Charles Staple Statement of case
Charlie Staple is taking a stand in an unprecedented legal battle—Charlie Staple vs. King Charles III. This fight is not just for him; it’s for everyone who believes in holding power to account and defending our fundamental human rights. Alongside this, he’s pursuing justice against four key defendants: PS Steven Richardson, PC Ben Purton, PC David Grivas, and PS Jacob Fuller. He’s asking for your support to help him challenge the British establishment’s unlawful protection of state officials and their violation of international law.
Charles Staple did nothing wrong. He was simply and passively exercising his fundamental rights—freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and freedom of speech—while objecting to state coercion and lockdowns. For this, he was attacked both physically and mentally by state officials. Two cases were brought against him in criminal courts, and he won both. One of these cases, Charles represented himself in Crown Court before a jury, where he received a No Case to Answer on the first charge, and the jury unanimously found him Not Guilty on the second.
There is independent video evidence documenting the unlawful actions of the police. Despite this, the British state, through the Attorney General and Solicitor General, vetoed the private prosecution of the four police constables involved. This blatant misuse of power is part of a larger pattern of abuse: Since 1990, 1,888 English and Welsh subjects have lost their lives at the hands of the British police, with 23 deaths just last year alone resulting from police restraint. These police officers, as servants of the King, have never been held accountable.
This case is being brought under universal jurisdiction in Texas, USA, as a direct result of the British establishment’s unlawful veto on bringing torture cases against state officials. Torture is universally unlawful, and the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT)—ratified by the British government—allows for prosecution of such crimes in foreign jurisdictions. Furthermore, the British incorporated UNCAT into domestic law through the Criminal Justice Act 1988, Section 134, which outlaws torture. However, what they failed to tell the international community is that they secretly included a veto at Section 135, which now blocks any attempt at prosecuting police officers for such crimes in the UK.
“Statements of Case and Judgments and Orders that are a made ‘in public’ are public documents and are available from court record.” CPR 5.4C
Staple v Police Sergeant Steven Richardson and others KB-2023-003845
Before His Honour Judge Eastman on the 26 04 2024 at 10:30am Claimant Charles Edward Staple V Joint defendants PS (Police Seargent) Steven Richardson Ben Purton 4115U, David Grivas 4211U, no name SW 3204 Commissioner metropolitan Police London.
- On the 28 11 2020 at or about 13:55 I, Charles Staple an English Constitutionalist and a member of the English Constitution Society was making my way to Trafalgar Square London via Great Marlborough Street London to petition and utilise my English Convention rights and ancient rights of freedom of assembly, thought and expression against what I saw as oppressive and unlawful government policies and regulations.
- I was arrested by PS (Police Seargent) Steven Richardson and constables Ben Purton 4115U, David Grivas 4211U, no name SW 3204 all constables under the employment of Metropolitan Police Commissioner or acting as the commissioner’s agents assisted in the arrest and prosecution. They were deployed and employed at all relevant times in London under the command of the Metropolitan police commissioner.
- Particulars of claim:

sorry quite late logging in last evening but having watched the whole show the statement of facts clearly stated in the case of Charles Staples is a work of art by you Graham
I THINK YOUV’E WON CHARLIE
If Grahams work and Charlies tenacity don’t send a shock wave throught the Police, then the Police will have proven how completely and utterly they do not understand our rights and also how completely and utterly they are unfit for the positions they hold. It will be interesting to see the judicial response to this case