Convo With A Judge About “Driving”

Me: “Your honor, I’d like to remind you that, according to the Uniform Commercial Code, that ‘driving’ is an occupational action and a commercial term for someone who is for hire to provide a service of transportation like a taxi or a person who is transporting merchandise to be sold, like a truck driver. Since nothing that I was doing while operating my personal private automobile was considered commercial, by definition, I was not driving because I was not involved in traffic. Going from point A to point be, even driving to work, is not considered driving if I’m not operating in a public commercial status, which is also known as traffic. I was merely traveling privately. Just because I use the same roadways, doesn’t mean I was operating in the same capacity. This is federal law, decided by the supreme court. I was traveling lawfully and need no license to do so. Licensing liberty law also says that my right to travel cannot be converted into a license and charged for a fee and that if such a litigation is written, which would be a violation of my right and infringe on my enjoyment of said right, then it charges no offense for me to not acquire a licence, ignore the litigation and proceed with impunity. I have no contract as a driver, no hours logged and am on no corporate payroll as such.”

Judge: “the definitions of the UCC aren’t valid in this situation, you have to have a license to operate a motored vehicle in the state of Ohio.”

Me: “what about what I said was unclear? Federal jurisdiction trumps your statutory jurisdiction as well. A motored vehicle is used for commercial purposes, which I defined for you previously. My personal automobile is household goods. And how are they not valid? Do you collect a revenue using federal reserve Notes in this court?”

Judge: “yes we do.”

Me: “that validates the federal jurisdiction of the UCC over this court. If you use federal money, then you have to abide by federal law and code… unless, of course, you’re saying you’re going to break federal law and code to extort me… Does the USC Title 18 part 1 chapter 13 subsection 241 and 242 apply to you if you infringe upon my rights and do me harm in the process? Hypothetically speaking of course…”

Judge: “hypothetically if that situation were to occur, yes.

Me: “If that federal code applies, then so does the UCC. You cannot pick and choose sir. You, yourself, are operating commercially on behalf of the court as an administrator of this municipality. So the UCC applies to you. I didn’t write the laws, I just found them. And, if we’re being honest, the officer, who brought this claim against me, should actually have state plates on his car since he is acting in a public capacity AND operating commercially to collect a revenue. But he doesn’t, he has private plates with police decals on them. You are allowing unlawful litigations to be enforced and do damage upon me financially and infringe upon my rights. Neither the state, nor the city, this municipality, nor you would have any standing in a federal court if you passed judgment on me over this while ignoring and violating federal law causing damage to me. Please have the bondsman bring forward the proper documents so that I can see who will indemnify me.”

Judge: “I will waive these charges and dismiss this case due to lack of evidence.”


Source: My Facebook buddy Yahhantoqeph Ben Yahuah

How to Beat Any Court Case in America

I am constantly getting the question: I got arrested and now I have court in a week what do I do??? Right away I want to say that the following strategy will NOT WORK for you if you have an actual victim or contractual obligation that require specific performance with government (like a drivers licensing agreement or tax filings where you admit to being a taxpayer). With that being said

The first step to avoiding Kangaroo Court is to challenge jurisdiction pre-arraignment, before any plea is entered (DO NOT ENTER PLEAS). You challenge jurisdiction by filing a Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, WRITTEN SUBMISSION not oral arguments. You can file a Motion to Dismiss 30 seconds after you receive your ticket or release. You don’t need an arraignment date, or even a Judges name to proceed.

If you file a Motion to Dismiss PRE-ARRAIGNMENT, the Judge is estopped from entering a plea on your behalf. (Estopped = prevented, precluded)

She/He MUST ANSWER your Motion, yea or nay before any further court business may proceed. If the Motion is denied, you simply file a 2nd, then a 3rd. Eventually they will screw up and break the law. Usually they will do this by ignoring your Motion and attempting to reset, schedule another arraignment, which is what you want.

A judge has 10 days (generally) to rule on your Motion. The DA also has that same 10 day window to file a Motion to Strike YOUR Motion.

Silence is not an option.
They MUST respond or be in default.

Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Strike = Demurrer where not allowed.

In criminal cases, such as felonies unlike traffic tickets there WILL be an Affidavit, and a sworn complaint. The key to beating criminal cases is to prove official or juducial misconduct. A LEO lying on an Criminal Affidavit is a get out of jail free card for you, and a possible criminal indictment for him.

The biggest problem and missing link for anarchists, sovereigns, and people who wish to be free is ENFORCEMENT. Everybody knows somebody who did something once or twice, and everybody has a strategy or theory.

The key is enforcing the laws, disciplinary actions that are already on the books. The Constitution and every state Constitution has procedures in place RIGHT NOW to end the trickery.

Anarchists don’t believe it and sovereigns are hit and miss.

In your past case or even a new one, any case:

It all starts with the arraignment. If you file a Demurrer (California)/Motion to Dismiss (other states) based on lack of personal and subject-matter jurisdiction, they CANNOT PROCEED.

They cannot enter a plea on your behalf.
They cannot schedule a trial date.
They cannot RE-SCHEDULE an arraignment.

The Demurrer/Motion to Dismiss cannot be ignored.

The Judge MUST rule on the Demurrer/Motion to Dismiss before any other business proceeds. The district attorney (prosecutor) has the OPTION to challenge your Demurrer but doesn’t have to. The deadline is 10 days in most jurisdictions.

If the Judge doesn’t respond he is in default. If the prosecutor responds AFTER 10 days HE is in default.

You can then file a Writ with the Chief Clerk of that court or a higher court to dismiss the case entirely on procedural grounds violations.

You then file criminal affidavits with the State Attorney General. Find the affidavits associated with the arrests and find the provable lies in them. Affidavits are sworn under penalty of perjury. You lie, you go to prison. At a bare minimum, the case based on the false testimony will be thrown out and overturned. Think about death row inmates, life sentences are overturned everyday due to false testimony.

Once you open a criminal perjury case against the law enforcement officers, district attorney, judges, etc. the investigation becomes a matter of public record. The state attorney general IS NOT going to risk prison, destroying his life family political ambitions to protect a few dumb cops. And if he does, even better.

Whether the investigation leads to arrests and indictments is irrelevant. You have used the state attorney general as your own private investigator, for free. File a Freedom of Information Act request, Open Records Act request for ALL documentation. Then take that documentation to a lawyer for your civil suit.

That’s how you sue. Get the State AG to do your work for free, first.

JUDGES DO NOT discipline LAW ENFORCEMENT.

Only the Executive Branch can DIRECTLY discipline, investigate the Executive Branch. Supervisors investigate and discipline their subordinates, yes? That is the State Attorney generals role. So always remember to be making a record of everything and build your own case. You need to take pictures of ALL paperwork, letters given to you. The small details make a big difference.

If you have been a victim of official misconduct you have an open and shut case in your favor. You also have a personal civil claim against the citizen arrestor. You can also drop common law liens on him as well. Each State has its own rules, but since it will always be someone acting under the Color of Law it can go directly to the federal courts. In an abuse of power claim, you won’t win by saying they violated your Rights, but if you make the claim they overstepped their authority and that in effect denied your Rights and caused you damages they allow it. The Civil Rights claim should never be the main claim but the effect of their unlawful actions causing you harm in that it violated Rights.

File a criminal affidavit alleging perjury with the State Attorney general and State police as soon as you can. If a cop offers false testimony in an affidavit or trial there is a process for that too. And, if you don’t know or don’t follow the process, that’s on you. It could be the Mayor or Chief of Police it really doesn’t matter who it is.

The three branches of government are duplicated at every level.

Executive
Legislative
Judicial

I would advise people to avoid ALL civil rights claims. Why? Because the 14th Amendment is unconstitutional. So is the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Can you use their own unconstitutional laws against them? Sure! States Rights. The Supremacy Clause. But you are arguing against the Constitution when you argue civil rights violation. You don’t need the feds. Your state Constitution, legislature, Supreme Court, and State Attorney General is enough.

Use your state branches of government AGAINST EACH OTHER.

Use the State Attorney General and State Police against local law enforcement, district attorneys, Mayors, City Council and County Commissioners, and County Sheriffs. If the Governor and State Attorney General disobey? Use the State Legislature to investigate, and then IMPEACH them. You can also use the State Supreme Court and District Courts to seek injunctions (restraining orders) and Writs of Mandamus. You can always THREATEN them with THEIR laws and policies, but those policies are not there to protect US, obviously. I have determined that I will never seek protection under any code or policy, not even the Constitution.

Those are THEIR restraints, their rules, not mine.
Show me evidence of YOUR authority, I make no claims.

Stay out of court, do not make physical appearances. You want EVERYTHING IN WRITING.

Submit your interrogatories in writing. Do not get stuck in a physical cross-examination. They will lie. The Judge will sustain their objections and overrule yours. There may or may not be a record.

When you file your Motions (Objections), Interrogatories (Examinations), Requests for Discovery, Subpoenas Duces Tecum,
all IN WRITING, they can’t bully you or run game. They MUST RESPOND in writing, under penalty of perjury automatically. And they won’t ever want to do that. They will remain silent and risk losing the case by default rather than risk going to prison by making false statements. Get their response in writing, under penalty of perjury. If you don’t direct your objections, complaints, allegations PROPERLY, you will just get the runaround and become one of those who swear nothing works, nothing matters.

You do not pay traffic tickets at the Post Office, correct?
Do you get heart surgery at the dentists office?

It doesn’t matter what the initial charge is, honestly (unless you ARE guilty of a common law crime such as murder, assault,
theft). ALWAYS file a Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice the entire claim and a Motion to Strike any paperwork filed by others. Like the district attorney, or Plaintiff/Defendant in Civil suit.

