Another trick courts are using re: R4C

[David Merrill]

So what you're saying (and Treefarmer, too) is that I need to open up a counterclaim in the USDC using the Libel of Review.

What about all these other things you've been recommending? Are they still important; or is the LoR the most important piece of the puzzle to get these "gangstas" off my back? (Please excuse my slowness.)

I'll be working at getting the oaths of office next. Or maybe searching out the district court in this area to file the LoR.

Jethro too;


The Libel of Review (LoR) is dismissed out leaving you with an evidence repository wherein you build your Record. In this case with KnowLaw there will be some kind of flaw in the oaths of office (almost certainly). So you get that into the record and serve a certified copy on the local court. There will be likely then a bunch of obvious loopholes in process indicating that the prosecution has become voluntary. Of course if you cannot see them, and you do not understand arraignment and some of the other things we have spoken of here then you will perfect jurisdiction around you anyway.

The LoR does a lot more than set up an evidence repository.


Here is some Crosstalk between echo chambers:

What pray tell does a LoR do for me? It gives me cognizance of the United States Trust - prior to [1789] the Corporation and its Persons - created - Under its SEAL.

IT IS ALL VOLUNTARY - where do you place your trust? Be sure to vote - indictments are based on evidence - registration. Registration of Trust. For the Settlor is Sovereign and liable internationally to other States regarding its domestic affairs; therefore, the Settlor keeps books in regard to the acts of its Persons - it is called a Register of Deeds.

That is a lot of trust law and the experience of a Libel of Review several years ago. That is what you are hearing. That kind of understanding enables one to speak to officials in a manner they not only understand but appreciate.

Peaceful inhabitant. Heir to the original estate.

[Treefarmer]

So what you're saying (and Treefarmer, too) is that I need to open up a counterclaim in the USDC using the Libel of Review.

What about all these other things you've been recommending? Are they still important; or is the LoR the most important piece of the puzzle to get these "gangstas" off my back? (Please excuse my slowness.)

I'll be working at getting the oaths of office next. Or maybe searching out the district court in this area to file the LoR.

The LoR IS your evidence repository that gets noticed by Judges, attorneys, METRO, and the likes.
It speaks for you where you can be heard: on the record.
You can then file your oaths of office and other important evidence in there, to get it seen and heard.
No attorner can take that away from you, AFAIK.

[Jethro]

Thanks David & Treefarmer,

What's the difference between a LoR/evidence repository for filing oaths of office, etc. and recording the same at a (county) recorder? If the objective is to create admissible evidence, would not the latter be equally sufficient since certified copies of public records are self-authenticating (e.g. Fed. Rules of Evidence Rule 902) and therefore admissible?

[David Merrill]

Thanks David & Treefarmer,

What's the difference between a LoR/evidence repository for filing oaths of office, etc. and recording the same at a (county) recorder? If the objective is to create admissible evidence, would not the latter be equally sufficient since certified copies of public records are self-authenticating (e.g. Fed. Rules of Evidence Rule 902) and therefore admissible?

The Default Judgment from the LoR is indeed filed in both offices - local and federal.





Read this carefully.


That is an intense little clause of American history and remedy, the 'saving to suitors' clause. Incompetence in common law always defaults to admiralty. But you get the "exclusive original cognizance" of the United States government. That is the basis of the LoR.

You keep the receipt. Look at the receipt here - a $46 Miscellaneous Case (no Default Judgment). Two years down the road you might R4C a traffic ticket, the US clerk of court might send it back, This case was dismissed in early 2013... You send it back with a copy of the receipt and remind him about 'saving to suitors' - Congress has guaranteed me the 'exclusive original cognizance' of the US government since 1789! You are in breach of contract...

REGISTRATION OF FOREIGN JUDGMNT

That is revealing right there but also note that he proved out his affidavit with a Certification of Commission on his notary too.

When you get the exclusive original cognizance of the US government then you can effectively explore any and all the techniques being explored here because you are getting all of it on the record.

