Virusless viral pandemic

**Derlyn** · 29-May-21, 01:39 AM

Hi

A while back I posted about a court challenge to government lodged by Ricardo Maarman.
My take was that it should be interesting.

You would not have read too much about this in the MSM because the less everybody knows about this case the better, if you get my drift.

A brief summary of his case was as follows:

Because government has used the prevelance of the Covid 19 virus as justification to introduce a lockdown together with all sorts of regulations which affected him and every other citizen in the country negatively, all he was asking government for was to show him the virus that was responsible for all this devastation.

I would consider this to be a reasonable request. After all, everytime we turn on the TV we see these round ball like structures with spikes. They must be real and look very scary and dangerous.

Mr Maarman and his attorneys were eventually in the Cape Town High Court on Thursday exchanging arguments with the government representation.

One would have thought that the easiest way for the government to get rid of Mr Maarman and his (silly) request, was to show him the virus or at least some sort of proof that it does actually exist. If they did, then that would have been it, slam dunk, case closed, however that's not what happened.

Government spent most of it's time in court arguing that it is not necessary for them to show the virus to anyone.
They started off by arguing that Mr Maarman is not sufficiently educated to be shown the virus.
They spent the rest of their time arguing why it was neither important nor urgent that this virus be shown to anyone.

The judge agreed that it was not urgent and dismissed the case.

This was a huge win for Mr Maarman.

If the Covid 19 virus did exist, surely it would have been the easiest thing in the world for government to show it to him. Instead they argued for all they were worth why it was not necessary to do just that. They have left the door wide open for further litigation where they could have shut it one shot.

Suspicious ? Seems to be.

Peace out .... Derek

**Dave A** · 29-May-21, 08:03 AM

If you bring a matter to court on an urgent basis, you have to show cause to the satisfaction of the court as to why it merits being dealt with on an urgent basis first - before the merits of the matter itself even start to be considered.

Maarman did not win anything. Maarman's case fell at the first hurdle. It tells us nothing as to the merits of the second hurdle he would have faced if he had got past the first one.

**Derlyn** · 29-May-21, 02:05 PM

Mr Maarman has been meticulously following the legal steps. This has been the 3rd time in court.

He has used the PAIA and written letters to government starting in April last year, but was ignored. No surprise there.

He then approached the constitutional court directly but was told that his case must first be heard by a lower court and so off to the high court he went. The state asked for more time to study the papers and the case was postponed for a month. The case then resumed on Thursday and after arguments back and forth, the judge decided it was not urgent and dismissed the case.

Whats interesting though is that Mr Maarman is now armed with certain info that was divulged by the state attorneys under oath during the arguments on Thursday which he did not have when he approached the constitutional court first time round. The state attorneys also argued on Thursday that this case is too important to be judged on by only one judge and according to them requires 3 or more judges.

Mr Maarman is no fool and I'm sure that in the foreseable future we will see him taking up the fight on our behalf again.

Watch this space.

Peace out .. Derek.

**Dave A** · 29-May-21, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by Derlyn

Mr Maarman has been meticulously following the legal steps. This has been the 3rd time in court.

If you say so.
(Plain reading of what you posted suggests otherwise).

**Derlyn** · 30-May-21, 12:19 PM

So the state attorneys argued that this case was too important to be heard by one judge only.

It's really strange that such an important case gets no coverage by the main stream media.

It is custom for msm journalists to jostle for space in the high court to get the scoop.

ENCA, SABC, New24, IOL, Citizen, Argus, Cape Times, Newzroom Afrika, Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, Sowetan, Citi Press, Daily Sun and The Herald.

Above are some of the msm media houses that have not reported a word regarding this case.

It does seem rather strange and out of the ordinary that such an important case gets no coverage, unless of course, they were instructed by their handlers to leave it alone. Maybe there's something they don't want their audience to know.

Like I said ..... Interesting case.

Peace out ... Derek

**tec0** · 30-May-21, 09:17 PM

@ Derek, So why are hospitals swamped? What is responsible for so many deaths? What evidence was presented?

Binnelanders actor Ben Kruger, 64, dies
Within this article, he died due to Covid 19.

i said in a previous thread, It is better to be careful and do what is needed to protect both yourself and those around you then to take chances.

i hope you never have to touch face with this virus/pandemic.

