Proof the U.S. Government uses Admiralty & Maritime Law on Citizens!

Proof the U.S. Government uses Admiralty & Maritime Law on Citizens!

The topic of U.S. Statutes and whether they are constitutional and binding on us without personal consent has been coming up more and more lately on ATS.

Many of us contend that the U.S. Statutes are nothing but contract law based on maritime and admiralty law, on captains law that we are tricked into consenting to by various purposefully deceptive means.

A lot of members scoff at this but this morning while reading the Miami Herald and an article about Ben Novack the son of the founder of the legendary Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach whose recent murder is still being investigated turned up a startling admission by the FBI that they are in fact using Maritime and Admiralty Statutes to confiscate property from his estate to keep it out of the hands of his widow who is a person of interest in the murder.

Why would a Federal Judge be using Maritime and Admiralty Statutes and ordering the FBI to seize assets under them when the case involves no international elements or travel by sea?

The FBI is using a maritime and admiralty statute as the basis for its effort to seize the following property: a 1957 Ford Thunderbird; a 1962 Ford two-door coupe; a 1970 Jaguar XKE, Series II; a 2004 Cadillac Escalade; a 35-foot barge with two-level wood deck, and the Batmobile, which was crafted from a 1977 Lincoln. The list includes 14 other items that were redacted from the court document

MiamiHerald.com

This is a very bold display of how maritime and admiralty statutes are used to circumvent constitutional law and practices.

And in August, she entered her husband's safe deposit boxes, according to a sworn deposition given by a Bank of America vice president. When the vice president pointed out that Narcy Novack's name wasn't on the account, Novack promised to return later in the day to have her husband add her name, and was allowed access. She didn't mention that her husband was dead.

``You could argue that her walking into the bank to open the security box and telling them that's she's not on the card, and that her husband is home alive on the couch -- clearly, in my opinion, would be some kind of bank fraud,'' said Scott Wagner of Coral Gables, a maritime lawyer and expert on asset seizure.

Are we to believe a Bank of America branch is a ship? That this is the cause, and note how the Herald went to a maritime lawyer to discuss the issue and he just happens to be an expert on asset siezure?

Part of what is stake here of all things is the world’s second largest collection of Batman memorabilia from the sixties TV Show including a working replica of the Bat Mobile.

Is the government simply using these statutes to potentially keep a possible murderess from coming into a fortune from her slain husband, even though she has not been formally charged and accused?

Or is the government blatantly using maritime and admiralty law to seize tens of millions of dollars of rare and vintage cars and one of a kind items for its own enrichment?

One way or the other for those who doubt the fact that Maritime and Admiralty Law is being used by our courts where no maritime or international issue is involved this is proof positive.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Lol USS Bank of America ROFL....

Good find there, this guns hand in hand with Rainfalls OP about a man getting his guns taking away because he was disgruntled... Isnt that nice the Nanny State is on the rise.

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Lol USS Bank of America ROFL....

Good find there, this guns hand in hand with Rainfalls OP about a man getting his guns taking away because he was disgruntled... Isnt that nice the Nanny State is on the rise.

Seems more like the Nanny Ship is on the rise! Like our 600,000 codes here in the United States aren't enough they are in fact openly now using Maritime and Admiralty Statutes under the color of Federal Law and openly admitting it!

Thank heavens I am a Pirate!

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


What do they think this is, Gilligan's Island or something? Come to think of it, had I not spent all that time watching TV back then, I would know something about these maritime laws and the legalities of it. Hey, seeing if Gilligan and the crew made it off the island seemed more important than actually trying to learn something back than. Damn you skipper. Mary Ann was hot. Gilligan should be fired out of a circus cannon as a result of dumbing me down.

The FBI has turned up the heat on Narcy Novack, the widow of slain Fort Lauderdale millionaire Ben Novack Jr., seizing assets from his estate under federal forfeiture laws.

MiamiHerald.com

It is an incredibly clear admission that the Federal Government considers maritime and admiralty statutes to be federal law.

The FBI is using a maritime and admiralty statute as the basis for its effort to seize the following property: a 1957 Ford Thunderbird; a 1962 Ford two-door coupe; a 1970 Jaguar XKE, Series II; a 2004 Cadillac Escalade; a 35-foot barge with two-level wood deck, and the Batmobile, which was crafted from a 1977 Lincoln. The list includes 14 other items that were redacted from the court document

Without one ship, or one sailor, or even an ocean being involved!

Amazing!

Darbies Day! I invoke the right of parlay... That news will Circumnavigate well beyond Del Mar Place in Fort Lauderdale.

I'm Disinclined to Acquiesce your request to Delay! Ben Novack's widow to Celebrate or Dismay? Hooray! Hooray!

[edit on 9-3-2010 by SeraphSirius]

[edit on 9-3-2010 by SeraphSirius]

I would like to see the pre-redacted court document and the other 14 items listed as the items subject to seizure.

All I notice regarding maritime law is that on the seizure list is a barge. I can't see why those expensive and rare items would be stored on a barge in the water, but that could explain why the FBI would use maritime statutes in this case.

I can't see how the bank fraud has anything to do with seizure of assets, other than as establishing motive as circumstantial evidence related to the murder. Bank fraud is a crime itself, and I'm sure the law pertaining to it are separate from law used in the seizure order.

Well it sure does not sound like Constitutional Law!

Admiralty law (also referred to as maritime law) is a distinct body of law which governs maritime questions and offenses. It is a body of both domestic law governing maritime activities, and private international law governing the relationships between private entities which operate vessels on the oceans. It deals with matters including marine commerce, marine navigation, shipping, sailors, and the transportation of passengers and goods by sea. Admiralty law also covers many commercial activities, although land based or occurring wholly on land, that are maritime in character.

Admiralty law is distinguished from the Law of the Sea, which is a body of public international law dealing with navigational rights, mineral rights, jurisdiction over coastal waters and international law governing relationships between nations.

Although each legal jurisdiction usually has its own enacted legislation governing maritime matters, admiralty law is characterized by a significant amount of international law developed in recent decades, including numerous multilateral treaties.

In fact it sounds like nothing but a throwback to Roman Law!

Seaborne transport was one of the earliest channels of commerce, and rules for resolving disputes involving maritime trade were developed early in recorded history. Early historical records of these laws include the Rhodian law (of which no primary written specimen has survived, but which is alluded to in other legal texts: Roman and Byzantine legal codes) and later the customs of the Hanseatic League.

Wkiipedia.org

So why is it being used against U.S. Citizens in situations that clearly meet none of the above state criteria?

Proto, I am a long time scoffer. With this bit of information I will look in to it a little more. The problem is that a lot of the sites offering hard proof seem either too extreme or too amatuerish to be taken serious.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
So why is it being used against U.S. Citizens in situations that clearly meet none of the above state criteria?

It doesn't clearly not meet the criteria. We don't have enough information to say that. I think we have enough info to say that it's BS, but that's it so far.

I'm thinking it comes down to the barge. A 35ft double-deck barge could contain those items, and 14 more if they weren't as big as cars.

That's the only way I could think of that maritime law could be used in seizure. I still want to know of what nature those other 14 items are that they deserved redaction from a document.

Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

What do they think this is, Gilligan's Island or something? Come to think of it, had I not spent all that time watching TV back then, I would know something about these maritime laws and the legalities of it. Hey, seeing if Gilligan and the crew made it off the island seemed more important than actually trying to learn something back than. Damn you skipper. Mary Ann was hot. Gilligan should be fired out of a circus cannon as a result of dumbing me down.

I never met Mary Ann but I did meet Ginger! I am so cruel when she introduced herself I said "And what is it you do for a living Tina?"

What this appears to be to me this case and the whole practice of using Maritime and Admiralty Contract Law is a form of modern day proscription.

That ages old practice begun by the Dictator Sulla to replenish Rome's treasury at the expense of political rivals and those not politically connected by either falsely accusing them and exiling and imprisoning and taking their wealth to replenish the treasury or murdering them and taking their wealth.

The Federal Goverment clearly has it's eyes set on the deceased's sizeable fortune and means to take it one way or the other.

Thanks for posting my friend.

Originally posted by DeltaChaos

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
So why is it being used against U.S. Citizens in situations that clearly meet none of the above state criteria?

It doesn't clearly not meet the criteria. We don't have enough information to say that. I think we have enough info to say that it's BS, but that's it so far.

I'm thinking it comes down to the barge. A 35ft double-deck barge could contain those items, and 14 more if they weren't as big as cars.

That's the only way I could think of that maritime law could be used in seizure. I still want to know of what nature those other 14 items are that they deserved redaction from a document.

Clearly though the barge was meant as storage and not as transportation and certainly not international transportation or even interstate transportation.

Nor or all the items the government seeking on the barge, for instance contents of safety deposit boxes and items stored in warehouses and in their apartments and homes too!

This is a classic end run around the constitution to enrich the state when no lawful guilt has been established by the state against the person they are in essence seizing these things from.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
Proto, I am a long time scoffer. With this bit of information I will look in to it a little more. The problem is that a lot of the sites offering hard proof seem either too extreme or too amatuerish to be taken serious.

I know what you mean but considering it is in fact a relatively well hidden system of alternative law who could write on it factually to a T besides those people in the upper tiers using and exploiting it as a form of trickery and deceit and why would they want too.

Information is in fact the most valuable commodity of all and that's why it can be so hard to come by it all and in its accurate form.