As KnowLaw gets some of the faulty oaths of office together he might publish an affidavit at the county clerk and recorder that he has not given consent to be prosecuted by vacant offices and recognizes the court not of record not. [SUTHERS was cleaning out his office the next morning; and look at his Oath today! It is clearly a fungible fidelity bond - even a stock certificate!] Then he gets certified copies - actually the original from the C&R into the case with the local clerk of court marking his certified copies FILED, including markings from the district attorney too, into the case file. Pretty quick things start happening like the prosecutor leaves the courtoom when his case is called?

So the judge asks, What can I do for you?


Instead of pleading or making a motion KnowLaw might become aware enough:

Business here is concluded. Have a nice day!


More likely though he will move for a dismissal and the prosecutor will come back into the room and they will resume the business of charging and prosecuting...

So it takes getting the remedy between your ears. If you are incompetent then the law will have its effect, thank God. You become like a vessel being blown about by the winds and tides. I want my trustees to control you until you get on your feet but then again I want you on your feet.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[David Merrill]

KnowLaw;


I hope you realize competence.


Robert RUBIN announced his resignation in time for the 5:00 News! Notice especially that I utilized the US Geodetic Survey to pull the entire issue to 9035 feet above the high tide mark. I keep an office with a granite desk and wonderful view up there!

[KnowLaw]

What's the difference between a LoR/evidence repository for filing oaths of office, etc. and recording the same at a (county) recorder? If the objective is to create admissible evidence, would not the latter be equally sufficient since certified copies of public records are self-authenticating (e.g. Fed. Rules of Evidence Rule 902) and therefore admissible?

Bingo, Jethro!

You said it! Make it happen!

That's what I do (file documents at the county recorder). Become your own court of competent jurisdiction. That's what sovereignty it all about. Like David says, become a competent record keeper. Form and keep your own record of events.

The LoR filed with the USDC is a significantly better method of being able to deal with the court system. But it accomplishes essentially the same thing as keeping your own record by filing at the county recorder. And filing at the county recorder is less expensive (if cost becomes a factor).

[KnowLaw]

Okay. I've had some time to mull over everything that has been suggested (trying to make sense of it and to gain insight into its significance) and I think I'm getting a clearer picture of what is happening. At least I hope I am. But I need some valid feedback -- and correction of my assumptions if they are incorrect -- so that I can correct what needs to be corrected in order to gain remedy.

Objective One: gain control of the judge in this matter. Gather the oaths of office together and publish an affidavit at the county recorder that I have "not given consent to be prosecuted by vacant offices" (if the oaths actually show this) and I do not recognize the court not of record. Using David's method, this is done by gaining the cognizance of the U.S. government through the district court by filing the documents into a miscellaneous case file and filing the original from the recorder into the case with the local clerk of court marking my certified copy FILED, including markings from the district attorney into the case file. Getting the DA's markings on these documents is significant in being able to gain control of the judge! This would also mean I would need to file a LoR.

Question 1: I haven't been able to locate a local office of the district court where I could open a miscellaneous case file. The only district court offices that I'm aware of in this state are in two of the larger metropolitan areas that are hundreds of miles from where I live. The only local courts showing in the phone book under United States Government are: Courts: Probation and Parole; U.S. Bankruptcy Court; U.S. Magistrate; U.S. Pretrial Services. Would the U.S. Magistrate court be part of the district court system where I might be able to get this done locally? Or no?

Question 2: If the oaths of office of the actors are indeed faulty (as David suspects), is gaining the cognizance of the district court the only way to get control of the judge in this matter?

Question 2a: If the oaths of office contain an oath upholding the U.S. and State Constitutions, wouldn't accepting this oath and putting the judge and prosecuting attorney on notice achieve the same thing as gaining the cognizance of the district court? It seems to me it would. Correct me if this is wrong, please!

Question 3: Are any affidavits that I might file into this muni court's record, aren't they part of the written record? Or would the judge need to recognize me as my own attorney in order for these to matter or play any significance?