EVERY AFFIDAVIT THEY WRITE IS A LIE! If there is no victim YOU ARE LYING!

No victim + No contract to perform = LIE

Theres only one answer/solution to the entire problem.

STOP
GOING
TO
COURT

From now on, all correspondence and Motions are to be submitted in WRITING. This FORCES them to respond in writing, on the record, with PROOF of their trickery. We have all been bamboozled by movies and television. You can fight an entire case and never have to set foot in court. Men on Death Row in Federal prison do it every day.

Every word uttered in a court room is entered IN WRITING FIRST. The only problem is, you never see those documents because your lawyer doesnt show you or give you his filings. We absolutely have to learn how to file ALL our own paperwork and ALL disciplinary paperwork Writs of Mandamus, Writs of Praecipe (order to dismiss sent to Court Clerkyes CLERKS have the power to dismiss cases).

Lets talk about handling your upcoming case.

It is quite easy to challenge jurisdiction without challenging jurisdiction by making them prove it with declarations because a challenge is equal to dishonor. When I use the term challenge, it is just because that is the legal term, and what people are familiar with. Properly done, you are asserting/declaring facts for them to rebut. Nothing more.

You can possibly use demurrers or motions as well but they need to specifically challenge the presumption of??jurisdiction and NOT argue statutory law or some other nonsense.

No victim + No contract to perform = No jurisdiction. Three things to remember.

If there is a victim, that gives Personal jurisdiction.
If there is a contract to perform, that gives Subject-matter jurisdiction

Its really just that simple.

Folks try to spin it 1,000 different ways, throw in legal mumbo jumbo, Latin phrases, the Constitution and they are just??walking into the spider web.

If you dont have a victim or a contract, you dont have a case. Leave all the extra crap out of it with these criminals and STAY ON MESSAGE. They are only playing with you because you are playing with them. So stop playing, start prosecuting non-performance.

When you file a motion to dismiss with prejudice they are stuck. There is literally nothing they can do except keep screwing up and digging a bigger hole for any appeal to a higher court.

They will keep resetting arraignments and ignoring your paperwork. I once went to arraignments 4 times in Clatsop county before they were able to get a good transcript, and the only reason why they were successful is because I was strapped to a chair in a little room in the jail appearing by video in the courtroom. Yes, I failed but at the time I didnt knew to never argue, never go to court, and never make oral motions or arguments or enter pleas. And when an involuntary plea is entered send a Declaration of Non-Consent to the court clerk.

The hardest part of all this is to KEEP IT SIMPLE and to the point. Leave out the extra stuff, emotional outbursts, disputable claims like; I am Sovereign, my birth certificate is money. You do not even need to cite points and authorities.

Again, lets all make sure we understand what Personal and Subject-Matter Jurisdiction is.

Personal Jurisdiction means that they have a claim on your PERSON, because you harmed or injured another PERSON.
Thats what extradition treaties are for. To bring your PERSON BACK to the scene of the crime.

Examples of courts with Subject-Matter Jurisdiction:

Tax Court
Vaccine Court
Bankruptcy Court
Traffic Court

These are all subject-matter jurisdiction venues because there is presumed to be a contract in place. They are specific issues, usually related to some sort of contract or business (commercial, UCC) dispute.

So, victims or contracts thats 99.99999999999% of it.
Two simple things. Not 30,000.

The governments try to say, well we have PERSONAL jurisdiction over our citizensyou live here, you??play by our rules which is pure lies. So next time ASK if you believe that to be true Mr. district attorney, prove it.??Show me proof of citizenship and the laws that govern citizens.

CODE is not LAW.

Thats why they are called a Transportation CODE, or a Municipal CODE, or a Tax CODE, or a Uniform CODE for Military Justice. Where is the contract where I agreed to your Code and citizenship and knowingly waived my Natural Rights? Show me the evidence and I will be happy to obey. Get the ideas of right and wrong out of your head and think objectively. How many people can afford to take off work, school and go to court even once a week? The answer is no one can afford that.

Going to court plays right into their hands and impoverishes YOU. Eventually you lose your job, run out of time, money, and energy. In addition to the possibility of saying or doing the wrong thing, being goaded into losing your temper and there you??go a free place to stay for a while for contempt. Not to mention possible getting your butt kicked, tazed, or even possibly murdered. Never put your physical person, body, or being in jeopardy unless you are CERTAIN of what you are doing and the
outcome.

There are people out there that are skilled and fearless in making physical court appearances. They are??secure in their knowledge and wont screw it up and say the wrong thing. This is NOT the average person. I do recommend going to court to watch how they operate though. Know your enemy. Some administrators (usually called judges) are looking for??reasons to help folks and some are looking for reasons to roast folks. If you go in there guns hot and popping off to one that intended to get you out of there and off their books, then youre done. Conversely, if you go in without putting them on notice from the get go, you are not going to have a good time. The only common denominators with folks winning, despite whatever strategy they use, is having no fear and the right psychology. Think of it as a game of poker, you have the winning hand and the river has already been turned. The most important thing is to comprehend YOUR OWN STATUS AND AUTHORITY. Youve already won unless you concede (and if you do it right).

All will continue to lose and miss money until you learn to handle these people ADMINISTRATIVELY.

What does that mean?

Paperwork. Drafted properly, submitted to the correct venue and ENFORCED with THEIR own rules, and skip the Points and Authorities when you are challenging the presumption of jurisdiction BEFORE arraignment or trial you dont need them.

Information and Belief

Language used in legal proceedings to qualify a statement and prevent a claim of perjury. A person???

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/information_and_belief

Information and Belief is similar to an affidavit but not subject to perjury charges if you are proven
wrong. Here is an example:

a) To the best of my knowledge I am not and have never been contracted with the State of California or the city of
Anaheim. The absence of documentary evidence proving a contractual relationship would indicate a lack of both personal
and subject-matter jurisdiction.

b) On the day/night in question I did not commit a common law crime, or damage any person or property. The absence of a
sworn affidavit, verifiable complaint, or forensic evidence proving I did commit a common law crime or am responsible
for damages, would indicate lack of both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction.

a) equals no contracts
b) equals no victims

You are challenging the presumption of both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction. Criminal and Civil and anything
else they are claiming. And now the ball is in their court to refute, rebut your information/affidavit.

If they dont and try to ignore you, they have lost by default. Now you just have to ENFORCE their default. To Enforce the default. You can perhaps use a notice of default, or summary judgement, but more importantly, EVERY government employee has supervisors, including judges. Climb the ladder.

Thats what I mean by enforcement and Im not talking about a court of appeals.

1. Use the judicial misconduct procedures.

2. File a Writ of Mandamus in a higher court district or circuit or Supreme to get the guy at the bottom to do
his job.

If you went to a burger joint and ordered a Big Mac and the drive thru gives you a fish combo, what do you do? Do you circle the drive thru 100 more times, complaining with each new fish sandwich or empty bag? Or do you get management involved?

What do you do if YOU are the OWNER?

Theres a multitude of bad things that can happen to a Judge who doesnt do her/his job and we were not taught to make these bad things come to life. So how exactly do you climb that ladder? So how exactly would you climb the chain of command in court? These are excellent questions, and one of the biggest pieces to this puzzle. People get frustrated or lose because they dont know the chain of command. ALMOST every court should have a Chief Justice and several clerks of which one is the Chief Clerk, and all lower courts are modeled after the national court structure the Supreme Court and District courts.

YOU dont get to decide some arbitrary response date. The Judicial Branch is governed by municipal code, local rules for counties and cities and California Rules of Procedure for all others. Most of which defer to the Federal Rules of Procedure
ALL of which outline the disciplinary actions that may be taken against wayward gov officials, and/or jurists.

Go after their employee fidelity bonds (more about that to come).

And in case you were wondering, a judge cant quash an affidavit or other filing unless you ALLOW him to. If they attempt to, a Notice of Default in Dishonor should be in order. Nobody can quash an affidavit. They either rebut or acquiesce. Period.
If they claim to have quashed your filing, that is just a way to them telling you that they have ignored it. Dont allow them to skate. This is also why I dont recommend going into courtrooms, because they are skilled professionals and are very good at deceiving people. You might say: So you are refusing to address my affidavit? My affidavit stands as fact unless you wish to rebut. Your willfull non-response will be administrative default Do you understand that I never gave you power of attorney so you dont have the authority to do anything but dismiss now?

Another really good question is: Are you a member of the BAR?
They will tell you that If your not going to enter a plea, then I will enter one for you. Which in reality is practicing law
from the bench and is both a felony and a crime that they do not have immunity from prosecution of, and you have to be the one to hold them accountable. They will usually just put it off for another hearing to try again.

If this happens, you enter in a notice of fault, in dishonor with opportunity to cure. Get it notarized, and give them one week before the next hearing to respond or dismiss/discharge, and also send copies to your state attorney general and state commissioner. You could give them 100 days and they still couldnt respond to what you send them send under their full commercial liability. Any affidavit that goes unrebutted stands as fact. I can say Im a pink elephant And if they dont respond then I am lawfully a pink elephant. If you are looking for the response time for Judges, DAs, prosecutors to respond/answer to Motions to Dismiss or Demurrers, typically the Plaintiff (prosecutor) has 10 days to respond to ANYTHING you filewith the Judge having discretion as to his response, or ruling.

In a physical appearance the Judge can answer immediately, possibly ignore you, adjourn the hearing proceeding until he
has had time to research the issue raised and THEN answer. Thats what is not happening in most cases of sovereigns, freemen, and Constitutionalists cases. Thats where the abuse of judicial discretion charge comes in. Go to the top State Attorney General, State Commissioner. File a Notice of Default in dishonor with an opportunity to cure, notarized and sent to the prosecutor. And if they dont respond, you file a civil suit.

 

Some people view the abuse of discretion standard as a judicial rubber stamp. (Cf. Wilson v. Volkswagen of America (4th Cir. 1977) 561 F.2d 494, 505-506.) It has often been said that a court acts within its discretion whenever there is an ???absence of arbitrary determination, capricious disposition or whimsical thinking.??? (People v. Preyer (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 568, 573.) As long as the court acts within the ???bounds of reason??? (ibid.), the court does not abuse its discretion.

 

The abuse of discretion standard, however, is not an abstract test based on whether the trial court judge was totally irrational. Instead, the court discretion is grounded in the policy and purpose of the statutes or laws being ??applied. ???[T]rial court discretion is not unlimited. ???The discretion of a trial judge is not a whimsical, uncontrolled power, but a legal discretion, which is subject to the limitations of legal principles governing the subject of its??action, and to reversal on appeal where no reasonable basis for the action is shown. [Citation.] (6 Witkin (2d ed. 1971) Appeal, ?? 244, p. 4235 . . .)??? (Westside Community for Independent Living v. Obledo (1983) 33 Cal.3d 348, 355.) ???[J]udicial discretion must be measured against the general rules of law and, in the case of a statutory grant of??discretion, against the specific law that grants the discretion. [Citations.]??? (Horsford v. Board of Trustees of Cal. State Univ. (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 393-394.) ~ http://www.sdap.org/news-10-10-08.html

 

Learn about the Abuse of Discretion Standard, and how to Argue it. Virtually every argument in an??opening brief is deficient without setting forth the standard of review and explaining how there was error under the standard. It can be a little trickier if you have a potential criminal conviction and not just a traffic or municipal case, but the same basics apply. I know some of you are thinking, why dont they just give me the paperwork and shut up already? You absolutely have to understand what has gone wrong to this point and what NOT TO DO going forward. The paperwork is secondary to know knowledge base. Paperwork without proper understanding is a one way ticket to jail or the poorhouse. When you really wrap your head around this basic concept, you wont need the paperwork. You will be able to walk into any courtroom in America and successfully defend anyone sitting in there. Even felony criminal cases.

No matter what you have been led to believe, there is no such thing as magic bullets. Its a dogfight, not a 15 round boxing match that ends in a decision. You go for the throat and dont let go until they bleed out. Im protective over my docs because of I give them to anyone and everyone, and they lose, guess whos fault it is Oh hes a witchdoctor. He doesnt know what he is talking about he got me thrown in jail. No. YOU did. YOU either screwed it up or didnt follow through or didnt enforce it. I take pride in the years worth of the fruits of my blood sweat and tears.

Im willing to go in a cage because Im free regardless And that scares the pants off of these fraudulent??peon servants. They see it. They feel it. I speak with authority whether its with my filings or speak it with a smile into their beady little eyes. This information will not free you. Being free is up to YOU.

File a a false imprisonment criminal affidavit and a civil suit if you have been wronged, the precedent for the going rate is $1.8m per day, in case you didnt know. And alays keep it simple. Did they have a warrant? Did they contact the Department of State who then contacted you? For any felony complaint, they also have to testify to the US District court youre a corporation also known as a person before hand too. If they restricted your movement AT ALL, then you have a winner. Leave out all the nonsense.

First things first, you need to challenge jurisdiction with a Demurrer, or Motion to Dismiss before anything else. This CAN be done electronically or certified mail, or hand delivered. So as youve seen here and a zillion other places, it doesnt matter WHAT you file if the Judge ignores or denies your paperwork and you dont have the proper response.

If you are physically present in the courtroom, they can ignore your paperwork, jam you up and just railroad you. So, deny all verbal motions, all questions, all oral arguments. If you appear ON PAPER ONLY, with your response (Demurrer), obviously the court, district attorney cant respond verbally. This means they have to do so in writing. Which puts their careers in jeopardy if they lie, ignore, or violate your right to due process (which includes all the proper procedures).

So you file your demure challenge on time and properly. Then just sit back and wait for a reply? When there is no reply and the next scheduled court date arrives. What then? You file it again, this time with the additional due process and judicial discretion violations. You can also file to recuse, Writ of Mandamus to compel the judge to obey the law, Writ of Praecipe to
compel the court clerk to dismiss on procedural grounds.

File your paperwork on the day of court. It is not wise to give your adversary advance warning of your plans. This is the entire point of the stay out of court. Some will say, what if he issues a warrant? A judge who issues a warrant on a defendant who PROPERLY responded and appeared in court to challenge jurisdiction has perjured himself and committed a felony.

Its just that simple.

You should be ecstatic for a judge to issue a warrant if you file a Demurrer. Thats an instant cause for dismissal and multi-million dollar lawsuit. You have absolutely nothing to lose by making a Special Appearance on paper ONLY. Whether speeding, red light, seatbelt or even DUI, the bluprint is the same. The Demurrer (Cali, Texas other common law states) or Motion to dismiss is an OBJECTION. You are NOT arguing case law, historical precendents, the constitutionality of statutes. You are simply stating, This does not apply to me or the circumstances of this alleged claim. Thats it. Can you include all that other crap? Absolutely, but dont be like most and lose focus. The focus is YOU and YOUR status

So what would be the basis of your Demurrer/Motion to Dismiss with prejudice? The basis is your Affidavit or Information and Belief. We should all be familiar with an affidavit. An Information and Belief is EXACTLY THE SAME (minus the jurat aka penalty of perjury).

There are only 2 things to deny in your affidavit or Info & Belief

(a) I am NOT contracted with the State of California or any political subdivision therein

(b) I did NOT commit any common law crime, harm any person, or commit property damage on the day/night/time in
question.

Thats it.

A and B are both denials of personal AND subject-matter jurisdiction.

Once submitted, they cant be ignored and MUST BE REBUTTED with physical victims, documentary evidence (contracts,
surveillance footage, etc.) or a WRITTEN REBUTTAL from the Plaintiff (State) itself. No district attorney is going to testify that you committed a crime under penalty of perjury. They are ALWAYS under oath anyway.simply not going to risk it.

This is a sample, rough, not to be used in any other case or jurisdiction. But it will give you a feel for what your
affidavit or Info & Belief should look like. See sample here.

 

 

Be Careful Who You Listen to and Trust

bilde

Please be careful who you listen to, who you trust. Even be careful with what I say, use your own intuition. After all we are blessed with intuition and the ability to differentiate right from wrong. I would even expect you to question me and what I say, even though I know I would never intentionally lie to you.

The reason why I bring this topic up, is because there are infiltrators and provocateurs out there that are casting huge nets with which to build lists of names of individuals to be used later when larger scale round-ups of liberty minded patriots begins.

The ones that are the ones that you should suspect first are those who close channels of communication rather that keep them open by responding and communicating with fair, open, and responsive communications. Those who do not respond or respond with slander, orders, negativity, or even just remaining silent are all signs that they may not be someone that you can trust. After all, these agencies and officers of government are only supposed to be there to serve and protect the rights and property of the people. There is no other reason for government, except perhaps defense of the homeland.

These agent provocateurs will also try to keep you in a narrow viewpoint about the situation, and not only will they express a narrow viewpoint, they will usually always try to influence you in a particular way. Sometimes they will try and convince you to not trust a particular individual, sometimes they will exhaustively promote particular individuals or groups.

These plants and government shills also commonly wont give you a straight answer when you ask them a simple question, and their favorite response is to imply that there is a defect with the complainant to sidestep the actual complaint.

When I talk about those who should be suspected and placed under further scrutiny and background review, I am not just talking about individuals, there may also be shill groups, or organizations. And the ones that should be scrutinized the MOST are those who claim to either be actively affiliated with or employed by government, or those actively promoting ideologies claiming that the government is fair, just, honest, or unbiased.

13133243_244191322636622_309713294813844185_nNaturally those working for the government or benefiting from the government in some way are highly suspect, because they stand to lose the most by withdrawing or losing their support for the broken corrupt system. They are dependent on the government, why challenge it? They will also contradict themselves; for example they may express sympathy and support for the protesters, but at the same time will express support for the government and the court system in particular. Like the fox guarding the hen house, they will usually be slick talkers as well. But will rarely offer citations or evidence to prove their claims.

While we are on this subject, I would like to talk briefly about lawyers. And I have more information here if you are interested in learning more. But who has more to lose from the government than a lawyer? Not just any lawyer, but a lawyer that makes his living by arguing cases in government courthouses?

Dont you think that the government would want to make sure that there were attorneys to defend the protesters? Keep them in the casino, where their chances are not good. And by not just any attorneys, but maybe even an attorney from the Top 100 list of all trial attorneys to prepare their defense. One who has worked their whole career arguing in support of subjects of government who were mainly charged with code or statute violations. A vast majority of them without a victim, like DUII cases, and other trumped up code violations.

I dont know about you, but after doing years of research on this topic. I have never found in the founding documents where the founders of this country ever suggested or implied that the people were bound by any code, statute, rules, regulations or policy of government. As a matter of fact the Declaration of Independence says exactly this: all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Did you happen to read anywhere in the quote above where the people are to be subject to the government? Do you think that the intent of the founding fathers was to make the people of this country bound by countless codes, policy, statutes, and other rules set by government? HELL NO! The rules that government sets are ALWAYS FOR GOVERNMENT! They do not have authority to make rules we are subject to. And I bet you wont be able to find in the founding documents for this country where it says that the people are to be subject to any rules of government. We are not subjects of government! They are our servants! What happens when your employee gets out of line? You FIRE THEM and find someone else to do the job.

