Dear Australian Federal Police,

I am making my FOI, RTN requesting the assistance of AFP Dept, it has evidence, proof, records SARS-COV-2, 2019-nCoV, Covid 19, Coronavirus, since Pandemic was declared, international borders limited, before extending to state border closes, other restrictions that had quarantine, monetary enforcements imposed under Health Directions issued by State or Federal law agenies, as well as Home Affairs, Border Force, Customs, or Her Majesty Australian Defence Forces tasked to areas regions as required and deployed. The people of the Commonwealth, thank you sincerely for those efforts in trying circumstances.

Article I included may aid Reference with/against any records AFP discovered solely related Bio Security tasks given the AFP Commissioner, to issue orders or directives. I am not seeking the AFP to verify any facts, already provided, by professionals in each of their specialised fields, when activated under Bio Security Act

There are currently 181 FOIs reveal that health/science institutions around the world have no record of SARS-COV-2 isolation/purification, anywhere.

For an offence to occur at Common Law essential issue is evidence, factual evidence beyond reasonable doubt, where required Judges, Magistrate would accept to be factual evidence, beyond reasonable doubt on the public record.

I am seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

I do not require and results that contain but not limited to (containing various sources of genetic material and never proven to contain any alleged “virus”) with transfected monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum and toxic drugs, then claim that the resulting concoction is “SARS-COV-2 isolate research laboratory.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus” (blamed for widespread death/disease/lockdown measures) actually exists.

Without this step having been performed and followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments, all claims of this alleged “virus” are nothing but wild speculation backed only by fraudulent science, fraudulent tests and fraud-based diagnoses.

I have included responses from Health Agencies, Law Agencies, Education body's to reference your findings against as comparison, contact for assistance if needed:
The Australian Department of Health, NSW Ministry of Health, CSIRO, WA Minister & Minister of Health, SA Minister for Health & Wellbeing, Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Uni of WA, ACT Govt(Gov of ACT/Canberra)
Canberra Health Services, University of New South Wales, Doherty Institute in Victoria,

Have a great day, thank Peace Officers at AFP. 👍🇦🇺

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-rev...
Yours faithfully,

Dean Miles

Dear FOI,

Please supply Evidence your rules were passed by laws under Great Seal of the United Kingdom to claim Jurisdiction over natural person, thank you..

ACTS AMENDMENT AND REPEAL (COURTS AND LEGAL PRACTICE) ACT 2003 (NO. 65 OF 2003) - SECT 130
130 . Supreme Court Act 1935 amended
(1) The amendments in this section are to the Supreme Court Act 1935 *.

[* Reprinted as at 9 February 2001.
For subsequent amendments see 2001 Index to Legislation of Western Australia, Table 1, p. 370 and Act No. 23 of 2002. ]

(2) Section 4 is amended as follows:

(a) in the definition of “Action” by deleting “by the Crown”;

(b) in the definition of “Cause” by deleting “by the Crown”.

(3) Section 9(1) is amended by deleting “Her Majesty” and inserting instead —

“ the Governor ”.

(4) Section 15(1) is amended by deleting “Royal Arms” and inserting instead —

“ armorial bearings of the State ”.

(5) Section 37(2) is repealed and the following subsection is inserted instead —

“
(2) Nothing in this section shall alter the practice in proceedings in relation to the prerogative and criminal jurisdiction of the Court.

”.

(6) Section 50(1) is amended by deleting “by the Crown”.

(7) Section 51(1) is amended by deleting “by the Crown”.

(8) Section 56(1) is amended by deleting “by the Crown”.

(9) Section 119 is amended by deleting “to Her Majesty or any of her subjects, or other persons entitled in like manner as subjects”.

(10) Section 154(1) is amended by deleting “Her Majesty’s” and inserting instead —

“ The ”.

(11) Section 154(3), (4), (5) and (6) are each amended by deleting “Crown” in each place where it occurs and in each place inserting instead —

“ State ”.

(12) The Second Schedule is amended by deleting “our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her Heirs and successors” and inserting instead —

“ the State of Western Australia

Yours sincerely,

Dean Miles