This will be my only response to this thread.

**Blurock** · 31-May-21, 09:59 AM

Coronavirus Cases:
171,040,613
view by country https://www.worldometers.info/corona...=homeAdvegas1?
Deaths:
3,556,957
Recovered:
153,154,743

We may differ about the cause of the pandemic. We may differ about the treatment for the pandemic. We may all agree that authorities acted wrong in the way that they implemented lockdowns, cigarette and booze bans and that governments used the virus as an excuse to gain more control over the populace. We may differ about vaccination and the effectiveness thereof, but anyone still denying that there is a pandemic is just plain stupid!

**Andromeda** · 31-May-21, 12:06 PM

These cases were dismissed by Concourt on the same day. The msm had little (actually nothing) to say about them either:

46 CCT 267/20 Siviwe Ngooo and Others v The State 03.03.21
47 CCT 251/20 Albertus Frederick Titus v Absa Bank Pty Ltd and Others 03.03.21
48 CCT 63/21 Ricardo Maarman v The Presindent Of RSA and Others 03.03.21
49 CCT 257/20 Raamano Patric Mulangaphuma v The State 03.03.21
49 CCT 264/20 Andrian Mitchell Farrar and Another v Meyersdal Nature Estate Home Owners Association and Another 03.03.21
50 CCT 272/20 Phuti Robert Nkoana and Another v The State 03.03.21
51 CCT 276/20 Joshua Mbongeni Ngcobo v Standard bank of South Adrica 03.03.21

You can find more about Mr. Maarman here https://realnewssa.com/the-republica...cardo-maarman/

The Real News SA, which has a photo of London as it's background on the home page.

You can't make this stuff up.

**Derlyn** · 31-May-21, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by Andromeda

These cases were dismissed by Concourt on the same day. The msm had little (actually nothing) to say about them either:

46 CCT 267/20 Siviwe Ngooo and Others v The State 03.03.21
47 CCT 251/20 Albertus Frederick Titus v Absa Bank Pty Ltd and Others 03.03.21
48 CCT 63/21 Ricardo Maarman v The Presindent Of RSA and Others 03.03.21
49 CCT 257/20 Raamano Patric Mulangaphuma v The State 03.03.21
49 CCT 264/20 Andrian Mitchell Farrar and Another v Meyersdal Nature Estate Home Owners Association and Another 03.03.21
50 CCT 272/20 Phuti Robert Nkoana and Another v The State 03.03.21
51 CCT 276/20 Joshua Mbongeni Ngcobo v Standard bank of South Adrica 03.03.21

You can find more about Mr. Maarman here https://realnewssa.com/the-republica...cardo-maarman/

The Real News SA, which has a photo of London as it's background on the home page.

You can't make this stuff up.

I think you might have misread or misunderstood my post.

The case I was referring to was in the HIGH court in Cape Town on Thursday 27th May 2021.
That's where the journalists normally hang out in their numbers.

Peace out ... Derek.

https://www.showusthevirus.info/

**Derlyn** · 03-Oct-21, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Derlyn

Mr Maarman has been meticulously following the legal steps. This has been the 3rd time in court.

He has used the PAIA and written letters to government starting in April last year, but was ignored. No surprise there.

He then approached the constitutional court directly but was told that his case must first be heard by a lower court and so off to the high court he went. The state asked for more time to study the papers and the case was postponed for a month. The case then resumed on Thursday and after arguments back and forth, the judge decided it was not urgent and dismissed the case.

Whats interesting though is that Mr Maarman is now armed with certain info that was divulged by the state attorneys under oath during the arguments on Thursday which he did not have when he approached the constitutional court first time round. The state attorneys also argued on Thursday that this case is too important to be judged on by only one judge and according to them requires 3 or more judges.

Mr Maarman is no fool and I'm sure that in the foreseable future we will see him taking up the fight on our behalf again.

Watch this space.

Peace out .. Derek.

As I said. Watch this space. He is going to take up the fight on our behalf again.
I am proudly one of the co applicants.

Papers have been served and accepted by the Con Court.

https://www.brighteon.com/04148f7b-6...0-29902166ce30

Peace out .. Derek.