Originally posted by Scorpitarius
When you go to court, you need to have standing to be heard or recognized by the court...which can be gained several ways. So, in our discussion, we want to achieve "common law" standing...basically ensuring common law jurisdiction.
So, for example, before you enter the court, ask any magistrates if it is a court of record (to ensure what you and the court representatives say and do go on record.)
1. You have standing by being a party to the issue.
2. The Magistrates’ court is not a court of record anyway, so the answer has to be “no”. This does not prevent a record being made of proceedings but it means there is no expectation of it happening. It is still worth noting that statutory equivalents of some common law powers of the superior courts of record (ie contempt) have been granted to Mags.
Originally posted by Scorpitarius
You want to avoid following orders, as that will change the jurisdiction from common law to maritime admiralty law. So don't "rise" when told to...don't agreee you your name being MR/MRS JOHN/JANE DOE, as this is the corporations name. If you follow any order from the courts, say ensure that it goes on record that you are doing so of your own free will. Etc...etc.. and there is so so so so much more to it.
3. Changing from common law to maritime admiralty law? Where is the authority for this statement? Can you point to any statute, regulation, case law or even authoritative piece of legal academic writing that supports this statement? It seems to have been pulled out of the air by someone and no one has ever provided any actual law to back it up. I think this is also a US-specific argument but if you can answer it from the US perspective it would still be very helpful.
4. The questions I am asking are to help me identify not just what you argue the law is, but WHY you say it is the law. I understand that you are identifying a separate legal entity (the “corporation”) but I still don’t understand WHY you say it exists or how it is created. What is the legal premise?
Originally posted by Scorpitarius
When a lawyer joins the law society, the bar, they have to take an oath to the bar. This ensures that the "secrets" of law are not revealed. I read a book by a lawyer once...he explained how the lawer goes from being a young, energetic and inspired student, wanting to make a difference, but how the law education slowly breaks him down until...by the time he realises it's such a scam, he's got too much money and power to want to change it. A very in depth book. The law society is what started the Legalese language and people agree to be ruled by the law society when they do (or don't do) certain things. I can't really explain this much further, but like I said, the info IS out there. Some understanding have come to me over a long period of time, after researching many different sources and pulling them together....so Im sorry if Im not much help regarding societies and the Bar.
5. I can’t speak for the US Bar but this is certainly not the case for the UK Bar. Goodness only knows what the solicitors get up to but I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and say they don’t swear that kind of oath either.
6. What was the book?
Originally posted by Scorpitarius
A corporation is given legal rights. Keep this in mind.
A legal person, according to my findings, is as follows...
PERSON: A human being - Also termed natural person.
Human being is defined as SEE MONSTER; Monster is essentially a creature not allowed to own property. NATURAL PERSON does NOT define what a person is. Thats like saying GLASS-ALSO TERMED TRANSPARANT GLASS...this doesn't tell you what glass IS any more than natural person tells you what a person is. so the only definition left is corporation. Let me know if that doesn't make sence.
Rememeber, "there will be no INVOLUNTARY servitude...but I think everybody voluntarily got registered.
7. When the opportunity presents I will have to hit the dictionaries because that seems like a very bizarre definition to find in a legal dictionary. Do you have an edition/ISBN or similar for the dictionary you used? Also, the term “natural person” is used to distinguish from a non-natural “person”, ie the artificial construct that represents a business for legal purposes. Natural person, then, is someone who is NOT a business or corporation.
Originally posted by Scorpitarius
I agree with point 7 I think...If I understood correctly.
I can't remember the specific info, Im sure I could find it again in my mass of notes should you not be able to find it youself, but the capitalization of a name originated from (and here's where i forget...Roman law, corporate law...im not sure.) but this capitalization was carried over when living souls first started being used as colateral.
8. Hopefully point 7 was clear enough for your understanding to be correct. It was very late and I was half-asleep when I wrote that post, it might get a little confusing in places!
9. I would be very interested if you could direct me to the sources from your notes for this. If they are not readily to hand then do not worry about it, but it would be useful to see for the sake of comparison.
Originally posted by Scorpitarius
I'm sure legalese carries the definition you've mentioned, however, you may wish to look up it's definition according to lawers. Read the law dictionaries if you doubt what I'm saying about the language. At least there you'll find tangible proof as opposed to asking for my opinions to try and proove to you.
I keep saying, start doing some research of your own as well as asking questions here.
10. I have. That’s the problem
edit on 9-3-2011 by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)