Anyway, back to attorneys dont you think that the government would want to be the one to assist with finding a suitable attorney to try the case where they have already murdered a man on the side of the road?

Attorney client relationship (click to enlarge).
Attorney client relationship (click to enlarge).

Wouldnt they be doing BIG TIME damage control right about now? I am not sure that they would want to find a suitable attorney, but I am sure that they would definitely want to convince him to take an attorney. Because if you do a little research on the attorney client relationship (see image to the left) you will find that clients of attorners (another word for attorneys) are always deemed incompetent to manage their own affairs because in the eyes of the government they are still an infant as recorded on the birth certificate. I dedicate a whole chapter to this topic in my book available here.

Of course the government would want to control as many factors in this fiasco as it can, which means that it would be imperative to have all the defendants re-presented by an attorney who is not even allowed to challenge the matter of jurisdiction, because by being a member of the A.B.A. (American Bar Association) they have admitted jurisdiction and are in reality an officer of the court, whose first duty is actually to the court and the government, and not to the client. So, as far as these defendants are concerned, I would fire all the attorneys, and immediately challenge jurisdiction by asking for evidence of jurisdiction (which they will never have). The governments codes do not apply to you unless you are employed by them, and I am not employed by them unless they are sending me a paycheck every other week. Just like I dont have to follow the Wal-Mart policy for employees because I dont work there. They could not give me a citation for being 15 minutes late or showing up out of uniform because we have no agreement, no contract and I am not their employee.

While we are on this subject about the difference between rules, codes, statute, policy and procedure. why don’t we introduce the word law. Can anyone tell me what a law is? Is it something that is written by legislatures? Is it something written by lawyers? Or, are laws written by God? Or are laws even written down at all? Which law book would you find the law of gravity in? A law does not need to be written down to see evidence of it, and the law is directly related to your rights. Do you know why it is directly related to your rights? The law is so simple and so closely related to your rights because the rights are the law. What are your rights? Have you ever told a cop; I know my rights! Do you know why saying that you know your rights sounds odd? Because everyone knows their rights inherently if you know the difference between right and wrong.

I might as well tell you right now while we are on this topic that there is no constitution that gives you rights. There is only a constitution that all public servants swear an oath to uphold and protect. It has nothing to do with the people, except that the constitution is rules for government to follow so that our rights are protected. The constitution does not give you rights, your rights are inherent or natural and they do not come from government. The constitution isnt even applicable to you, but we do use it to hold government servants accountable. All the rules are rules to restrict government. And they have tricked us to think that the government is the authority because of the constitution but they are not even enforcing the constitution. Everything is backwards because they are enforcing rules, statutes, codes, and policy on people who it does not apply to because they are not employed by government. And like I said before, if their policy applies to me, then I need to be getting a regular paycheck because I dont follow orders for free. Just think, when a public servant pulls you over and writes you a ticket for not wearing a seat belt, he is breaking the law. He is breaking the law because he is forcing or enforcing policy that is only meant for agents of government. Not only that but he is actually extorting and committing piracy on land by pillaging and unjustly enriching himself and his organization by forcing you to pay for not following his rules.

All that a right is, is something that is not wrong. So your rights are things that you are allowed to do where no one else should infringe on those rights, because they are not wrong. It is that simple, although you may not be able to see the simplicity of it right away. It really is simple. The law is do no harm and that is pretty much it.

Back to the attorneys that are defending these political prisoners. Do you think that they would EVER want to honestly challenge their money maker? Their employer? Their bread and butter? After going to law school for how many years, I am sure they will not make any real arguments. What kind of counsel would be used to defend them? What kind of defense are they going to get? Are the attorneys going to accept ANY liability for their actions? Or when these peaceful protesters get their day in court are they going to get sentenced to lengthy terms in prison and a follow-up bill for the trial representation from the lawyer? In a matter as important as this, why would you trust another agent of the same government who has been evidencing its corruption the entire time? I can guarantee you that a licensed attorney will not ever address the validity of the charges. They will at most just try to ineffectively poke holes in the prosecutors case. Dont get me wrong they will make the trial a spectacular event. Like in the Hunger Games no one that plays really ever wins.

Most attorneys will be more than happy to take your money, but then proceeds to do nothing. I have seen this happen more times than I can count. He wont put you on the stand, doesnt file or put in any documents. The best defense you will get from them is a he didnt know defense or a he didnt mean it defense. Which never challenges the validity or applicability of the charges, and results in the 100 year prison sentence. You go to jail, and they say Im sorry I did the best I could while generating another bill for hours spent in court doing nothing but ever the great actor and professional, looking like he is doing everything he can.

The attorneys are just part of the problem though. The justice department is pulling something inconceivable here. The government is coming in on both sides so that they can maintain control of the situation, but they have been using military and government actors and infiltrating the real protest and victimizing locals to give the honest peaceful protesters a bad name (more about that in a bit). The attorneys job is to make it impossible to uphold the constitution. Then you ask them why he wont challenge jurisdiction and usually they will essentially retaliate with an attack instead of responding responsively with a rebuttal.

Just think, it may be a very good way to send them all to jail for a very long time to teach them not to stand up to the all powerful government (who is supposed to be our servant and protector, not punisher and master). Remember how in 1994 the FBI burned the religious compound to the ground and murdered everyone at Waco Texas? Look what they did to Lavoy? Did he deserve a summary judgement that harsh? Didnt he deserve due process? At the very least, unlike in Waco the government knew they couldnt get away with murdering everyone in Harney county, Oregon that protested in this situation so they are doing the next best thing; trumped up bogus charges with no victims, and likely very stiff prison sentences, and of course these BAR attorneys are never going to argue the unlawfulness and illegality of the of the charges as your re-presentation on a kangaroo court charge.

They will also likely consolidate all the defendants so that the ones with council can force everyone to accept the same court stipulations, rules, and outcome as the ones who are being re-presented by attorners instead of challenging the charges themselves or asking for ALL the information and evidence (fact specific) that was provided to the alleged grand jury that indited them.

It is clearly known now that the doors at the refuge facility were left open, the Sheriff had prior knowledge of what was about to occur, but they acted like nothing was going on. There were reports of trucks with no tags (license plates) for anonymity in town before the incident terrorizing the local people, destabilizing the community, slashing tires, being disrespectful and threatening. There were several incidents allegedly where the participants were claimed to be militia and III%ers.

Excerpt from an Oregonian/Oregonlive.com reporter Lez Zaitz. Notice no names mentioned as far as who was doing the "harassment" and "threats".
Excerpt from an Oregonian/Oregonlive.com reporter Les Zaitz. Notice no names mentioned as far as who was doing the harassment and threats. More about Les in part 2. (click to enlarge)

And Sheriff Ward did not back the people like he was supposed to and take care of the destabilization efforts, he did what Grasty told him to do which was nothing. Stand down while his locals were being harassed and intimidated. Isnt it interesting that the Sheriff even implicates his own 74 year old mother, but fails to identify any of the destabilizers even though the Sheriff claims that the man or men even showed up at his office to harass the him at work! Sheriff Ward, I have a question for you why do you reveal the identity of a victim (your own mother even) yet fail to identify who the criminal was who threatened her.

This could be an attempt to demonize the right to travel community also by using vehicles where the tags have been removed for threatening, intimidating, harassing, and following locals. Which brings us to black propaganda.

Black propaganda can be the most effective strategy, but can also be the most destructive for the agency that propagates it because of the blow-back potential.

FBI (or mercs) in civilian clothes.
FBI (or mercs) in civilian clothes.

In case you are wondering what I am talking about when I refer to Black propaganda, it is essentially when the FBI, CIA, BLM, DOJ, ect. uses its own assets, agents, contractors, or mercenaries and takes them out of uniform and puts them into civilian clothing and makes them pretend that they are militia members, Oregon Citizens, or Harney County Citizens and orders them to go in and create havoc, create chaos, go to the armory, cause disruption, be loud, be drunk, be agent provocateurs. They do this to destabilize and traumatize the local people. As a result, the destabilization and the trauma that is unleashed will cause the local people to run to law enforcement to the FBI, to the government for protection from those who are causing trouble who are really employed or tasked by agencies of government in the first place, especially if the provocateurs are actually victimizing and harassing people.

The danger of black propaganda is that if it is discovered or found out as it was in the cases of Afghanistan and Iraq where the US was doing operations and blaming it on the Muslims. Blowing up their own embassy and then blaming it on Al Qaeda or ISIS for example. Let us not forget the similar black propaganda on 9/11 where they blew up their own buildings and blamed it on the Muslims. When black propaganda is discovered, the blow-back can reach an epic scale of disaster for the instigator when the people realize that they have been played for fools and lied to by the agents and by the government who they have given faith and trust to. The people of Harney county are now discovering that agents and actors employed or contracted by the FBI, BLM, DOJ, and the Sheriffs department were purposefully and intentionally infiltrating Harney county with destabilizers, agent provocateurs, and other infiltrators in order to manipulate the people of Harney county back to the governments side and also a very effective side effect was to cause cause the people of Harney county to stay away from the protest and not even think about getting involved.

With this information coming out now, it will swing the pendulum back in the opposite direction. When the realization sets in that the people have been betrayed yet again by their own government. The blow-back on them will be limitless. This also is encouraging because the blow-back is so enormously powerful it can cause this whole corrupt government house of cards to crumble, and here’s why: Imagine if you were a brother or sister or family member of one of the people wrongfully in jail right now and you found out about this black propaganda going on, you would use this as your platform to demand a change in circumstances. And because the black propaganda is so ethically and morally wrong, there would be overwhelming support.

When you cant trust your own government, or even your own local Sheriff to faithfully and competently perform and execute his duties honestly what is going to happen? And not only that, but in this operation of theirs, dont forget that they senselessly murdered a man; a man who was also a father, a brother, a husband, a friend.

The government and politicians that are supposed to be protecting us, have failed miserably. How can we ever trust them to carry out their duties when they play so dirty? How can we allow them to remain in office?

If these patriots believe that the constitution is the supreme law of the land, why on earth wouldn’t they challenge jurisdiction? The code or statute is not the law of the land, and yet they are being charged with code violations, and not constitutional violations. Why is that? Charging them with constitutional violations would be absurd by the way because they never swore an oath to uphold a constitution, they never signed it, and they never were a party to it. Only government employees do that.

It was not federal code books that these guys were carrying around in their shirt pocket, it was the law of the land i.e. the Constitution. Which all public servants swear to uphold. It is not to be used as a restraint on the people, it is a restraint on the government. The common man is not bound by the constitution, they are protected from government intrusion by it. Or else it would be the other way around the people would have to swear the oath, but they dont.

The truth is always worthy of defending. The truth is even worth dying for.

I was going to try and put this entire article in one part, but I think I will stop here and continue this article soon in a part two. I have much more to say on this topic and there is much more that you need to know to be fully informed about this situation and I will get it out to you as soon as I can. I know that this article has already covered some very important topics, and it is dangerous for me to be sharing it with you, but who is going to stand up if I dont?

Part 2 will include more important information, a comparison of the grievances that the original colonists had with Great Britain and how they relate to what our government is doing today, plus more dirt I dug up on this Harney county protest. Stay tuned!

Thank you for reading and peace be with you.

ONLY BELLIGERENTS HAVE RIGHTS

ONLY BELLIGERENTS HAVE RIGHTS

we-the-people-session-vii-rights-of-the-accused-39-638The individual Rights guaranteed by our Constitution can be compromised or ignored by our government. For example, in United States v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538, 539 (D. Pa. 1947), Federal District Court Judge James Alger Fee ruled that,
 

The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor to the person who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto. It is a FIGHTING clause. Its benefits can be retained only by sustained COMBAT. It cannot be claimed by attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a BELLIGERENT claimant in person. McAlister vs. Henkel, 201 U.S. 90, 26 S.Ct. 385, 50 L.Ed. 671; Commonwealth vs. Shaw, 4 Cush. 594, 50 Am.Dec. 813; Orum vs. State, 38 Ohio App. 171, 175 N.E. 876. The one who is persuaded by honeyed words or moral suasion to testify or produce documents rather than make a last ditch stand, simply loses the protection. . . . He must refuse to answer or produce, and test the matter in contempt proceedings, or by habeas corpus. [Emphasis added.]

 

Notice the verdicts confrontational language: fighting, combat, and most surprising, belligerent. Did you ever expect to ever read a Federal Court condemn citizens for being passive or ignorant? Did you ever expect to see a verdict that encouraged citizens to be belligerent IN COURT?
 
Better go back and re-read that extraordinary verdict. And read it again. And commit it to memory, for it succinctly describes the essence of the American legal system.
 
Clearly, we must do SOMETHING, for as Sir Edmund Burke said,
 
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
But apathy (doing nothing) isn’t simply a function of cowardice or indifference; apathy is a synonym for ignorance.
 
What is it apathy or ignorance? I don’t know and I don’t care.
 
Ignorance makes the public more manageable in the courts and in confrontations with the government. Insofar as government naturally seeks to expand its powers at the expense of the citizens Rights, government has a vested interest in the public’s ignorance and consequent apathy. The interest in expanding its powers encourages the government to provide little, no, or even false, education on what our Rights should be.
 
If you are a product [victim] of the public school system then consider this, The Department of Education gets what it pays for. and you need to get yourself smart the sooner the better! This is not a good time for dumb-ass.
 
Silence gives consent, is the rule of business life. To stand by, in silence, and see another sell your property, binds you. Silence gives rise to fraud or silence gives rise to agreement. What better way to acquiesce than to not object?
Acquiescence is acceptance!
“The right of a person under the 5th Amendment to refuse to incriminate himself is purely a personal privilege of the witness. It was never intended to permit him to plead the fact that some third person might be incriminated by his testimony, even though he was the agent of such person.” — Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43.

Not only that but if you allow anyone to “represent you”, instead of being “the belligerent claimant in person” (Hale v Henkel, i.s.c.), you become a “ward of the court”. Why? Because obviously, if someone else has to defend your rights for you, you must be incompetent! Clients are called “wards” of the court in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. See a copy of “Regarding Lawyer Discipline & Other Rules”, as well as Canons 1 through 9.

Also, see Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client:

“The attorney’s first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter.” (emphasis mine)

Lord Yeshua the Christ said in Luke 11:52

“Woe unto you lawyers for ye have taken away the key of knowledge; ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.”

And also in Matt 23:13,33 (NIV)

“You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to … How will you escape being condemned to hell?”

“A lawyer cannot claim that you have rights.” U.S. v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538

Lawyers cannot defend your rights because they are franchisees of the English bar association, a corporation that licenses its franchisees and regulates their activities. All a lawyer can do is get the master of the ship to go easy on you if you confess to the fictional claim against you. A lawyer will not help you prove your sovereignty for fear of being disbarred. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the only person who can claim his rights is the belligerent claimant in person. To effectively accomplish this you must be able to establish the record with certifiable knowledge of the law.

 

“The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant [Jesus style], nor the person who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto. It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be retained only by sustained combat. It can not be retained by attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in person…once he testifies to part, he has waived his…he must refuse to answer or produce, and test the matter in contempt proceedings, or by habeas corpus.”~ US v Johnson, 76 F. Supp 538, 540 (1947).

The “Real-World” Example:

 

The Frederick, Maryland kidnapping of the baby: We can recall from the Lawrence case that this girl has cross-examined cops before, and knows how to enter evidence to the record of the court. So she went into the FREDERICK, MARYLAND DISTRICT JUVENILE COURT with a script and a game-plan.

The judge asked four times consecutively, “Are you sure you don’t want a court appointed attorney???”

Her only reply was “That she was with TITLE 42 SEC. 1986 certifiable knowledge of the law and that she will be representing the name on the docket of the court.”

The Attorney for the state went blah, blah, blah, and when the young Mother cross-examined the cops she ripped the cop to shreds like a Momma eagle feeds little strips of bloody rabbit flesh to her baby eagles. She turned it into a trial of the State where the cop confessed that he committed at least two felonies. She asked him these questions:

1. State your name.
2. What’s your badge number?
3. What’s your rank?
4. Who do you work for?
5. How do you get paid?
6. Is that in the form of a bank check, direct deposit?
7. Would that be considered commerce?
8. When you were hired, did you take an oath to uphold the Constitution for the United States of America?

Right about there is where the State’s case started breaking down, because the cop said, “I took an oath but I don’t know if it was for America.” – busted!!! –The judge stepped in and said “every public servant has to take an oath! Did you get a warrant to enter the motor home?!?” and “This is a perfectly competent mother with more care and attention to detail than any other I’ve ever seen. I’m going to order that the State release the child back to the mother immediately.” Co-incidentally, the Attorney for the State approached me and said that he had spent quite a bit of time at my website and he handed me a hardbound copy of “Constitutional Law” from his personal library.

The judge’s personal assistant found the Mom at a restaurant later that day and spent half an hour with her over lunch just to tell her that the judge was totally impressed, and that has never happened in the history of FREDERICK, MARYLAND DISTRICT JUVENILE COURT with the suspended rules where anything the judge says goes. She said that the STATE always holds a child for a minimum of 30 days and that this is the first time in the court’s history that anyone has ever proven that the STATE has no claim, Especially a 22-year old single mom.

I guran-freakin-tee that a lawyer won’t do that for you!

So fire him and move on!

The Big Three Articles IV, V, and VI of the Bill of Rights.

The Big Three – Articles IV, V, and VI of the Bill of Rights.

THIS WEEKS CLASS ASSIGNMENT

The Big Three Memorize Articles IV, V, and VI of the Bill of Rights.

A) Memorize Article IV for police encounters

B) Memorize Article V to understand two distinct forms of process, Judicial (article III courts) and Administrative (article I, II and IV territorial and administrative tribunals).

C) Memorize Article VI to understand MMPPR mandatory minimum pleading practice requirements and the due process rights and protections you must be afforded at a probable cause hearing considered waived if not demanded at arraignment or initial appearance before pleading.

Article IV
the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no Warrants [for these] shall issue [by any court for any road side seizure] but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized

Officer License, insurance and registration please, I need to see them.

Response do you have a warrant for my personal papers and private documents, or is this a shake down?

NOTE: officers and agents of government, public and civil servants acting in a capacity representative of public office are required to display Identification on demand. Do you qualify for the requirement attributed to this class distinction?

Article V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising [by ticket or citation] in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in times of actual service [ tickets and citations for infractions and violations of statutory commercial duties and obligations apply only to public officers and civil servants ]

Only public officers, civil servants and governmental service providers are subject to tickets and citations for dereliction of an official duty or obligation of public office against the dignity of the state, as distinguished from a crime against the people or a person in violation of the law of nature against doing harm, injury or damage to the life, liberty and property of another.

Article VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Entering any plea admits jurisdiction and serves as a waiver of your right to a probable cause hearing, also referred to as an examination hearing, where you are entitled to everything here stated in article VI before being required to plead.

