provision
would have been a valid law of the Commonwealth; or
	(d)	both:
	(i)	the Australian Federal Police is investigating a matter relating
to a relevant criminal activity that relates to an offence against a
law of the Commonwealth or a Territory; and
	(ii)	if the Australian Federal Police is investigating, or were to
investigate, a matter relating to a relevant criminal activity that
relates to the State offence-that investigation is, or would be,
incidental to the investigation mentioned in subparagraph (i).
Specificity of acts or omissions
(2)For the purposes of paragraph (1)(c), the specificity of the acts
or omissions involved in committing a State offence is to be
determined having regard to the circumstances in which the

offence was committed (whether or not those circumstances are
expressed to be elements of the offence).
State offences covered by paragraph (1)(c)
	(3)	A State offence is taken to be covered by paragraph (1)(c) if the
conduct constituting the State offence:
	(a)	affects the interests of:
	(i)	the Commonwealth; or Terry Baker Federal Agent was quite adamant
on this point and I will use it as evidence.
	(ii)	an authority of the Commonwealth; or Terry Baker Federal Agent
was quite adamant on this point and I will use it as evidence.
	(iii)	a constitutional corporation; or
	(b)	was engaged in by a constitutional corporation; or
	(c)	was engaged in a Commonwealth place; or
	(d)	involved the use of a postal service or other like service; or
	(e)	involved an electronic communication; or	 I have already alleged
that the documents were very resolution scanned and using my G4 and
High Resolution printer taken by Peter Whalan reproduced in Parkwood
QLD.
	(f)	involved trade or commerce:
	(i)	between Australia and places outside Australia; or
	(ii)	among the States; or
	(iii)	within a Territory, between a State and a Territory or between
2 Territories; or I have already alleged that the documents were very
resolution scanned in NSW then using para (e) delivered onto my family
computer held and being used by Peter and Jane Whalan at 10 county
court Parkwood , Queensland and using my G4 and High Resolution
printer taken by Peter Whalan reproduced in Parkwood QLD.
	(g)	involved:
	(i)	banking (other than State banking not extending beyond the limits
of the State concerned); or
	(ii)	insurance (other than State insurance not extending beyond the
limits of the State concerned); or
	(h)	relates to a matter outside Australia; or
	(i)	relates to a matter in respect of which an international
agreement to which Australia is a party imposes obligations to which
effect could be given by the creation of an offence against the
domestic laws of the parties to the agreement; or  Your Email advising
me that India was not a signatory to the Hague and Australia is and
the violations sent to you are child rights violations.  A Human
Rights Court has already passed a direction that there are gross
violations of the child rights.  Further a Supreme Court has passed an
opinion on the Human Rights that violations are primarily Australian
and Australia must find competent court.  And the Consolidated Acts
which I can also include contains complete acceptance of Australia's
position of Child Rights.
	(j)	relates to a matter that affects the relations between Australia
and another country or countries or is otherwise a subject of
international concern.  You have received a number of emails
confirming violations, and interpretation and international concern
over this matter, from USA, India, Switzerland.  USA as far NARA's
half brothers and sisters are concerned.  Switzerland as far as Nara's
aunt is concerned, United Nations, India as far as by brother is
concerned.  And this will not stop until justice is done.
(3)Subsection (3) does not limit paragraph (1)(c).


electronic communication means a communication of information:
	(a)	whether in the form of text; or
	(b)	whether in the form of data; or
	(c)	whether in the form of speech, music or other sounds; or
	(d)	whether in the form of visual images (animated or otherwise); or
	(e)	whether in any other form; or
	(f)	whether in any combination of forms;
by means of guided and/or unguided electromagnetic energy.
engage in conduct has the same meaning as in the Criminal Code.

F/A Sally Jennings this letter contains a format about a complaint and
if you don't understand or I have not understood this portion of the
law properly as it applies to your jurisdiction please let me know.

Yours Sincerely


REDACTED: