The Common Law vs the Civil Law

[Gavilan]

So in my search for the common law, I have come across very interesting things, for example:


You have to go back in history and study English and Roman history to find out how we end up with different jurisdictions for common law and civil law. See, Civil law is the successor to Roman Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_law "Roman law forms the basic framework for civil law, the most widely used legal system today, and the terms are sometimes used synonymously."

England was ruled by the Romans, and when they left: By the 5th century A.D. barbarian tribes were attacking other parts of the Roman Emperor Honorius decided that the Roman legions in Britain were needed elsewhere. He sent a letter to the people of Britain telling them the soldiers had to leave. They must fight the Anglo-Saxons and invaders on their own." http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/primary...roman_remains/

The Anglo-Saxons were on their own, they had to fight to protect themselves, they could no longer count on Rome. But the City of Londinium continued to this very day as an outpost of Roman law! See what Prof. Richard Werner says here scroll to the 14 minute and 50 second mark. https://youtu.be/EC0G7pY4wRE?t=14m50s

Now, see what is going on with the secretive City of London: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrObZ_HZZUc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1ROpIKZe-c

Now, many people are surprised to hear that the Governments are corporations and for profit, but they are and you have to study English history to find out why.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/primary...roman_remains/https://www.americanbar.org/publicat...lf-defens.html

But as you saw back in the second video of the City of London, after the Battle of Hastings in 1066 William the Conqueror made a deal with the people that was running the Ancient City of London (that is to say the money changers) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHnwtkfX2k4

So you can now see how the Dual Jurisdictions developed.

[David Merrill]

But what if the whole Columbus Flat-World issue is a parable? The real claim being activated is the Templar Knights from 100 years before?

This explains a lot about the "judge" oaths being encrypted.

Paul was a Roman citizen. Recently there is strong evidence supporting the already known - Mark was the first Gospel written. Mark was a scribe for Peter, and was much younger. Being literate and able to afford the expensive parchment, papyrus and permanent inks supports that Mark was as claimed, from Venice and therefore Roman too.

Do you see how we agree?

[Gavilan]

But what if the whole Columbus Flat-World issue is a parable? The real claim being activated is the Templar Knights from 100 years before?

This explains a lot about the "judge" oaths being encrypted.

Paul was a Roman citizen. Recently there is strong evidence supporting the already known - Mark was the first Gospel written. Mark was a scribe for Peter, and was much younger. Being literate and able to afford the expensive parchment, papyrus and permanent inks supports that Mark was as claimed, from Venice and therefore Roman too.

Do you see how we agree?

Have you seen the coat of arms for the City of London?


The left is the ancient coat of arms of the Knights Templar and the right is of the City of London.

[David Merrill]

Have you seen the coat of arms for the City of London?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5096[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]5097[/ATTACH]

The left is the ancient coat of arms of the Knights Templar and the right is of the City of London.

I found a great used book the other day! Actually two. This all falls into perfect alignment.



The truth revealed is that Mark scribed the Book of Mark with the revenant Jesus, Peter and Paul in Damascus where Jesus had fled. Then Mark went to Jerusalem and contacted Matthew, Luke and John for their testimony and scribed the remaining Gospels with the same purpose. - To prepare for the Return of the King to the Jerusalem throne even though He did not return three days after death, as prescribed by the prophet Zechariah.

It seems strange that Roman civil law is what is in place in America today. Not any more. Paul was Roman too. Mark's remains were brought back to his home in Venice. I once had a Roman Catholic Priest, rogue and the Voice of the Practitioner out of Golden, for Science of Mind teaching that Mary MAGDALENE was Jesus' wife. When suddenly he shouted in my face that Jesus "Died on the Cross". He had been researching my findings and knew I had my doubts...

But that is at the heart of the claim through a fragment of wood brought from the Holy Land to Scotland with the FRY and St CLAIR families - the legendary True Cross fragment. Blackened by age and allegedly the Blood of Jesus, giving these seafaring mariners a claim represented in Roselyn Chapel to authority and authorship of the Bible. But what we find is that this line of thought fails on two major points:

• Jesus survived
• the Passover Lamb was a slaughter, not a sacrifice

Therefore the bloodied fragment, real Cross or not is meaningless as a claim. Especially in a redeemed, guiltless legal environment where the sacrifices are simply putting God's gifts to waste.

[David Merrill]

Therefore please try integrating the absurdly strange behaviors of the Department of Justice and the US Supreme Court itself!








Witness with REHNQUIST who copied the oath verbatim from the 1789 Judiciary Act we have transparency. But with ROBERTS we find the DoJ is not willing to show us his oath of office? Plus this mailing was delayed by the postal machine running out of ink, and the envelope jamming so that the bar code was improperly printed. All on what should be a standard response that should have never gone into appeal.

The DoJ should have sent the oath on the first FOIA request, in my opinion. I believe I can make better sense of it for you readers here. This routine request for the oath of office has some major consequences in international law!


BTW: The Appeal defaulted on June 4, 2018 days before it arrived in the mail, because of the poor quality of the DoJ mailing room. Just the same, the defaulted appeal is only saying the DoJ will get to it as soon as they can. Defaulting on June 4 means this will reach judgment on July 4 - how appropriate!

[David Merrill]

Also, from CLAUSEN's commentaries on Morals and Dogma we find a graphic explanation of the Secret Jamaica-Rambouillet Accord in 1976, where the Americans and French went into private to remove gold and install SDR's into the exchange rate of the US Dollar. And why the world sat back and let that meeting decide so much world history, in secret minutes (trust).

[lorne]

No one likes being caught running a fake judiciary, David.

[marcel]

I found your boulevard.
Why the asterisk?

[David Merrill]

This fraud is reflected in the Russian Case; where the DoJ is insisting the prosecution stay going even though the Defendant has entered Writ of Mandamus - undoubtedly based in there is no "judge" to hear anything.

Half of that docket report is trying to correct for errors entered due to the "judge" dismissing the case, and then somebody says the prosecution must keep going...




Motion to Continue denied. This is not a motion for a continuance.

[xparte]

The "JUDGES" IDENTIFICATION the vacant official It is only by ownership you can alter it without liability who owns the Oath . "commingling of assets "professionals that hold a license can form a professional limited liability company a business entity designed for licensed professionals, such as lawyers, doctors, architects, engineers, accountants, and chiropractors it creates a separation between the individual and the entity and the oath .

[lorne]

asterisk

[as-tuh-risk]

noun

1. a small starlike symbol (*)

2. a blemish in an otherwise outstanding achievement.
He came into the tournament highly ranked, but with a bit of an asterisk after testing positive for use of a banned substance.

3. (biology) alternate of Asteriscus.

[David Merrill]

Who owns the oath?

Good question. ANSWER: David Merrill owns it as First Redeemer and First Trustee of the resulting trust. When you get your mind wrapped around co-creation you will own it too.

Does that make sense? If Congress is allowing Angela CAESAR, the Clerk of Court in their legislative tribunal (USDC DC) to be malfeasant, then Congress is in breach of contract. So that allows opportunity for me to act in Congress' stead. I am not altering the Form Congress prescribed in 1789 though. I just go on the record supporting that Form and that it cannot be changed.

This transaction is of interest to THE ALL - quantum superposition: