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

reply to post by greenovni


The only motion that I can think of that might work is to file an appeal motion for summary judgment, and to be honest with you, I do not know how this works on appeal.

A summary judgment is rendered when there is prima fascia evidence and no need for a trial. Regardless of the statute of limitations, if you could file this motion under the premise that your prima fascia evidence is that you were knowingly lead into signing a fraudulent contract then maybe it might work.

That is me just pulling something out of my rear, however...

Hey man... Put on the superman cape and go for it. I commend you for having the cajones to stand up, and I mean straight up stand up, to the system.

Down with the man!!!!!

Originally posted by greenovni

I missed the deadline to challenge paternity by 17 years as I recently found out that the child is not biologically mine. .

Wait a second, 17 years??
So how old is the kid?
It sounds like you just need to wait one more year and the child will then be an adult and you will be no longer required to pay and you can head out to Costa Rica.

Am I mis-reading this?

By the way, this thread has turned into something great, thanks for all the perspectives.

Jean Paul, I've read many of your posts in the past, but have a new found respect for your eloquence and intellect, thank you for standing up to the mightier-than-thow "priest class lawyer set." Education at it's best. And these people wonder why lawyers have a bad name!

[Lurks Back into the Shadows]

reply to post by DrZERO


I thought he meant that he had to challenge it before turning 17 yrs old, as that was when the statute of limitation was up. Could also mean maybe its one of those special cases like an autistic kid that could force someone to prettymuch pay for life as they will always be a dependant? Just speculation on my part.

reply to post by DrZERO


I think that the OP owes for a certain amount of back pay for child support.

That is the central issue if I am not mistaken.

If not, then I agree with you. Wait a year. Bite the bullet. Keep making the payments and then get the F out of dodge when that 18th birthday rolls around.

I just gotta say for a minute however, that I kind of feel sorry for that kid.

As someone who essentially had an absent father my entire life, I can tell you that it can do untold damage to that kids psyche.
Sorry to be a party pooper, but that might also be the attitude of the court.

Originally posted by DrZERO

Originally posted by greenovni

I missed the deadline to challenge paternity by 17 years as I recently found out that the child is not biologically mine. .

Wait a second, 17 years??
So how old is the kid?
It sounds like you just need to wait one more year and the child will then be an adult and you will be no longer required to pay and you can head out to Costa Rica.

Am I mis-reading this?

By the way, this thread has turned into something great, thanks for all the perspectives.

Jean Paul, I've read many of your posts in the past, but have a new found respect for your eloquence and intellect, thank you for standing up to the mightier-than-thow "priest class lawyer set." Education at it's best. And these people wonder why lawyers have a bad name!

[Lurks Back into the Shadows]

edit on 15-3-2011 by DrZERO because: to fix tags

Yes, this child support is to be over in a few months BUT arrears stay forever till paid. No passport till arrears are paid unfortunately.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DrZERO

 

I thought he meant that he had to challenge it before turning 17 yrs old, as that was when the statute of limitation was up. Could also mean maybe its one of those special cases like an autistic kid that could force someone to prettymuch pay for life as they will always be a dependant? Just speculation on my part.

No, I just found out months ago that the child is not mine because the mother now has decided to come clean after all these years from the 1 night stand.

reply to post by greenovni



Your reason and logic is sound however here is the problem as I see it. You are asking the Judge to rule on whether he has subject matter jurisdiction. By so doing you just gave him jurisdiction to decide the case. How do you think he is going to rule? That's right he will pretend to take your argument into consideration however he will ignore the entire argument and rule against you. If you give the fox the authority to decide whether he will raid the chicken coup or not how do you think he will decide? Why? You gave him authority to do so. You consented to it. You do not understand what kind of court you are in. You must first get the judge to admit what type of court he is running per the manual I sent you. He won't and will be forced to dismiss before he admits it. if he says common law or admiralty then you can use the rules against him etc. if he says any other then where are the rules of procedure etc. He won't he will dance around it and he will tell to get legal advice and of course the counter for that is in the manual also.

Update: This way you are not asking him to rule on the subject matter you are asking him to prove he has the right to rule period which he doesn't unless you consent to it. In Watching the Moores video this is where they fail and keep getting hauled back into court.

Otherwise you have already lost. If you decide to go ahead with your case as outlined your best bet is to also rescind your signature on the birth certificate nunc pro tunc. Notarize it and file it in the county and send a copy to the state vital statistics and any other agency where it has been used or recorded, give them 21 days to challenge it (they won't), and have a copy for the judge. Sorry to be the wet blanket and I hope you get lucky and have a judge with a modicum of decency as has happened on very rare occasions but unfortunately it is unlikely.

PS You are not going to out word smith the judge using his lifeblood statutes, that's what he does every day for his living.

By the way I am not giving "legal" advice the definition of legal is the authority by statute to do that which is otherwise unlawful. I am a lawyer in fact, not an "attorney "at" law" and there is a big difference despite what attorneys at law will tell you.

Also concerning so called "freeman" arguments. I have to laugh at those using this as a disparaging remark that somehow invalidates any argument it is pinned on. Just like the term "truther" is now somehow derogative which means seeking truth is somehow wrong and seeks to invalidate any argument that 9/11 was a conspiracy by merely pinning the label on anyone making such arguments. So it is trying to pin the label freeman on seeking freedom from tyranny supposedly makes it somehow bad. I'll wear the label "freeman" as a badge of honor any day as I seek to be a free man!

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by DrZERO

 

I think that the OP owes for a certain amount of back pay for child support.

That is the central issue if I am not mistaken.

If not, then I agree with you. Wait a year. Bite the bullet. Keep making the payments and then get the F out of dodge when that 18th birthday rolls around.

I just gotta say for a minute however, that I kind of feel sorry for that kid.

As someone who essentially had an absent father my entire life, I can tell you that it can do untold damage to that kids psyche.
Sorry to be a party pooper, but that might also be the attitude of the court.

I feel sorry for her also since I was never there for her as her mother kept her away from me since birth, I also always kinda knew that I was not the bio dad through the years.

The sad part is that her mother decided to come clean a few months back because she had "something eating at her"

I told the kid, as well as the mother that I had a right to know as well as the child. She has a right to know who her father is, not a make believe dad, but her REAL father and family.

She is about to turn 18, and all I "owe" is arrears so yes, I am willing to fight the sharks simply for the sake of decency!

BTW, Where is duality90????

reply to post by hawkiye


Can you send me the manual that you are speaking of by PM?

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by greenovni

 

Your reason and logic is sound however here is the problem as I see it. You are asking the Judge to rule on whether he has subject matter jurisdiction. By so doing you just gave him jurisdiction to decide the case. How do you think he is going to rule? That's right he will pretend to take your argument into consideration however he will ignore the entire argument and rule against you. If you give the fox the authority to decide whether he will raid the chicken coup or not how do you think he will decide? Why? You gave him authority to do so. You consented to it. You do not understand what kind of court you are in. You must first get the judge to admit what type of court he is running per the manual I sent you. He won't and will be forced to dismiss before he admits it. if says common law then you can use the rules against him etc. he won't he will tell to get legal advice and of course the counter for that is in the manual.

Otherwise you have already lost. If you decide to go ahead with your case as outlined your best bet is to also rescind your signature on the birth certificate nunc pro tunc. Notarize it and file it in the county and send a copy to the state vital statistics and any other agency where it has been used or recorded, give them 21 days to challenge it (they won't), and have a copy for the judge. Sorry to be the wet blanket and I hope you get lucky and have a judge with a modicum of decency as has happened on very rare occasions but unfortunately it is unlikely.

PS You are not going to out word smith the judge using his lifeblood statutes, that's what he does every day for his living.

