The Abatement stands in true judgment as adjudicated by the jurists, various judicial officers listed below, who have sworn out their oaths of office before the ever-living God, the same God in monotheism on the currency IN GOD WE TRUST, as prescribed by Statute and published them with the proper clerks as prescribed by the state constitution. The Jurists’ oaths of office have been included in the initial abatement. True Name paid the filing fee in the District Court only after understanding the clerk of court refused to accept the papers as a part of the felony cause in the same forum. It would seem that Judge DISTRICT hearing a felony matter as District Judge would allow for papers like this Abatement to be filed easily into that same record but True Name has chosen that this abatement must be properly lodged into the Record and paid the filing fee, even though this matter is already adjudicated in abatement.
People v. Scott in the Colorado Court of Appeals makes clear,
Quote:
…and proceeds with the performance of the duties connected therewith until the disability is adjudged by a proper tribunal, he is a de facto officer, whose acts performed in the discharge of his official duties are valid and binding.
Furthermore there is dishonor upon the Court of Appeals revealed in Scott:
Quote:
However, the response did not state whether these documents had been filed with the secretary of state.
And so the Colorado Court of Appeals proceeded in
Scott without addressing the positive fact that the District Attorney subject had not published his oath of office in the Secretary of State’s office; but rather addressed tangential principles indicating that complying with the State constitution was superfluous.
Furthermore yet Scott is about a District Attorney not publishing a sworn oath correctly. The District Attorney did not like in this matter of Abatement sign an arrest warrant and sign as witness “County Court Judge” for the oath process of the alleged County Sheriff who took action while in a vacant office under that bogus oath of office. In other words, the office of District Attorney is not hands-on law enforcement directly in contact with making arrests that might involve handcuffing or even tackling a man like True Name. Applying Scott to the County Sheriff and County Judge is very limited especially when applying principles of justice that True Name deserves as a man. A man might act intuitively to defects in process and authority around him, and is not subject to having to discover those defects prior to an encounter with law enforcement. The authority of common sense dictates this to be true. Was True Name obliged to research Bogus COUNTY’s faulty oath of office, and that COUNTY has signed XXX County Sheriff First LAST’s oath of office as County Court Judge from a vacant office; all prior to being confronted by Sheriff LAST and deputies acting upon the bogus warrant too (subsequently)? Additionally when True Name began researching oaths of office at the XXX County Clerk and Recorder he was harassed with threat of arrest if he did not assure officials in writing that he had no access to even other people’s guns and ammunition – outside the scope of the bogus bond agreement he had been coerced to sign after false arrest.
Additionally it might be pointed out that every action of Bogus COUNTY as an alleged County Court Judge since January of 2008, according to
Scott is coming up for Judicial Review and True Name is allowing for the Justice Center in County Seat to save face by simply honoring this Abatement already adjudicated by the following jurists as proven by Certified Copies from County Clerk and Recorder offices and the Secretary of State. Additionally yet, Related District Judge’s oath of office is bogus and her current office is vacant as proven in the Abatement and its attached Oaths of Office.
Jurists:
John William SUTHERS (State AG)
Michael BENDER (Supreme Court Chief Justice)
District ATTORNEY
Local PROSECUTOR
District JUDGE
[Mentioned DISTRICT JUDGE] Disqualified – bogus oath. (Failed to renew it this term.)
The above five officials have already by action and factual finding adjudicated res judicata a true judgment that Bogus COUNTY is intentionally and fraudulently acting as County Court Judge by not swearing out an oath of office, or in the alternative never bothering to read the constitutions he swore to uphold in early 2006. The above listed jurists are conscientious and honorable in the oath-bonding process and the State of Colorado Comptroller of the Currency is liable to pay lawful money for any breaches in contract between them and the People, and any one of the People, as enumerated in the Bills of Rights. Bogus COUNTY is without any judicial or sovereign immunity and is exposed personally, as is the State of Colorado for not monitoring officers qualifying their offices.