Can you beat the courts?

Santos binachi explains law and what happens in a court room. The goes on to inform you on exactly what to say to turn the case upside down, turn the judge white and walk free.

Listen to the vid from the 10min mark.... If you want to know more, watch all parts.

Does any body know anybody that has achieved this?




Can you accuse the judge as being your corporate entity, and get the clerk to confirm this as she/he has just issued him a legal document staing that he is the trust holder to your trust account, unless someone states otherwise? This is why the say stand up and state your name. Point to the judge and say "it's you who is accused here today"
state that you are the beneficiary and demand the case be dissolved?

He then says to start to mention the fraud just carried out in the court, for a quick dismissal.

I believe he is on track with this, but i'll watch the video, and edit my reply. On Youtube, Creo Harmony is the one who is taking the knowledge of Roger Elvick and showing how to apply it. (Original Redemption)

I can agree with everything up to about 4 minutes into it. I'm not sure where he gets this Live Birth Record business. I have not heard of this, and certainly Roger would not recommend it. But up to that point, he is 100% on target, IMO. Now to watch the rest.


At 5:14 seconds, he admits he has only been learning this over the last 3 months, so Santos is not the person to learn from, but someone to listen to. Check out Creo Harmony on youtube, and "Claiming your Court Case" as your property. That is what I believe to be the most progressive front in Redemption, today. Also, of course, Winston Shrout is modeled about 80% after Roger Elvick's teachings. Everyone else is someone to listen to, but not to learn from. Jordan Maxwell picked up on this early, right at the time I did, around 1999, when Roger first broke this info to the world. Him and Vic worked together and along with another sovereign whose name escapes me, who wrote Cracking the Code...those guys were taking Roger Elvicks info and distorting it to make money off the book, and then Jordan found out he was being conned and broke off ties with them both.

Winston Shrout was the one who emerged from the whole ordeal and kept as close to Roger's teachings as possible. Sam Kennedy and Sam Davis, and Ron Lutz were all bad attempts at taking Roger's info and making a "product" from it. And they all paid for that, too.

Now, I think Creo Harmony is working hard as bringing this to light. She has knowledge of how to use the "Closed accounts" Roger spoke of, and uses, and nobody understands.


At 10:40, when he tells you what to ask the judge, you have to be real careful. There are all kinds of questions one could ask. Just remember to never answer their questions, with anything but a question. And know when to act, when to speak, when it's your turn. One simple question may do nothing to phase the judge, but a barrage of similar questions can get their attention.

Just a couple of quick comments.

1) Get a free consultation with an attorney first. Call your State Bar Association to find out about it.

2) If it's a serious matter, do not follow the video. One of three things will happen. You may be sent for a psychiatric exam, you may be charged with contempt, you may be ignored. You will certainly irritate everyone involved and that's not a good position for a defendant to be in.

3) If it's a very minor matter, I suppose you could roll the dice and hope that the judge says: "I don't get paid enough to listen to loonies like this, tear up his lousy $25 ticket and kick him out of here." But as I say, it's a gamble. You could end up worse off.

Be really careful, get serious legal advice.

Originally posted by charles1952
Just a couple of quick comments.

1) Get a free consultation with an attorney first. Call your State Bar Association to find out about it.

2) If it's a serious matter, do not follow the video. One of three things will happen. You may be sent for a psychiatric exam, you may be charged with contempt, you may be ignored. You will certainly irritate everyone involved and that's not a good position for a defendant to be in.

3) If it's a very minor matter, I suppose you could roll the dice and hope that the judge says: "I don't get paid enough to listen to loonies like this, tear up his lousy $25 ticket and kick him out of here." But as I say, it's a gamble. You could end up worse off.

Be really careful, get serious legal advice.

FIRE your attorney, and kick his BRITISH ACCREDITED REGISTRY (BAR) ASS out of town!
How do you expect to get justice from the Crown?

OK, I can see there's going to be a real disagreement here. Let me ask any of you to find any evidence that US attoneys are in this "British Accredited Registry." If you can't (and I certainly wasn't) then don't listen to this guy. My only purpose is to save your skin by having you avoid a serious mistake.

Besides, if this worked, I can guarantee you that defense lawyers all across the country would know of it by now, and would be raking in big bucks by defending clients with it.

Originally posted by charles1952
OK, I can see there's going to be a real disagreement here. Let me ask any of you to find any evidence that US attoneys are in this "British Accredited Registry." If you can't (and I certainly wasn't) then don't listen to this guy. My only purpose is to save your skin by having you avoid a serious mistake.

Besides, if this worked, I can guarantee you that defense lawyers all across the country would know of it by now, and would be raking in big bucks by defending clients with it.

You cannot use your own hand for bait!
Lawyers are NOT ALLOWED to use this. That is what the BAR is for, to BAR them from the "Private" side, and keep them reigned in the "Public" side of the "Trust".

reply to post by magickmaster


Thanks for the info magic master, could you supply some links to the thread

An a tourney will never get you to not state your name as they cannot charge you, or claim legal aid.

Like Charles said, they can just claim you be mad. Lol. Unless you had a lawyer in the gallery, and call them to witness the fraud taking place.

reply to post by magickmaster

Dear magickmaster,

You cannot use your own hand for bait!

Why not, noodlers do it all the time?

Lawyers are NOT ALLOWED to use this. That is what the BAR is for, to BAR them from the "Private" side, and keep them reigned in the "Public" side of the "Trust".

I have never seen or heard of anything like this. Please show us a law, a rule, a regulation, a court order, something that supports this. And by something, I don't mean an essay written by some guy who is just making assertions without legal standing.

Despite my opening joke, this is serious business. People can go to jail over this. Be careful of what you're doing. Practicing law is not something a do-it-yourselfer can pick up over a weekend. (or a month, for that matter)

With respect,
Charles1952

It bothers me that people are this stupid. Where do people come up with this crap?

reply to post by phroziac

You know, maybe you bring up a good point here. I might have been going about this the wrong way. If I were prosecuting the case, and the judge wasn't a complete idiot, I'm reasonably certain I could have the guy in a jail cell in about 45 minutes.

Perhaps if enough guys try it and get jailed, word will get around that this is not a good idea. Is that what it will take?

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Mmm, yeah, but your in court anyway, Your obviously a lawyer, so I can see this being your worst nightmare. Lol.

So what is your take on this, you seem to say it may be possible, but may be risky as you could tick the judge off, what if you had a doctor to say you were of sound mind? How is a judge qualified to say someone is crazy? Obviously you would have to represent yourself. But if it's not "you" can't a representative of you say the same thing and still get paid?

Originally posted by Wifibrains
reply to post by magickmaster

 

Thanks for the info magic master, could you supply some links to the thread

An a tourney will never get you to not state your name as they cannot charge you, or claim legal aid.

Like Charles said, they can just claim you be mad. Lol. Unless you had a lawyer in the gallery, and call them to witness the fraud taking place.

edit on 13-9-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)

I wish it were that simple, as sharing links. It took me 5 years to understand it, and feel comfortable discussing it with confidence.

It cannot be "proven". It's the way the system functions, and is built. If you understand the system, you understand "Redemption". The judges understand it completely, because they work for the bankers who created the system. Ask question, I will do my best to answer.

It all boils down to who is holding or making the "claim". The courts "fake" the claim, with "charges", and our "dishonor" creates the debt, which our bodies are then held as collateral for.

reply to post by Wifibrains

Dear Wifibrains,

I'm no longer a lawyer, gave it up a while back for a little less stressful life.

OK, let me tell you why I'm worried about this new "defense." Let's say it works. Then, in a fairly short time, nobody will be convicted of anything. I don't think you'd like that result very much. And if it happens, the laws will just be changed to make it impossible to work anymore.

Let's say it doesn't work. Then everybody who tries it runs the risk of giving up a defense that might have worked, and getting slapped with court sanctions. I don't think you'd like that result very much, either.

So what is your take on this, you seem to say it may be possible, but may be risky as you could tick the judge off, what if you had a doctor to say you were of sound mind?

And the doctor will probably say that, but you have to spend the time to get the exam, and it's not scheduled based on the defendant's convenience. It's not literally a pain in the butt, (that's another type of exam) but it is a nuisance.

How is a judge qualified to say someone is crazy?

You're right, he isn't. He takes the report from the psychologist, or whoever, then almost always says whatever the report says.

Obviously you would have to represent yourself. But if it's not "you" can't a representative of you say the same thing and still get paid?

I'm not quite clear about your question. The lawyer can take it without charge "pro bono," the court will appoint someone, in which case the state pays for it, you have to cough up the money, or you do-it-yourself.

In limited circumstances, especially places like small claims court, or tickets, it can make sense to represent your self. But if we're talking about any felony, or even some misdemeanors, the case will have so many angles to it that you'll need some trained help.

Many lawyers will give a half-hour consultation for free. I would suggest getting opinions for three or four of them and think about what they say. It may be BS, or it may be solid, but you'll at least have something to work with.

With respect,
Charles1952

Completely wrong...you'll just have more Lawyer BS
The lawyer (liar) is your worst enemy, and the worst kind of enemy to the Republic.

Originally posted by phroziac
It bothers me that people are this stupid. Where do people come up with this crap?

I hear you, this guys full of crap.

That judge is going to find your dumb ass in contempt of court
and throw you in the slammer.

this stuff isnt even slick

reply to post by magickmaster

Dear magickmaster,

Completely wrong...you'll just have more Lawyer BS
The lawyer (liar) is your worst enemy, and the worst kind of enemy to the Republic.

You're not giving me much to work with here. What's wrong? What evidence to you have to show that it's wrong? What's your reasoning?

I've helped some people in my time. One woman was facing 1-5 for a Social Security fraud. I worked through the facts of the case, she had confessed, by the way, and got her probation. I firmly believed in that case that justice had been served and was able to show that.

In another case, I was not the defendant's attorney, but I was consulted by the U.S. Attorney. The Defendant got a harsher persecution than normal because justice demanded it. But I was a rare type of attorney. Your mileage may vary.

Would you tell O.J. Simpson that his lawyer was his worst enemy? I didn't think so.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


It works like this, summarily.

We, the People, are the OWNERS of the Corporation or the Private Side. However, Foreigners (those without US citizenship) are employees, and as such, on the Public Side. As Owners, we have the Exemption, the Tax Exemption.

In 1933, after the gold was removed, which was our ability to pay, public policy HJR 192, of June 5, 1933, was put into place, which was the insurance policy indemnifying the people against the debt, which was now to take place, and which would have to be extracted from the Public, i.e., Foreigners. The Policy reads that no contract can be put forth which compels payment in "substance" or Specie, i.e., gold or silver.

In Commerce, which we are now in, following several court decisions following Eerie Railroad vs Thompkins, one can fulfill the obligation of any debt with an "acceptance" of that debt. This is known as a "Bankers Acceptance". The people, being the original bankers, extending their wealth, for the government to borrow from.

What is the source of that wealth? The Birth Certificate, as Registered, certifies there is on deposit, a value that will cover the labor you create in your lifetime. This is borrowed into existence when the Birth Certificate is created and the Social Security Number issued. This "value" is what is borrowed against, in order for the government to create wealth.

ALL credit comes from the signature, and only REAL LIVING PEOPLE can create that credit and value with our signatures, which happens to be the bankers BIGGEST secret. So, it is YOU and I that give value, when gold and silver are gone. No fictitious entity can create credit, only a REAL PERSON. So the government, a fiction, borrows from the living people, to exist.

More to follow, soon.

The IRS collects the debt from the employees and strawmen, but they are collecting the interest FOR the creditors. If you identify yourself as an employee, and not an employer, you are the one who owes the tax, otherwise, YOU are the one they are collecting the tax for.

In court, they are collecting revenue in BANKRUPTCY from the debtors, not the creditors, or the beneficiaries of the Trust. How do you identify yourself as one of those debtors?

Hire a Lawyer, defend the charges, and fight the debt.

How do you Identify yourself as one of the Creditors?
Accept for Value, the charges, claim them as your Property in your own accounts, question the validity of the Claim and supposed "claimholders".

What is happening in court?

The Corporation which is dead and cannot be injured, cannot have a valid claim, so therefore the corporation uses "charges" and they are entirely for the Employees. Code violations are Employee responsibilities.

You are presented with Charges. These "Charges" are nothing more than an "information" given which is held by the "claimant". The information is used to quantify a value of debt for the account or "incident". You are charged with 3 counts of Felonious activity but in reality you are Presented with 3 Accounts which have your strawman's name as the Debtor on them. When you do not accept the charges for value, and sign and pay them right then and there, you are held in "Dishonor" of that debt, and who is holding the bond on the account at that point?

YOUR LAWYER, the BONDED ONE, who can hold the charges against you! The Attorney is the one who sells you down the river!

What you need to do is call a witness to the stand, The Attorney, and ask him if he is holding the bond?
Make him testify to it, to prove it to yourself, if you want to. The courtroom will clear faster than you can say, WOW!

When you Accept the account, then they are supposed to settle it and close it for you. What rogue judges and lawyers do is they hold it in Suspension Accounts, while they hold you in jail to try to intimidate you, usually for no longer than 72 hours. Why do they release you sometimes after 72 hours? That is the time for Truth in Lending, another commercial or commerce rule.

reply to post by magickmaster

Dear magickmaster,

We are in two separate worlds, yours speaks a different language than mine. I tried to work through your first paragraph, which was:

We, the People, are the OWNERS of the Corporation or the Private Side. However, Foreigners (those without US citizenship) are employees, and as such, on the Public Side. As Owners, we have the Exemption, the Tax Exemption.

I do not understand it, I'm reasonably certain that no court in the country could understand it, and, I'm sorry to say, I'm leaning toward believing that you don't understand it.

Owners of corporations have a tax exemption and every citizen is an owner? That means every citizen has a tax exemption and no citizen needs to pay tax? I will bet my house that if someone is tried for tax evasion in a federal court and uses that as a defense, they will spend a lot of time in a locked facility, either penal or mental.

I will say this as often as I feel like it. PLEASE DO NOT USE THESE IDEAS IN COURT. YOU WILL RUIN YOUR LIFE.

If, perchance, you believe you understand it and think it works, I suppose you learned it from someone. So, there must be people (plural) who know this technique. Please point me to any court in which it has worked, and the case, so I can look up the decision myself. And no, I don't mean the video of the municipal court, where the judge recesses for a break and the defendant waltzes out boasting that he has won.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


It's okay that you don't understand it. Most modern scientists have no clue about Nikola Tesla, either.
You do not defend anything, and you do not testify to anything in court. You would be the perfect trap for any freeman, Mr Ex-Lawyer.