By the way I am not giving "legal" advice the definition of legal is the authority by statute to do that which is otherwise unlawful. I am a lawyer in fact, not an "attorney "at" law" and there is a big difference despite what attorneys at law will tell you.

Also concerning so called "freeman" arguments. I have to laugh at those using this as a disparaging remark that somehow invalidates any argument it is pinned on. Just like the term "truther" is now somehow derogative which means seeking truth is somehow wrong and seeks to invalidate any argument that 9/11 was a conspiracy by merely pinning the label on anyone making such arguments. So it is trying to pin the label freeman on seeking freedom from tyranny supposedly makes it somehow bad. I'll wear the label "freeman" as a badge of honor any day as I seek to be a free man!

edit on 15-3-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

I only have 7 days to get this motion in. My birth certificate has been voided by the powers that be as well as 100s of thousands of my country men (to combat identity theft)

Voided PR Birth Certificates

I am completely lost about how to go about rescinding my signature on something that has been nulled and voided

OP, I believe what is being suggested here is for you to be very careful and consider possible ramifications that can befall you.

You are proposing opening Pandora's Box, challenging the Constitutionality of legislation. I feel this is something that must be done, but it must be organized and executed by an organization or group.

What is happening is we are living within a Matrix, a man created Matrix. Our being asleep at the wheel has allowed evil persons to sneak in and basically enslave us.

The poster Duality90 is basically saying this. All the posts calling Free Men crazy are saying this. If it is being said that our government can create legislation that we MUST live by what else can our society be described as if not enslaved?

I brought up that issue on another board I visit. The situation is here in Florida a child was killed during a soccer game and what I heard on the news is that the State capitol is now meeting to suggest legislation. What will come from that meeting is some new legislation (law?) which the citizens of Florida must now live by.

I ask, "What gives them the Right/Power to do such a thing? Do the representatives not have to present their ideas to the public for a vote or at least a look over? I'm sorry but if the answer is they do not, my brothers/sisters we are living under a dictatorship!

I wonder if the Dualty90 guy realizes what is happening in this thread? He is arguing from the perspective of someone who, as has been suggested, isn't being taught the real picture. He's fighting HARD for the side of the Matrix. Somewhere along the line, apparently, we informed our government that we want them to RULE OVER us?

This Matrix we are living in is too powerful to have been created by mere men.

God help the man who actually brings light to our Matrix alone!

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
OP, I believe what is being suggested here is for you to be very careful and consider possible ramifications that can befall you.

You are proposing opening Pandora's Box, challenging the Constitutionality of legislation. I feel this is something that must be done, but it must be organized and executed by an organization or group.

What is happening is we are living within a Matrix, a man created Matrix. Our being asleep at the wheel has allowed evil persons to sneak in and basically enslave us.

The poster Duality90 is basically saying this. All the posts calling Free Men crazy are saying this. If it is being said that our government can create legislation that we MUST live by what else can our society be described as if not enslaved?

I brought up that issue on another board I visit. The situation is here in Florida a child was killed during a soccer game and what I heard on the news is that the State capitol is now meeting to suggest legislation. What will come from that meeting is some new legislation (law?) which the citizens of Florida must now live by.

I ask, "What gives them the Right/Power to do such a thing? Do the representatives not have to present their ideas to the public for a vote or at least a look over? I'm sorry but if the answer is they do not, my brothers/sisters we are living under a dictatorship!

I wonder if the Dualty90 guy realizes what is happening in this thread? He is arguing from the perspective of someone who, as has been suggested, isn't being taught the real picture. He's fighting HARD for the side of the Matrix. Somewhere along the line, apparently, we informed our government that we want them to RULE OVER us?

This Matrix we are living in is too powerful to have been created by mere men.

God help the man who actually brings light to our Matrix alone!

I was asked yesterday is I wanted to die. The girl I was talking to said that I am just a mere, uninformed, blind mortal that is playing with fire by challenging the powers that be about their own created power.

