1. I posted this in this what I felt was a more appropriate area.Originally Posted by motla68
2. I only posted a snippet of what the entire article detailed.
I do remember from reading American Jurisprudence that under common law, a person could create any identity so long as it was not used in fraud.
Government created identities has to mean you are using someone else's creation.
I concur with that, even when you do not give them a name they create a named constructive trust pending on how serious the situation is you will be given the name John Doe or Jane Doe.
Questions is will one know how to deal with this situation is all depending upon the acceptance of the name.
Identity or law of identification is a separate branch of the Law of Evidence
A treatise on the law of identification; A separate branch of the law of evidence
The word identity descends from Latin, idem, meaning "same".Identification of Persons and Things.
1. It is proposed in these pages to introduce the law and rules of identity of persons and things as a separate branch of the law of evidence. It has become a question of growing importance and one that is daily before the courts; perhaps the question of personal identification is now one of the greater importance, not only because the doctrine that the identity of name was evidence of identity of person, has measurably exploded, except in the examination of titles to real estate; but because of the great number of important cases of mistaken identity, both in civil and criminal practice, and in cases involving the identity of the living and the dead. Parties to actions, the ancestor and the heirs to estates questions of pedigree, marriages, births and deaths; questions of vendor and vendee, ancient records and documents, and parties thereto, and the degree of evidence necessary toe stablish them, and the doctrine of idem sonans.
My question is if an policy enforcement officer can demand identification, is the identification, in fact, yours? It seems to be carrying government identification carries burdens of servitudes .....
I do not mind walking this through in baby steps if that helps you.
From your quote on Identification Of Persons and Things:
Read the following case carefully as in referenced to this entity called Person:identity of name was evidence of identity of person
The word "person" in legal terminology normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than man. See e.g. 1 U.S.C. sec 1. ; Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F.2d 417, 425.
Yes I know your going to say there is a distinction between persons and natural persons and I agree, BUT what you have shown me just says person not natural person. By laws of statutory construction when a law means something it says it has to be specific and not general, or somewhere within the same Article give definitions and specfically define natural person whenever they say person.
Ok, next lets look a little further down in your quote:
I assume the toe was a typo for to.the degree of evidence necessary toe stablish them, and the doctrine of idem sonans.
Also for this you added:
You did good friend, but your only partly there in understanding.The word identity descends from Latin, idem, meaning "same"
There is something called the sona language and the architects of the legalise society are masters at it. Your correct is saying " same " , but when you add the word "sonans" now were looking at the definition of " sounds the same ". BUT just sounding the same is not the same. So now you know why when someone points at a piece of plastic or paper and they ask is that you, you can unequivocally say: " I do not consent to be recognized by that name" , because your not a piece of plastic or paper.
Remember me saying: " mom and dad said what shall we call him, not what shall we write him " ?
Adding a couple more things to this:
In most courts the attorney's are allowed to lie to get what they want, but in most courts if you do not speak up then this is acquiescence to the facts. this is known as a tacit. "Silence is Futile". - the borg. Any copy brought into evidence by rules of evidence must be a certified copy, when they ask if that is you when pointing to the signature on a piece of plastic or paper another response you could say: " I do not have the original to compare it to, sorry no ".
Also there is nothing on that COLB/BC that contractually obligates you to that name, just learn to walk away from it. The inked footprint on it does not mean crap either, for one thing if it was you , it is no longer you because your not a child anymore and the actual forcing of the footprint onto the piece of paper voids the law 18 USC 242 among other things.
There is other thing too someone could argue that the fact we even use it. Well this is the necessity, you have a natural right to basic needs of survival no matter what name you use.
Just like there is confiscation for army necessity that was mentioned in the Liber Code we have the basics too for natural existence.
Hope that answer your question and then some, might have to think about a couple of those and do some due diligence to put the pieces together.
No need for the baby step walkthrough. I'm fairly versed in the Law of Persons. Let's explore concepts instead.
Actually, this is presumption on your part.
The term 'persons' is a legal construct that a political power holder can manipulate completely to their design whether natural or artificial.
I would focus more on Classical Greek, Latin, and Law French rather than sona. Sona has only been around since the 30s. More important than the sound is the meaning.
Also: http://naruto.wikia.com/wiki/Shikamaru_Nara
Here is a concept; Father, Mother, child , aunt, uncle, grandpa. Are these persons constructed for political power manipulation?
What came first, real man or the person? therefore who has higher law?
I was not born on the land of Greece, South America or France so what does that have to do with anything?
I can only really make a distinguishments for what land I sojourn on. Cannot change the past so what does it matter? Cannot prove the future so what does it matter? I can only be concerned with events happening today.
The higher Claim in Law depends on the man or woman's TRUST. If Trust is found in the State, then the State has the higher Claim. Pretty simple actually, it is up to the man or woman - Choice.
Stay on God; or,
Stay on Man.
The former brings blessings, the latter curses. Ever read Deuteronomy 28? As I said it is really very simple. Law is a benefit. There is always a higher power when you speak of Law.
The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.
Lawful Money Trust Website
Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST
ONE man or woman can make a difference!
I feel you are forgetting a critical component of law.
Law implies the ability to establish and maintain one's will by force (the baton variety).
Is the name a gift given to government first, followed by conveyance to a child?
Not exclusively, more like consideration. The event recorded will get a name whether the parents fill out a form or not, either John Doe or Jane Doe. Government commences a survey and out of consideration allow the parents to name the event.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote