Quote Originally Posted by doug555 View Post
IMO, the first banking record created with the "lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)" on it is when you have admissible evidence of breaking your contract with the FED through usage of FRNs.

County records I believe are also evidence... however, subsequent inadvertent usage of FRNs re-establishes the FED contract, IMO.

The Affidavit in the county record memorializes the exact date when you created that first 12 USC 411 demand on record with the bank.

I think you have it now!

Now, just go write yourself a check and deposit it today, Dec 26, 2014, with the above exact demand on both instruments under your name & address on the front, and then go out and celebrate!

You are now free... you have just "broken the bonds"!

Thanks for your patience and perseverance!

BTW: I continue to write this exact wording on all my checks and deposit slips, just to establish a "preponderance of evidence" in case it is ever needed.
Doug555,

My replies, a few last questions, and a pasted sanitized text version of the letter sent to the Treasury and recorded at the County almost 2 years ago. Look forward to your/anyone's review and comments.

Doug555: "County records I believe are also evidence... however, subsequent inadvertent usage of FRNs re-establishes the FED contract, IMO."
IMM: The pasted 'Treasury letter' has no mention of 'all transactions' and implies or otherwise stipulates RILM of 'Net Pay'. Therefore, all prior RILM attempts are null and void until new Affidavit is sent and recorded effective Jan 1, 2015. Agree?

Doug555: Now, just go write yourself a check and deposit it today, Dec 26, 2014, with the above exact demand on both instruments under your name & address on the front, and then go out and celebrate!"
IMM: I recognize handwriting (not stamping) '411 and 95a(2)' on the front of checks/deposit slips. I currently have been stamping the '411' language on deposit slips and BACK of checks (the stamp is my signature and the 'standard USC 411 language' demand). As for the required signature on the BACK of the check, is there harm in continuing to use my stamp (although w/o the 95a(2) language, just USC 411), or since the front of both deposit instruments (check/slip) are in proper accordance with RILM can I simply handwrite my signature as normal on the back?

Doug555: You are now free... you have just "broken the bonds"! Thanks for your patience and perseverance!
IMM: Doug555 and everyone on this great Forum, THANK YOU for you patience, guidance and perseverance! ...

I welcome anyone's thoughts on my 'empty RILM demand from the Treasury' letter below (sent/recorded almost 2 years ago) of which I have pasted from the original. As you stated Doug555, perhaps this is a good lesson for what NOT to do, and perhaps you can emphasize that in your reply as a reference to this letter assuming it is completely ineffective as a RILM evidence record, of which I believe has been proven true, unfortunately. I may add a line to the new Demand Affidavit to be recorded at County, that "the new Demand (effective Jan 1, 2015), null and voids any prior demand made by me effective the date of this new Demand, Jan 1, 2015". Or something to that effect.

Thankful,

imm



02/19/2013
Prepared by, and Return to:
‘imm’

Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220*
Attn: Secretary of the Treasury

Re: Lawful Money Demand


Dear Secretary of the Treasury,

THIS IS NOTICE TO ONE AND ALL that I, ‘imm’, a man, hereby make a DEMAND FOR LAWFUL MONEY pursuant to Title 12 USC 411 for redeeming all monies that are deposited into and withdrawn from any bank or depository institution, as performed by me or for me; hereinafter ‘events’.

Events include but are not limited to the following: direct-deposit from any company paying me in such manner; check cashing or deposit; cash deposits; bank cards; ATM; debits or withdrawals or payments; electronic transfers, or any other means relating to all accounts I have at any financial institution subject to the Federal Reserve Act. Said events are subject to a superseding DEMAND FOR LAWFUL MONEY with the express intent to redeem any private credit instrument into lawful money pursuant to, albeit absent any benefit or privilege from, Title 12 Section 411 of the United States Code.

This demand is made pursuant to law binding all parties subject to Section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, now codified at Title 12 United States § 411. This demand is made for the express purpose of exercising my remedy under the law and to rebut the false and presumptive notion that I voluntarily endorse the private credit of the Federal Reserve. I expressly do not endorse private Federal Reserve credit in any form.

This Notice also applies retroactively to any existing accounts I have at any institution subject to the Federal Reserve Act. It was only by fraudulent omission that I was prevented from invoking the remedy available within 12 USC §411 from the start of any relationship I have made with any financial institution subject to the Federal Reserve Act.

Any current or previous contractual obligation I may have made due to the fraudulent omission of the remedy found in Title 12 USC §411 is unequivocally subordinate to this Notice and Demand letter, and, shall not be construed to modify any provision contained within this Notice and Demand letter.
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

________________________________
‘imm’ – All rights reserved