NOTE : Stating that you do not understand the NATURE of the proceedings is just cause in law for the Judge or Magistrate to order a Psychological evaluation or Psychiatric examination, unless your inability to understand is for good cause shown, such as the prosecutions notice being inadequate or service of process being incomplete or defective, failing to provide you with paper work that comports with MMPPR, such as would reasonably apprise you of BOTH the nature and cause for the accusations or charges against you.

Cause for the charges against you would include subject matter and personal jurisdiction, subject matter being sufficient alleged facts or evidence supporting the charge, personal jurisdiction being the capacity of the parties to sue and be sued.

CLARIFICATION AND POINTS IN AUTHORITY

Are you being prosecuted in an private individual or official public capacity, and do you qualify to be prosecuted in a official public capacity if lacking official title of public office?

Civilians are exempt and immune from dereliction of duty charges where the duty is legislated and proscribed by exclusively for public/civil servants.

Do you know which laws, common and civil, apply to which class of persons, natural and corperate?

“Two national [and state] governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution [for civilians], with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress [and the state legislatures] outside and Independently of that instrument [and the constitutions of the respective states, for civil servants] ” (Downes vs. Bidwell 182 US 244)

It is clear that Congress, as a [or any state] legislative body, exercise[s] two specie of legislative power: the one, limited as to its objects [ effecting civilians]: the other, an absolute, exclusive power [to restrict the liberty rights, restrain and regulate the official activities and compell performance of civil servants] The preliminary inquiry in the case now before the Court, is, by virtue of which of these authorities was the law in question passed? (Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 6 Wheat. 265, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821)). for with them [civilians] Congress does not assume to deal [has no delegated authority to legislate beyond the law of nature] and they are neither the subject nor the object of revenue laws ., as stated in the cases of Long v. Rasmussen, 281 F. 236 (1922), De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 176, 179, and Gerth v.United States, 132 F. Supp. 894 (1955).

As of the time of the writing of the Constitution, there were two great systems of law in the world —the Civil Law and the Common Law. — the basic concept of these two systems was as opposite as the poles—in the Civil Law the source of all law is the personal ruler [superior officer]; In the Common Law. . . the source of all law is the people; they, as a whole, are sovereign. During the centuries, these two systems have had an almost deadly rivalry for the control of society, the Civil Law and its fundamental concepts being the instrument through which ambitious men of genius and selfishness have set up and maintained despotism; the Common Law, with its basic principles, being the instrument through which men of equal genius, but with the love of mankind burning in their souls, have established and preserved liberty and free institutions. . . The Civil Law was developed by Rome. . . The people under this system have those rights, powers, and privileges, and those only which the sovereign [or superior of officer]considers are for their good or for his advantage. He adds or takes away as suits his royal pleasure. All the residuum of power is in the Emperor. Under this system, the people look into the law to see what they may do. They may only do what the Emperor has declared they may do. . . Under our common law system, we look into the law to see what we may not do, for we may do everything we are not forbidden to do. This civil law concept explains why, over the centuries, it has been possible for the head of a state, operating under this concept, to establish with comparative ease a dictatorship. We must always remember that despotism and tyranny, with all their attendant tragedies to the people, as in Russia today, come to nations because one man, or a small group of men, seize and exercise by themselves the three great divisions of government—the legislative, the executive, and the judicial.. . When the [Civil Law] concept has been operative, [peoples] have suffered the resulting tragedies—[such as] loss of liberty, oppression, great poverty among the masses, insecurity, [and] wanton disregard of human life. ¬ J. Reuben Clark, former US Under Secretary of State and Ambassador to Mexico.

The Common Law is absolutely distinguishable from the Roman or Civil Law systems.(People v. Ballard 155 NYS 2d 59).

There are two systems of law at work in the world, the [common] law of the land, and the [ civil ] law of the sea. ¬ Jordan Maxwell

By: Neil Rowe

Dear Elected Officials

Dear Elected Officials…

I am writing you this letter today acting in the capacity as assistance of counsel for multiple People that your subordinates have been targeting and victimizing for attempting to exercise their inherent, non-negotiable rights, and unlawful code and policy enforcement over those whom it does not apply. (1)

The problem arises when your officers initiate improper traffic stops over individuals who are not operating under a licensing agreement with the department of motor vehicles, and are not acting in commerce and therefore are not subject to the commercial vehicle code or any statutes unless you can show how they agreed to be bound by these codes with full disclosure and meeting of the minds. To have a policy and/or custom of committing felonies because of a traffic safety issue is not only ludicrous, but lawless and unacceptable. (2)

These actions by alleged peace officers of Aggravated Kidnapping, Grand Larceny, Fraud, Identity Theft, Extortion, Armed Robbery, Malicious Prosecution, Barratry, Personage, Trespass, Assault, Securities Fraud, Conspiracy, Unlawful Arrest and Imprisonment to name a few are not becoming of those wishing to uphold peace and protect the communities which they serve. To make an unlawful traffic stop for the purposes of revenue generation in the name of keeping you safe is wrong in itself, but then to add to that criminal behavior consisting of multiple aggravated felonies is unfathomable and something needs to be done about it, and if you refuse to take action, you will be implicated and included by your inaction. Make note that I will be sending evidence of these crimes to the California Attorney Generals office to open an official investigation into these matters, along with your response (if any) to this communication.

I would strongly advise that if you are aware and have knowledge of these high crimes being committed against people in the community with whom you are entrusted to keep the peace and also to protect and serve, that you do the honorable thing and look into these matters immediately instead of victimizing those whom you are supposed to be protecting by proxy.
The one point and question I have for you in this entire message is to simply find out if you are also involved in these unlawful policies and procedures, customs and behavior. So, I must ask you if you condone (ratify) this rogue behavior by the officers that you supervise. Please send your response in writing to the return address listed above, a simple response is acceptable, as long as it is written and signed by you.

If you do not condone this behavior you would be wise to open an investigation so that you are not thought of to be participating or even directing these criminal activities. I would honorably ask that you immediately open an honest and transparent investigation immediately into this matter as a significant number of the officers under your command are currently liable for substantial violations of rights under both the Constitution for the California Republic and also the Constitution for the United States of America, and will not only be subject to a criminal investigation by the State Attorney Generals office for violations of title 18 USC section 241, 242 and 245 among other federal crimes, but also by civil title 42 USC 1983 causes of action.

Please also be aware that we are actively collecting any and all evidence to support our case/s so please act accordingly.
If you fail to respond to this communication, it will be presumed that you are tacitly acquiescing by your silence and you will also be subject to being named individually and officially in pending litigation for encouraging and possibly even directing the actions of the officers that you manage.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter,

Trent Goodbaudy

Footnotes:
(1) The People of the California Republic are not subjects of government; they are the creators and grantors of the government, whom are entrusted with the sole objective of protecting our rights and liberties.
(2) governments are but trustees acting under derived authority and have no power to delegate what is not delegated to them, But the people, as the original fountain, might take away what they have delegated and entrust to whom they please. The sovereignty on every state resided in the people of the state and they may alter or change their form of government at their own pleasure. Luther v Borden, 48 U.S. 1, 12 Led 581
at the revolution the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereign of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens and joint tenants in the sovereignty. Chisolm v Georgia 2 Dall 440, at pg. 471.
This is a rough draft of a letter I plan on sending to elected officials in the future.

You too can make the District Attorney speechless in under 4 questions!

My (very interesting) conversation with a couple of Washington County District Attorneys

My (very interesting) conversation with a couple of Washington County District Attorneys

My (very interesting) conversation with a couple of Washington County District Attorneys

Handing out copies of my book in front of the courthouse and jail.
Handing out copies of my book in front of the courthouse and jail.

Last week when my sister was being held illegally against her will, I went and handed out free copies of my new book Freedom from Government; How to Reclaim Your Power around the courthouse and jail area. I had nice pleasant conversations with many people, but I had one book left and I happened upon a male and female attorney having a casual conversation and even playing on a recently felled old growth in front of the courthouse.

I approached them and asked Are you attorneys?

They replied, Yes, we are.

And I said, You dont mind me asking you a few questions do you?

And the male attorney standing on a large log says, You dont already have an attorney do you?

I replied, Definitely not. as I removed the last of my books that I had brought with me from my briefcase, flipped open to chapter 2, titled Attorneys and Representation.

I wasted no time and immediately went on with So, as an attorney where does your loyalty lie? To whom is your first duty? The court, or the client?

He gave an answer that was obviously easy for him, almost like an honor student in school he replies, matter-of-factually, We swear an oath to the State of Oregon.

To this I respond, So your loyalty is not with the client. I continue, And now that we know to whom your loyalty lies, maybe we should investigate an attorneys actual relationship with his client.

I address the male attorney again, Are you familiar with the Corpus Jurus Secundum, legal encyclopedia? The rulebook for attorneys

He replies, Yes, we used it in school.

I start reading from chapter 2 of my book, quoting from their own rulebook, A client is one who applies to a lawyer or counselor for advice and direction in a question of law and then further in the paragraph Clients are also known as Wards of the court in regard to their relationship with their attorney.

The male attorney does not respond, so I continue, So what exactly is a Ward of the Court?And without waiting for a response, I continue with, A Ward of the Court is defined by the supreme court as; Infants and persons of unsound mind, placed by the court under the care of a guardian.

I get the vibe that these people do not want to be talking to me all of the sudden, but I was not done quite yet, I went on with, Are you familiar with the term Properia Persona?

The male attorney continues with, I think I heard about that in school what does it mean?

And then I make him instantly regret asking me that. I respond, Well, you are aware of persons representing themselves Pro Se, correct? I dont get how someone can represent themselves, if they just are themselves, so when I go to court it is always in my Properia Persona which is Latin for my Proper Person.

