Court / Stuart Hill repeats jurisdiction claims as he tries to have case thrown out

STUART Hill had a motion to throw out his latest court case dismissed after claiming the Crown has no jurisdiction to prosecute him.

The 82-year-old appeared at Lerwick Sheriff Court charged with driving without insurance, a test certificate, a licence and a valid licence plate after being stopped by police at Lerwick’s Market Cross on 3 May.

Representing himself, Hill answered barely any questions about the charge itself – which he is due to go on trial for next month.

Instead he focused his attentions on issues of sovereignty, allodial ownership and whether the procurator fiscal has jurisdiction over Shetland.

A lengthy back-and-forth between Hill and Sheriff Ian Cruickshank ensued, with Hill repeatedly asserting that Shetland was not part of the UK.

He told Sheriff Cruickshank on several occasions that he was not able to make judicial decisions unless he could prove Shetland was owned by the UK, at one point interrupting the sheriff to make this point.

Advertisement1 of 9

Sheriff Cruickshank pointed to work by international lawyer Professor John Grant, which asserted that Shetland and Orkney were part of the United Kingdom.

He read out a quote from him, which said it “seems now to be beyond agreement that Orkney and Shetland form part of the UK”.

However Hill said he would “disagree” with that, calling it “all speculation” and saying that there was “no proof”.

Procurator fiscal Duncan Mackenzie said Hill was “again misunderstanding the difference between civil and criminal law”.

Making an “extreme example”, he said an attack on Shetland by another state would be considered an attack against the UK.

With Hill saying that Lerwick Sheriff Court had no jurisdiction to deal with criminal cases in the isles, Sheriff Cruickshank asked him what would happen if a serious crime was committed in Shetland.

“That’s entirely up to the people of Shetland,” he said, adding he was “not suggesting a revolution”.

Sheriff Cruickshank refused his motion to dismiss the case, and asked if he sought to appeal it to a higher court, adding: “You have never once appealed my decision to a higher court”.

With Hill refusing, the sheriff asked him if he was ready and prepared for trial next month.

But Hill said “in the absence of jurisdiction” he did not “recognise this court”.

Mackenzie said the Crown was prepared for trial on 18 December, and that CCTV footage had been turned over to Hill.

Asked if he could agree the provenance of the footage, Hill said the court would need to establish its jurisdiction first.

“If the court cannot establish jurisdiction, that evidence is irrelevant. To me it is immaterial.”

Hill will return for trial on 18 December.