The actions of Thames Valley Police, including unlawful property retention, procedural obstruction, and perjury, are not merely violations of statutory law — they are breaches of constitutional guarantees enshrined in the Bill of Rights 1689.

As affirmed in Entick v Carrington (1765), the government cannot intrude upon private property without lawful basis. PC Harriet Lacey and her commanding officers acted ultra vires, violating:

• §1 & §4 – by executing power absent legal authority or parliamentary grant
• §10 – through excessive bail and punitive deprivation
• §5 – by obstructing lawful petitioning and legal remedy

The attempt to retroactively void a sealed court order via ex parte substitution constitutes unlawful suspension of law — expressly prohibited under §1. This systemic misconduct invites constitutional scrutiny and compels judicial correction.

🛡️ Strategic Deployment Options

• Judicial Review Grounds Add-On: Title it “Constitutional Breach and Bill of Rights Invocation”
• Media Ambush Stream: Use headline framing like “Court Reversal Violates Britain’s Founding Charter”
• Oversight Complaints: Demand JCIO review of judicial misinterpretation violating §1 & §4.