I knew our conversation would not last much longer, so I started wrapping up by saying, Are you familiar with the difference between making a special versus general appearance in court?

The male attorney responds with, Do you do seminars?

I respond with a drawn out, Not yet.

Then I said, The only reason I am out here today is because my sister is being held without consent and jurisdiction in the jail, and they are lucky it isnt me in there because I know my rights! And just so you know, I am going to be out here giving out my book and talking to people every day until my sister is free.

And I notice the first activity from the female attorney she is frantically texting someone on her iPhone

I begin to walk away but first, I ask the male attorney if he would like a copy, and then I give him my last book that I brought. We need to educate even them, and all the other public servants of their proper place and how they are working for us, not the other way around.

My sister was released from custody an hour later, and I realize that perhaps that female attorney that remained silent was the one with seniority from the district attorneys office (what other attorneys would be on recess in their playground in front of the courthouse?), and I dont know for sure, but I think I may have had something to do with my sisters expedited release.

My sister was initially accused and charged with assault, but like magic, now has no resulting court dates, no release agreement, never even saw a judge, no fines, probation, or ANY OTHER RESULT. The case just disappeared. Smart girl even got officer Lapine of the Hillsboro City Police Department in Oregon to agree to a $50,000 contract to see her identification.

If you havent guessed already, you NEED TO READ MY BOOK! I made the District Attorney SPEECHLESS in less than 4 questions. Dont you want or even NEED this power as well? Reclaim your power! Get your hands on the book now! ONLY at shop.freedomfromgovernment.org

I have to say that the $25 I paid for this book was the best money I ever spent! Carrie Bradshaw

Want to learn more? (So much more you will be BLOWN AWAY!) Get your hands on a copy of the book!Click here to purchase "FREEDOM from GOVERNMENT; How to Reclaim Your Power" NOW!

Not to mention all the other tools, tags, stickers, spygear, and more for you to reclaim your inherent power and natural rights. Visit shop.freedomfromgovernment.org today!

Keywords: jurisdiction, authority, Oregon, district, attorney, Washington, county, Oregon, police, court, sheriff, deputy, certificate, money, debt, constitution, power, inherent, natural, law, legal, good morning America, hunger games

SOURCE: http://freedomfromgovernment.org/ You too can make the District Attorney speechless in under 4 questions! Originally posted March, 2013.

Redefining Words to Steal Your Freedom

Allow me to reveal to you something that I find rather interesting about the constitution. Stay with me here for a bit I promise it will be worth it.

Noah Webster
Noah Webster

Have you heard of Noah Webster? (Note: There is a lot of confusion between Noah and Daniel Webster, but there was no relationship between them. Daniel Webster is best known as a lawyer, a member of Congress, a secretary of state, and perhaps the greatest orator of the first half of the nineteenth century. Noah Websters fame is quite different: it rests on his pen.)

Do you know why Noah Webster spent more than 25 years writing and publishing his dictionary?

Noah realized that England and the new America had different forms of government, institutions, customs and laws. Because of this, he believed that they needed different vocabularies. He also knew that science and technology were developing rapidly, and new words were being introduced just as quickly. So, he spent over 25 years researching words and their origins and writing the first American dictionary. This dictionary helped Americans to feel pride in their new country, and enabled everyone across the new nation to have a standard vocabulary.

noah-websters-quotes-2Websters greatest achievement was the dictionary. In 1800 he published his intentions of writing a dictionary. He published a shortened, concise but comprehensive, version in 1806. The final version was finished in 1825 and published in 1828. It contained 70,000 words. It is no exaggeration to say that it was immediately accepted as the greatest dictionary of the English language on both sides of the Atlantic. Why would he dedicate SO MUCH time to this mundane sounding undertaking?

Contrary to popular opinion, he did NOT write it so that people could check their spelling. He wrote it in an attempt to prevent the government from changing the meanings of the words in the constitution. In fact, if you look in the very front of the 1828 Noah Websters Dictionary on page 11, you will find an elequant and delightful to read passage from Noah himself explaining why he wrote his dictionary which I will quote below (Take note of how many times America is used, and how many times United States is NOT used):

This country must in some future time, be as distinguished by the superiority of her literary improvements, as she is already by the liberality of her civil and ecclesiastical constitutions. Europe is grown old in folly, corruption, and tyranny in that country laws are perverted, manners are liscentious, literature is declining and human nature debased. For America in her infancy to adopt the present maxims of the old world, would be to stamp the wrinkles of decrepid age upon the bloom of youth and to plant the seeds of decay in a vigorous constitution. American glory begins to dawn at a favourable period, and under flattering circumstances. We have the experience of the whole world before our eyes; but to receive indiscriminately the maxims of government, the manners and the literary taste of Europe and make them the ground on which to build our systems in America, must soon convince us that a durable and stately edifice can never be erected upon the mouldering pillars of antiquity. It is the business of Americans to select the wisdom of all nations, as the basis of her constitutions, to avoid their errours, to prevent the introduction of foreign vices and corruptions and check the career of her own, to promote virtue and patriotism, to embellish and improve the sciences, to diffuse an uniformity and purity of language, to add superior dignity to this infant Empire and to human nature. ~ Noah Webster 1828 dictionary (page 11).

So it seems that we have been transformed from an infant empire to an empire of infants who need a nanny. Essentially what Noah is beautifully expressing above, is that the old world that the colonists escaped from was full of corruption and tyranny as our country currently is again today. He goes on to say that the laws in Europe are unacceptable because of how perverted they have become, and how long-standing law and traditions are not being honored, people are being dumbed-down and not reading as much as they should, and human nature, in general, has been debased or destabilized all by design. The worst thing to happen to the fledgling America would be to let the corruption and tyranny sprout and grow here at home. Everyone back then knew how bad the problems were. However, time has a way of making us forget.

So then what important message does this evidence? I believe the moral to the story here is that the meanings of words are vitally important. The meanings of words have been altered. Because of this we should always define the terms we use if needed and AS needed to clarify and rectify the deception that we have been subjected to.

I have a suspicion that the dejure government of America was extinguished when it began to be called the United States. You may be wondering why this is, and I will tell you why this is important. Think about this the place I am at is commonly referred to as Oregon. When you add a State of to the beginning of Oregon it changes it from something that is real, into something that has an ALTERED STATE it is not the same thing as Oregon it is a different state of Oregon a compromised state if you ask me!

When you begin noticing these things, you will start seeing them everywhere for example the State of the Union address is not addressed to the Union but the altered state of it.

When the founders were inspired to write the constitution, Noah Webster was terrified that someday the courts would screw it up. He spent over 25 years writing an entire dictionary simply to keep those meanings true to what the founders envisioned for this country.

Another important thing to remember is that a lot of people make a mistake by referring to constitutional rights that they in reality do not have. The constitution does not give us rights. When we are born we inherit natural rights as living beings. We are not a fictional creation of government, we are living, breathing, unique, individual, intelligent men and women. The government did not create us. WE created government for the sole purpose of protecting us, of which it is failing miserably at. The constitution is the document that was written to restrain government and protect your rights. It was never intended to be used to grant them or take them away.

So the next time you hear some one refer to their constitutional rights, please set them straight and tell them that it is their protected, guaranteed, or non-negotiable right. Because we dont have a fighting chance if the corruption has spread so far as to have changed the minds of men by deception through altered meanings of words. The only way they win is through deception, and they are not going to win because we are now wide awake.

Even though it is the 5th amendment and not the first, in my opinion it is the most important amendment to the bill of rights (and the most important element of our liberty). The fifth amendment reads as follows:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The Framers derived the Grand Juries Clause and the Due Process Clause from the Magna Carta, dating back to 1215. Scholars consider the Fifth Amendment as capable of breaking down into the following five distinct constitutional rights: grand juries for capital crimes, a prohibition on double jeopardy, a prohibition against required self-incrimination, a guarantee that all criminal defendants will have a fair trial, and a promise that the government will not seize private property without paying market value. (Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fifth_amendment)

Essentially what this amendment is supposed to do is prevent the government from stealing (they call it seizure) private property, prohibition of self-incrimination and double jeopardy, guarantee to a fair trial, and grand juries for criminal trials. The protection of life, liberty, and property includes everything rightfully under your control, including your body, papers, documents, car, land, bodily fluids, laptop, phone everything. This also includes your rights as they are considered your property. But this is getting off topic so I am going to end this one and leave you with one last word of wisdom: Take the time to learn your rights. They are the most valuable things you will ever learn to be able to live your life they way you want.

Invest in yourself, you are worth it.

Peace.

Why You Cant Buy Freedom At The Drive-up Window

Why You Can’t Buy Freedom At The Drive-up Window

You cannot digest freedom as easy as you can digest a meal.
It is too bad that you cannot digest learning about your freedom as easy as you can digest a meal.

Do you know what the problem in today’s world is? The problem is that everyone has become accustomed to living a life of commercial convenience where everything is done for them if they have enough money. Everyone presumes to know what the law is because of what they have been told but then they never verify that for themselves, leaving them stuck doing exactly what they are wagering you will do. The powers that be not only know this, but they are the ones who created and were the inventors of this Ponzi scheme, so they make their rules just tough enough that they can still convince you that you are free, while running the best fear game in the business. This is why the demand for money is so great, because when you have money, you essentially have another’s sweat equity, or labor, or even intelligence at your disposal.

First, evaluate how important it is to you to be free. I know that without knowing how important it is, you will never be able to justify spending time on it. How important is it to you to learn all you can about becoming free?

You know the old saying: Money can’t buy happiness.? Well, that is true because money can buy stuff or services, but to be happy takes something inside you to make happen and while I realize that you might be thinking that you can buy happiness in the form of pharmaceuticals or other drugs, and maybe that is a way that you could buy happiness. There is something wrong with that too because constant happiness would not be gratifying without anything to contrast it with so you STILL would not be happy (satisfied) with life.

Learning how to exercise your liberty is not ever something that can be done for you. Freedom doesn’t care how much money you have, because short of buying a mental implant in the future, there is no current way to augment our knowledge base except by doing it the old fashioned way.

Don’t get me wrong, the tools that you can use to learn are better than ever, but the problem is getting the tools to deliver the information with an effective percentage of comprehension on your end. You have to do your own due diligence, you have to know the truth with every fiber of your being. You have to be able to rely on something more solid that what someone else has told you. Use your intuition, you know right from wrong. Would it be right to fraudulently portray yourself as something that you are not? Is there any difference between you and the little piece of plastic with your picture and vital information on it?

And sure you might not have time for all that studying and learning about what is REALLY going on. But if you don’t give it the importance that it is worthy of, you will continue to struggle, swimming against the current your entire life. It is not until you can learn to let go and relax and go with the flow that you will see from new perspectives that you never imagined existed.

My how beautiful some of those views are. Take the route less traveled. Don’t try to bite off more than you can handle at one time. A friend once compared learning and processing the concepts to layers of paint. Apply one coat at a time. And you have to let each coat dry between applications. So when you try and learn a new concept, first do an overview of the info (a fresh coat of paint), and then when that one dries do another coat of paint (progress into the information incrementally and give yourself time to process it in between) do another coat, let it dry, and keep repeating the process until you fully comprehend the information.

After you fully comprehend you then must learn to be able to express it to others to be truly effective. You have to know what to say when they run their fear game on you. Then the best way to reaffirm and make it easier is to practice teaching what you have learned. Once you are a good teacher you will have become a master.

Good luck on your journeys, may blessings and peace be with you brothers and sisters.

Trent G.

Traffic Stop Script by Trent Goodbaudy

"That which is Free cannot ALSO be that which is governed." One is free. Or one is not free.
That which is Free cannot ALSO be that which is governed.
One is free. Or one is not free.

Memorize this traffic stop script for your next police encounter!??

NOTE: YOU HAVE TO MEMORIZE THIS! DO NOT READ IT TO AN OFFICER!

The first (and biggest) step is to get your mind right. Then it won’t matter what they try to throw at you, you will know how to counter every attack. Spend ample time learning and practicing BEFORE manifesting any of this outwardly. You need to have confidence, and knowledge provides this confidence, then the combination of the knowledge and confidence will guide what you manifest externally. My goal is to be honorable, I want to give them proper notice, and I want to make a record of everything just like I am gathering evidence for a lawsuit.

Remember: To stay in common law your entity must be from common law. A wo/man cannot act in commerce. It runs entities but never is an entity.

DONT EVEN TRY THIS WITH ANY TYPE OF STATE PLATE ON YOUR CAR, they have been trained to believe that any car with a public brand (state plate) is also public property (meaning it is their property). You cannot be double minded it is all or nothing. You cannot give them evidence that shows you have contracted with the state.

DO NOT GET EMOTIONAL except for filling yourself with love. Use the golden rule:??Dont think of others as an enemy or competition think of others as YOUR alternate self. Do you love yourself? Then treat both your-self AND your alternate-selves like it. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. We are all one.This is the ONLY way that we will be able to conclude peace.

First off, always find a safe place to pull over NOT ON THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY (A church parking lot is best). Always greet the officer in a friendly manner and ask them for their name and badge number (you may remind them that Officer is a title and not their name if you want), and then continue using the following:

(Im gonna boil it down to one question on my next encounter (that is if I decide to speak at all).)

The question is:

Do you have probable cause to believe that I have committed a crime involving a victim; because if you do I would like you to articulate that to me , otherwise this is an unlawful detention and I have no obligation to provide you with anything and I should be free to go on my way Right? ~ Trent Goodbaudy

There are a few more appropriate questions you can ask for example; if??they ask for any documentation from you ask them if they plan on using any of it against you in court. And if they want to give you a citation, ask Are you authorized to NEGOTIATE a FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT????When they ask: What is your name? it would be fair to ask: Are you asking me legally or lawfully? His answer: Legally. Your response: Please show me where I am legally required to have a NAME or better yet, where is the law which states that I am lawfully required to have a NAME? They will likely respond with: I do not understand. and in that case, all I would want to know is which one of those corporate officers has a CLAIM against me? If they have a claim; they will have no problem articulating it, and if NOT they need to leave me the hell alone. NEVER make statements! If you must make a statement, make it a non-rebuttable statement. If you don’t know what that is please check out my short $.99 ebook that will explain it beautifully. You can get it by clicking on this sentence (plus MANY other GREAT tools to assist you).

The other strategy that you can use is when the agent asks for “License, insurance, and registration…” ask if he plans on using any of those against you in court, and it doesn’t even matter what his answer to that question is because then you tell him that in order for him to get anything from you, he is going to have to perform a warrantless search and siezure to get it because you are not going to give him anything (testify against yourself). Then if he takes anything from you, you can have any of that evidence excluded using the courts own exclusionary rule.

If you are still not getting anywhere, ask for a supervisor and then shut the hell up except to repeat the same thing to the supervisor.

Important notes to remember:

  • To detain is to arrest. Look it up in Blacks Law, in fact here you go read and learn.

Detain To retain as the possession of personalty. To arrest, to check, to delay, to hinder, to hold, or keep in custody, to retard, to restrain from proceeding, to stay, to stop. People v. Smith, 17 Cal.App.2d 468, 62 P.2d 436, 438; State v. King, 303 S.W.2d 930, 934.
See Confinement; Custody.

  • Ask, no DEMAND them to articulate their probable cause, otherwise it is an unlawful detention. By the way, it is not a crime to refuse to give the cops ANYTHING unless you have victimized someone.??WE ARE KINGS! NOT SLAVES!??The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that ???each man???s home is his castle???, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  • If they say you fit the description of someone who they are looking for make them produce the report number and prove it.
  • If you don’t already have one or three get a dashcam. Cameras help you create a record. Tell them that the video is streaming live to YouTube (they are likely too dumb to know better if you aren’t live streaming).
  • Get Cell 411 so that you can call for REAL help. It also has a live video streaming feature if you have signal.??http://safearx.com/
  • Be prepared because corporate POLICYMEN have little to no knowledge of de jure law or law enforcement and they do not understand the unalienable and imprescriptable Rights of the American people in the fifty states either. Most have no idea what their own state and federal constitutions say nor do they understand what actual laws they are supposed to be enforcing in the first place.

Police officers in America are not doing their job and they probably never will. They seem to exhibit minimal knowledge of law and law enforcement. They are tyrants and just an extension of political aims for ill-gotten gains, theft within the special maritime jurisdiction, piracy and extortion. Police are Corporate Revenue Collection Officers who are para-military trained to kill and take your unalienable Right to do something, away from you. The??American Gestapo are protected by the foreign BAR attorneys as officers of the corporate commercial court systems. The so-called courts are operating in bankruptcy and the police are an extension of those private tribunals to enforce the bankruptcy (and collect $) against what are deemed corporate US citizens. You are tried as a corporation.

Think about this: There is not any legitimate job you can have where you act in the capacity as a domestic terrorist with a corporate badge to get away with it. Police officers are domestic and do not possess lawful venue and jurisdiction. The American people in the fifty states are all non-domestic.

 

  1. A police officer is not doing his/her job when they initiate threat, duress and coercion at automobile stops and take people’s Rights away if they don’t waive them during a corporate administrative proceeding on the side of the road.
  2. A COP is not doing his/her job when they step on State and federal constitutions and commit high treason against the Constitution for these united states of America.
  3. A police officer is not doing their job when they operate under State statutory color of law and make legal determinations contrary to the forty-three Supreme Court decisions regarding the right to travel, right of way, right of free passage. Police officers will take away your right to travel on the postal rural routes of passage in a private automobile for non-commercial purposes.
  4. Police will violate our Right to locomotion to travel freely, safely and unencumbered for such non-commercial purposes as ordinary travel, recreation or pleasure in any given day.
  5. Police are not doing their job when they rip off your car or make criminal conversions and fraudulent conveyances (tow/impound) of private property over to the financial benefit of third parties without our consent.
  6. COPS break the law when they force you and intimidate you into surrendering your persons, houses, papers and effects and implement para-military trained Gestapo style tactics to force you to bear false witness against yourself.
  7. COPS are not doing their job when they are in contempt of the current Chapter eleven reorganization bankruptcy of the United States, violate public policy and try to steal your labor.
  8. Police are not doing their job when they force you into commerce, force you to CONTRACT with them (against your will), write a SECURITY (commercial traffic ticket) absent a public hazard or surety bond (violation of the SEC Act of 1933/1934 -Secureties and Exchange Commission) while acting in the public.
  9. A police officer is not doing their job when they cite a FICTIONAL State statute, practice law without a license and act in the capacity as PROSECUTOR, executioner, judge and jury over the lives of innocent men and women within the fifty-states.
  10. Police are not doing their job when they waste tax payer dollars protecting State and municipal property and the financial assets of STATE corporations and their crooked politicians.

Since when does a POLICE OFFICER within the several states for the union of fifty-states, ever do their job as it was originally intended and for the protection of the of the Rights of men and women? As most Americans will agree, the police do not work for the people anymore. They are predatory, dishonest, liars and are quite possibly more dangerous to our liberties (as a free people) than standing armies.

For valuable tools in your travels visit shop.freedomfromgovernment.org

 

Affordable private travel tags now available and much more! CLICK HERE FOR MORE!