It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Video: Judge Admits That The Court Is A Common Law Court - Are Freemen Correct?

page: 12
153
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Some lawyers (I don't know how many) already believe that the system is worthless or broken or whatever term you would like to use. Even more than some lawyers would like a system that is fair, clear and acceptable to the public. For those lawyers, just bringing about a massive change in the system would be more than enough reward. They'd be glad to do it for no money. (Of course, it wouldn't hurt them financially to first show loopholes in the system by getting their clients off, then reform it.)




posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Unfortunately, it would seem that there are indeed very #ty lawyers out there. Lawyers can be a help, or they can be perhaps the biggest hindrance ever.

You could of course always sue them in negligence, but I imagine that at this point in time you are probably quite sick of legal proceedings.

Best of luck fighting whatever taxes the State is levying upon you (presumably, incorrectly or unjustly). Did the lawyers you hired let you have a free consult/give you a short rundown of their previous trial history (which you could corroborate)? As I said, there are alot of very mediocre lawyers out there who will represent themselves as very competent and efficient professionals. Caveat emptor.

Alas though, if the State has you by the balls, there is little that the lawyer can do but mitigate the loss. The law can be unflinchingly and unrepentantly harsh


As already stated, this is not a tax case. It is a child support case for a child that is not biologically mine, from a 1 night stand when I was 16 and the "lady" in question was 29.

I am sick and tired of legal proceedings but the fight must continue...



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I know I am late to the conversation, and forgive me if this was already said.

This is the reason why lay people should not represent themselves, they are clueless and through around words they don't understand. I'm a lawyer, if I'm sick I go to a doctor, if my car breaks I go to a mechanic, and for taxes, I go to an accountant. Leave law to the professionals.

Common law: based on stare decicis, or prior decisional law of the courts.

Statutory law: base on legislation.

These two types of law are intertwine. For example: sixth amendment to US Constitution says you have right to speedy trial in a criminal case. Well what on earth does that mean, a week, a month, a year, a decade?

States pass legislation that define what "speedy trial" means. In New York, it means 6 months for a felony. Does that mean if you are arrested on January 1st your case must be brought to trial by June 1st? Not necessarily. There are a number of excusable reasons why the government does not need to be ready for trial. The tests that apply to these excuses are evaluated by the courts looking to see what other courts have done in similar circumstances.

Thus, you has common law and statutory law intertwine.

More examples. Under NY personal injury law, unless you have a serious injury in a car accident, you cannot sue, you must rely on no-fault compensation. That is a statute. The courts use common law, i.e. Prior decisions by other courts, often higher courts to help determine if the injury you are claiming is legally a serious injury to allow your suit.

Corporations are people as far as courts are concerned. They can sue, be sued, and even be prosecuted criminally.

So, if you have a case, hire a lawyer.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Josephus23
 




I personally think that a better approach to taking back our liberties would be to start a mass campaign informing everyone their rights as a juror. More specifically jury nullification.


I just so agree. Jury nullification, or, specifically, the jury examining the law itself, is never discussed with prospective jurors, and Judges will not tell them that can do this. This should be went over before the trial even starts.

And you are welcome, Josephus23, but sadly, most people would rather just pay and go to jail. Not me, went to jail once, enough for me. I spent about two years learning, experimenting, reading, talking, and researching the Common Law, and the Articles and the Constitution. Works for me.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegoods724
Your story is an interesting one, sounds to me like you are trying to figure out a way to get out of some ticket, by saying the system is faulted. If that was feasable then everyone would do it. I think your pretty screwed either way. Every courthouse knows the reason they collect tickets is to pay their pockets and if they allow you to use some excuse to get out of it well they get less money. Good Luck though the system is bull and my question is why are traffic tickets so expensive when the public would totally decrease the cost of a ticket, since it has little to no effect on the speeding in the nation.



His account isn't a story. It's fact.
2nd, you sound as though you are trying to demonize his assertions with petty opinionated drivel
in the form of the "establishment's" false and undisclosed contracts it has acted upon the American people
with deception and fraud.

It is feasible. The issue is:
Most people don't know how to fight and don't WANT to fight.
They'd rather pay than to actually use their mind.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


The Federal government currently has a 97% guilty plea conviction rate. They have a 75% conviction rate for cases that actually go to trial. This means that if a person is charged with a federal crime in the United States and pleads guilty, they have a 25% chance of beating the rap, which is why lawyers work so hard at advising their clients to accept a plea bargain, because they are worthless 75% of the time in securing that person freedom. Those are not good averages.

Hire a lawyer after charged with a federal legislative criminalization act and be rest assured that lawyer will be advising you to accept a plea. What does this mean for you? This means you will be convicted of a crime, and even if you do not do any time, you will be drawn in to the "criminal justice" system where your rights will be pissed on and laughed at, while your lawyer expects to get paid for doing this for you.

Yep. If you like to be screwed, hire a professional...and by that I don't mean a lawyer. You have a better shot at satisfaction if you go the other route, even if it is a "crime".



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rastus3663
reply to post by Josephus23
 

That's not what I was taught when I got my paralegal degree.


Of course not. Law school will not teach you anything about corporate rules, for they know they are one. You want to know things, use that computer sitting in front of you. Law school only taught you what they wanted you to know.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


Thanks for keeping the helm during my absence autowrench.

It is difficult being a one eyed person in the world of the blind, but it helps if there are two of us.


That being said, I want to get into something that will explain all of the contradictions that seem rife throughout this thread.
And to be honest with you, I am tired of providing links.
Obviously few have taken the time to read the link on Admiralty Law, because if they did, they they would have seen that that department of homeland security works under Admiralty Law, and has the power to OPENLY declare Admiralty Law as the law of the land during an emergency.

Well guess what folks, here is the kicker....

We have been living in a state of emergency since 1863. Meaning we have been living under martial law since 1863.
These states of emergency are temporary and must be renewed. I believe the last time that this was done was during the swine flu epidemic about 3 years ago by Obama, and nary a person noticed.
You see, much like the completely unconstitutional PATRIOT ACT, these states of emergency are only valid for so long because they essentially suspend the Constitution and must be re-enacted.

That is the entire point to the gold fringe around the flag. That signifies a MILITARY flag. This was made official in 1950 by Eisenhower. Do not fall for the BS game that the fringe is for decoration. The US flag has a very specific design and if it deviates in the slightest then it is not an "official" US flag.
Look up the history that accompanies the gold fringe and how it is used.

Research the number of countries (islands) in the British Commonwealth that use the gold fringe on their flags when dealing with official matters.

The congress has the power to create pretty much anything, but the Supreme Court is supposed to check this power, along with the President.
The Senate was originally supposed to be comprised of a group of those already voted upon by the locals. It would be someone who was already a congressmen from their respective state. The respective state's house would then vote their ONE Senator to represent the desires of the STATE in DC.

This made a Federal State Senator much more loyal to the interests of their STATE, because they were not FEDERAL employees. This was all changed with the completely bogus 17th Amendment.

Our system has slowly and thoroughly been perverted to such a degree that what has been stated concerning Congress' ability to create any type court of their desire, despite constitutionality, IS true to a certain degree.

BUT this is only true because we have been living under a state of emergency since 1863.

-This allows for virtually unchecked power by the executive branch.
-Virtual suspension of the constitution
-The creation of Kangaroo courts by congress and the military
-The president can create law simply by signing statements
-The INCOME TAX (it was originally sold to us as a war tax)
-The suspension of habeas corpus
-The suspension of posse commitatus
-The suspension of the 4th Amendment
-The implementation of the idea of "guilty until proven innocent"

We are Caesar's 13th Brigade in America. We are the military/industrial/prison/media complex of the future.
edit on 3/10/2011 by Josephus23 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
As we know all "Lawyers" must become members of the BAR in order to practice Law.

What DOES BAR stand for ?

BAR - British Accreditation Registry/Regency

And if you don't play by their rules then you are "Dis Barred".

So naturally of course most trained Attorneys will disagree with these concepts.
It's the Against their pledge of allegiance to the BAR and analogous to the curtain concealing the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz.

Our Legal system is based upon Maritime Law, aka The Uniform Commercial Code .
This is why all Federal Building and Corporations for that matter display a flag of sovereignty ....one for the United States and another for their own Corporation's laws.
Because this pertains to contractual law, you do as in any contractual agreement accept and agree to the terms.

This is why you sign for everything and/or agree in a court of law by acknowledging your presence by answering to your NAME.

This became clear to me when I had a traffic violation that I didn't want to be charged with and paid an Attorney to represent me.
He told me that the key was that I was to not utter a word, and that he would do ALL OF THE TALKING.

IN other words, not to answer the Judge when my name was called AND thereby transferring representation to my legal council instead.

As these Freemen are doing in not answering to their formal Names...and claiming representation they are not granting the court jurisdiction over them.

Without agreement, by both parties, as in any contract, the contract is not binding.

There IS something to this. But the PTB obviously do not want this secret revealed.

We are being railroaded here folks. Our system is merely a means for the Govt to borrow against our Tax payments funneling more and more money to the Banks. It's a huge ponzi scam.

Our prices in gas and food are going through the roof because of this huge ponzi scam making our Dollars worthless.

We Americans are fighters and I hope that we as a nation will ....

begin to wake up and smell the coffee !

Live Free or Die !



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by greenovni
 


You deserve more then a star and flag...

You see I completely forgot, about admiralty... Which covers damage to Sailors...

Which no matter what a marine tells you they are still legally department of the navy... which means all damage to sailors and the marines... are covered by a different set of laws....

The rapes of several marines and sailors is not cover exclusively by civil state law... it is a federal matter....

You good sir reminded me to look again... thank you for the inspiration...

summing up the issue...

Damage to sailors is not covered by pre-signed agreements with the DOD... the follow a whole different set of rules...

You pointed out a way all the victims in the navy and marine core can give it back with no lube....I missed it the whole time... the whole time and your words ...poof...

take a good look at what TYPE of court it would fall into...

And what it beautiful is the victims can sue their attackers... and leave out the DOD... the attackers cant use JAG for defense... (cant participate unless they are subpoenaed..) leave them out and hit the attackers hard as hell as sub-contractors to dfas...

Sir it was simple matter of WHAT type of court would this play in....

I feel like an idiot for not seeing it...

A friend is running it past JAG... four states over....



thank you for asking that basic question... what type of court?

good job OP



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


Sorry to hear of the profession you chose. I have met only one good lawyer, they attempted to disbar him and he helped out thousands of people with traffic court, he was brilliant and now dead for over a year or so. They did him in because he told the truth and actually helped people instead of selling them out.

A "statute" is NOT a law but a mere regulation. A law is something that is based on the Constitution and on its delegated "powers", which are derived from the CONSENT of the public/private sector, in a need for restraint of an action to protect the general public. It starts out as a "bill" presented TO the people for approval. In being a regulatory functioning "law", then the "State" does not need the consent of the governed or Constitution, they do it by "claimed neccessity", which is a bunch of BS. Statutes regulate and you are fined or jailed for breaking them, therefore they are regulatory in nature and do nothing to protect the general public because there is no victim. The "State" collects fees, more like camoflaged "taxes" or surcharges for usury.

Why more lawyers don't tell the truth, even at the risk of being disbarred, who needs the BAR, I have my own "power of attorney in fact" and can practice law for myself, without the need for being licensed and it is legal. You do not need a licesne to practice law, I have never seen a "law" that forbade it.


ATTORNEYS - LAWYERS - COUNSELORS - ESQUIRES
___________________________________________________________
Ye Wretched Hordes
Though Ye may have begun with high ideals and lofty
intentions, it is for naught.
Ye have traded your American souls for the title for English
Noblemen.
Ye have forsaken the country that gave you birth for doing the
bidding for a power-foreign against your neighbors and kin.
Honor, Virtue, and Purpose were left behind when Ye enjoined
the conspiratorial monopoly, the BAR Association, wherein,
Ye daily reap the benefits by criminal syndicalism.
Though Ye may have once been as a fresh fruit upon the tree, the
system for which Ye adhere is putrid vat for villainy.
The venal slime and treachery for the BAR Association courses
through your veins, Ye Wretched Hordes for the
LAWYERING CRAFT!



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Hey mr. green I'm in FL too. If you msg me your email or something maybe we can share our knowledge. I tried to message you but I have to make a certain number of posts. I have been giving my city hell as of late for trying to hide under the color of law for violating my rights.
In regards to the freeman movement, I would say not so effective here in the US, I say our best bet as I think someone mentioned before is to use our constitution and try to get juries educated on their right to nullify laws. Also there are some laws that do help protect you from the government employees 18 U.S.C. § 241& 242. There may be some stuff in your state statues too. The make things difficult so that people wont even try, you just gotta fight till your last breath and show them that you are not going to go down without a fight. Hold them to their social compact. Some common law stuff they still recognize are latin terms like mens rea and corpus delicti but for the most part they will not honor ANYTHING in your favor. Its all a game and if you want to win then study their rules and use it against them, they break their own rules a lot and if you call them out on it its quiet hysterical. Heres some stuff for if your in FL. This is the 1838 original FL constitution, why mention it? well the last section(27) of basic rights


Section 1. That all freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal; and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property and reputation; and of pursuing their own happiness.

Section 2. That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and established for their benefit; and, therefore, they have, at all times, an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may deem expedient.

Section 6. That the right of trial by jury shall forever remain inviolate.

Section 8. That no freeman shall be taken, imprisoned, or disseized of his freehold, liberties, or outlawed or exiled, or in any manner destroyed or deprived of his life, liberty, or property, but by the law of the land.

The constitution is the supreme law of the land and I believe common law is part of the law of the land as well.

Section 26. That frequent recurrence to fundamental principles, is absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty.

Section 27. That to guard against transgressions upon the rights of the people, we declare that every thing in this article is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate; and that all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions, shall be void.

Theres your power that freeman stuff will only get you in deep s***.

Also wanted to add that the purpose of the judicial branch of government is to judge the law as well not just accept whatever the legislator writes, there is no money in doing their job though
Also read the federalist papers regarding the judical branch. You can use that in court I have a case for that....somewhere.
edit on 10-3-2011 by Teckniec because: addition.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Reply to post by Teckniec
 


How will it get one in deep #?

Section 27 clearly states the any law not in accordance with the bill of rights of the state is void.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Contracts can be verbal as well. I thoroughly recommend watching these clips "Don't talk to cops"
(Mr. James Duane, a professor at Regent Law School and a former defense attorney, tells you why you should never agree to be interviewed by the police)

www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by Teckniec
 


How will it get one in deep #?

Section 27 clearly states the any law not in accordance with the bill of rights of the state is void.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Well depending on the situation of course. If you for example take your tag off your car shred your license and go for a trip while carrying a firearm........Even if there is no injured or complaining party, I don't think your getting out of that one. I'm just saying if people take this freeman stuff and go thinking they can handle courts could get one locked up really really quick. Everyone thinks judges are like gods and what they say is the law.



posted on Mar, 11 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by finemanm
I know I am late to the conversation, and forgive me if this was already said.

This is the reason why lay people should not represent themselves, they are clueless and through around words they don't understand. I'm a lawyer, if I'm sick I go to a doctor, if my car breaks I go to a mechanic, and for taxes, I go to an accountant. Leave law to the professionals.

Common law: based on stare decicis, or prior decisional law of the courts.

Statutory law: base on legislation.

These two types of law are intertwine. For example: sixth amendment to US Constitution says you have right to speedy trial in a criminal case. Well what on earth does that mean, a week, a month, a year, a decade?

States pass legislation that define what "speedy trial" means. In New York, it means 6 months for a felony. Does that mean if you are arrested on January 1st your case must be brought to trial by June 1st? Not necessarily. There are a number of excusable reasons why the government does not need to be ready for trial. The tests that apply to these excuses are evaluated by the courts looking to see what other courts have done in similar circumstances.

Thus, you has common law and statutory law intertwine.

More examples. Under NY personal injury law, unless you have a serious injury in a car accident, you cannot sue, you must rely on no-fault compensation. That is a statute. The courts use common law, i.e. Prior decisions by other courts, often higher courts to help determine if the injury you are claiming is legally a serious injury to allow your suit.

Corporations are people as far as courts are concerned. They can sue, be sued, and even be prosecuted criminally.

So, if you have a case, hire a lawyer.