Part of the problem is: I've been seeking a way to remedy this matter without having to use the district court. I was under the impression that if you could get into a court of record (where the common law is recognized), then you could bring out the defects in the presentment and thereby achieve remedy. I missed my chance to recuse the judge at the "arraignment" and demand a hearing in a judicial court of record.

Because I have not had a complete understanding of the significance of the suggestions that have been made and the specific way in which they need to be executed, there are some things that are still needing to be done. Hopefully, I still have time to correct those errors.

I just today received another letter from the appointed attorney (haven't yet filed the first "return to sender" photocopy with the local court because I was attempting to find a district court office where I could open a file) and have not opened it, and have marked it "return to sender" in the same manner as David suggested for the first one. I'll be getting photocopies of that letter and getting the P.O. to date stamp those copies tomorrow when I return it. If I'm unable to locate a local district court office in order to obtain the D.A.'s file markings, will it still be useful to file these copies with the local court, or will the judge just disregard them?

I'll also tomorrow be looking into obtaining the oaths of office of the judge and the prosecuting attorney.

This is embarrassing to admit (simply because I didn't have the correct understanding to go on from the start), but I "refused for cause" the three copies of the documents (the Determination of Release Conditions and Release Order, the Order Regarding Counsel, and the Notice to Defendant re: "your court appointed attorney") that were handed to me at the "arraignment," and returned them to the court last Thursday by Certificate of Mailing. It didn't hit me until today that perhaps these won't be recognized by the judge either, even though they are in the record.

I'm doing my best to understand the processes in play here, but it's difficult to be certain without being able to get certain crucial questions answered first. I'm not dumb; just ignorant of how these processes are supposed to work. Any useful comments will be greatly appreciated!

[KnowLaw]

Okay, update on what has transpired. (As much as possible, I'd like to document what happens in this matter. Perhaps this thread will help someone else out who finds themselves in a similar circumstance.)

I learned that the local U.S. Magistrate Court is connected with the USDC, but that in order to open a case file, I would need to travel to the State capital (or use the mail) to begin the process at the main District Court there. They don't handle this type of thing in the local Magistrate Court. This would mean if I wanted file stamps on documents submitted to the Muni court, I would have to go to the capital to get them (a 170 mile trip).

Question: Other than in the instructions to the DC court clerk which get published on a certificate of mailing back to a presenter, how else might I be able to demonstrate to the Muni court that documents are being filed with the USDC such that the court becomes aware of this? Perhaps (answering my own question) this is where the LoR comes into play once it is filed with the District Court. So, this would still be effective if I were only to file documents with the DC by mail rather than in person?

Today I was able to file the copies of the two returned letters of the appointed attorney into the case file at the Muni court. I was a bit apprehensive about whether or not the clerk would accept them; she asked, "You have an appointed attorney, don't you?" I told her that I was obtaining my own assistance of counsel and that these needed to be filed providing evidence that the appointed attorney had never been engaged in the matter. She seemed to understand that and filed the photocopies.

I also filed a certified copy of my recorded Affidavit of Administrative Notice along with a certified copy of the original certificate of mailing in 2009. On the back of each of the three pages of the affidavit I placed a stamp in the lower right hand corner, signed (First Middle) at a diagonal over it cancelling it, then sealed it putting my thumb print to the right and covering it, dated it, and placed the EIN (SSN without dashes) on each of the front pages at the top right.

According to information I researched about the Universal Postal Union (UPU), I should have done this on the presentments. I goofed! It's been a while since I read it. There are so many little things to remember that this slipped my mind. But what I was thinking originally was: I wanted to establish myself as the postmaster of this affidavit. Had it been on a presentment, this action would have constituted a cross-claim. On any presentments in the future, I'll try to remember to do this; not sure what effect, if any, this might have on matters. The affidavit went unrebutted back in 2009, so I wanted to establish this document within the jurisdiction of the UPU. Would this still qualify as a cross-claim? The following is the pertinent explanation about the significance of invoking the UPU:

Autographing a stamp not only establishes you as the postmaster of the contract but constitutes a cross-claim. Using the stamp process on documents presents your adversaries with a problem because their jurisdiction is subordinate to that of the UPU, which you have now invoked for your benefit. The result in practice of doing this is that whenever those who know what you are doing are recipients of your documents with autographed stamps they back off. If they do not, take the matter to the US Postmaster to deal with. If he will not provide you with your remedy, take the matter to the UPU for them to clean up.

