DL was NOT provided or used as ID

[EZrhythm]

In the past I have signed DL documents and the electronic pad, "Without Prejudice" and nothing else. Because that is only two words they must have glanced only enough to believe it was a name.

[allodial]

There are a variety of ways to deal with the signature line. If at a loss for space...

John Henry for the parties
John Henry for the driver
John Henry as Secured Party
John Henry as Claimant
John Henry as Agent

[ Believe it or not Doe is left out on purpose! ]

The following require more space:

John Henry for DOE JOHN H
John Henry for the State of California
John Henry d/b/a DOE JOHN H

I know of someone that has established that its, say,

House of Smith d/b/a
DOE JOHN H...

This was established by letterhead sent to the head of the DMV or the like.

If there is really a severe space restriction for 'signature', one could simply put:

DOE JOHN H
or
DOE JOHN H 1293993 {license or ID #}

Either way, one can within three days or so of filling out the app for a DL send a letter to the DMV (Director or Attorney) or SoS that might go along these lines:

John Henry of the Doe clan

To fiduciary agents/officers of the DMV:

This is to inform you that I, __________________, on behalf of

DOE JOHN H

and/or for

JOHN HENRY DOE
(CALIFORNIA) File # ______________

apply for {or renew or whatever} a CALIFORNIA IDENTIFICATION CARD.

I would not suggest a "true name" signature. True Name d/b/a ENTITY #3049494 is one thing. But merely signing True Name could put you in the position of accommodation party. IMHO its best to just put

DOE JOHN H #03949494
or
DOE JOHN H

for the signature if you are extremely pressed for space and to always subsequently notify the DMV of your power of attorney or some other claim---IN OTHER WORDS make it clear as pie without a bunch of blah blah blah Paytriot kitchen sinkage that John Henry was acting as Attorney-In-Fact in putting the signature of the ENTITY on the signature pad--as in so they cant presume otherwise. Alternatively or additionally one could file a fictitious name registration that shows say...

John Henry, c/o private 100 Main street, New York, New York not domestic

doing business as DOE JOHN H

Don't expect the lemming mindset to even remotely comprehend your exercise of brains. If you are having conceptual issues perhaps you are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

UPDATE:

Well, as suspected, the STATE OF FLORIDA has decided to suspend/revoke the DL card I make use of. It is their card so they have the right to do with it what they please.



Now comes the matter of whether or not the county Sheriff and the court will remain in honor by not harassing me, or attempting to re-venue me, while I move on the common right of ways. My entire process is in the cognizance of the United States District court and the proper and lawful record of my timely refusals and notices are in the cognizance of all parties involved in this matter.

I will be carrying a voice recorder with me now in case of an encounter with an LEO at the roadside. I have ordered up a certificate of search for my true name from the district clerk of court and will be carrying that with me as well to offer any LEOs who attempt to disparage or assassinate my declared character of peaceful inhabitant on the land. Also, I ordered up a certified copy of my "NOTICE AND DEMAND OF LAWFUL MONEY" document filed into my evidence repository for another matter I am currently dealing with (mortgage scavenger). The notice shows my actions match my claim of peaceful inhabitant as I show my demand for lawful money in written form and on the record for all to see and know.

NOTICE AND DEMAND OF LAWFUL MONEY.doc

Copies of these certified documents will be presented to any LEO who attempts to gain jurisdiction over me. I may send copies of this entire process to the Judge Advocate General per the well informed instruction of Michael Joseph who offers that the Navy is the highest ranking authority on this land entrusted with the duty to keep the peace, and protect those who declare, and display by action, their character as being peaceful inhabitants on the land. Since Admiralty Law is the what is being enforced and administered in most cases, it seems logical that the JAG is responsible for ensuring that those who invoke Admiratly do not bring it upon the dry land against one who has undeniably established his/her character as being without the Federal Reserve Districts, and thusly, without Admiralty jurisdiction.

[David Merrill]

I guess what I propose goes more towards expressing intent in a way that would be more convincing to LEOs while on the side of the road. The officer ignored AJ's true name signature. But what if it was clearly stated on the DL that it is not to be used to identify the man that surrenders the DL. And what if a copy of the amended agreement is presented to the LEO. Perhaps things would be more likely to be handled at the roadside instead of in someone's brick-and-mortar courtroom. In other words, "Allright, I'm just going to issue a warning. Have a nice day!"

In practicality there is not enough room for much verbiage. In Colorado - at least around Colorado Springs suitors were signing:

Fairly quickly, after a few verbal skirmishes but with success the DoR swapped out the digital pads with much smaller ones. That is when we went to True Name signatures. Another thing now is that you wait for at least ten days and receive the new license card by mail. I suspect "non-assumpsit" and "without prejudice" are signature add-ons of the past. Likely you will not get your card at all until you correct the signature.

What I keep kicking myself about is that several months ago I received an email with a state statute that clearly said that the Driver License was not to be used for Identification Purposes! I don't recall saving it, and I have tried several times to find it and cannot. My memory is really good and I recall just letting it get by because of a priority-shift. Maybe a mood; I just thought, Every state has probably got a clause like this in the statutes and didn't bother saving it...

I think the discussion avoids the fact that Anthony Joseph signed the Driver License Card Anthony Joseph. That signature is on the record with the Department of Revenue too. So if the cop on the stand cannot be considered trustworthy, the card in AJ's possession and the records from the DoR can be subpoenaed by Discovery.

Signed: Anthony Joseph d.b.a. ANTHONY XXXXXX

That is right, the STATE OF FLORIDA already recognizes the distinction between Anthony Joseph (living man) and the LEGAL M. NAME (TRUST vessel) as the agreement was signed in that manner, therefore, there is acquiescence to my declared character. The result (resulting trust) is that I am with standing and authority to refuse the trustee duties associated with any "charges" against that account. My declaration of that standing and authority is clear and undeniable as it resides in the cognizance of the United States at the clerk of the district court.

whoo boy, This card is not to be used for identification of the holder. HOLDER - have you just volunteered as Trustee in your desire to escape the frying pan...

This is friendly advice to keep you out of the [line of] fire

I'll admit to not being much of a wordsmith. I've edited the verbiage in that post to better express the actual intent. Thanks, John Booth.

I think the discussion avoids the fact that Anthony Joseph signed the Driver License Card Anthony Joseph. That signature is on the record with the Department of Revenue too. So if the cop on the stand cannot be considered trustworthy, the card in AJ's possession and the records from the DoR can be subpoenaed by Discovery.

I guess what I propose goes more towards expressing intent in a way that would be more convincing to LEOs while on the side of the road. The officer ignored AJ's true name signature. But what if it was clearly stated on the DL that it is not to be used to identify the man that surrenders the DL. And what if a copy of the amended agreement is presented to the LEO. Perhaps things would be more likely to be handled at the roadside instead of in someone's brick-and-mortar courtroom. In other words, "Allright, I'm just going to issue a warning. Have a nice day!"

[David Merrill]

I think the discussion avoids the fact that Anthony Joseph signed the Driver License Card Anthony Joseph. That signature is on the record with the Department of Revenue too. So if the cop on the stand cannot be considered trustworthy, the card in AJ's possession and the records from the DoR can be subpoenaed by Discovery.

[shikamaru]

Someone I know on the land know as Florida signed the words " non assumpsit " only about a year ago, it has worked well for him so far.

You can get a rise out of the magistrate pleading "non-assumpsit by way of confession and avoidance" as well

Somebody PM'd me this - I believe because of this subject matter.

Richard Earl found that section of the Illinois Vehicle Code per a request I shouted on the ShoutBox. Thanks, Richard!

...speak up and say: " I do not consent to be recognised by the name and waive any benefit thereof".

Nice, motla68. I will use a variation of that for my next encounter with an LEO. On several occasions I instructed officers "not to use the DL for identification purposes." There's the old saying, "you get more with honey than you do with vinegar." That being said, rather than verbalizing instructions to LEOs, I'll just inform them of what I do and do not consent.

"This driver's license does not belong to me - it belongs to the State of Illinois. I do not consent to be identified by any of the images or markings on the driver's license other than the image of my signature found on the front-side bottom."

[motla68]

whoo boy, This card is not to be used for identification of the holder. HOLDER - have you just volunteered as Trustee in your desire to escape the frying pan...

This is friendly advice to keep you out of the [line of] fire

Someone I know on the land know as Florida signed the words " non assumpsit " only about a year ago, it has worked well for him so far.

[John Booth]

I'll go even further and suggest that such a novation can be included on the DL itself - on the signature line.

This card is not to be used for identification of the holder.
[True Name signature]

Now it becomes nearly impossible for the FR agent to impose an identity on peaceful inhabitants that have such an agreement with the state.

whoo boy, This card is not to be used for identification of the holder. HOLDER - have you just volunteered as Trustee in your desire to escape the frying pan...

This is friendly advice to keep you out of the [line of] fire

[motla68]

Somebody PM'd me this - I believe because of this subject matter.

By process of lawful strategy this is not how an officer approaches the situation inheritable. One must express the intent to void the assumption. This is the tacit I spoke of some time ago which can be also through silence if we do not speak up.
Subsection of that code says:
(c) Use of information contained on a driver's license is not a violation of this Section if (i) the individual whose information has been used gave express permission for that use or (ii) the information relating to the individual was obtained from a source other than the individual's driver's license.

The latter which is (ii), that part in reference to said officer seeing the name on registration matching the drivers license would give the hook he would need if one did not speak up and say: " I do not consent to be recognised by the name and waive any benefit thereof". As to say, no I do not need any services/benefits today. I could further thrown in our discussion about service, but we have already discussed that already in this thread I think.

Subsection (a) is also interesting noting a commercial activity. We have thwarted such claims with 18 U.S.C 31 by definition what commercial use is. If someone is interested in discussing that it would probably be best suited for a new thread though.

[David Merrill]

Somebody PM'd me this - I believe because of this subject matter.

IL Vehicle Code
Sec. 6‑117.1. Prohibited use of driver's license information.

Sounds to me like if you tell the officer that it is not for ID purposes, he cannot use it for such.

[motla68]

their burdens and requirements in order to stay in honor when encountering a competent and peaceful man or woman who inhabits the land while choosing to remain without their formed districts in his/her own right. The clause is a required "exit door" for those immune to the newly formed structure and district overlay of the physical land. That "exit door" is a mandatory obligation and remedy written into the law in order to avoid the charge of tyranny and forced servitude upon those who know and exercise their inherent exemption and immunity from their system.

When citing these laws, statutes and codes in that inherently immune capacity, character and standing, through overt and proper declaration, it serves as only a friendly and peaceful reminder to those who are bound, and oath-sworn, to that structure that the law provides free remedy to those who claim it competently.

I believe my "family jewels" are quite safe and cozy where they are, and belong.

You have misunderstood my comment regarding the double edged sword; I meant that not only will it cut through the lies you were unaware of your entire life, it will also cut through your past beliefs, and manner of conducting yourself, so you cannot go back in to that "old way" in good faith or conscience once the truth is revealed. In other words, be careful and ready for truth when you ask for it because it will effect you permanantly one way or the other.

Ok, thanks for the correction.
I am working on getting stuff done by using some of the language but just not the statute coding, I have heard of others who have done this so I await with anticipation of some results in the near future. Nevertheless getting interesting responses from the registrar and the comptroller in birth county.

First off, thank you, Anthony Joseph, for starting this thread to share your experiences.

Anthony Joseph initially identified himself to be a peaceful inhabitant...

The process has been expedited to make it nearly impossible for Anthony Joseph, the man, to express his peaceful inhabitant nature...

The new expedited process is designed so that the police officer no longer needs to address the issue that the DL card was not utilized by AJ for identification purposes...

Perhaps one would be prudent to novate the DL agreement such that the holder of the DL does not use the DL for identification purposes (the agreement is the paper application for DL). A copy of such agreement should be kept inside the glove compartment of motorized conveyances and presented to the armed Federal Reserve agents at the roadside. I'll go even further and suggest that such a novation can be included on the DL itself - on the signature line.

This card is not to be used for identification of the signatory, per sec 6‑117.1 of the Illinois Vehicle Code.
[True Name signature]

Now it becomes nearly impossible for the FR agent to impose an identity on peaceful inhabitants that have such an agreement with the state.

This is the current Entry Banner to this website. What the Reader/Student should keep in mind is that Chapter 20 of the same Judiciary Act of 1789 also formed the districts, which are the state Districts overlaid on the American states and in 1790 these districts became the conduit for responsibly settling the debt obligations of the District United States. So read the Banner with that in mind, and you will discover hopefully that the 'saving to suitors' clause is the abatement and avoidance of that forum.

David, this is one of the most clear explanations of the significance of the 'saving to suitors' clause. I encourage anyone to bookmark your post.