http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqpBT6-3-oo

[David Merrill]

Possibly there is a lead - .

[5201]

David

David I cannot get either of the 2 links you posted to work for me from this threat
Very interested
first one went to advertisiment for image service and second said could not load because of errors
can you either repost in the thread or summarize or send to me via e mail or such? etc...? Thanks

[David Merrill]

Welcome 5201! Thank you for bringing failed links to my attention. I have attached them here in the website.

[pumpkin]

IC 32-24-1-2 "Owner" defined
Sec. 2. As used in section 5 of this chapter, "owner" means the persons listed on the tax assessment rolls as being responsible for the payment of real estate taxes imposed on the property and the persons in whose name title to real estate is shown in the records of the recorder of the county in which the real estate is located.
As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.9.

IMO, allodial title, is not required at all. 'As used in section' does not alter the status of the people. Government can only make laws concerning things over which they have authority. Government has no authority over the property rights of the people. Those rights are inalienable. And as for Indiana is concerned, this ends Article 1 of the 1816 constitution:

Sect. 24. To guard against any encroachments on the rights herein retained, we declare, that every thing in this article, is excepted out of the general powers of Government, and shall forever remain inviolable.

Article one, of course mentions the right to property, and all other inalienable rights (limited only by controversy between owners of those rights, the people). Government has been excepted out of the inalienable rights of the people. We get the common law from England, but England had one king. With no nobility, and only a representative government, common law is not the same as in England. Fee simple does not mean a thing next to the inalienable rights of the people. The question for land ownership, that is most important IMO, is who is in possession? Who has had peaceful possession? Who paid the previous owner his asking price? Is the one in possession one of the people? An owner in common law has dominion over what he owns. We have no king but only servants. Who here thinks that the servants replaced the king?

[JohnnyCash]

.. to work for me from this threat

Why do you consider this a threat? For my part, the bank is paying my real estate taxes http://jesse2012.com/mortgagetx.jpg
which seems a nice compromise while we figure this one out.