Information is power and the informed citizen is in many ways government's any government's worst nightmare!

Thanks for posting.

I find the whole subject of maritime law as applicable to us as human beings fascinating..good find!

I also tend to believe fact a maritime lawyer was consulted has nothing to do with a 35 foot barge lol. Its a pity the article didnt reference the maritime and admiralty statute specifically.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Ok, the article states that Mrs. Novak had already removed the items from a warehouse and was in current possession of them, so I infer that the FBI is trying to seize them from her, after the fact.

It says that she tried to take a boat as well, implying that she was somehow unsuccessful.

So unless she took the stuff out of the warehouse and then placed them in a conex in a port, it doesn't really make sense.

The article also states that Mr. Novak was beaten to death, then at the bottom it says he was killed execution style. Conflicting information, lack of information - bad article. Need to look at the court documents and/or a some better articles.

Needless to say, federal law enforcement exercises a lot of liberties in taking away our liberties, like they're somehow entitled. I'm sure the there's something in the Patriot Act that makes it all OK - it's a loophole party.

Originally posted by Nonchalant
I find the whole subject of maritime law as applicable to us as human beings fascinating..good find!

I also tend to believe fact a maritime lawyer was consulted has nothing to do with a 35 foot barge lol. Its a pity the article didnt reference the maritime and admiralty statute specifically.

It sure would in fact be interesting to find out the origins (date and nation) of the maritime and admiralty statute being used in this case.

What is more amazing is the frank admission of what form of statutes are being used.

It's true Miami/Ft Lauderdale is a huge port and transhipment center so many people here are much more aware of maritime regulations but it is rather brazen how the government is putting it as if they kind of expect people to say way to go feds! That will show that alleged murdering widow, screw the constitution we want our pound of flesh!

This is a case though where they are truly not hiding it!

reply to post by DeltaChaos


It’s a rather bizarre case my friend. At one time many years ago the Novack family was truly Miami Royalty when the Fontainebleau was built and owned by the family before they sold it to the Hilton Hotel Chain.

The family itself has a very colorful past in the Miami area replete with the typical shady business dealings you would expect from a town that has given the nation “Miami Vice” and “Burn Notice” and “CSI Miami” all of which offer real glimpses into the very real third world city/state lifestyle Miami is about.

The truth is there are probably dozens of potential suspects who might have had a reason to kill the Novack heir.

With no next of kin except a politically unconnected wife I think what we are seeing is the government simply wanting to seize the estate at any and all costs including the cost to the constitution that they are clearly trying to circumvent in these actions.

Thanks for posting.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by DeltaChaos

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
So why is it being used against U.S. Citizens in situations that clearly meet none of the above state criteria?

It doesn't clearly not meet the criteria. We don't have enough information to say that. I think we have enough info to say that it's BS, but that's it so far.

Clearly though the barge was meant as storage and not as transportation and certainly not international transportation or even interstate transportation.

Not that this seems to be an issue anymore, but you can see that even if the barge wasn't intended for transport, merely storage, how the law could be exploited to apply to anything in a maritime port as well.

Maritime law would surely have to apply to ports as well as maritime transport channels, otherwise what would be the point?

Also, I'm wondering what's going on here jurisdictionally. What constitutes the necessity of involvement of the FBI in a case that probably should be handled by local authorities anyway? Would it be the value of the property alone?

reply to post by DeltaChaos


The murder occurred in New Jersey where the decedent was staying at a hotel with his wife. The decedent though kept his primary residence in Ft. Lauderdale and had business ventures headquartered throughout Florida but did business nationally. So there are likely a lot of state borders to cross in tracking down potential suspects as well as identifying all the assets of his estate and liabilities too.

With local law enforcement budgets hampered by a decreasing tax base because of the real estate crisis it makes sense to hand the case off to the FBI especially since they are investigating it along the lines of a murder for hire.

It’s doubtful his wife beat him to death! That’s the kind of thing that could definitely break a nail!

Roman Maritime Law
According to scholars, maritime law was used for the very first time by the Romans during the growth of Italian Republics and cities of the Baltic Sea. With the increase in Italian trade and commerce, piracy activities also increased. The merchant ships of Venice, Pisa, and Genoa, whose trading activities prospered especially within the Mediterranean needed regulation for both commerce and safety. Thus the Roman Maritime Law was formed. It is said that Roman maritime law had been inspired from the Rhodian law. However, there is no proof to this as specimen of Rhodian law has survived.

Brighthub.com

Maritime Law truly is the oldest existing form of law and most clearly dates back to the Roman Republic a system that our own nation was founded on the principles of.

In many ways our nation is mirroring Rome's progression from a Republic into an Empire and a Dictatorship.

By the way the ship part in Dictatorship does have a related meaning.

States are like ships, they are ventures for profit!



[edit on 9/3/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]