Pretty interesting definition of common law. However Blacks Law dictionary defines it as the common law of the courts of England. Or the British law of commons. And also as those laws of antiquity common to the people and that body or rules for government in relation to security of persons and property, and distinguishes it from law created by legislatures or statute. Common Law in America is therefore embodied in the Bill of Rights and the common knowledge of rights acknowledged in teh 9th and 10th amendments reserved to the people of no harm no crime no injured party no claim and government hands off of the rights of the people etc..

As for hiring a professional yeah sure hire an officer of the court whose first duty is to the court and not his client as he pleads his case to another officer of the court who has the same duty as him to the court. That is called collusion. Sign your life away to the court to decide your fate ANY WAY THEY PLEASE and they will play the theatrical game of defense vs prosecution etc. to massage your illusions they are actually seeking justice for you.


edit on 11-3-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by greenovni

Unfortunately, it would seem that there are indeed very #ty lawyers out there. Lawyers can be a help, or they can be perhaps the biggest hindrance ever.

You could of course always sue them in negligence, but I imagine that at this point in time you are probably quite sick of legal proceedings.

Best of luck fighting whatever taxes the State is levying upon you (presumably, incorrectly or unjustly). Did the lawyers you hired let you have a free consult/give you a short rundown of their previous trial history (which you could corroborate)? As I said, there are alot of very mediocre lawyers out there who will represent themselves as very competent and efficient professionals. Caveat emptor.

Alas though, if the State has you by the balls, there is little that the lawyer can do but mitigate the loss. The law can be unflinchingly and unrepentantly harsh


As already stated, this is not a tax case. It is a child support case for a child that is not biologically mine, from a 1 night stand when I was 16 and the "lady" in question was 29.

I am sick and tired of legal proceedings but the fight must continue...


If it is not biologically yours, can you not rebut the presumption of paternity (and free yourself from any burden) by taking a DNA test?



posted on Mar, 11 2011 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by finemanm
 


The Federal government currently has a 97% guilty plea conviction rate. They have a 75% conviction rate for cases that actually go to trial. This means that if a person is charged with a federal crime in the United States and pleads guilty, they have a 25% chance of beating the rap, which is why lawyers work so hard at advising their clients to accept a plea bargain, because they are worthless 75% of the time in securing that person freedom. Those are not good averages.

Hire a lawyer after charged with a federal legislative criminalization act and be rest assured that lawyer will be advising you to accept a plea. What does this mean for you? This means you will be convicted of a crime, and even if you do not do any time, you will be drawn in to the "criminal justice" system where your rights will be pissed on and laughed at, while your lawyer expects to get paid for doing this for you.

Yep. If you like to be screwed, hire a professional...and by that I don't mean a lawyer. You have a better shot at satisfaction if you go the other route, even if it is a "crime".



I hate to say presume, but would you not say that such a high conviction rate is quite possibly related to the fact that most cases brought to trial are usually based on a fairly strong State case? They only prosecute when there is sufficient evidence from which to infer guilt. Admittedly, there are some very dodgy cases in certain states where prosecutors will go ahead despite evidence being largely or entirely circumstantial, but unfortunately that suffices.

Also, have you ever sat and observed a criminal court? The vast majority of the people coming through the door for trial have a litany of evidence against them that is pretty damned difficult to defend. If a defense is impossible (because the facts are obvious), is it so terrible for a lawyer to try and mitigate the punishment for his client? I would say that is in fact the responsible thing to do.



posted on Mar, 11 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by autowrench
 


Thanks for keeping the helm during my absence autowrench.

It is difficult being a one eyed person in the world of the blind, but it helps if there are two of us.


That being said, I want to get into something that will explain all of the contradictions that seem rife throughout this thread.
And to be honest with you, I am tired of providing links.
Obviously few have taken the time to read the link on Admiralty Law, because if they did, they they would have seen that that department of homeland security works under Admiralty Law, and has the power to OPENLY declare Admiralty Law as the law of the land during an emergency.

Well guess what folks, here is the kicker....

We have been living in a state of emergency since 1863. Meaning we have been living under martial law since 1863.
These states of emergency are temporary and must be renewed. I believe the last time that this was done was during the swine flu epidemic about 3 years ago by Obama, and nary a person noticed.
You see, much like the completely unconstitutional PATRIOT ACT, these states of emergency are only valid for so long because they essentially suspend the Constitution and must be re-enacted.

That is the entire point to the gold fringe around the flag. That signifies a MILITARY flag. This was made official in 1950 by Eisenhower. Do not fall for the BS game that the fringe is for decoration. The US flag has a very specific design and if it deviates in the slightest then it is not an "official" US flag.
Look up the history that accompanies the gold fringe and how it is used.

Research the number of countries (islands) in the British Commonwealth that use the gold fringe on their flags when dealing with official matters.

The congress has the power to create pretty much anything, but the Supreme Court is supposed to check this power, along with the President.
The Senate was originally supposed to be comprised of a group of those already voted upon by the locals. It would be someone who was already a congressmen from their respective state. The respective state's house would then vote their ONE Senator to represent the desires of the STATE in DC.

This made a Federal State Senator much more loyal to the interests of their STATE, because they were not FEDERAL employees. This was all changed with the completely bogus 17th Amendment.

Our system has slowly and thoroughly been perverted to such a degree that what has been stated concerning Congress' ability to create any type court of their desire, despite constitutionality, IS true to a certain degree.

BUT this is only true because we have been living under a state of emergency since 1863.

-This allows for virtually unchecked power by the executive branch.
-Virtual suspension of the constitution
-The creation of Kangaroo courts by congress and the military
-The president can create law simply by signing statements
-The INCOME TAX (it was originally sold to us as a war tax)
-The suspension of habeas corpus
-The suspension of posse commitatus
-The suspension of the 4th Amendment
-The implementation of the idea of "guilty until proven innocent"

We are Caesar's 13th Brigade in America. We are the military/industrial/prison/media complex of the future.
edit on 3/10/2011 by Josephus23 because: (no reason given)


This is all absurd. You obviously can't tell the truth to someone who wants to believe so fervently in something non-existent. I can't recall what the case name was but look it up... An American court entertained all of these ideas and promptly dismissed them as a ridiculous attempt to disenfranchise the court of its lawful jurisdiction.



posted on Mar, 11 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by nh_ee

As we know all "Lawyers" must become members of the BAR in order to practice Law.

What DOES BAR stand for ?

BAR - British Accreditation Registry/Regency

And if you don't play by their rules then you are "Dis Barred".

So naturally of course most trained Attorneys will disagree with these concepts.
It's the Against their pledge of allegiance to the BAR and analogous to the curtain concealing the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz.

Our Legal system is based upon Maritime Law, aka The Uniform Commercial Code .
This is why all Federal Building and Corporations for that matter display a flag of sovereignty ....one for the United States and another for their own Corporation's laws.
Because this pertains to contractual law, you do as in any contractual agreement accept and agree to the terms.

This is why you sign for everything and/or agree in a court of law by acknowledging your presence by answering to your NAME.

This became clear to me when I had a traffic violation that I didn't want to be charged with and paid an Attorney to represent me.
He told me that the key was that I was to not utter a word, and that he would do ALL OF THE TALKING.

IN other words, not to answer the Judge when my name was called AND thereby transferring representation to my legal council instead.

As these Freemen are doing in not answering to their formal Names...and claiming representation they are not granting the court jurisdiction over them.

Without agreement, by both parties, as in any contract, the contract is not binding.

There IS something to this. But the PTB obviously do not want this secret revealed.

We are being railroaded here folks. Our system is merely a means for the Govt to borrow against our Tax payments funneling more and more money to the Banks. It's a huge ponzi scam.

Our prices in gas and food are going through the roof because of this huge ponzi scam making our Dollars worthless.

We Americans are fighters and I hope that we as a nation will ....

begin to wake up and smell the coffee !

Live Free or Die !


HAHAHA are you kidding me? 'British Accreditation Registry'? Are you honestly insane? You are seeing acronyms where none exist.

The term 'bar' comes from the fact that professional society of English barristers is both known as 'the bar council' and because the legal profession (at least, as a barrister) is colloquially known as 'the bar' in England and Wales. It is not hard to see where the American use of the term came from...

And for gods sake, learn what the UCC is - it is not a body of maritime law. It is a statute that standardised sales and contract law across the United States so that every time an interstate transaction occurred states did not have to wrangle with which jurisdiction (state law) to treat as being that governing the contract.

Do some research would be my suggestion.
edit on 11-3-2011 by duality90 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
153
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join