After much deliberation, yes, I guess I am.

I wish I had an organization by my side, but alas, I do not.

This simple case is bigger than me, I am not doing this for the sake of winning alone. There are thousands of non bio dads in jails and prisons right as we speak for non payment of child support for children that are not theirs biologically.

It is about time 1 person stands alone in the face of tyranny. Will that person be me? Who knows!

What I do know is that I've been in an open prison for many years because of this and it is about time I say ENOUGH!

reply to post by greenovni


Hi there OP!

At the risk of intruding on your personal life, what is the actual story behind all of this?

I'm assuming that at some point you were in a relationship with this woman, during the course of which (or after your relationship had broken down) she became pregnant with a child, and that at some point, you either believed the child to be yours and put your name on the child's birth certificate? Or did she give birth after your relationship had ceased without you present either at birth or registration of the child's birth?

I can't advise particularly on American matters of law (again, my training is in the UK), but I will hopefully try and give you what little advice I can.

Have you already had some sort of hearing by the way? Is your next appearance in court an appeal? or will this be the first time yourself and the child's mother have litigated? I presume you are appearing before a State Circuit court?

Just trying to get the basic facts so that I can hopefully offer what little advice I can.

Only problem here is that I don't know what the common-law presumptions are in Florida. In England and Wales we have a common-law presumption of paternity, as well as the various statutory rules governing attribution of parentage. On that matter you might want to consult a lawyer or hit the family law textbooks at the law library (because, at least in England, there is the presumption that if a child is born during the course of a marriage between man and wife, that child is automatically presumed to be his, unless he can rebut that presumption i.e. DNA testing, husband was absent during the period of conception et c.), because any such presumptions may still be valid outside of what the statutory regulation on parentage (legal attribution of parenthood) says.

That being said I shall try and have a look over it, although if there is anyone here who is a practicing attorney (in this thread) their contribution would probably be invaluable to you.

Best of luck!

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by greenovni

 

The only motion that I can think of that might work is to file an appeal motion for summary judgment, and to be honest with you, I do not know how this works on appeal.

A summary judgment is rendered when there is prima fascia evidence and no need for a trial. Regardless of the statute of limitations, if you could file this motion under the premise that your prima fascia evidence is that you were knowingly lead into signing a fraudulent contract then maybe it might work.

That is me just pulling something out of my rear, however...

Hey man... Put on the superman cape and go for it. I commend you for having the cajones to stand up, and I mean straight up stand up, to the system.

Down with the man!!!!!

I think my brother once filed this motion during a small civil dispute to no avail, despite the fact the other guy (builder) was blatantly just avoiding paying under a contract for the sale of goods. I think unless the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of the person filing the motion (i.e. the other party's suit is just short of frivolous) it is seldom granted. Even then, I imagine summary judgment is entirely at the discretion of the judge, so unfortunately subject to the whim of whoever happens to be presiding, you may or may not have your day.

That being said, as far as I know, I don't think a failed motion necessarily defeats or necessarily reflects poorly on your case.

Originally posted by greenovni

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by DrZERO

 

I think that the OP owes for a certain amount of back pay for child support.

That is the central issue if I am not mistaken.

If not, then I agree with you. Wait a year. Bite the bullet. Keep making the payments and then get the F out of dodge when that 18th birthday rolls around.

I just gotta say for a minute however, that I kind of feel sorry for that kid.

As someone who essentially had an absent father my entire life, I can tell you that it can do untold damage to that kids psyche.
Sorry to be a party pooper, but that might also be the attitude of the court.

I feel sorry for her also since I was never there for her as her mother kept her away from me since birth, I also always kinda knew that I was not the bio dad through the years.

The sad part is that her mother decided to come clean a few months back because she had "something eating at her"

I told the kid, as well as the mother that I had a right to know as well as the child. She has a right to know who her father is, not a make believe dad, but her REAL father and family.