Use of a notary combined with the postage stamp (and sometime Embassy stamps) gives you a priority mechanism. Everything is commerce, and all commerce is contract. The master of the contract is the post office, and the UPU is the supreme overlord of the commerce, banking, and postal systems of the world. Use of these stamps in this manner gets the attention of those in the system to whom you provide your paperwork. It makes you the master of that post office. Use of the stamp is especially important when dealing with the major players, such as the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, Treasury, etc. They understand the significance of what you are doing. Many times they hand documents back to someone using this approach and say, "Have a good day, sir." They don't want any untoward repercussions coming back on them.

I don't expect the affidavit to do magic. But it's certainly going to establish the record I've been keeping.

I was also able to obtain the judge's oath of office. The county recorder didn't have on file an oath for the city attorney. They suggested I check with the city clerk.

In looking at the judge's oath, it seems to be a valid oath: "I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution and laws of the State of XXXX, and the Charter, Ordinances and Laws of the City of XXXX, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and defend them against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of the office of Municipal Judge for the City of XXXX, according to the best of my ability, so help me God (or so I do affirm)"

So, I can accept the judge's oath in an affidavit and hold him to his agreement on the record. I like the sound of that: "On the record." That's what David teaches.

I've read where matters such as this are most often settled in the validity expressed in the paperwork, or the written record. That's where I can excel. That the actual trial is often a formality. Although I hardly expect that in this case. But I'm going to do my best to establish a valid written record expressing the truth. We'll see whether the adversarial actors will honor their oaths. (I'll be preparing an allocution just in case.)

I've also read that filing a motion for discovery (since I haven't seen a verified complaint and have no idea yet what I'm supposed to be defending), getting the judge to grant it, and giving the prosecuting attorney a deadline like 10 days can be effective. When the prosecutor doesn't come up with valid discovery, the judge has no recourse but to dismiss.

All of this sounds fine in a fairy tale world where people have integrity and are honest. We'll see how it flys in the real world.

What made the difference was: I went back and carefully re-reading what David was suggesting at the outset of this inquiry, and it was all beginning to fall into place. I could see what I needed to do. I needed to get clear on what process I wanted to pursue. I also needed to calm down so that I could think straight. Once that occurred, I went about following David's suggestions as best I could.

There's one more thing I'm considering doing. I came across a private insurance bond for financial responsibility that I could swear out in an affidavit and record. If I entered that into the matter, maybe the judge might be a bit more accepting of my position. Only problem is, I'm not real happy about the way the affidavit is worded. I don't want to admit a connection between a legal fiction and true name. May need some help with the wording.

Any comments or clarifications will be appreciated.

[Moxie]

Anyone remember how this one turned out?

[KnowLaw]

Anyone remember how this one turned out?

Pretty much what happened, without going into all the detail, is what David posted as the last message in a similar thread over at suijurisforum.com

In other words:

I liked the example when the ex-Army Ranger became a new suitor amidst a traffic matter. During a preliminary hearing he just rode it out - whatever the judge wanted to do.

When they handed him the yellow slip - the Notice of the next hearing he wrote across it Refusal for Cause and walked it up to the bench saying, "Your presentment is hereby refused for cause timely and I am placing it on your bench."

The judge was speechless; "Well, uh... hmm... What am I supposed to do with this?"

The suitor left the courtroom and never heard another word about it. Ever!

I handed the judge his walking papers and never heard about the matter again.

If you'd like more detail about the process and how it is approached from a different angle than the one espoused here, you can go to Common Law Remedy and download a free report that will give you all the details about the approach I used.