She is about to turn 18, and all I "owe" is arrears so yes, I am willing to fight the sharks simply for the sake of decency!

BTW, Where is duality90????

Aaah... you may run into problems if, in both your mind and the child's, you have been seen as and have been treated as her father for 17 years. Did you have parental responsibility during that time? i.e. the power to make decisions concerning education, healthcare, religion et c?

Edit: I know that that must really suck in your eyes that your mistaken belief is now being used against you, but (and again, I do not know the specific position under Florida law) many governments/courts will always be bound to make orders so long as they are in the best interests of the child. Prejudice to the parent usually takes a backfoot.

Originally posted by duality90
reply to post by greenovni

 

Hi there OP!

At the risk of intruding on your personal life, what is the actual story behind all of this?

I'm assuming that at some point you were in a relationship with this woman, during the course of which (or after your relationship had broken down) she became pregnant with a child, and that at some point, you either believed the child to be yours and put your name on the child's birth certificate? Or did she give birth after your relationship had ceased without you present either at birth or registration of the child's birth?

I can't advise particularly on American matters of law (again, my training is in the UK), but I will hopefully try and give you what little advice I can.

Have you already had some sort of hearing by the way? Is your next appearance in court an appeal? or will this be the first time yourself and the child's mother have litigated? I presume you are appearing before a State Circuit court?

Just trying to get the basic facts so that I can hopefully offer what little advice I can.

Only problem here is that I don't know what the common-law presumptions are in Florida. In England and Wales we have a common-law presumption of paternity, as well as the various statutory rules governing attribution of parentage. On that matter you might want to consult a lawyer or hit the family law textbooks at the law library (because, at least in England, there is the presumption that if a child is born during the course of a marriage between man and wife, that child is automatically presumed to be his, unless he can rebut that presumption i.e. DNA testing, husband was absent during the period of conception et c.), because any such presumptions may still be valid outside of what the statutory regulation on parentage (legal attribution of parenthood) says.

That being said I shall try and have a look over it, although if there is anyone here who is a practicing attorney (in this thread) their contribution would probably be invaluable to you.

Best of luck!

1. Relationship = 1 night stand many years ago
2. Woman said many months later that she is pregnant
3. I was 16, she was 29 at the time
4. I was not there during birth nor signed the birth certificate
5. 4-5 months after the birth my mother forced me to sign some papers at some office (I think it was acknowledging paternity)
6. Baby's mother said to me that I was not the father but that I had a great job laughing
7. I turned 17 and was hauled into child support court
8. I tell the judge that I wore a condom on my 1 night stand
9. Judge said: You slept with her, you are the father
10. I told the judge that could not be and he banged the gavel and viola! I was the father.
11. 17 years have passed (I was never involved in the child's life) and the mother now has a brain tumor
12 Mother calls me on the phone after many years to ask me if I remember what she said many years ago
13. I said no and she then started crying and told me that I was not the father of the child
14 My whole life has been screwed over by the child support system

Which is all moot as I am not arguing any of those points, I am arguing that the law itself used to pin this paternity on me is void as it is constitutionally defective as I already proved with many court precedences a few posts above.

The judgment being defective is void thus it never happened!

reply to post by greenovni

I only have 7 days to get this motion in. My birth certificate has been voided by the powers that be as well as 100s of thousands of my country men (to combat identity theft)

I am completely lost about how to go about rescinding my signature on something that has been nulled and voided

I was talking about the childs BC. if yours is being voided though that is good, don't sign a new one that is the first contract that puts you in thier statutory hell.

What I would do if it were me is: To rescind the signature simply write a letter that you are not the father not responsible and you rescind any and all signatures on and or any claim, document, birth certificate, (et al) that claims or implies etc that you are the father and responsible etc blah blah... nunc pro tunc at the end, which makes it retroactive as it was done through inadvertence or by mistake and never should have been done.

File it in the county under miscellaneous send copies to all agencies needed. You can give 7 days to rebut also since you are pressed for time and file with your motion.

Edit: just saw this

4. I was not there during birth nor signed the birth certificate
5. 4-5 months after the birth my mother forced me to sign some papers at some office (I think it was acknowledging paternity)

Same procedure rescind all signatures, you were a minor unable to enter a contract, did so under duress coercion etc etc. Judges very seldom will rescind or override another judges order unless it strengthens the position of the courts authority and or brings them more money. Most of arrears money will go to the court which is why they are pressing the issue not because they care about the child.

reply to post by hawkiye


Duh!!! I was thinking on my own BC. Will def look into this.

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
OP, I believe what is being suggested here is for you to be very careful and consider possible ramifications that can befall you.

You are proposing opening Pandora's Box, challenging the Constitutionality of legislation. I feel this is something that must be done, but it must be organized and executed by an organization or group.

What is happening is we are living within a Matrix, a man created Matrix. Our being asleep at the wheel has allowed evil persons to sneak in and basically enslave us.

The poster Duality90 is basically saying this. All the posts calling Free Men crazy are saying this. If it is being said that our government can create legislation that we MUST live by what else can our society be described as if not enslaved?

I brought up that issue on another board I visit. The situation is here in Florida a child was killed during a soccer game and what I heard on the news is that the State capitol is now meeting to suggest legislation. What will come from that meeting is some new legislation (law?) which the citizens of Florida must now live by.

I ask, "What gives them the Right/Power to do such a thing? Do the representatives not have to present their ideas to the public for a vote or at least a look over? I'm sorry but if the answer is they do not, my brothers/sisters we are living under a dictatorship!

I wonder if the Dualty90 guy realizes what is happening in this thread? He is arguing from the perspective of someone who, as has been suggested, isn't being taught the real picture. He's fighting HARD for the side of the Matrix. Somewhere along the line, apparently, we informed our government that we want them to RULE OVER us?

This Matrix we are living in is too powerful to have been created by mere men.

God help the man who actually brings light to our Matrix alone!

With hindsight, I can see how that could be extrapolated from what I am saying. Perhaps it is correct.

Unfortunately, although the constitutionality of legislation has been challenged (and overturned), as far as I am aware, noone has ever successfully challenged a state or federal legislature's competence to enact new law by way of legislation. At least not in the UK - to my knowledge.

What I find problematic about the freeman argument is that what I gather are it's fundamental arguments which attempt to displace the longest-held theoretical underpinnings of our legislative systems. The enormity of that challenge is not to be understated.

Given that many of the arguments seem to be founded on an extremely dubious interpretation of the law in various areas, and several outright lies, I remain extremely sceptical.

I am of course open to seeing new evidence which would show the validity of the arguments, but that clear and unambiguous evidence has not yet been forthcoming.

Edit: just did a bit of poking about on arguments of the English freeman movement, notably s.61 Magna Carta (1215).

www.worldfreemansociety.org proclaims that s.61 (right of lawful rebellion) is both still in force and gives people the right to engage in lawful rebellion if displeased with the monarch.

As far as I can tell (of course I cannot look at the physical text of the Magna Carta to be 100% certain, only going off what I can gather on the internet), that is pretty much just a complete fabrication of what s.61 Magna Carta was about and neglects to inform readers that the vast majority of that statute has been either explicitly or implicitly repealed down the line.

There are of courses some acts from that long ago that still apply (Statute of Quia Emptores 1290) is still one of the principle laws governing tenure and estates. That does not mean that all are, and it is exceedingly rare to see such an old statute still applicable.

s.61 only ever actually made mention of Barons having the right of rebellion, and as far as I can tell, even this was later repealed in English history.

I suspect that many of the movement's arguments are just an extension of what people want the law to be, rather than actually reflecting the realities of the situation.

reply to post by duality90

I am of course open to seeing new evidence which would show the validity of the arguments,

I laughed out loud hard when I read that... Thanks I needed a good laugh today...